iii,"'"^' 
 
 
 mm 
 
 til 111! 
 
 tlilliiiilil! 
 
 I'l ! 
 
 Hllllllii 
 
 \ !!ii m^ 
 
 mm 
 
 liiiiii 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Class 
 
 l.£Ht.rii\ 
 
 t^ 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2008 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/ethnictrinitiestOOpainrich 
 
ILebt lleonarD i^aine, 2E>* W>* 
 
 A CRITICAL HISTORY OF THE EVOLUTION OF 
 TRINITARIANISM AND ITS OUTCOME IN THE 
 NEW CHRISTOLOGY. Crown 8vo, $2.00. 
 
 ETHNIC TRINITIES AND THEIR RELATION TO 
 THE CHRISTIAN TRINITY. Crown 8vo, $1.75 
 nei. 
 
 HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN & CO. 
 Boston and New York. 
 
THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 AND THEIR RELATIONS TO THE 
 CHRISTIAN TRINITY 
 
 A CHAPTER IN THE 
 
 Comparative l^i^tor^ of Heligionsi 
 
 BY 
 
 LEVI LEONARD PAINE 
 
 WALDO FBOrSSSOB OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTOBY IN BAKOOB 
 THEOLOOICAL SEMIKABT 
 
 .** The true criticism of Dogma is its history " 
 David Fbibdbich Stbauss 
 
 BOSTON AND NEW YORK 
 
 HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY 
 
 ^l^e KlitierjjiDe ptt^^, ^Tamlinbge 
 
 1901 
 
T3 
 
 COPYRIGHT, I90I, BY LEVI LEONARD PAINS 
 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 
 
 Published September, igoi 
 
 GENERAL 
 
TO 
 YALE UNIVERSITY 
 
 MY ALMA MATER 
 
 WHOSE FREE AND TOLERANT SPIRIT TOOK FULL 
 
 POSSESSION OF ME IN MY COLLEGE DATS, AND 
 
 HAS CONTINUED TO BE THE SPRING OP 
 
 MY INTELLECTUAL LIFE 
 
 AND TO 
 
 PROFESSOR GEORGE P. FISHER 
 
 DEAN OF YALE DIVINITY SCHOOL 
 
 WHO SO ADMIRABLY ILLUSTRATES IN HIS LIFE AND 
 
 WRITINCJS THE CHARACTER OF THE INSTITUTION 
 
 WHICH HE ADORNS, THIS LATEST FRUIT 
 
 OF MY HISTORICAL STUDIES 
 
 IS DEDICATED 
 
 101S37 
 
PEEFACE 
 
 The comparative history of religions is the 
 latest and most productive field of investigation 
 and discovery that historical science has opened. 
 The field as a whole is vast in extent and complex 
 and intricate in its character. This book deals 
 with a single chapter of it. I was led to the study 
 of the Ethnic trinities by my previous studies in 
 the historical evolution of the Christian trinity, — 
 finding as I did that Christian trinitarianism is 
 only a part of a world-wide historical evolution 
 that goes back to the very origins of religion itself. 
 Thus, while the present volume is an entirely 
 fresh and independent work, it may properly be 
 regarded as a companion of my previous book: 
 " A Critical History of the Evolution of Trinita- 
 rianism, and its Outcome in the New Christology." 
 Its object is to carry the history of trinitarianism 
 back of its later Christian form of development, 
 and trace its primary sources as well as its histor- 
 ical evolution through the various Ethnic trinities 
 until it enters its Christian stage, and then to 
 compare with each other these different stages of 
 
7i PREFACE 
 
 religious thought and draw from such comparison 
 its historical conclusions. 
 
 It may be made a point of criticism by some of 
 my readers that I have entered so deeply and fully 
 into the philosophical development of Greek trin- 
 itarian thought ; but my apology is that an accu- 
 rate knowledge of New Platonism, and above all 
 of Plotinus, is absolutely essential to the under- 
 standing of Christian mediaeval philosophy and 
 theology, and of the modern ideas that have been 
 evolved from them. Scholars are coming to real- 
 ize — what until recently has been little appre- 
 ciated — that Plotinus was the most original and 
 acute philosophical thinker since Plato and Aris- 
 totle, and that his influence to-day has eclipsed 
 that of his great masters. In fact, the Plotinian 
 pantheistic monism is increasingly regnant in mod- 
 ern philosophy, not to say in Christian theology. 
 It may be said that not a few of the historical and 
 metaphysical blunders that have had vogue in 
 past histories of Christian doctrine have arisen 
 from ignorance of those later transformations of 
 Platonism which are so clearly set forth in the 
 speculations of Plotinus. 
 
 While I have restricted myself to a single phase 
 of the general history of religions, it should be 
 borne in mind that the evolution of the idea of 
 God is central to all religious thought, and con- 
 
PREFACE 
 
 vu 
 
 sequently that the subject-matter of this book will 
 be found to include more or less directly many of 
 the fundamental problems of theology. Like the 
 earlier volume it is purely historical and critical, 
 not dogmatic, resting entirely on the scientific 
 inductive method ; and it wiU, I believe, furnish a 
 new illustration of the truth of Strauss's words, 
 . adopted as a motto on the title-page : " The true 
 criticism of dogma is its history." 
 
 If there are any who have been indisposed to 
 accept the statements and conclusions of my previ- 
 ous book, I cannot doubt that the perusal of this 
 one will overcome such indisposition, unless indeed 
 their minds are proof against all purely historical 
 evidence ; while to those who are ready to accept 
 the divine revelations that are given in nature and 
 history this new volume will, I am sure, bring new 
 satisfaction. They will learn more fully perhaps 
 than ever before that the world as a whole, not 
 only in the reahn of nature and natural law, but 
 also in the history of man as a religious being, is 
 full of divinity and of the proofs of a divine move- 
 ment of love, and so will be able to read with a 
 new sense of their profound meaning Browning's 
 lines: — 
 
 " The earth is crammed with heaven 
 
 And every common bush afire with GJod.'* 
 
 LEVI L. PAINE. 
 
 Banoob, Me., April, 1901. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PART I 
 
 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Chap. Pacw 
 
 I. Preliminaky Survey 3 
 
 II. Special Causes of the Rise of the Ethnic 
 
 Trinities 14 
 
 ^ m. General Character and Relations of the 
 
 ""^ Ethnic Trinities 31 
 
 IV. The Hindoo Brahmanic Trinity ... 37 
 
 1^, V. The Persian Zoroastrian Trinitarianism . 64 
 
 ^ VI. The Greek Homeric Trinity .... 92 
 VII. The Evolution of the Greek Philosophical 
 
 Trinitarianism 124 
 
 ~ VIIL The Greek Plotinian Trinity .... 162 
 
 PART II 
 
 THE RELATIONS OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES TO THE 
 CHRISTIAN TRINITY 
 
 I. The External or Historical Relations . 191 
 II. The Internal Relations — Resemblances . 219 
 III. The Internal Relations — Differences . 270 
 rV. The Providential Mission of Christianity as 
 
 A World-Religion 281 
 
 V. The Unreadiness of Christendom for the Ful- 
 fillment OF ITS Mission .... 291 
 VI. Two Perils of Organized Christianity — I. 
 
 Ignorance 299 
 
 VII. Two Perils of Organized Christianity — II. 
 
 Insincerity 306 
 
 VIII. The New Problem of Theology in the Twen- 
 tieth Century 340 
 
 Index 371 
 
PART I 
 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
" Though all the -winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon 
 the earth, so truth be in the field, we do injuriously by licensing 
 and prohibiting to misdoubt her strength. Let her and falsehood 
 grapple ; who ever knew truth put to the worse in a free and 
 open encounter ? Her confuting is the best and surest suppress- 
 ing. He who hears what praying there is for light and clear 
 knowledge to be sent down among us would think of other mat- 
 ters to be constituted beyond the discipline of Geneva, framed 
 and f abricked already to our hands. Yet when the new light which 
 we beg for shines in upon us, there be who envy and oppose, if it 
 come not first in at their casements. What a collusion is this, 
 when as we are exhorted by the wise man to use diligence " to 
 seek for wisdom as for hidden treasures" early and late, that 
 another order shall enjoin us to know nothing but by statute ? 
 When a man hath been laboring the hardest labor in the deep 
 mines of knowledge, hath furnished out his findings in all their 
 equipage, drawn forth his reasons as it were a battle ranged, scat- 
 tered and defeated all objections in his way, calls out his adver- 
 sary into the plain, offers him the advantage of wind and sun, if he 
 please, only that he may try the matter by dint of argument ; for 
 his opponents then to skulk, to lay ambushments, to keep a nar- 
 row bridge of licensing where the challenger should pass, though 
 it be valor enough in soldiership, is but weakness and cowardice 
 in the wars of truth." — John Milton. 
 
CHAPTER I 
 
 PRELIMINARY SURVEY 
 
 This book proposes a comparative study of the 
 Ethnic and Christian trinities. Recent investiga- 
 tions in the history of religions have given a new- 
 aspect to this subject, aud have entirely changed 
 the view to be taken of the historical relation of 
 the Christian ideas of God and those of other 
 religions, and especially of the trinitarian doctrine 
 of God as existing in a trinity of persons or of per- 
 sonal forms. This change has been brought about 
 in two ways. In the first place, scientific and his- 
 torical studies have developed new conceptions of 
 the unity that imderlies phenomena and events, 
 of the universality of law, and of the evolution of 
 aU things along the lines of natural and moral 
 causes. This principle of evolution first became 
 evident in the processes of the physical world, and 
 has been adopted as a cardinal axiom of science ; 
 but it has been proved to be equally a fundamen- 
 tal force in aU. historical events. A historical evo- 
 lution according to fixed historical laws is as surely 
 working in human affairs as a natural evolution 
 is working in all the movements of the material 
 universe. An essential difference, however, is to 
 
4 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 be noted between physical and historical evolution. 
 The latter is moral, involving the element of hu- 
 man free agency, with its consequent variability 
 of human action, while the former is under strict 
 physical law, and so fixed and invariable. But the 
 moral kingdom is as truly one of law and evolution 
 as the natural. The power of free will is not a 
 mere erratic and unaccountable form of activity ; 
 it has its own mysterious laws, and these laws 
 work in harmony with all the laws of the imiverse, 
 and play their proper part in the grand evolution 
 of the world's history. For it must be recognized 
 at once that all recent scientific discoveries tend 
 towards a single result, namely, that one ultimate 
 law of life and movement includes every form of 
 existence, and produces one system of things which 
 we call the universe. The old Platonic idea that 
 this cosmos in which man has his place is an ani- 
 mal with a world-soul contains an element of 
 scientific truth. The universe is one living organic 
 whole, under the guidance of one active force or 
 combination of forces, and all individual living 
 things are held within its eternal sway. What is 
 called the law of natural evolution is simply the 
 last word and summary of all the scientific laws 
 and principles that aU recent investigations, from 
 Copernicus, Kepler, and Newton, down to the 
 latest discoveries of the present day, have brought 
 to light. That law, in the very nature of things, 
 can allow no exception. To break it once is to 
 break it up forever, and dissolve the order of the 
 
PRELIMINARY SURVEY 5 
 
 world. Evolution is a process, the result of life, 
 and so long as there is life, so long will it work 
 according to the divine laws of its own nature in a 
 ceaseless progress towards its highest ends. Man 
 is mysteriously included in this great world system, 
 and so we must expect that the law of evolution 
 wiU reveal itself in human history as well as in 
 physical science, and hence it is that what is called 
 the scientific and inductive method of study and 
 investigation is also the method of the true histo- 
 rian. 
 
 This universal evolutionary law or principle 
 finds special illustration in the history of the 
 world's religions. Comparative religion — almost 
 the youngest of the sciences, and which is destined 
 to revolutionize theology and philosophy in many 
 points, shedding new light as it does on the origin 
 and wide prevalence of ideas and beliefs supposed 
 to be unique, and the possession of a few favored 
 men — gives conclusive proof of the fact that all 
 f the religions of mankind have been the result of a 
 plow and wide development under a law of evolu- 
 /tion that is universal in its range. To this law 
 "Christianity, as a system of religious beliefs and 
 dogmas, forms no exception. Every article of the 
 Christian creed is the full flower of a long histori- 
 cal evolution. The dogma of the trinity is a con- 
 spicuous example. Whatever be the truth as to 
 the mode of the Divine Being, whether he really 
 exists in personal unity, or in personal trinity, or 
 is pluralized in aU the gods of heathen polytheism, 
 
6 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 it is a historical fact which caanot be gainsaid, that 
 the Christian trinitarian dogma as set forth in 
 the Nicene Creed was the slow growth of centu- 
 ries, starting from a single new point of religious 
 belief, and unfolding itself step by step through 
 successive accretions of religious thought gathered 
 from various historical sources, passing from unity 
 to duality, and from duality to truiity, then mov- 
 ing on from a lower inchoate trinitarian stage to 
 one higher and more complete, until out of contro- 
 versy and schism tt^^ full Nicene homoousian doc- 
 trine was reached. / Thus the Christian dogma of 
 the trinity as a historical evolution is to be classed 
 with the other trinities of the Ethnic religions, 
 and should be studied with them, as together form- 
 ing a siQgle chapter in the comparative history of 
 religions^ 
 
 This new scientific view of the historical relation 
 of the Ethnic and Christian trinities has been 
 amply sustained and illustrated by the recent his- 
 torical discoveries in the field of the Ethnic reli- 
 gions. That some of these religions contained 
 divine triads had been a recognized isuct of long 
 standing ; but its real significance was not appre- 
 ciated, and a scientific and critical study of the 
 trinitarian elements and an estimate of their 
 relation to the Christian trinity had never been at- 
 tempted. The new researches, however, go much 
 farther, xhey reveal triaities of varied forms and 
 developments in almost all the Ethnic religions. 
 Such trinities are found in the theogonies of the 
 
PRELIMINARY SURVEY 7 
 
 Egyptians, the Chaldaeans, the Babylonians, the As- 
 syrians, the Hindoos, the Gaulish-Celts, the Teu- 
 tonic-Scandinavians, the Greeks and Romans, the 
 Phrygians, the Persians, the Chinese, the Ameri- 
 can tribes, Hawaiians, Polynesians. That trinities 
 should be so widely spread among the different 
 peoples and races of the world is certainly a fact 
 of great religious significance, and a historical 
 study of these trinities should yield some fruitful 
 religious and theological lessons.X, Such a study is 
 especially needful in view of the fact that Chris- 
 tian traditional theology is founded upon assump- 
 tions that are entirely at variance with the results 
 of the new science of comparative religion, partic- 
 ularly in the field of historical evolution. These 
 assumptions are centred in the idea that God 
 made a special, supernatural revelation of himself 
 and of his mode of existence to the first progeni- 
 tors of the race. Monotheism, or the doctrine of 
 one God, was supposed to be a part of that prime- 
 val revelation. Polytheism was regarded as a 
 perversion of the original faith, brought about by 
 human sin and depravity which darkened the un- 
 derstanding and corrupted the will. This doctrine 
 of the fall and original sinfulness of the race was 
 based on the acceptance of the account in Genesis 
 of the temptation of Adam and Eve by the ser- 
 pent as historical truth. Paul became the most 
 influential expounder of it. He was a true Jew, 
 and accepted the traditional Rabbinical theory of 
 the plenary inspiration of the Old Testament 
 
8 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Scriptures. Hence his philosophy of heathenism, 
 namely, that sinful and fallen men " did not like 
 to retain God in their knowledge," so that God 
 gave them over to the delusions of polytheism and 
 idolatry. But these views of Paul, which have 
 been so influential with later Christian theologians, 
 have no historical basis. It is a piece of Jewish 
 traditionalism which the Jewish convert, Paul, 
 carried with him into the Christian church. Mono- 
 theism, so far from being the earliest doctrine of 
 God, is a late development of human thought. It 
 involves a long process of analysis and synthesis 
 in the observation and investigation of the external 
 world. In the beginnings of human experience 
 man saw only particular phenomena. The unity 
 of nature was unperceived. The world was filled 
 with separate causalities and agencies. The idea 
 of a first cause behind aU the original activities 
 of nature was a flight of reflective thought to 
 which those first children of the race were utterly 
 unequal. Polytheism was the natural and spon- 
 taneous religion of the primeval world. The sen- 
 tence, " In the beginning God created the heavens 
 and the earth," — a statement that seems so 
 ancient to us, as we read it in the first chapter of 
 Genesis, — is in reality modem, when seen in its 
 true historical place in the long evolution of man's 
 ideas of God. The writer of that sentence had 
 behind him many centuries of Hebrew thought 
 and faith, and behind the oldest Hebrew was his 
 Chaldaean ancestor, with his polytheistic creation 
 
PRELIMINARY SURVEY 9 
 
 myth left on record for us, fortunately, in the re- 
 surrected clay tablets of Nineveh. I have spoken 
 of the earliest members of our race as children. 
 Such indeed they were. Their gaze upon the outer 
 world around them was like that of the rustic in 
 Pollock's " Course of Time " who — 
 
 " Thought the visual line that girt him round, 
 The world's extreme ; and thought the silver moon. 
 That nightly o'er him led her virgin host. 
 No broader than his father's shield." 
 
 In that primeval time the imagination was the 
 chief interpreter to man of nature and its powers. 
 It was man's religious imagination that turned 
 the sun into a god, and filled sky, air, earth, and 
 sea with multitudinous divine beings. With the 
 development of the reflective and rational faculties 
 man began to read in nature the signs of order, 
 law, and unity. Then followed the tendency to 
 find a headship among the various divinities of the 
 vast polytheistic pantheon. Here the trinitarian 
 idea, which so many analogies and indications of 
 tripleness in nature and man had suggested, came 
 in to help. Trinities became the superior gods, 
 and this step became a half-way house to another, 
 namely, the idea of a first god among the three, 
 like Brahma in the Hindoo trimurti, Zeus among 
 the Greeks, and Jupiter among the Komans. But 
 monotheism was not easily made congenial to the 
 polytheistic mind, and remained the idea of the 
 cultured and philosophic few. The trinitarian 
 conception, however, was more easily accepted. It 
 
10 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 satisfied the sense of plurality, and also met in a 
 degree the need of a higher unity. It was at this 
 trinitarian stage of polytheistic limitation that the 
 Ethnic religions mostly stopped. Only in several 
 of the Ethnic philosophies, as they should be 
 rather called in distinction from the popular reli- 
 gions that were based upon them, was a theistic or 
 pantheistic unitarianism reached. That such a 
 trinitarian half-way house should have been erected 
 between the most unrestricted polytheism and the 
 most abstract unitarianism, and have remained as 
 the traditional abiding-place of Ethnic religions, 
 is seen to be most natural, when we note how 
 easily Christian theologians were led to use this 
 device as a support of their own trinitarian doc- 
 trine. The Christian trinity was held up in early 
 Christian apologies as the golden mean between a 
 crude heathen polytheism, on the one hand, and 
 a stark Jewish monotheism, on the other. Even 
 modern apologists have employed the same device. 
 So astute and accomplished a theologian as Henry 
 B. Smith declares that the old Biblical and Pla- 
 tonic theistic doctrine of God as a uni-personal 
 being is in fact a form of deism, and he substitutes 
 for it a trinitarian theism of his own, namely, that 
 God exists as an absolute uni-personality, while not 
 uni-personal but tri-personal, — a form of doctrine 
 which seems to me utterly self-destructive, and is 
 a strange theism indeed. 
 
 The trinitarian idea has a similar relation to 
 the pantheistic philosophies which were developed 
 
I 
 
 PRELIMINARY SURVEY 11 
 
 out of the original polytheistic religions. These 
 philosophies sought to bring the popular polythe- 
 ism into harmonious relation with the metaphysi- 
 cal conception of a divine unity. This was accom- 
 plished by an evolution theory according to which 
 one primal being became the original cause of all 
 multiform existence. All individual gods were 
 mere emanations from a single monad, — different 
 modifications of one divine Being. This logical 
 rather than scientific evolution — for it had no sci- 
 entific basis — started from a speculative unity, 
 but made no further use of it, except as a tran- 
 scendental background for the trinitarian stage to 
 which it moved at once, and which was made the 
 real ttov o-tw or centre of the whole system. Why 
 the triads should have had so prominent a place 
 in this pantheistic theory is not very clear, since it 
 was only a single step in a descending series. Yet 
 in fact the trinities of the pantheistic philosophies 
 are the most definite and fixed of all the Ethnic 
 trinities, and in them the line of division is sharply 
 drawn between the gods who form these trinities 
 and the other numerous gods who complete the 
 evolution. This is the case with the Hindoo trin- 
 ity, Brahma, Vishnu, Civa, and stiU more clearly 
 with the New Platonic or Plotinian " three hypos- 
 tases," TO eVf 6 vovs, rj ^v\y. 
 
 We have thus seen that monotheism, histori- 
 cally considered, is the end of an ascending series 
 of beliefs concerning God, rather than the be- 
 ginning of a descending series, and that history 
 inverts the traditional view. 
 
12 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 The same result is reached in that modification 
 of monotheism which is found in the Christian 
 dogma of the trinity. This dogma has also been 
 traditionally held to be a part of the original reve- 
 lation of God to the race. It was supposed to be 
 found in the Old Testament. Christ was believed 
 to have taught the elements of it in his interpreta- 
 tions of the Scriptures concerning himself. Au- 
 gustine held that the first verses of Genesis con- 
 tained a trinitarian reference. This idea likewise 
 is without historical foundation. The Ethnic trin- 
 ities are a comparatively late development in the 
 history of religious thought when viewed from the 
 side of the remote past, though ancient when looked 
 at from the standpoint of later historical times. 
 It is to be remembered that the prehistoric ages 
 cover by far the longest period in the vast process 
 of the life of the world. All authentic history is 
 but a modern chapter of the earth's annals as a 
 whole. As to the Old Testament, it contains the 
 history of a vigorous and radical reaction from the 
 Ethnic polytheism to monotheism, and its strong 
 insistence on the doctrine of one God made the 
 development of the trinitarian dogma impossible. 
 The Christian trinity was historically a new devel- 
 opment out of Jewish monotheism, in consequence 
 of the doctrine that grew about the person of Jesus 
 Christ, though it obtained the materials from 
 which it was formed from earlier Greek philo- 
 sophical thought. It is also to be noted that the 
 Ethnic trinities as well as the Christian exhibit 
 
PRELIMINARY SURVEY 13 
 
 long and definite stages in their evolution. The 
 most complete trinities are of late date. The 
 Hindoo trimurti did not reach its final stage till 
 the fifth or sixth century of our era, though its 
 origin dates from pre-Christian times. The Plo- 
 tinian New Platonic trinity, the most perfect trin- 
 ity as a speculative metaphysical theory that has 
 ever been conceived, belongs to the third century 
 A. D. So the Christian trinity required four cen- 
 turies for its complete development in the Nicene 
 and pseudo-Athanasian creeds. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 SPECIAL CAUSES OF THE RISE OF THE ETHNIC 
 TRINITIES 
 
 From this preliminary survey we pass to a 
 closer investigation of the historical origin and 
 character of the Ethnic trinities. Their origin is 
 hid in the obscurity of the prehistoric ages. When 
 the Ethnic religions first appear under clear his- 
 torical light they are already polytheistic, and the 
 trinitarian feature is more or less fully developed. 
 In the latest authoritative book i on the Babylo- 
 nian religion and mythology, it is stated that " we 
 can thus trace back the existence of this great 
 triad of gods (Anu, Bel, and Ea) to the very 
 beginning of history." This is equally true of 
 the Egyptian and the Hindoo trinities. Thus an 
 investigation of the causes that led to their devel- 
 opment must be conducted with such side lights as 
 are afforded us from early man's religious nature 
 and environment and from the forms into which 
 these trinities were moulded. The radical ques- 
 tion is, why a trinity of gods, or a triune god, 
 rather than a duad or a quaternity of gods, or 
 a duo-une or quadrune god? Certainly there is 
 
 1 See Books on Egypt and Chaldea^ vol. iv. 1899, by Budge and 
 King, of the British Museum. 
 
THE RISE OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 15 
 
 nothing peculiar in the number three to dis- 
 tinguish it from the other numerals. A triangle 
 is no more remarkable as a geometrical figure than 
 a square or a pentagon. Why, then, should three 
 have become the sacred number of deity? The 
 question might here be raised whether after all 
 trinity was so eminent in the Ethnic religions, 
 whether in fact too much has not been made of the 
 triads that have been found. It is true that 
 the Ethnic polytheism allowed a considerable lati- 
 tude to its trinitarianism. There were changes 
 from one triad of gods to another, also duplicates 
 of triads, and in the Egyptian religion there are 
 counted eleven triads. Professor Rawlinson finds 
 a quatemity of gods in some districts. But these 
 exceptional cases only prove and emphasize the 
 rule, and Bishop Westcott's avowal in his book on 
 " The Symbolism of Numbers " is substantially 
 true : " It is impossible to study any system of 
 worship throughout the world without being struck 
 with the peculiar persistence of the triple number 
 in regard to Divinity." Three, then, was some- 
 how held among the early races of mankind to be 
 a peculiarly sacred number, and as such especially 
 appropriate to deity. 
 
 That certain numbers have peculiar sacredness 
 was a very early tradition. Such were seven, ten, 
 as well as three. It was an ancient idea that 
 numbers had a deep and fundamental significance. 
 Pythagoras, the most famous and venerated name 
 in early Greek philosophy, built his whole system 
 
16 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 of the origin of the universe on numbers, finding 
 in them the first principles of order and beauty 
 and law. The peculiar sacredness of seven was 
 emphasized in Hebrew tradition and especially 
 recognized by the Mosaic laws, but was by no 
 means limited to that people. Christianity ac- 
 cepted the Old Testament idea, and the Koman 
 Cathohc Church has perpetuated it in its seven 
 sacraments, seven mortal sins, etc. It was a Py- 
 thagorean idea that odd numbers are more pro- 
 pitious than even numbers, and this superstition 
 has taken deep hold on men. The elder Pliny 
 declares : " Odd numbers have more power than 
 even ones." Virgil, in one of his Eclogues, sings : 
 " God takes delight in odd numbers." The Eo- 
 mans were very superstitious about unlucky even 
 days of the months. How far this explains the 
 early sacredness attached to three cannot be known. 
 But Plutarch tells us that "The Eomans were 
 very careful in their curses to repeat them three 
 times, — three being with them a mystic num- 
 ber." 
 
 There is a remarkable passage in Aristotle (" De 
 Ccelo," i. 1) in which he distinguishes line, plane, 
 and body as having magnitude in one, two, and 
 three directions. " Since body has magnitude in 
 three directions, it has magnitude in all directions : 
 hence three equals all, or is the complete or per- 
 fect number." He quotes the Pythagoreans to 
 the eifect that everything is marked off by threes : 
 "The end, the middle, and the beginning have 
 
THE RISE OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 17 
 
 the number of the whole and are a triad." Hence 
 he adds : " Therefore, having received from nature 
 as it were laws of it (^. e. the triad), we also em- 
 ploy this number (three) for the holy rites of the 
 gods. Moreover, we apply predicates of common 
 terms in the same manner. For we call the term 
 ' two,' or ' the two,' ' both,' but we do not style 
 them ' all.' But concerning ' the three,' we first 
 use this expression (all), and these forms of lan- 
 guage, as has been said, we follow because nature 
 herself thus leads the way.^^ This curious passage 
 plainly indicates that Aristotle found or thought 
 he found the number three to contain a unique 
 feature or principle of nature. The universe, he 
 conceived, is based on the principle of " the triad." 
 It is interesting to note how Aristotle connected 
 the laws of nature with those of religion and the 
 gods. The rites of religion in his day had appar- 
 ently some trinitarian features which he regarded 
 as somehow connected with the trinitarian char- 
 acter of nature itself. Aristotle does not pursue 
 this point farther, but plainly he started a line of 
 speculative thought which would have logically led 
 him to a trinitarian conception of God himself. 
 There is no trinitarian element in Aristotle's philo- 
 sophy, except so far as it may be drawn from the 
 general principles of Platonism, which he accepted ; 
 where, as we shall see farther on, a trinitarian 
 principle lurks. But plainly Aristotle must have 
 been struck with the evidences which nature 
 seemed to afford of a triadal character in the con- 
 
18 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 stitution of things. Too much, indeed, should not 
 be made of this passage, which occurs, not in a 
 philosophical work, but in a treatise of physics. 
 
 Aristotle, on the whole, cannot be counted as in 
 any sense a religious trinitarian. He held to the 
 unity of God, whether theistically or pantheisti- 
 cally is not quite clear. His testimony, therefore, 
 is the more remarkable, and helps us to understand 
 how the ancient world should have singled out 
 tTiree as a number of peculiar sacredness. The 
 indications of a natural and divine constitution 
 which Aristotle discerned in the triple characteris- 
 tics of external things may also be found in the hu- 
 man soul and in its laws of thought and reasoning. 
 Psychology finds a tripartite division clearly distin- 
 guishable in the soul. The functions of the intel- 
 lect, the sensibilities, and the will are quite diverse. 
 Yet the soul is one, with a single self-consciousness. 
 So, also, the logical reason works in a threefold 
 way. AU thought in its development involves 
 thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The Aristotelian 
 syllogism, which expresses the law of all logical 
 mental processes, consists of three parts : the major 
 premise, the minor premise, and the conclusion. 
 Augustine made use of such analogies drawn from 
 the composite nature of the soul and its activities 
 in his work on the Trinity. These tripartite dis- 
 tinctions which he finds in the faculties of man 
 are not of a very scientific character, but they 
 show that Aristotle's idea of a triad as a part of 
 the constitution of nature and as somehow symbol- 
 
THE RISE OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 19 
 
 izing the divine existence was a fertile thought, 
 and found reception in other minds. A consider- 
 able portion of Augustine's treatise is devoted to 
 the comparison of God as existing in trinity and 
 man as having a trinity of faculties and modes of 
 thought and action. 
 
 The same line of defense of the mysterious, if 
 not contradictory, character of God, as triime or 
 tri-personal, has been adopted by many later theo- 
 logians. The position has been taken that in the 
 very nature of things God must exist in trinity, 
 and that such a trinitarian mode of existence is 
 essential to the full expression of the moral and 
 personal life of God. The point to be noted is 
 that it is an argument for the dogma of the trinity 
 drawn from the triune distinctions found in nature 
 and in man. One form of this argument is seen 
 in the so-called " social trinity " recently set forth 
 by Shedd, Fairbairn, and others, — a view which 
 seems to have a singular popularity. It seems to 
 be assumed that a person must be put into social 
 relations with some other person or persons in 
 order to the exercise of self-consciousness, and as 
 before creation God was alone he must have had 
 an interior triple personality as the basis of con- 
 scious existence. This theory is simply another 
 speculative effort to explain and defend the three- 
 ness of God; but it is psychologically unsound. 
 Self-consciousness, which is the condition of per- 
 sonality, does not require the actual existence of 
 any individual non-ego in order to its activity. 
 
20 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 The Ego postulates its own subjective non-ego by 
 a psychological necessity. It is the mystery of 
 personality that the subject of it is self-conscious, 
 that is, has self-communion. God as a person is 
 a social unit, and needs no trinity of persons in 
 order to the exercise of his social nature. Man 
 certainly is not a "social trinity," yet the first 
 man Adam seems to have been very sociable with 
 himself before Eve was created to be a helpmeet 
 to him. When Robinson Crusoe, in the realistic 
 story of De Foe, was cast on a desert island with- 
 out human companionship, was it necessary that 
 his nature should be trinitarianized in order to the 
 continued exercise of his social, moral instincts ? 
 The simple suggestion of it carries on its face its 
 utter absurdity. What makes the story so true 
 to life is the natural way in which Robinson lives 
 alone, keeps a diary of his long solitude, and tells 
 us how he sighed and wept over his lonely lot. 
 Did it ever occur to any one that Crusoe was in 
 danger of losing his mind or capacity of seK-con- 
 sciousness during those twelve years of complete 
 isolation ? Rather, in fact, were not his faculties 
 of personality quickened into more vigorous activ- 
 ity by his lonely experience ? Such, certainly, is 
 the impression made by the story, — a story so 
 artfully told that it has all the verisimilitude of a 
 historical autobiography. And must we regard 
 the Divine personality as deficient in those quali- 
 ties of persistent self-consciousness which are so 
 plainly inherent in human persons ? 
 
THE EISE OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 21 
 
 Of all the metaphysical or logical theories that 
 have originated in the effort to make rational 
 and comprehensible to faith the traditional dogma 
 of the Christian trinity as three persons in one 
 God, this one of a social trinity, though it has the 
 prestige of many distinguished advocates, is the 
 most illogical and fatuous. As an explanation of 
 the divine tri-unity, it is a more concrete form 
 of the metaphysical conception of trinity as in- 
 volved in thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, but it is 
 equally fallacious. Dr. Schaff confesses that the 
 distinction of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis gives 
 only a Sabellian trinity, and a " social trinity " is 
 not tri-personal, for God's self-consciousness is 
 uni-personal, as is that of every moral being. I 
 refer to these examples of later theorizing on the 
 question of the necessity of a trinity in God as 
 showing how easily speculative thought may take 
 this direction, since natural analogies seem to fa- 
 vor it. 
 
 But whatever view be taken of such speculative 
 arguments for a trinity in God, from psychologi- 
 cal, logical, or social analogies, there is no evidence 
 that they ever arose in ancient times. They be- 
 long to a highly reflective and philosophical age. 
 I am even inclined to doubt whether the Ethnic 
 trinities owe their origin and growth in any way 
 to such refinements of thought as are connected 
 with attaching a sacred and mystical character to 
 numbers. The Pythagorean doctrine that num- 
 bers form the substance of things is an after- 
 
22 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 thought of a quite fully developed civilization. 
 The Etlinic trinities were a spontaneous evolu- 
 tion of the mythopoeic imagination of uncivilized 
 man, rather than a product of the speculative rea- 
 son, and their real causes must be sought in other 
 directions. 
 
 Recent anthropological investigations have 
 brought out into full light the fact that \hQ fam- 
 ily based on the union of the sexes is the original 
 foundation of human society. Such is the picture 
 given of the beginnings of social order in Genesis, 
 and it accords with the latest results of histor- 
 ical criticism. The most conspicuous and potent 
 principle of all life in the view of early man was 
 generation. This required the masculine and 
 feminine elements — the two uniting to produce 
 a third, namely, a son. Father, mother, son, — 
 these form the social trinity that lies behind all 
 human life and society. But this early interpreta- 
 tion of things did not stop there. Generation was 
 made equally the cause of the foundation of the 
 world. All the early cosmogonies and cosmologies 
 are built on this theory. Two original principles — 
 as, for example, the Heaven and Earth of Hesiod, 
 which are personified as male and female, or, in 
 the Chaldaeo-Babylonian religion, Ea, the god of 
 water, and Damkina, his wife, goddess of earth — 
 unite to produce through successive generations 
 the world. It is but a step further to introduce 
 a triad of gods as the generative source not only 
 of the world and man, but also of all the gods of 
 
THE RISE OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 23 
 
 polytheism. And in fact this generative idea, with 
 its triad of Father, Mother, and Son, gives us the 
 keynote of the Ethnic trinities. Professor Sayce, 
 in his " Hibbert Lectures," declares : " The only 
 genuine trinity that can be discovered in the re- 
 ligious faith of early Chaldsea was that old Acca- 
 dian system which conceived of a divine father and 
 mother by the side of their son, the sun god ; " and 
 he further adds : " The keystone of Semitic belief 
 was the generative character of the deity. A lan- 
 guage which divided nouns into masculine and 
 feminine found it difficult to conceive of a deity 
 which was not masculine and feminine too. The 
 divine hierarchy was necessarily regarded as a 
 family, at the head of which stood ' father Bel.' " 
 The study of the other Ethnic religions discloses 
 the same fact. With many variations of form 
 the generative triad is the principle that binds 
 aU these religions together and gives us one key 
 to the explanation of their trinitarian character. 
 Here is the explanation of the origin of the term 
 father — so frequent a name of the first and high- 
 est god in all the Ethnic religions. The tradi- 
 tional idea that the fatherhood of God is a part 
 of the new revelation of the Christian gospel is 
 a historical error. It pervades the Ethnic reli- 
 gions, and lies at the foundations of the Ethnic 
 trinities. Homer's title of Zeus, " father of gods 
 and men," was a part of the religious inheritance 
 of the Aryan race; and behind the Hebrew Se- 
 mitic belief in Jehovah as the creator and father of 
 
24 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 mankind was the earlier ChaldaBO-Babylonian faith 
 in " the sovereign father Ea." Plato showed his 
 reUgious conservatism in calling the creator of the 
 world and man, in his " Timaeus," " the great father 
 of the gods." Even Plotinus, pantheist as he was, 
 continually styles his first hypostasis, to li/, " Fa- 
 ther," paying so much of deference to tradition. 
 When Jesus of Nazareth taught his disciples to 
 pray, " Our Father, who art in heaven," he was 
 only following, though with new insight and clearer 
 apprehension, the well-nigh universal religious con- 
 sciousness of the race. 
 
 The feminine element, which was fundamental 
 in the generative theory, kept its place and func- 
 tion in the Ethnic trinities. The first and second 
 members of a triad are usually husband and wife, 
 thus preparing the way for the son, or third per- 
 son, who often becomes the chief object of faith 
 and worship, for a reason which wlQ soon appear. 
 The prominence of the female goddess is marked 
 in all the ancient religions. In the Homeric 
 Olympus, Here and Athene are closely connected 
 with Zeus in power and function. So in the 
 Roman religion, Juno and Minerva form with 
 Jupiter the Capitoline triad. In the Egyptian 
 trinity of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, Isis, the wife and 
 mother, was the most popular member, and Isis 
 temples and rites became the fashion at Rome in 
 the Imperial times. Ashtaroth, whose name ap- 
 pears in the Old Testament, was, under the name 
 of Istar, a member of the Babylonian triad, and 
 
THE RISE OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 25 
 
 had a Chaldsean origin. It is to be said, however, 
 that the feminine element is less prominent in later 
 Ethnic trinities, and in the latest and most fully- 
 developed examples, namely, the Hindoo and Plo- 
 tinian, it quite disappears, and a masculine mem- 
 ber takes its place. But while the aspects of wife 
 and mother faded out of view in many of the 
 Ethnic trinities, the aspect of son, as the third 
 member of the triad, grew continually in impor- 
 tance and conspicuousness, — supplanting often 
 the first god or father in popular favor and wor- 
 ship. Thus Marduk, the great god of the Baby- 
 lonians, is a god-son of " the sovereign father 
 Ea." Among his titles are " first-born son," " only- 
 begotten," " holy son." 
 
 The naturalistic character of the Ethnic trini- 
 ties here comes into distinct view. Among the 
 earliest, most remarkable, and widespread forms 
 of human worship was that of the sun or sun-god. 
 Traces of it are found in almost every known re- 
 ligion, and its popularity grew from age to age. 
 Never was it greater than in the latest Graeco- 
 Roman times. Constantine, before his conversion 
 to Christianity, was a devoted worshiper of He- 
 lios or Apollo, the sun-god, and Julian his nephew, 
 the last pagan emperor, made sun worship the 
 centre of his New Platonic religion. Thus, in 
 the Greek world Father Zeus had given place in 
 popular belief to his son, the sun-god Apollo. 
 The same was true in the Egyptian world, where 
 the sun-god Horus, the son of Isis and Osiris, 
 
26 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 became the popular divinity. It is interesting to 
 note how easily the third member of the Ethnic 
 triad, the son, became metamorphosed into the 
 sun-god. The Babylonian Marduk was the sun- 
 god, like the Greek Apollo and the Egyptian 
 Horus, and thus the deep hold of sun worship on 
 men was transferred to the son of the generative 
 triad and increased his greatness and power. So 
 that it may be said that when Christianity began 
 to spread in the world, its most powerful competi- 
 tor and rival was that member of the Ethnic 
 triads which represented the product of the gen- 
 erative principle and which also represented the 
 latest relic of the primeval nature worship, the 
 sun-god, the god of light, heat, life, and blessing 
 to the world. 
 
 But there is another distinct line of causation 
 that played its part in the Ethnic trinitarian de- 
 velopment. The earliest religious attitude of men 
 toward the powers of nature, which they mytholo- 
 gized into supernatural divine beings, was one of 
 fear and supplication. But how could they reach 
 the ears of the sovereign Father of the gods, who 
 dwelt in the highest heavens? The need of a 
 mediating and intercessory being between man 
 and God — a point which Plato made so central 
 in his dualistic philosophy, and which was borrowed 
 from Platonism and developed more fully by Philo, 
 Paul, the author of the Fourth Gospel, and finally 
 by Plotinus in New Platonism — has been echoed 
 by all human souls from the beginning of time. 
 
THE RISE OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 27 
 
 Ancient philosophy was largely employed in the 
 effort to explain how the deity is related to the 
 world and man, and how the bridge between them 
 can be crossed, and a basis be established for hu- 
 man prayer and worship and communion. Plato's 
 mediation doctrine, which has so deeply affected all 
 later thought, was anticipated in the Ethnic trini- 
 ties. Here came in the special function of the 
 son, the third member of the triad, or second mem- 
 ber, as he sometimes became. Merodach, the Baby- 
 lonian sun-god, " the son of Ea, the first-born of 
 the gods," was " intercessor between god and 
 man," " interpreter of the will of his father Ea," 
 " the redeemer." So Agni, one of the most re- 
 markable and popular of the ancient deities of 
 India, — himself triune, also a member of a trin- 
 ity, namely, Dyaus, Indra, Agni, — a son of 
 Indra, is described in the Vedic hymns as "the 
 best friend of man among the gods," as " not far 
 off," as " house priest and friend," " chief sacrifi- 
 cial priest," "messenger," "a link between earth 
 and heaven," " man's guest." In a hymn to Agni 
 it is said : " May he bring the gods here to us." 
 " As a father to his son be easy of access to us." 
 It was these mediating deities, who were brought 
 by their functions into nearer and closer relations 
 with man, that became the great objects of popular 
 veneration and worship. 
 
 It is to be noticed in this connection that the 
 mediative idea by itself requires but two divine 
 beings, not a trinity. But even the mediating god, 
 
28 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 the son of the father, might easily be regarded as 
 still so distant as to need another mediating being 
 to fill, in some further measure, the void. It was 
 thus that Platonism introduced the doctrine of 
 subordinate gods or daemons to fill the middle 
 stage between God and man. So we find in one 
 of the Babylonian trinities Merodach raised to the 
 second place in the triad, and a second mediator 
 introduced as the third member. This helps us 
 to understand the later growth and greater indefi- 
 niteness of development of the third member of 
 several Ethnic trinities. The same fact occurs in 
 the history of the Christian trinity, and will be 
 noticed later. 
 
 If we compare the generative idea with that of 
 mediation as causes producing the Ethnic trinities, 
 both are found united in many of them, and that 
 very early in their history. In fact, the two ideas 
 run naturally together and form parts of one gen- 
 eral view. Sonship and mediatorship are closely 
 affiliated. Who can so well represent the father 
 of our race as his own son? Christianity laid 
 hold of this natural affiliation in its doctrine that 
 God sent his only begotten Son into the world to 
 be his messenger of love and mercy and to be a 
 mediator between him and his human creatures. 
 
 In considering the causes that have contributed 
 to the production of the Ethnic trinities we might 
 stop at this point, for we think the two great 
 causes have been brought to light. Generation as 
 the original force in the formation of the world 
 
THE RISE OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 29 
 
 of gods and men, and mediatorship as the great 
 principle by which aU moral beings are brought 
 into relations of amity and fellowship with God, 
 — these afford a satisfactory historical explanation 
 of the Ethnic trinities, and we need look no 
 farther. But the survey is not quite complete 
 without considering a point or two more. We 
 have seen that in the Ethnic religions there was a 
 historical evolution from multiplicity to unity. In 
 this movement the Ethnic trinities were a sort of 
 half-way house, and it was natural that some of 
 them should stop there, while others moved on to 
 dualism, and others still to monism. It may be 
 even said of several Ethnic religions that they are 
 polytheistic, trinitarian, dualistic, and monistic. 
 This is especially true of the Persian Zoroastrian- 
 ism, one of the purest and noblest of them all, an- 
 ticipating in many of its doctrines those of Chris- 
 tianity. The Ethnic trinities were also a natural 
 stage in the pantheistic counter-evolution from 
 unity to multiplicity, which was an outgrowth of 
 philosophic thought, and is illustrated in Hin- 
 dooism and Plotinian New Platonism. Hindooism, 
 starting from unity in Brahm, proceeds to the tri- 
 murti, Brahma, Vishnu, and Civa, and thence on 
 down through the whole pantheon of divine beings 
 to man and the lowest forms of existence. So 
 Plotinus made his starting-point a pure abstrac- 
 tion, TO €v (the one), out of which he drew his 
 "three hypostases," which became the fountain- 
 head of an evolution that embraced all things. It 
 
30 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 is a curious fact that the most recent effort of 
 Christian trinitarian theologians to set forth the 
 triple nature of God, as most completely satisfying 
 the speculative reason in its efforts to harmonize 
 the conflicting categories of unity and multiplicity, 
 or of sameness and difference, is precisely that 
 which marks the philosophic trinitarianism of the 
 Ethnic religions. Surely speculative philosophies 
 in their attempts to solve the mysteries of the uni- 
 verse often find themselves in strange company, 
 and the moral is that some mysteries which must 
 be accepted as facts can never be satisfactorily 
 explained. It is the old. story, so continually re- 
 hearsed, of the captive bird uselessly chafing its 
 wings against the network of the cage that holds 
 it with a relentless grasp. The common panthe- 
 istic tendency that lurks in all these vain attempts 
 is strikingly apparent. 
 
CHAPTER in 
 
 GENEEAL CHAKACTER AND RELATIONS OF THE 
 ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 We pass now from the causes that united to 
 develop the Ethnic trinities to a more direct con- 
 sideration of their interior characteristics. The 
 facts at the basis of such a consideration cover so 
 vast a field that it is impossible to attempt any- 
 thing more than a cursory survey. It is essential, 
 however, to any adequate comparison of the Ethnic 
 trinities with the Christian trinitarian dogma, such 
 as is proposed, that this part of the subject should 
 be carefuUy examined, and, after a summary gen- 
 eral statement, I shall give a more minute account 
 of several of the Ethnic trinities that were more 
 highly developed, and that present interesting 
 points of comparison to the Christian trinity. 
 
 A comparative examination of the Ethnic trini- 
 ties reveals many points of clear resemblance and 
 also considerable variety of form and development. 
 The resemblances suggest the question whether 
 they do not all spring from a common root. That 
 there was such a common root in the form of a 
 primitive revelation to the first parents of the race 
 has been the traditional view of Christian theolo- 
 gians ; but it is completely overthrown by the 
 
32 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 whole trend of historical investigation. The very- 
 differences, which are quite radical and appear in 
 the earliest historical times, indicate diverse and 
 independent origins. The old unscientific theory 
 of an original unity of the race, with a single an- 
 cestral abode, language, and religion, is contradicted 
 by the plainest historical facts. Such unity is the 
 still far-off goal of human civilization and pro- 
 gress, — still a political, ecclesiastical, and philoso- 
 phical ideal, not a fact of man's beginnings. The 
 pre-Adamite, pre-historical men were essentially 
 savages. Gradually populating and spreading 
 over the vast wilds of the earth, they roved in 
 small clans whither they would, until the nomadic 
 state gave place to the agricultural and stationary. 
 Meanwhile diverse languages, customs, traditions, 
 ideas, modes of social and political life, grew up 
 everywhere. Such a thing as a general wide- 
 spread social order was utterly unknown. SmaU 
 tribes lived in isolation or in frequent war, resist- 
 ing all intrusions from without. It was in such a 
 condition of human life that the different Ethnic 
 religions and trinities had their earliest begin- 
 nings. To explain them by intercommunication 
 and borrowing of religious ideas is impossible, for 
 they are found at the same time in all parts of the 
 world, in Asia, Africa, Europe, America, and the 
 islands of the Pacific. There is only one rational 
 way to account for them. They are the result of 
 the common religious instincts and needs of human 
 nature. At first sight it seems strange that so many 
 
RELATIONS OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 33 
 
 independent trinitarian religions should have arisen 
 spontaneously among men. But the study we have 
 already made of the causes that worked toward 
 their formation goes far to solve the mystery. 
 These causes deal mainly with facts, laws, condi- 
 tions, needs, aspirations, of a universal character. 
 In truth, the prevalence of divine triads in the re- 
 ligions of the world is to be explained in the same 
 general way as the wide prevalence of sacrificial 
 cults, of idolatrous worship, of rites such as cir- 
 cumcision and baptism, of calendars of holy and 
 secular days, and especially of a seventh day of 
 peculiar sacredness. All these ideas, customs, 
 rites, institutions, are a natural and spontaneous 
 outgrowth of the common conditions and yearnings 
 of man's religious nature. They are not peculiar 
 to any one people or class of peoples, but are the 
 common inheritance of the race. The same is true 
 of a doctrine of God. The religious instincts of 
 man cry out for " God, the living God," and every- 
 where throughout the world, even among the most 
 degraded tribes, some conception of God has taken 
 shape iQ some form of religious faith and worship. 
 The Ethnic trinities are simply developments of 
 such religious impulses and cravings. Man cre- 
 ates God in his own image. He sees the genera- 
 tive force operative in all nature, and he builds 
 a theogony of deity in which Fatherhood and 
 Motherhood and Sonship play their parts. He 
 looks upon God as far distant in the heavens, 
 dwelling in sun, moon, and stars, and, fearing his 
 
34 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 power, he builds a triad in whicli a son-mediator 
 may be a daysman between him and his Maker. 
 He sees or fancies he sees a triple character or 
 principle at work in the world, and so he invests 
 the number three with a peculiar sacredness and 
 reduces his divine pantheon to a trinity of beings 
 that somehow represents or includes the whole. 
 
 But while common religious instincts and wants 
 produced a common trinitarianism among numer- 
 ous separated tribes and nations, there are wide 
 divergences among them in the strictness and com- 
 pleteness of the trinitarian development. In some 
 of them it is loosely and hesitatingly set forth, 
 in others much more rigidly and definitely. This 
 usually depends upon the degree of intellectual 
 and philosophical advancement of the people. The 
 French archaeologist, A. Bertrand, in his recent 
 most instructive work, "La Religion des Gau- 
 lois," proves beyond question from archaeological 
 discoveries the existence of triads and trinitarian 
 ideas among the Gauls; but such ideas assumed 
 the crudest and most iUusive shapes, as, for in- 
 stance, in the tricephalous or three-faced heads of 
 divinities found on altars and vases. On the other 
 hand, among the more highly civilized Chaldaeans, 
 Babylonians, Assyrians, and Egyptians, triads of 
 ^ods were a common and notable feature of their 
 theogonies. It is, however, among the three most 
 philosophically cultured peoples of the ancient 
 world that the most highly developed trinities are 
 found, namely, the Hindoos, the Persians, and the 
 
RELATIONS OF THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 35 
 
 Greeks. The Zoroastrian, the Brahmanistic, and 
 New Platonic trinities are not only quite fully de- 
 veloped along the line of the trinitarian evolution, 
 but form component parts of highly elaborated 
 philosophical systems, reminding one of the subtle 
 theological speculations of the Nicene age on which 
 were built the wonderful metaphysical superstruc- 
 ture of the homoousian trinity. 
 
 Akin to this class of facts is the noticeable ease 
 with which the Ethnic trinities are modified or re- 
 adjusted to meet new circumstances or influences, 
 while still preserving their trinitarian character. 
 The names and offices of the three members of the 
 triad are subject to change. The earlier Accadian 
 trinity becomes reorganized among the Babyloni- 
 ans, and the Babylonian trinity in turn is amended 
 by the Assyrians. Egypt had numerous local 
 trinitarian cults. There was one triad at Mem- 
 phis, another at Thebes, another at Abydos, and 
 almost every district had its local triad. Even in 
 the same locality a triad had a fluxive character, 
 at least so far as names and functions were con- 
 cerned. The number three itself was sometimes 
 invaded or its significance extended. In some 
 Egyptian localities a fourth god was added, though 
 usually of a subordinate character. It was also 
 the case in Egypt especially, where the trinitarian 
 element was wholly subject to the universal poly- 
 theism, that there should be triple combinations of 
 triads, and even a further triplicity. The fam- 
 ily or generative idea that was so fundamental to 
 
36 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 almost all the Ethnic trinities also tended to give 
 elasticity to the triads. Each of the gods in the 
 Babylonian triad had his wife, and wives were 
 common in many Ethnic trinities, thus in a sense 
 duplicating the number, though it is doubtful 
 whether the wives were thought of as separate from 
 their male companions. These peculiarities of the 
 Ethnic trinities are of course to be explained by 
 the common polytheism that underlies them all, 
 though this polytheistic feature is less obtrusive in 
 some cases than in others. As we have seen, a 
 triad of gods is a natural stage in any polytheistic 
 or monotheistic evolution. What is remarkable is 
 that, in any thoroughly polytheistic form of reli- 
 gion, the idea of a trinity should have had such 
 prominence or persistency. It helps one to realize 
 how deep must have been the impression made on 
 the ancient world by those phenomena of nature 
 and of man that led them to place generation and 
 mediatorship at the very basis of their religious 
 ideas of God and of his relations with themselves. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE HINDOO BEAHMANIC TRINITY 
 
 From this general survey I pass to a particular 
 description of the three great representatives of 
 the Ethnic trinities, namely, the Hindoo, the Zoro- 
 astrian, and the Greek. This chapter will be de- 
 voted to the Hindoo. 
 
 The Hindoo religion appears in the Vedas in 
 full polytheistic form, as a deification of the phe- 
 nomena and powers of nature. There were three 
 classes of divinities, the gods of the sky, of the 
 lower atmosphere, and of the earth. The earliest 
 worship made the sky gods most prominent, but 
 the tendency was towards the prominence of the 
 lower divinities, since they were supposed to be in 
 closer relations with men. Thus the earlier sky 
 gods give way to the atmospheric gods, and they 
 in turn to the earth gods. Varuna is supplanted 
 by Indra, and Indra in turn by Agni, who be- 
 comes the central deity of the whole Hindoo poly- 
 theistic pantheon, — a triune god, " the first trial- 
 ity," comprehending in himself the threefold unity, 
 typical of earth, atmosphere, and heaven. Here 
 already the pantheistic strain begins to appear, 
 which finally in later Hindoo philosophy triumphs 
 completely over the earlier polytheism. Of Agni 
 
38 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 it is said, " in Mm are all the gods." It is this 
 peculiar character of earth god, including also the 
 higher orders of divinities, that invests him with 
 the mediatorial functions of which I have already 
 spoken. This triune feature of Agni is described 
 in language that reminds one forcibly of modern 
 Sabellian expressions concerning the Christian 
 trinity. " Threefold is my light." " He is aU 
 threefold, three are his tongues, his births, his 
 places of sojourn, thrice led about the sacrifice given 
 thrice a day." Meanwhile the trinitarian idea is 
 emerging already in the Vedic period, fluctuating, 
 however, in the names of the triad as the tendency 
 of popular thought and worship passes from the 
 higher to the lower gods, until it takes a more pro- 
 nounced shape in Dyaus, Indra, and Agni, which 
 may be called the Vedic trinity, as compared with 
 the later Brahmanic trinity of Brahma, Vishnu, 
 and Civa. This Vedic trinity illustrates the ten- 
 dency from the primitive subordination of the 
 lower deities to their equality with the higher and 
 to the practical substitution of the third member 
 for the first and second in the popular faith and 
 worship. It is Agni, the third member of the 
 Vedic trinity, who is creator of the world, and high- 
 priest and mediator and guest and friend of man. 
 This feature of Hindooism is the historical pre- 
 cursor of a similar development in the history of 
 the Christian trinitarian dogma, where the earlier 
 subordination element in the case of the second 
 and third persons is at length wholly obliterated by 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 39 
 
 Augustine and the Western Churcli, and a com- 
 plete equality is established. The pantheistic ele- 
 ment which is to be noted in the triune character 
 of Agni grows more and more pronounced in later 
 Vedic times. There is a tendency to a unification 
 of divinities, which prepares the way for the com- 
 plete pantheism of the Brahmanic period. The 
 language of the priests and philosophers reminds 
 us of the Stoic writers by whom the old gods are 
 still honored with the lips, and the polytheistic lan- 
 guage is retained, but whose figurative or allegori- 
 cal method of interpretation reduces it all to the 
 baldest pantheism. It is at this point that the 
 idea of the God-Father rises into notice, in a way 
 that is suggestive of Platonism, especially in its 
 New Platonic form. 
 
 The next stage in the evolution of Hindooism is 
 Buddhism, — one of the most remarkable move- 
 ments in the world's religious history. Gautama 
 or Buddha, " the enlightened," as he came to be 
 called, was not a radical reformer of the Vedic 
 faith, but a saint, or earnest seeker after personal 
 salvation. He opened a new " way " to heaven. 
 While Brahmanism sought the heavenly life 
 through knowledge or asceticism, Gautama sought 
 it by purity and love. Philosophically he was an 
 agnostic, but Buddhism as a religion became athe- 
 istic, acknowledging neither god nor personal im- 
 mortality. Gautama resembled Jesus in this, that 
 he was not a dogmatist but a moral teacher. The 
 similarity between the teachings of Buddha and 
 
40 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 those of Christ is certainly striking. He pro- 
 claimed a free gospel for aU men, declaring against 
 all castes or priesthoods or aristocracy of know- 
 ledge. How strange in an age when the religion 
 of the many was so radically different from that 
 of the few to hear such words as these : " I have 
 preached the truth without making any distinction 
 between exoteric and esoteric doctrine, for in re- 
 spect of truth, Avander, your master, has no such 
 thing as the closed fist of a teacher who keeps 
 some things back." If one would realize how 
 full of reminders Buddha's teaching was of the 
 sayings of Christ, in its whole tenor and spirit, let 
 him read the Dhammapada, one of the canoni- 
 cal books of the Buddhists, which contains a col- 
 lection of the reputed sayings of Buddha. How 
 authentic this collection is it is impossible to say, 
 but certainly it was believed to be such by Bud- 
 dhists of a later generation, and it breathes a spirit 
 of religion "pure and undefiled," as realistic as 
 the Sermon on the Mount or the parable of the 
 sower. The " kingdom of God " for Buddha, like 
 Christ's, was " within." Righteousness was not a 
 matter of outward works, or ceremonies, but of 
 inward character. Let me give a few selections 
 from Buddha's sayings in illustration : " All that 
 we are is the result of what we have thought. If 
 a man speaks or acts with a pure thought, happi- 
 ness follows him like a shadow that never leaves 
 him." " Hatred does not cease by hatred at any 
 time ; hatred ceases by love : this is an old rule." 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 41 
 
 " If a man conquer himself he is the greatest of 
 conquerors." "Bad deeds and deeds hurtful to 
 ourselves are easy to do ; what is beneficial and 
 good, that is very difficult to do." " Let a man 
 overcome anger by love ; let him overcome evil by 
 good." " Speak the truth, do not yield to anger, 
 give if thou art asked for little, and by these three 
 steps thou wilt go near the gods." " The best 
 of men is he who has eyes to see." " As a solid 
 rock is not shaken by the wind, wise people falter 
 not amidst blame and praise." " First of all let a 
 man establish himself in the good, then only can 
 he instruct others." " He who is permeated by 
 goodness, let him turn to the land of peace, where 
 transientness finds an end, to happiness." " A rest 
 like that of the deep sea, calm and clear, the wise 
 find who hear the truth." Surely, if these pas- 
 sages were incorporated bodily in Christ's Sermon 
 on the Mount, there would be no moral jar, rather 
 a complete rhythmic spiritual harmony. We shall 
 not be surprised now to find that Buddha taught 
 a gospel that was for all mankind. " The Exalted 
 One appears in the world for salvation, for joy to 
 many people, out of compassion for the world, for 
 the blessing, the salvation, the joy of gods and 
 men." 
 
 No authentic biography of Buddha has come 
 down to us. The earliest accounts were sayings 
 or logia placed in a historical setting of narrative 
 to explain the occasion of what was said, very 
 much as the Memorabilia of Socrates by Xeno- 
 
42 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 phon were constructed, or the Synoptic gospels. 
 The later lives, which bear so close a likeness in 
 many ways to the gospel accounts of Christ, are 
 wholly legendary. One of the most remarkable of 
 these legends is that of Buddha's temptation by 
 Mara the Evil One. The earliest form of the tra- 
 dition was that Buddha, before setting out on his 
 public career, fasted for twenty-eight days. The 
 temptation was a later addition. Of course the 
 marvelous similarity of the account to that given 
 in the gospels of Christ's fasting and temptation 
 by the devil strikes every reader. Oldenberg well 
 says on this point : " It seems scarcely necessary 
 to observe that in both cases the same obvious 
 motives have given rise to the corresponding nar- 
 rative; the notion of an influence exerted by 
 Buddhist traditions on Christian cannot be enter- 
 tained." Neither can the opposite idea of a coun- 
 ter influence be considered ; for the Buddhist tra- 
 dition is certainly the earlier. Such legendary 
 accounts began to gather around the life of Buddha 
 not many years after his death. Buddha himseK 
 became deified and finally was made the supreme 
 deity, incarnating himself from time to time in one 
 and another human being. His birth was also 
 made miraculous, involving a divine as well as 
 human element. 
 
 Buddhism finally became a sort of exile from 
 India, but its leaven remained, and later trinitarian 
 Hindooism introduced Buddha into its pantheon 
 as one of the incarnations of Vishnu. This brings 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 43 
 
 us to the last stage of the development of Hindoo- 
 ism, the great sectarian trinity of Brahma, Vishnu, 
 and Civa. 
 
 The Hindoo trimurti grew out of the Brah- 
 manic pantheism, which was itself based on Vedic 
 polytheism with its triads. Brahma became the 
 absolute god of pantheistic Brahmanism, while the 
 old Vedic divinities were retained as forms or 
 creations of Brahma. The Maha-bharata, one of 
 the two great Indian epics, gives us the intermedi- 
 ate stage between Brahmanism and the more com- 
 pletely developed Hindooism of later times. In 
 this epic the pantheistic character of the trinity 
 is clearly visible. There is one absolute form of 
 deity, namely, Brahma or Brahm, but he appears 
 in three personal manifestations, Vishnu, Civa, 
 Brahma, " one form, three gods." Everywhere the 
 real identity of the three gods is implied. Krishna, 
 the hero of the epic, who is represented as an in- 
 carnation of Vishnu, declares himself to be " the 
 supreme being, having no beginning," "the pro- 
 ductive cause of the entire universe, and also its 
 destroyer," " the beginning, the middle, and the 
 end of beings," thus identifying himself with 
 Brahma and Civa as well as with Vishnu, and 
 uniting in himseK the functions of aU three. But 
 this strongly pantheistic reaction was followed by 
 an evolution towards a more systematized trinita- 
 rianism, in which the distinctly personal character 
 of the members of the trinity is emphasized. The 
 earlier epical definition of deity as " one form, 
 
44 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 three gods " is inverted into " three gods, one 
 form." Such is the fully developed Hindoo tri- 
 murtL But it must not be supposed that the 
 sectarian trinity of later Puranic Hindooism is 
 any less pantheistic in fact than the older trinity 
 of the Epic, or of the Brahmanical books. The 
 question among the sects came to be which person 
 of the three is the true Brahma. This is the pecul- 
 iarity of the sectarian orthodoxy of later Hindoo- 
 ism. Under cover of it different sects could unite, 
 — each calling itself trinitarian, but claiming that 
 the trinity of Vishnu, Civa, and Brahma was 
 really contained in one or other of the three. This 
 pantheistic trinitarianism " was eventually repre- 
 sented under the symbol of a body with three 
 heads " — a mode of setting forth triunity which 
 was anticipated by the Celtic Gauls in their crude 
 altars and tombs called tricephales. 
 
 Such in brief is the history of the evolution of 
 the Hmdoo trimurti. Several points are notice- 
 able as we study its internal character. First, it 
 was a direct historical development of Vedic reli- 
 gious thought, and is rooted in polytheistic, and 
 not in monotheistic ideas, thus representing a stage 
 from multiplicity to unity — in this respect differ- 
 ing from the Christian trinitarian evolution, which 
 moved from unity to multiplicity, and agreeing 
 with all the Ethnic trinities. Secondly, the Hin- 
 doo trimurti represents a movement on philo- 
 sophical lines towards a pantheistic, not a mono- 
 theistic unity. It is impossible, within the limits 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 45 
 
 of this survey, to follow all the successive stages 
 of development. The old Vedic triads gradually 
 gave way to new ones, and to a more complete 
 poljrtheism, with a dim background of monothe- 
 ism. This principle of imity became a subject of 
 philosophic study, and in Brahmanism took a com- 
 pletely pantheistic form. Brahm was at first the 
 term for mere eternal absolute existence. This 
 impersonal form of deity subsequently became 
 personalized in Brahma, the masculine of Brahm, 
 and formed the First Person of the Hindoo trin- 
 ity. Brahma was the Creator and Father of all 
 things. As the Vedic religion starts with physi- 
 cal phenomena and its gods are personifications 
 of natural forces, so the Hindoo philosophical 
 trinity followed the same materialistic lines. AU 
 phenomena involve three laws or conditions of 
 existence, generation or creation, preservation, de- 
 struction and reproduction, and these forces are in 
 constant operation through succession and interac- 
 tion. The Hindoo triad laid hold of these trini- 
 tarian aspects of nature. To Brahma, the Creator, 
 was added Vishnu, one of the oldest Vedic sun 
 gods, who was raised to a higher rank as the 
 second person of the triad, the preserver. Then 
 Civa, also an ancient divinity, under the form of 
 the fire god, Rudra, became the third person, as the 
 destroyer and regenerator. Originally these three 
 gods were not regarded as forming three absolute 
 independent Beings, but as created and dependent, 
 while on an equality with each other, being com- 
 
46 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 mon emanations from the Absolute One, thus in- 
 dicating their polytheistic background. But as 
 the evolution moved on the relation of the three 
 became more pronounced and close. The under- 
 lying pantheism of aU Indian philosophy became 
 the uniting element in the new Hindoo triad. 
 Brahma, Vishnu, and Civa ceased to be equal 
 gods or forms of one god, and became a trinity 
 in co-relation and subordination, though the pan- 
 theistic element still ruled it and merged the 
 three together in one common divine existence. As 
 this more complete trinitarian form became de- 
 veloped, the relations of the three members of the 
 triad were changed, and also the order of subordi- 
 nation. In the Purana period Vishnu is the high- 
 est and supreme god, Civa is second, unless treated 
 as a rival of Vishnu, while Brahma, who originally 
 was first in rank and authority, falls to the third 
 place, — a process which we shall see again and 
 again occurring in the history of the Ethnic trini- 
 ties, and which forms a curious chapter in the evo- 
 lution of the Christian trinitarianism. In the final 
 stage of Hindoo trinitarian development its pan- 
 theism is complete. For the Vishnuite Vishnu is 
 the absolute god, and the other two members of 
 the triad are merely forms or names of Vishnu. 
 The same is true of Civa for the Civaite. In 
 other words, Hindoo trinitarianism becomes sec- 
 tarian, and it is such a sectarian trinity within 
 whose pantheistic folds the two great Hindoo sects 
 have managed to live together down to the present 
 day. 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 47 
 
 But, thirdly, the most remarkable chapter in 
 the evolution of the Hindoo trimurti is the in- 
 carnation of Vishnu in the form of Krishna, the 
 god-man. The idea of a divine incarnation was 
 not new in Indian thought. It is a fundamental 
 element of aU mythologies. Gods are continually 
 appearing as human beings, assuming the form of 
 a man or woman, or even for the time personating 
 some actual man or woman, as, in the Odyssey, 
 Athene assumed the form of Mentor, and went 
 with Telemachus as his companion to the court of 
 Nestor. The theory of transmigration which is so 
 embedded in Indian thought has a clear affinity 
 with that of incarnation. The lines between the 
 brute, the human, and the divine worlds, between 
 the natural and the supernatural, were not sharply 
 drawn in those early unscientific times, as they 
 are to-day. There was nothing extraordinary to 
 the Indian thinker any more than to the Greek, 
 in the descent of the gods to companionship with 
 men, and in the assumption of human guise. He- 
 brew thought shows traces in the Old Testament 
 of the same anthropomorphizing tendency. Abra- 
 ham is represented as entertaining divine beings, 
 who appeared as men and ate at his table. But 
 the Vishnu-Krishna incarnation doctrine has one 
 peculiarity. It was not a temporary manifestation 
 of a god to men in a human form. It was a per- 
 manent incarnation of the Absolute Deity in a 
 divine man, who was born, and lived, and died like 
 other men. These incarnations of Vishnu were 
 
48 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 indeed repeated according to human needs, but 
 each incarnation was a true birth into a true hu- 
 man nature. Krishna thus describes it in the 
 Bhagavat-Gita, or " Divine Song," to his friend 
 Arjuna : " Many births of mine have passed away, 
 O Arjuna, but thou hast not known them. 
 Though I am unborn and of essence that knoweth 
 no deterioration, though I am the lord of creatures, 
 still, relying on my own nature, I take birth by 
 my own powers of illusion. Whensoever loss of 
 piety occurreth and the rise of wickedness, then 
 do I create myself. For the 'protection of the 
 righteous^ for the destruction of evil-doers^ for 
 the sake of establishing piety, I am horn age 
 after age^ The Maha-bharata, or " Great Epic," 
 represents Krishna as " born of a woman," living 
 an active human life among men, and finally as 
 suffering death like any other mortal. Yet in the 
 " Divine Song," which is included iu the " Great 
 Epic," Krishna again and again speaks in the 
 person of Vishnu, describing himself as the " Su- 
 preme Being." And Arjuna replying, after hav- 
 ing been allowed a vision of Vishnu in his divine 
 glory, addresses him, " I bow to thee, O chief of 
 the gods ; be gracious unto me. I desire to know 
 thee that art the primeval one." These passages 
 surely remind one of the Christian doctrine, and 
 irresistibly force on the Christian historical stu- 
 dent the question whether the Hindoo Vishnu- 
 Krishna incarnation doctrine is not borrowed from 
 Christianity itself. Some Christian scholars have 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 49 
 
 held to this view, but all recent investigations have 
 tended more and more strongly to the opposite 
 side, and to my mind there can be no historical 
 doubt as to the main lines of fact. Interpolation 
 has played a part in all ancient and mediaeval 
 literature. This is especially true of the so-called 
 sacred books of the world. The more sacred the 
 writing, the stronger the temptation to make addi- 
 tions in the form of new matter, or of new inter- 
 pretation of the old. The Indian sacred books 
 are not exceptional. The " Great Epic " is, like 
 the Old Testament as it now appears in Jewish 
 literature, the result of many recensions involving 
 growth and enlargement. It is a vast compound 
 of myth, legend, history, philosophy, and poetry, 
 gathered around the golden age of Hindoo tradi- 
 tion. Whether it contains any real historical mat- 
 ter is doubtful. Like Homer, it is mainly a com- 
 pendium of legendary traditions. These traditions 
 extend back into the origins of Indian history, and 
 are filled with the true Indian spirit. What may 
 be called the first edition of the " Great Epic " as 
 a written work may be dated certainly as early as 
 the third or fourth century B. c, but additions con- 
 tinued to be made to it down to the Christian era, 
 and afterwards on to the sixth century. Of course 
 there were opportunities for later borrowings from 
 the growing Christian traditions ; and these bor- 
 rowings can be easily discovered by plain marks of 
 internal evidence. Some of these are drawn from 
 the New Testament gospels, and others are copies 
 
60 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 in spirit if not in the exact letter of the legendary' 
 apocryphal lives of Christ. But the nucleus and 
 substance of the Vishnu-Krishna incarnation is 
 just as surely pre-Christian and of native Indian 
 origin as the Hindoo Triad itself. It bears the 
 clear marks of Hindoo genius and thought. The 
 differences between it and the Christian dogma, 
 which are radical and essential, while the resem- 
 blances are more superficial, though startling at 
 first sight, — a matter that wiU be dealt with 
 more fully in a later chapter, — clearly indicate 
 an independent origin. One general point of dif- 
 ference may be properly mentioned here, since it 
 has to do with the radical character of the Hindoo 
 trinitarian incarnation doctrine, as compared with 
 all other like dogmas, whether Ethnic or Chris- 
 tian. The most notable and fundamental differ- 
 ence between the divine incarnation of Krishna 
 and that of Jesus consists in the fact that Jesus 
 was a real man with a veritable human life, while 
 Krishna was a purely mythical being. On its di- 
 vine supernatural side the Krishna doctrine quite 
 agrees with the Christian, but it utterly fails on 
 the human side. In other words, the Christian 
 doctrine of the divine incarnation, as it was evolved 
 in the early church, had its starting-point and 
 centre in a historical personage, namely, Jesus of 
 Nazareth, whereas the Indian doctrine is whoUy a 
 growth of Indian speculative thought, and has no 
 element of historical fact to bring it into closer 
 relation with actual human life. Thus these two 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 51 
 
 different modes of conception illustrate the two 
 general classes of incarnation theory into which 
 all such theories may be divided: (1) the class 
 which starts with deity, and by an incarnation re- 
 duces deity to humanity; (2) the class which 
 starts with a real human being and raises him to 
 the rank of deity, and then accounts for his human 
 nature by an incarnation of his deity. Vishnu- 
 KJrishna is an illustration of the first class. AU 
 purely mythological incarnations are of this class. 
 According to Darmesteter, the Avestan scholar, 
 Zoroaster was not a real historical man who was 
 afterwards divinized by his later disciples, but a 
 mythological creation who became incarnate in the 
 Persian theology. If this were true, Zoroaster 
 would belong to the same class with Vishnu- 
 Krishna. The second class is represented by the 
 Christ of Christian orthodoxy, the result of a his- 
 torical evolution, which has been unfolded in my 
 previous volume, "A Critical History," etc. In 
 this case a real man was divinized, and then a doc- 
 trine of incarnation was developed to account for 
 the presence of God in the flesh among men. The 
 same is true of Zoroaster, if the view of West, 
 Mills, and others, be taken, — the view which 
 plainly best accords with the most ancient of 
 Avestan texts, — namely, that Zoroaster is to be 
 regarded as a Persian sage and prophet, who ap- 
 peared as a reformer and founded a new religion, 
 and was afterwards divinized into a god and wor- 
 shiped. Then naturally followed the tradition 
 
62 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 of his miraculous birth and divine incarnation. 
 To the same class belongs Buddlia in the later 
 Buddhist religion. All efforts to turn the life of 
 Gautama into a myth have signally failed. Ideal- 
 ized as that life became in the growth of tradition, 
 so that it is difficult to separate fact from legend, 
 the outlines of a true historical person stand out 
 too distinctly to give any foothold for critical 
 skepticism. The historical Buddha was a real 
 man with a human biography, as I have already 
 described it ; but after ages developed around 
 his life and name a series of divine Buddhas or 
 incarnations of deity, of whom the historical Gau- 
 tama, " the enlightened one," or Buddha, was one. 
 A clear distinction should be drawn here be- 
 tween all incarnation theories and those mediation 
 ideas which we have found so characteristic of the 
 various Ethnic trinities. All incarnation theories 
 are based on the mediation principle, but a fuU 
 mediation trinitarian doctrine does not necessarily 
 involve the incarnation of a god into humanity, 
 and in fact it was not included in most of the 
 Ethnic religions, even where the mediation princi- 
 ple was quite fully developed, as, for example, in 
 the Platonic philosophy. Plato introduced the 
 mediation element into his dualistic transcenden- 
 talism. Philo developed out of Plato his Logos 
 doctrine, and gave to the Logos the name of medi- 
 ator, using the word /xco-rny? which afterwards went 
 into the Christian vocabulary. But the Greek 
 mediation doctrine never reached any theory of 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 53 
 
 incarnation. The Sot/xwi/ of Plato and the /Aco-trr;? of 
 Philo always remained supernatural divine beings. 
 Even Plotinus refused to borrow such a material- 
 istic doctrine, as he would have termed it, from 
 Christianity. His profoundly trinitarian mediation 
 system was completely idealistic and speculative, 
 and introduced no element either from mythology 
 or history. In this respect Christianity and Hin- 
 dooism including Buddhism stand apart from all 
 other religions, and it is this fact that gives the 
 Vishnu-Krishna doctrine such significance in the 
 history of the Ethnic trinities. This doctrine is 
 essentially the principle of a divine mediatorship 
 acting between God and men, in the interest of 
 human well-being, carried out to its completest 
 limit. Divine condescension could go no further 
 than to lead a god to enter the human condition and 
 to live a real human life from birth to death, enter- 
 ing life and leaving it in a true human way. This 
 is the simple meaning of the Krishna myth. It 
 was the last and highest word of Indian religious 
 philosophy on the mystery of the moral relation be- 
 tween God and man. It taught that the Absolute 
 Deity was in closest intimacy with humanity, that 
 human moral necessities and cravings for a moral 
 salvation were aU met and satisfied in a divine 
 movement of God towards his creatures which in- 
 volved, when the situation demanded, a real incar- 
 nation of God in the flesh, bringing him into the 
 closest possible nearness to the objects of his love, 
 so that they could see him somehow as he is, and 
 
64 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 believe on him to the saving of the soul. A single 
 passage from the " Divine Song " well illustrates 
 the spirit of Hindooism in its purest form. Krishna 
 thus discloses to his friend Arjuna the ef&cacy of 
 faith in himself : " Fix thy heart on me alone, place 
 thy understanding on me. Hereafter then shalt 
 thou dwell in me. Exceedingly dear art thou to 
 me, therefore I wiU declare what is for thy bene- 
 fit. Forsaking all religious duties, come to me as 
 the sole refuge ; I will deliver thee from all sins." 
 How strongly like this is to the Fourth Gospel I 
 need not say. But, as we shall see, such sen- 
 timents are not peculiar to the " Divine Song " or 
 the Fourth Gospel. They are the deep spiritual 
 utterances of a common humanity, and have been 
 repeated again and again in the history of religion. 
 Nor is it so wonderful that this lofty speculation 
 should have been reached by Indian sages, when 
 we realize the conditions under which they wrought. 
 No historical people in the world, perhaps, can be 
 compared with the Hindoos in the region of ab- 
 stract religious thought. Even Greek philosophy 
 seems superficial and crude when put into close 
 critical comparison with the philosophy of India. 
 It must be remembered that recent philological 
 science has discovered the clear bond of tribal and 
 linguistic relationship between India and Greece, 
 and also the clear indication that the Indian civi- 
 lization and literature are much the older of the 
 two. The Vedas were written before Homer sang, 
 and the Brahman pliilosophers discussed the nature 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 65 
 
 of God and the soul before Thales developed his 
 crude theory that all nature originated from water, 
 or Anaxagoras suggested that behind all mixed 
 phenomena there must be something unmixed and 
 self-moved which he called the soul of things. 
 There is good ground for believing that Pythagoras 
 and Heracleitus owed some of their philosophical 
 ideas to India. Not till we come in Greek thought 
 to Plotinus and the later New Platonists do we find 
 a development of philosophical speculation that in 
 metaphysical acuteness and profundity rivals the 
 sectarian schools of the Hindoo trinitarianism. The 
 people of India have been from the earliest histori- 
 cal times on the whole the most intensely religious 
 and religiously thoughtful people in the world. 
 Their literature illustrates this. There is no his- 
 tory or science therein in the modem sense. It 
 all belongs to the sphere of ethics and religion. 
 Buddha, the consummate flower of Indian thought 
 and life, was a religious reformer and saint, and he 
 remains to-day one of the most striking religious 
 figures in the calendar of the world's noblest and 
 loftiest spirits. It is not so strange, then, that such 
 a redemptive incarnation theory should have arisen 
 in Indian theology. 
 
 From what has been said it is plain that the 
 Tnediation idea rules above all others in the Hin- 
 doo trinitarianism, and culminates in the divine 
 incarnation of Vishnu in the form of Krishna, 
 who appears as the divine-human friend and helper 
 of man. The precursor of this phase of doctrine, 
 
66 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 in Indian religious tradition, as we have seen, was 
 Agni, a member of an early Hindoo trinity, namely, 
 Varuna, Indra, and Agni. But Agni was never 
 incarnate as a human being. His mediatorship 
 never reached the point of his humbling himself 
 and submitting to a human birth and even to a 
 human death. But this further step in the medi- 
 atorial office was natural and historically involved, 
 and the theological movement from Agni to Vishnu- 
 Krishna was along the lines not only of specula- 
 tive logic, but of the religious intuitions. If God 
 and man are morally related, and yet are meta- 
 physically separated in two diverse spheres of be- 
 ing, the truest union between them can be brought 
 about only by an incarnation of the higher being 
 into the fleshly nature of the lower, and the Hin- 
 doo Brahman reached this conclusion by the same 
 road as Athanasias, when he wrote : " God must 
 be made man in order that man may be made 
 God," that is, may be brought into completest spir- 
 itual unity with him. One step only remained to 
 be taken to exhaust this whole cycle of religious 
 thought, namely, that the subject of incarnation 
 should be an actual historical human personage. 
 But this was scarcely possible from the Hindoo 
 point of view. The Vishnu-Krishna doctrine and 
 its trinitarian accompaniment had their historical 
 source in the Vedic polytheistic mythology. But 
 mythology and history do not easily mix, or rather 
 it might better be said, they mix so easily that the 
 mythological carries the historical with it, so that 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 57 
 
 to the Hindoo thinker Krishna was as truly a his- 
 torical character as Komiilus was to the Koman, or 
 Adam to the Hebrew. The myth was in their eyes 
 as much fact as any event of history. In short, 
 there is no need of a historical incarnation of an 
 actual man from the mythological or ideal stand- 
 point. Myth or legend has become history for all 
 practical purposes. A reversal of this process must 
 spring from the opposite quarter, namely, from a 
 real human person who from sainthood is evolved 
 into divinity and then is raised into a preexistent 
 heavenly condition to become incarnate. It is cer- 
 tainly remarkable that in Indian history, where a 
 mythological and philosophic idealism so thoroughly 
 rules, a signal illustration should be furnished of 
 an incarnation doctrine based on a historical back- 
 ground. I refer to the case of Buddha and Bud- 
 dhism. What makes this case the more remarkable 
 is the fact that Buddhism is not a dogmatic re- 
 volt from earlier Yedistic or Brahmanic ideas. It 
 is simply a chapter in the history of the Hindoo 
 religion, — a new effort along old lines to solve the 
 mystery of human life and salvation, a wholly ethi- 
 cal reform, made vital, indeed, by the holy life and 
 character of Buddha himself. But just here is to 
 be found the true and easy explanation of what 
 seems at first sight so difficult of solution. The 
 vital force of Buddhism lay in the person and per- 
 sonal life of its founder. The new religion gath- 
 ered itself around the man Gautama. The first 
 and easy step of religious evolution was to make 
 
68 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 this saint among men a superhuman being, and 
 finally an incarnation of the Absolute God. Such 
 was the historical starting-point in the evolution of 
 dogmatic Buddhism and its doctrine of numerous 
 divine incarnations in men like Gautama. 
 
 It is interesting here to note that in the history 
 of the Buddha doctrine and cult we have the only 
 clear and complete historical counterpart to that 
 of dogmatic Christianity. The Vishnu-Krishna 
 doctrine, as we have seen, lacks one radical point 
 of resemblance, in that it rests on no historical 
 footing. But this lack is supplied by Buddhism. 
 It is in India, then, that we find a thoroughly de- 
 veloped dogma of a historical incarnation of God 
 in a real human nature, closely analogous to the 
 Christian dogma, yet chronologically anterior by 
 hundreds of years, so that if there was any bor- 
 rowing it must have been on the Christian side. 
 Of this, however, there is no proof, and there are 
 differences, both in historical origin and in inter- 
 nal evolution and character, which stamp both 
 as wholly distinct and independent types of that 
 common mediation idea which is as old and uni- 
 versal as the human race. It is this need so deep 
 in human nature of some mediator or mediating 
 movement between God and man that unites all 
 religions together, whether Ethnic or Christian, 
 however distinguishable in other respects. Every 
 religious faith, as a rule, rests at last on a medi- 
 ating principle by which man may climb to God, 
 be it Marduk, or Agni, or Athene, or Zoroaster, or 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 69 
 
 Mithra, or Sosiosh, or Krishna, or Buddha, or the 
 "Word" of the Fourth Gospel, or the "tpvxn" of 
 Plotinus. 
 
 The question might be raised whether the Jew- 
 ish and Mohammedan religions are not exceptions 
 to this rule. It is true that these two religions — 
 both Semitic, and having the same original char- 
 acter, as reactions from polytheistic beliefs — agree 
 in rejecting all distinctly trinitarian forms of di- 
 vinity. The stark monotheism of these religions 
 prevents any such tendency; but it is far from 
 true that they lack all mediational features. Juda- 
 ism made much of the mediatorship of Moses. 
 Paul, himself a Jew, declared that the Jews re- 
 ceived the law from God at the hands of a /tco-mys 
 or mediator, referring to Moses. The Mosaic law 
 itseK was regarded as of divine origin and nature, 
 and the worship therein enjoined, first in the tab- 
 ernacle and afterwards in the temple, was made 
 the medium of communication between the wor- 
 shipers and Jehovah. It is true that Moses 
 himself was never deified; but his Law, and the 
 Temple, and the Temple cultus with the sacrificial 
 system, became veritable mediators between the 
 people and God. It was on the basis of their rela- 
 tion to the Law and the Temple that they regarded 
 themselves as the chosen people of God, while aU 
 the heathen were disowned and cast away from his 
 favor. The case is much the same with Moham- 
 medanism. Mohammed only proclaimed himself 
 a prophet like Moses, and his followers have never 
 
60 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 treated him as more than man. Yet a principle 
 of mediation between them and Allah was estab- 
 lished in the view taken of the Koran, which they 
 regard as a verbally inspired communication given 
 to Mohammed directly from God, and so the chief 
 means of obtaining the divine favor. The Koran 
 has become the great Mohammedan fetich, though 
 some account must also be made of the Caaba, or 
 temple, at Mecca, with its legendary traditions 
 and consequent superstitions, such as the directing 
 of aU prayer toward Mecca, as if God would hear 
 and answer his worshipers only from that sacred 
 spot. The forms of mediation in these religions 
 certainly differ considerably from those of other 
 religions, but the mediation principle, as a way of 
 satisfying the religious needs of men, is found 
 equally in them. 
 
 It was Christ, if the testimony of the Fourth 
 Gospel may be accepted, who first promulgated in 
 its sharpest form what may be historically called 
 the Protestant doctrine, that no eternal mediation 
 of any sort is required between man and his Maker, 
 and that every human being may directly approach 
 God and commune with him face to face, when he 
 said : " The hour cometh, when ye shall neither in 
 this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the 
 Father," " God is a spirit, and they that worship 
 him must worship him in spirit," that is, not 
 through outward mediational forms, or in any par- 
 ticular place, but directly anywhere and every- 
 where, with no bar between that needs to be re- 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 61 
 
 moved by any human or divine mediator. Christ 
 taught the same doctrine more authentically in his 
 parable of the prodigal son, where the erring peni- 
 tent returns on his homeward way and meets his 
 father face to face. Paul, too, had recognized, 
 though perhaps less clearly, the same royal truth, 
 when he declared that " God dwelleth not in tem- 
 ples made with hands, and is not far from any one 
 of us," " for we are also his offspring." But so 
 spiritual a vision was not easily discoverable by 
 men, and remained for ages the far off Holy Grail 
 of himian search and hope. None of the Ethnic 
 religions quite reached it. Only now and then 
 has some single solitary thinker, in some inspired 
 moment of religious meditation, caught sight of it 
 and left it to shine a lone star in literature. Such 
 was Seneca when he wrote : " It is not necessary 
 to raise the hands to heaven, nor to ask the temple 
 keeper to admit us to the ears of a divinity, as if 
 we could then be better heard. God is near to 
 you, he is with you, even within you ; yes, I may 
 say that the Holy Spirit has its seat within us " 
 (Sacer intra nos spiritus sedet. Ep. 41, ad Lucil.), 
 — words that remind us at once of Paul's in the 
 passage just quoted from his address on Mars HiU 
 in Athens, and make less surprising the tradition 
 that these two men met and afterwards had a cor- 
 respondence which has come down to us. It is 
 needless to say that the so-caUed " Letters of Paul 
 and Seneca " are whoUy spurious. But this fact 
 lies behind them, namely, that man's moral con- 
 
62 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 sciousness may anywhere and at any time so open 
 itself to the divine incoming and presence that no 
 vail shall remain to hide God's face, and no medi- 
 ator be needed to bring him near to us. Such 
 foregleams of truth, however, have been rare. Job 
 is described as " a man of God ; " yet he prayed : 
 " O that I might know where I could find him." 
 Plato was the perfect flower of Greek philosophy, 
 yet he wrote : " God is hard to find, and when 
 found is difficult to make known to others." Ten- 
 nyson, who voiced, perhaps, beyond all others the 
 religious aspirations and acquisitions of our mod- 
 ern world, was a true prophet and seer when he 
 sang : — 
 
 " I hold it true with him who sings 
 To one clear harp in divers tones, 
 That men may rise on stepping stones 
 Of their dead selves to higher things.^' 
 
 Such " stepping stones," indeed, are the divine 
 revelations given in the successive stages of the 
 history of religion, — " The world's great altar 
 stairs that slope through darkness up to God." 
 That vision of spiritual truth which Christ caught 
 with such wonderful clearness, and which Paul 
 and Seneca had glimpses of, needed for its fuller 
 comprehension those fuller revealings of God in 
 the wonderful discoveries in science and history 
 of the last fifty years. Surely the writer of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews builded better than he 
 knew, when he wrote : " God, who at sundry times 
 and in divers manners spake in time past unto 
 
THE HINDOO BRAHMANIC TRINITY 63 
 
 the fathers by the prophets," "hath provided 
 some better thing for us, that they without us 
 should not he made perfect.'' How far short of 
 the real truth, as seen in the light of later his- 
 tory, did this writer come ? For him, plainly, the 
 " end of days " was near at hand. Comparing the 
 dispensation of the prophets with the messianic 
 teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, he was fully as- 
 sured that the new dispensation was ushering in 
 the grand consummation of mundane events. 
 How little did he realize that the gospel which 
 Christ had proclaimed was itself only a seed which 
 nineteen long centuries would quicken and unfold, 
 until in another " end of days " a new epoch 
 would be reached of higher and grander revela- 
 tions, itself in turn to be succeeded " at sundry 
 times and in divers manners " by still wider and 
 more splendid displays of the Divine beneficence ; 
 for even " we " in these far ojff last times have not 
 yet been " made perfect." 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 THE PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 
 
 The Persian religion is closely connected with 
 the Indian in origin and early character. These 
 peoples not only had a common Aryan ancestry, 
 but their historical traditions indicate a common 
 migration from their original home, and a subse- 
 quent division into two bodies in their movement 
 southward, from which resulted two distinct nations. 
 In the dim prehistoric backgTound of Zoroastrian- 
 ism there are traces of a polytheism which bears 
 plain marks of affinity with the Vedic polytheism 
 of India. Zoroaster himself, if he was a historical 
 and not a mythical character, as on the whole 
 seems the best supported view, was a reformer 
 of the ancient religion in the direction of mon- 
 otheism. Zoroastrianism has usually been treated 
 as if based on a thorough philosophical dualism, 
 and as representing in an extreme form the dual- 
 istic theory of the origin of the universe, namely, 
 that the present system of things, with its mixture 
 of good and evil, is the result of the action of two 
 original, eternal, and independent principles, one 
 good and the author of all good, the other evil and 
 the author of all evil. There is a single short 
 passage in the Gathas which seems to teach this 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 65 
 
 view. But even the Gathas were not free from 
 interpolation. Mr. L. H. Mills, the Avestan 
 scholar, in his introduction to the Gathas, says : 
 " We may say, a priori, that all existing composi- 
 tions of antiquity are and must have been interpo- 
 lated," — a statement which seems somewhat start- 
 ling, but which all historical investigators must 
 accept as substantially true. Mr. Mills adds that 
 there are " less interpolations in the Gathas than 
 is usual." The Gathas in the Avestan sacred 
 writings correspond to the Synoptic gospels of the 
 New Testament. Mr. Mills regards the interpo- 
 lations in the Gathas as "the work of Zoroaster's 
 earliest disciples." There was a decided tendency 
 from the first, undoubtedly, in the Zoroastrian re- 
 ligion towards a dualistic doctrine, and it became 
 fuUy developed in the later Zoroastrianism ; but 
 it never reached the point of extreme dualism, as 
 was the case in Christian Gnosticism, which bor- 
 rowed its dualistic principle from Zoroastrian 
 sources, but converted it into something quite differ- 
 ent from the doctrine of Zoroaster himself or even 
 of his true followers. Zoroaster was a practical 
 reformer, not a speculator, and his reform was di- 
 rected mainly against polytheism, especially in the 
 form of the worship of evil spirits. This seems to 
 have led him to the assertion of a monotheistic 
 doctrine. Ormuzd was the one eternal good god, 
 surrounded by subordinate good beings. A good 
 god cannot be responsible for the existence of 
 evil. Such evil cannot be imputed to Ormuzd's 
 
66 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 agency or permission. Whence, then, comes evil? 
 The Zoroastrian treated it as connected with " the 
 imperfection that is inherent in the nature of 
 things." Out of this inherent imperfection sprang 
 the kingdom of evil beings with Ahriman at their 
 head, ever at war with Ormuzd and his kingdom 
 of good. In this way arose the dual character of 
 the world and of man. A dualism of this kind is 
 consistent with a monotheistic doctrine, and is not 
 far from the doctrine of Christ and of Paul, not to 
 speak of the Jews after the exile, who had drawn 
 much of their new theology from their Persian 
 neighbors. Such a monotheistic dualism seems to 
 have been the basis of Zoroaster's reform. When 
 one seeks to scan more closely the details of Zoro- 
 aster's career, and to gain a clear picture of his 
 life, the path of the historical scholar is beset at 
 once with difficulties. If the critic's task is diffi- 
 cult in the case of Buddha, it is much more so in 
 the case of Zoroaster. While I am ready on the 
 whole to agree with Mills and West against the 
 brilliant and trenchant criticism of Darmesteter, it 
 must be avowed that the effort to separate even a 
 few grains of historical truth from the mass of 
 legendary additions is well-nigh ineffectual. But 
 if a full picture of Zoroaster cannot be portrayed, 
 at least the rough outlines of his life are plainly 
 discernible through all the mists and shadows of 
 legendary tradition. 
 
 Here as everywhere in historical research the 
 law of evolution comes to our aid. The canonical 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 67 
 
 Avestan books, which are our chief authorities for 
 what can be known of Zoroaster, were written at 
 various periods. The exact dates cannot be given. 
 The date of Zoroaster himself is wholly conjec- 
 tural, — the estimates of Avestan scholars ranging 
 from the fifteenth century b. c. to the seventh 
 century b. c. Haug ascribes the Gathas, the 
 earliest of the Avestan scriptures, to the twelfth 
 century B. c, the Vendidad to the tenth, the later 
 Yasna to the eighth, and the Yahsts, the latest of 
 them, to the fifth. This estimate allows about 
 eight hundred years for the completion of the 
 Avesta, — a period which Haug regards as " rather 
 too short than too long." Whatever view be taken 
 as to the correctness of these dates, they go to 
 illustrate the fact of the length of the historical 
 evolution which was involved in the growth and 
 final collection of the writings known as the Zend- 
 Avesta. But the evolution did not stop here. It 
 is continued a half millennium later in the great 
 Zoroastrian revival under the Sassanian dynasty, 
 when the Pahlavi translations and commentaries 
 were published. What opportunity was offered dur- 
 ing so long a stretch of years for interpolations 
 and legendary growth is easily seen. The question 
 now arises : What was the law of evolution in the 
 course of these twelve to fifteen centuries ? Darmes- 
 teter puts it thus : " The question is whether Zoro- 
 aster was a man converted into a god, or a god 
 converted into a man," We have seen how Darmes- 
 teter himself decided it, He regarded the Zoro- 
 
68 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 aster story as purely mythical. But the more con- 
 servative view seems to best fit the course of devel- 
 opment as given in the Avesta itself, namely, that 
 a historical man became the subject of a legendary 
 evolution which finally invested him with semi- 
 divine attributes and functions. If we begin with 
 the oldest Avestan book, the Gathas, the picture of 
 Zoroaster there given, though only in incidental 
 touches, is thoroughly human, with no suggestion 
 of divine functions. He first appears as a reformer 
 and prophet, becomes a preacher of a purer faith 
 in God to his countrymen, converts many, includ- 
 ing the king, to his doctrines, and thus founds a 
 new reformed religion. In this work no super- 
 natural agencies are employed. No miracles are 
 wrought. Zoroaster is born in the natural way and 
 dies a natural death. There is, however, a single 
 hint of what is to come. The religious proclama- 
 tions of Zoroaster are declared to be prophetic 
 and inspired. He is a true priest of God, and 
 his words are divinely revealed and authoritative. 
 Thus we are prepared for subsequent legendary 
 additions. The scene soon changes as we pro- 
 ceed to the later books. Zoroaster's birth becomes 
 miraculous. Zoroaster himself becomes a miracle- 
 worker, and a supernatural atmosphere more and 
 more surrounds him. Instead of being a human 
 reformer, he appears as a divinely sent messiah 
 and mediator armed with divine power, and finally 
 is raised to the rank of a demi-god. This corrup- 
 tion of the original tradition marks a return to the 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 69 
 
 earlier polytheism against which Zoroaster himself 
 had protested. The new ethical monotheism which 
 he had preached yielded to polytheistic tendencies, 
 and the doctrine of evil spirits resumed its old 
 sway. The so-called dualism of the later Avestan 
 and post-Avestan Zoroastrian books is really a 
 polytheism of the most rigid sort, colored to a 
 deeper dye by the dualistic principle, though the 
 whole doctrine is redeemed from utter dualistic 
 pessimism by its eschatology, which proclaims the 
 final triumph of good and the everlasting destruc- 
 tion of evil. 
 
 The remarkable resemblances between events in 
 the life of Zoroaster and similar events in the Hfe 
 of Christ have attracted the attention of Christian 
 scholars. Like resemblances have already been 
 noted by us in the account of Buddha. No doubt 
 some of the more superficially striking resem- 
 blances are due to a post-Christian borrowing in 
 the later stages of historical evolution. But such 
 borrowing cannot account for those features of 
 likeness which are after all most radical and con- 
 spicuous. And if this is clearly true in the case 
 of Buddha, as we have seen, much more is it true 
 beyond all doubt and controversy in the case of 
 Zoroaster. The Avestan writings were completed 
 some centuries before the Christian era, and the 
 evolution of the Zoroastrian tradition was original 
 and independent of foreign influences. The most 
 remarkable coincidences in the lives of Zoroaster, 
 Buddha, and Christ are explainable in the same 
 
70 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 way that so many coincidences of every kind in 
 history, in legend, and in folk-lore are explained. 
 Our present studies are seeking to explain by the 
 same critical historical process the remarkable co- 
 incidences in the trinitarian ideas of so many 
 ancient peoples, where the theory of borrowing 
 either direct or indirect is absolutely impossible. 
 The case is the same with individual lives as with 
 whole peoples. Legend works in the same way in 
 both cases. Take, for example, one of the most 
 striking incidents in the lives of Zoroaster, Buddha, 
 and Christ, — the temptation by the evil spirit. In 
 all three cases this temptation occurs at the most 
 critical period in their careers, the character of 
 the temptation is essentially the same, and the 
 tempter is the same wicked spirit of evil. The 
 superficial incidents in the three accounts vary, 
 but the radical elements of the transaction are the 
 same. What need of resorting to the theory of 
 borrowing when the evidence is whoUy against it ? 
 Human nature and human Hfe are essentially the 
 same in their exhibitions in all mankind. A great 
 temptation is inherent in the very nature of things 
 as a component part of a great character and 
 career. Similar temptations by the Devil are to 
 be found in other lives. Demonology has played 
 an immense part in legendary history. The hves 
 of the early Christian monks were filled with such 
 accounts. I might illustrate this point by other 
 like coincidences in the lives of these three men 
 who became the founders of three religions. One 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 71 
 
 example more must suffice. All these traditions 
 contain a miraculous birth through a divine par- 
 entage or power, but the Zoroastrian account goes 
 a step further. It makes the birth of the mother 
 of Zoroaster immaculate and miraculous, and, 
 though this development of tradition does not ap- 
 pear in the New Testament, it does appear in the 
 post-apostolic apocryphal legends that quickly 
 grew up around Jesus and his mother, and the im- 
 maculate conception of the Virgin Mary, as weU 
 as of her son, not only became an article of 
 Christian faith, but remains a dogma of the Catho- 
 lic church to this day. The doctrine and cultus of 
 the Virgin Mary, be it noted, is not peculiar to 
 Christianity. The virginity of the mothers of the 
 founders of a new religion is repeated again and 
 again in legendary history. Zoroastrianism has its 
 virgin mother ; so Buddhism ; and the list might 
 be lengthened. Illustrious men have been thus 
 partially deified by ascribing to them a divine 
 fatherhood. Plato, in the golden age of Athenian 
 culture, did not escape the fate of genius. Legend 
 made Apollo his father. Even mythology has its 
 virgins. Athene, the patron goddess of Athens, 
 was endowed with the special gift of virginity, and 
 hence the name of her great temple, the Parthenon. 
 It is natural to invest any great religious reformer, 
 especially in an uncritical age, with peculiar rela- 
 tions to the heavenly world. First he becomes a 
 special messenger or prophet of God. The next 
 step is easy, viz., to impute to his message a divine 
 
72 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 inspiration. How natural, then, to believe that his 
 birth was not ia the ordinary way! Human 
 motherhood explains the reality of his humanity. 
 Divine fatherhood explains what is supernatural 
 and miraculous in his life and charaxjter. Incarna- 
 tion is an obvious coroUary. A demi-god or god- 
 man is the logical result. These stages of legendary 
 evolution, so easily developed in the times of a 
 credulous and superstitious faith, have been re- 
 peated again and agaiu in the history of religion. 
 
 No trinity had yet appeared in Zoroastrianism, 
 but one feature of the developed Zoroastrian doc- 
 trine was preparing the way for a trinitarian tend- 
 ency, namely, the raising of Zoroaster from the 
 rank of a human reformer to that of a divine 
 messiah and mediatorial demi-god. The religion 
 of Zoroaster himself, if we may judge from the 
 Gathas, which purport to record many of his say- 
 ings, was one of remarkable spirituality and 
 purity. Righteousness, sin, moral agency, free 
 will, moral law and its sanction, involving pun- 
 ishment and reward, the spiritual and immortal 
 character of the soul, and final judgment, with 
 its everlasting issues, — such radical truths of 
 the moral consciousness seem to have been cardi- 
 nal in Zoroaster's own religious faith. Naturally 
 his reform was laid on the lines of a redemptive 
 movement of God for the healing and saving of 
 mankind from the miserable condition into which 
 they had fallen through the evils inherent in their 
 natural condition. The key-note of his gospel was 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 73 
 
 redemption. It was a divine offer of help and 
 salvation through a human instrument. So close 
 is the analogy between the Zoroastrian prophetism 
 and messianism and that of the later Jews, that 
 one cannot help surmising some historical connec- 
 tion between the two ; and when we remember that 
 the Jewish messianism in its fully developed form, 
 as it appeared in the two centuries before Christ, 
 was post-exilic, the inference becomes not at all 
 improbable that the Jews of the Captivity gathered 
 many of their later messianic ideas from Zoroas- 
 trianism. This is quite surely the case with the 
 Jewish eschatology. The book of Daniel is post- 
 exilic. The doctrines of the immortality of the 
 soul, of the resurrection, of evil spirits, especially 
 of Satan the arch fiend, of heaven and hell, which 
 appear in later Judaism, are quite clearly of 
 Zoroastrian origin. 
 
 It is in the second stage of Zoroastrian evolu- 
 tion that the element of mediation and redemption 
 through a divinely commissioned savior becomes 
 more marked. As in the evolution of the Chris- 
 tian trinitarian dogma, a human messiahship gave 
 way to a semi-divine mediatorship, so with the 
 Zoroastrian movement. But here occurred a pe- 
 culiar chapter in this evolution. A new actor ap- 
 pears on the scene in the person of Sosiosh, " the 
 benefactor " or savior. Let it be noted in pass- 
 ing that this term " savior," in a religious sense, 
 is not original in the New Testament. The Zend 
 word Sosiosh clearly corresponds in meaning to 
 the Greek word o-o)T^p (savior). 
 
74 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Plutarch, writing about the time of the reduc- 
 tion of the oral traditions of Christ's life and 
 gospel to written form, styles the gods o-wrijpcs, or 
 saviors and friends of men. So, in the New Pla- 
 tonic school, ^sculapius, the god of medicine and 
 healing, became the centre of a special religious 
 cult, and came to be conmionly designated among 
 his worshipers as 'O o-corrjp, that is, " The Savior." 
 In the Zoroastrian tradition this person, who ap- 
 pears under the title of Sosiosh, is purely mythical. 
 He is represented to be a son of Zoroaster, but 
 he is to be supernaturally born from a wife of 
 Zoroaster at the very end of the world, when the 
 measure of its miseries is full. Then his saving 
 work as a messenger of Ormuzd will be completed, 
 in raising the dead, rewarding the righteous with 
 everlasting happiness, and annihilating the whole 
 kingdom of the wicked. This account of Sosiosh, 
 so plainly mythical, yet so closely connected with 
 Zoroaster's life, is one of Darmesteter's strongest 
 points against the historicity of Zoroaster himseK, 
 and I confess that it well-nigh breaks down the 
 historical probability of the whole Zoroastrian 
 tradition, though I do not even yet give up the 
 view of West and Mills. But in either case it is 
 clear that in the later parts of the Avesta we have 
 passed completely out of authentic history into 
 the region of legend. The part played by the 
 law of evolution is well illustrated by the Sosiosh 
 myth. In the earlier Avesta Sosiosh is mentioned, 
 but only in a general way. The later writings 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 75 
 
 grow more and more explicit and particular. His 
 supernatural character and mission from Ormuzd 
 is fully set forth. It is declared of him that he 
 " will come from the region of the dawn to free 
 the world from death and decay," " when the 
 dead shall arise and immortality commence." 
 Darmesteter believes this to be a nature or solar 
 myth, and suggests that Zoroaster was originally 
 a storm god. Already in the Zend-Avesta Sosiosh 
 is a son of Zoroaster, to be supernaturally born at 
 the end of Time, but, when we pass from the 
 Avesta to the Pahlavi Bundahish, Sosiosh becomes 
 the last of three prophets, or divine messengers of 
 Ormuzd, each of whom is to reign a thousand 
 years, — the name Sosiosh being given especially 
 to the last. These Zoroastrian millenniums have 
 an interesting historical connection with the mil- 
 lennium of Jewish expectation and hope which 
 passed over into Christianity. The third and last 
 millennium, which Sosiosh will inaugurate and 
 conclude with the resurrection, judgment, and 
 destruction of death and heU, became the great 
 rallying point of Zoroastrian faith. 
 
 We have already referred to the connection be- 
 tween the Jewish messianism and millennium and 
 the Zoroastrian ideas. Quite as remarkable are 
 the coincidences between the Zoroastrian doc- 
 trine of "last things" and the Christian. The 
 Christian eschatology, beginning with the second 
 coming of Christ, followed by the resurrection of 
 the dead and the general judgment, and conclud- 
 
76 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 ing with the eternal rewards of heaven and the 
 eternal punishments of heU, is so completely a 
 repetition of the Zoroastrian " last things," that a 
 borrowing from one side or the other seems almost 
 a fact to be accepted at once, were no historical 
 relation directly traceable. Certain similar escha- 
 tological elements indeed are to be found in other 
 Ethnic religions, as for example the dogmas of 
 personal immortality, of heaven and heU, which are 
 clearly set forth in the Greek mythology and later 
 Greek philosophy, and are made familiar to us in 
 Plato and Plutarch. But the doctrine of a bodily 
 resurrection through the instrumentality of a di- 
 vinely sent mediator is surely unique in aU Ethnic 
 religions, and the direct historical connection that 
 can be clearly traced through Judaism between the 
 Christian and the Zoroastrian dogmas seems to re- 
 move all ground for doubt. It is my own growing 
 conviction that much of the eschatological language 
 of the New Testament can best be explained by ref- 
 erence to the Zoroastrian Persian messianism and 
 eschatology. The Jewish post-exilic and pre-Chris- 
 tian writings are full of eschatological ideas and 
 language plainly suggestive of Persian sources, and 
 these same ideas and expressions reappear in the 
 sayings of Christ and the letters of Paul. What 
 a Zoroastrian ring there is in Paul's words in 
 the fifteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians, " The last 
 enemy that shall be destroyed is death." The book 
 of Revelation simply gathers up all the Zoroas- 
 trian, Jewish, and Christian figurative language in 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 77 
 
 its vivid portrayal of the eschatological faith of the 
 age in which it was written. The prominence of 
 fire all through the New Testament as the element 
 of destruction and punishment is a pecuharly Zoro- 
 astrian reminiscence. The description in the Sec- 
 ond Epistle of Peter of the final conflagration, in 
 which " the earth and the works that are therein 
 shall be burned up," is an exact transcript of the 
 Zoroastrian theory of the mode of the ending of 
 this present world. The apocalyptic lake of fire into 
 which death and Hades are cast is also Zoroastrian, 
 except that, while the fire of the Zoroastrian the- 
 ory involves annihilation, the apocalyptic fire burns, 
 without annihilating, forever. I will only add that 
 the Devil or Satan of the Bible is the Ahriman of 
 the Avesta, and was, we cannot doubt, a direct im- 
 portation from Persia, though the allusions to the 
 Devil and his kingdom in the Fourth Gospel and 
 Johannine Epistles are apparently Gnostic in char- 
 acter. But Gnosticism is distinctly Zoroastrian in 
 origin and is directly based on the Persian dualism. 
 We now come to the third stage in the trinita- 
 rian development of the Zoroastrian doctrine. It 
 is to be noted that no full triaity has yet emerged. 
 The doctrine of Sosiosh as a semi-divine mediator 
 and savior has indeed prepared the way for such 
 a result, but the movement here paused and in fact 
 was never so fully completed as in other Ethnic 
 trinities. We may well here ask the reasons why ; 
 and they are close at hand. To begin with, ori- 
 ginal Zoroastrianism was a monotheistic reaction 
 
78 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 from the polytheism out of which it sprang, like 
 the Hebraism of the Old Testament. The history 
 of Judaism shows how little ground there is in such 
 a monotheism for a trinitarian development. The 
 natural soil of a trinity of gods is polytheism rather 
 than monotheism, as we have seen in the history 
 of the Ethnic trinities, all of which sprang from 
 polytheistic sources. It was once a favorite idea 
 of conservative scholars such as Hardwick and 
 Rawlinson that the Persian dualism was the off- 
 spring of an original monotheism ; but recent in- 
 vestigations in philology and comparative rehgion 
 have shown it to be utterly without foundation, as 
 also the kindred idea concerning the earliest doc- 
 trine of the Hebrew people. The monotheism of 
 the Old Testament beginning with the first chapter 
 of Genesis is a reformed version of an older poly- 
 theistic myth which the Chaldaeo-Babylonian slabs 
 of the resurrected library in Nineveh have laid 
 open before our eyes, and which cuneiform scholars 
 are already learning to read. 
 
 It is not, then, surprising that Zoroastrianism, 
 with its strong leaning to a monotheistic-dualistic 
 rather than polytheistic view of deity, shoidd stop 
 short of a full trinity, which is a direct step back- 
 wards towards the ground once left behind. Such 
 a step could be taken only when a religious cor- 
 ruption and decline had set in. 
 
 There is another reason for the incompleteness 
 of the Zoroastrian trinitarianism even in its fullest 
 development. Persia at its highest point of civil- 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 79 
 
 ization never rose to the same rank with India or 
 Greece. Its culture included poetry, art, chron- 
 icle, and ethics, but never reached the still higher 
 sphere of abstract speculative thought. No school 
 of pure philosophy ever flourished there. Thus 
 the Persian religion was never subjected to a meta- 
 physical and scholastic treatment. Its religious 
 system was theosophic rather than philosophic, 
 — a work of the imagination rather than of the 
 pure speculative reason. It would be idle to ex- 
 pect, under such circumstances, the evolution of 
 a complete theological trinity, and we shall not 
 find it; but, as we have seen, a step was taken 
 which went a long way toward such a conclusion, 
 and a trinitarian shadow was cast which will 
 finally give us a mythological triad, if not a phi- 
 losophical trinity. This step was its Sosiosh me- 
 diation doctrine. The idea of a mediator between 
 God and man is a fundamental element in every 
 trinitarian dogma, and it became central and reg- 
 nant in Zoroastrian belief. This doctrine of a 
 divine mediator does not demand a trinity as a 
 philosophical necessity, but it naturally leads to it 
 unless counter ideas are in the way. Just such 
 a counter idea was in the way to the Zoroastrian 
 believer, namely, his deep prejudice against the 
 old animistic polytheism. Only when this preju- 
 dice was suffered to decline and die out could the 
 trinitarian evolution have free way. This was 
 precisely the historical course which the Persian 
 religion took. The Avesta itself clearly discloses 
 
80 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 a revolutionary polytheistic tendency. The over- 
 throw of the Persian empire by Alexander intro- 
 duced Greek influences and ideas. The rise of the 
 Parthian kingdom with its semi-barbarism still 
 further disorganized and demoralized the old Per- 
 sian religious faith. The ancient Zend language 
 in which the Avesta was written grew corrupt, 
 and out of it emerged the new Persian dialect 
 called Pahlavi. Thus the Zoroastrian sacred 
 scriptures ceased to be read by the people, and the 
 Zoroastrian monotheism gave way rapidly to the 
 polytheism which reigned around it. Its very his- 
 tory became more and more obscure. Not till the 
 new Persian empire of the Sassanidae in the third 
 century A. D. was a new chapter added, and a new 
 movement given to the mediating principle which 
 had characterized it from the beginning. But the 
 significance of this new chapter lies in the fact 
 that it leaves the original Zoroastrian starting- 
 point and line of evolution and reverts back to the 
 Madzean polytheism out of which Zoroaster him- 
 self arose. 
 
 The two earliest stages of Zoroastrian trinitarian 
 evolution, as we have seen, were the outgrowth of 
 the mission of Zoroaster, — a historical character. 
 Though they quickly passed from history to legend, 
 and then to myth, they at least started from his- 
 torical ground. Not so with the third stage. It 
 was mythological from the beginning, and gathered 
 around one of the most ancient of the Aryan di- 
 vinities, Mithra. Mithra, or Mitra, first appeal's 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 81 
 
 as a sun god in the Indian Vedas in close associa- 
 tion with Varuna, the great heavenly sky-god, and 
 already his mediatorial function is visible. He is 
 " the giver," " the generous one," " the friend," of 
 man. It is in a similar form and function that 
 Mithra appears in the Avestan writings. He is a 
 creature of Ormuzd, " the created light," that is, 
 a sun-god. As such he is " a servant and organ " 
 of Ormuzd, mediating between him and man. But 
 through the Avestan period Mithra remains in the 
 background. First Zoroaster himseK, and next 
 Sosiosh, his semi-divine son, are the chief instru- 
 ments through which Ormuzd carries on his be- 
 nevolent designs for the amelioration and final 
 salvation of man. Not till the decline of the ori- 
 ginal Zoroastrianism has fairly set in does Mithra 
 appear as the great mediating divinity, at last 
 supplanting, not only Zoroaster and Sosiosh, but 
 even Ormuzd himself. The history of this curious 
 evolution, involving entirely new cyclic movements 
 on new lines, is obscure. Enough here to say that 
 it gathered force as the original Zoroastrianism 
 declined, without any apparent opposition. Even 
 in the latest Yahsts of the Avesta Mithra is plainly 
 rising into greater prominence. He is thus de- 
 scribed, in the prayer called Mihir Yahst, as 
 " holy, the most beautiful of creatures," all-seeing 
 and all-powerful. Especially is he " the protector 
 and patron of truth-loving men " and "the dis- 
 penser of blessings." He is also the "most victo- 
 rious " servant of Ormuzd against the Kingdo; 
 
82 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Evil. Ahriman trembles before him. He " pro- 
 tects the poor and oppressed," and " defends the 
 faithful against evil spirits, against death, and 
 leads them toward immortality." It is remark- 
 able that in this very period, when a new medi- 
 ating god is coming to the front, the first sign of 
 a divine triad should display itself. One of the 
 Persian kings, Artaxerxes Mnemon, rededicating a 
 Zoroastrian temple which Darius his ancestor had 
 built, solemnly declared : " By the grace of Or- 
 muzd I have here established Anhita and Mithra. 
 May Ormuzd, Anhita, and Mithra protect me." 
 This new trinity plays no great part in the later 
 Zoroastrianism. Mithra becomes the central figure 
 of it, absorbing more and more the functions of 
 Sosiosh " the savior," as is seen in the application 
 to him of the term " mediator." Such is the tes- 
 timony of Plutarch, who wrote in the first century 
 of the Christian era. Describing the Zoroastrian 
 dualism, Plutarch says (Isis and Osiris, 46) : 
 " Mithra is between the two (Ormuzd and Ahri- 
 man), for which reason the Persians call Mithra 
 ' the Mediator ' (/xetrtnys)." Thus Zoroastrianism 
 proper gave way to the new Mithraism. Mithra 
 as " Mediator " became the centre of a new cult 
 which in the second and third centuries A. D. was 
 very popular and widespread in the Eoman world, 
 patronized by emperors, and with special temples 
 in Rome itself. It was the mediatorial character 
 of Mithra that gave his worship its popularity — 
 a popularity so great that at one time it threat- 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 83 
 
 ened to rival and even eclipse Christianity itself, 
 which was also making rapid strides with its own 
 Christian mediation doctrine. Mithra, in the eyes 
 of his worshipers, was the "living and abiding 
 link between the visible and the invisible." He 
 was " the secondary principle of good," " the con- 
 ductor of departed souls " to the narrow bridge 
 which must be crossed to reach the heavenly 
 world. As the dualistic doctrine of evil in all its 
 forms had a primary place in Mithraism, and was 
 in harmony with the pessimism and religious reac- 
 tion of the age, it is not wonderful that the Mithra 
 cult should have assumed a strongly sacrificial 
 and bloody character. Mithra himseK became the 
 great high priest in these sacrifices. He was re- 
 presented as slaying a bull, in virtue of his atoning 
 function. The tauriholium was the most solemn 
 sacrificial rite of Mithraic worship, symbolizing 
 and efficiently procuring for the suppliant for 
 whom it was performed remission of sins and re- 
 generation to a new spiritual and heavenly life. 
 It was indeed a baptism by blood. The subject 
 of it was placed naked imder the altar of sacrifice, 
 so that the blood of the victim might be shed 
 directly upon him. A strange transaction indeed, 
 and strangely like to the doctrine of the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews ; " Without the shedding of blood 
 there is no remission ! " Strange, I say, when we 
 consider the character of the period in which it 
 occurred. It is a suggestive proof of the terrible 
 power of sin and of its remorseful workings upon 
 a soul. 
 
84 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 I have already referred to the fact that Mithra, 
 who was originally subordinate to Ormuzd, and 
 even reduced to the third place in the triad, sub- 
 sequently rose practically to the first place, sup- 
 planting Ormuzd himself. Such a process, by 
 which the mediating member of the trinity, as the 
 special friend and savior of men, should become 
 first and nearest in the thoughts, and affections, 
 and hopes of men, and hence in time first in the 
 divine order of the gods, is most natural, and we 
 have already found it a marked feature of the his- 
 torical evolution of most of the Ethnic trinities. 
 Thus in the Babylonian triad Marduk, the me- 
 diating sun-god, usurps the place of Ea, his 
 father. The same was true of Vishnu-Krishna in 
 the Hindoo trinity, who, in his capacity of god- 
 man and mediator, reduced Brahma to almost a 
 shadow. So Mithraism pushed Ormuzd back into 
 a place of inferiority, or rather he was quietly dis- 
 placed and forgotten. The triad was practically 
 reduced to unity in the Mithraic faith. I must 
 refer to my earlier work, " A Critical History," 
 etc., for a complete account of the remarkable 
 evolution of the Christian trinity in the same di- 
 rection, by which the original subordination doc- 
 trine of the early Greek church was transformed 
 into a theory of triunity in which the three were 
 made absolutely equal, or rather were reduced to 
 personal unity manifesting itself in a plural form, 
 — a view which at last reached a result curiously 
 similar to the Mithraic, namely, that the Father, 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 85 
 
 the first and most exalted person of the Patristic 
 Trinity, has become practically swallowed up and 
 lost in the absoluteness of the deity of the Second 
 Person, the incarnate Son, known on earth as 
 Jesus of Nazareth. To make the analogy more 
 complete it only needed that Zoroaster himself, 
 the founder of the reformed Madzean religion, 
 should have remained the central figure in its evo- 
 lution as he was at first. 
 
 One radical difference between the Mithraic 
 and the Christian conception of mediatorship is 
 clearly discernible. Mithra was a mediator be- 
 tween Ormuzd and Ahriman, while the Christian 
 scheme made Christ a mediator between God and 
 mankind. It is true that Origen taught that 
 Christ paid a ransom to Satan and so released 
 mankind from his power, and this thoroughly 
 materialistic view became the traditional church 
 doctrine for nearly a thousand years. Augustine 
 accepted it without any questioning, and his au- 
 thority carried it on into the Middle Ages. Anselm 
 and Abelard seem to have been the first to ques- 
 tion it. But the doctrine of Paul and of the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews, though essentially differ- 
 ing in other respects, agreed in this, that the me- 
 diation wrought by Christ was between God and 
 sinful men, and both views were founded in the 
 Old Testament sacrificial system, which knew no- 
 thing of Satan as a party to the transaction, and 
 made much of God's holy law and of man's viola- 
 tion of it, beginning with Adam the head of the 
 
86 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 race. Anselm, the true founder of the substitu- 
 tional theory of atonement, was in harmony on 
 this point with the Old Testament and PauL 
 Whence Origen derived his theory of mediator- 
 ship between God and the Devil is not clear. But 
 he was weU acquainted with the Gnostic dualistic 
 ideas of his day and found them even in the Fourth 
 Gospel, and thus might easily have been influenced 
 toward a view which quite harmonized with the 
 tendencies around him. It was in this very period 
 in the history of Christianity that the doctrine of 
 Satan and his Kingdom of Evil became especially 
 prominent in the faith of the church, not only in 
 its creed but also in its life. Monasticism, which 
 started from a strongly dualistic conception of 
 the world, in its earlier history is full of illus- 
 trations of this view of Satan as sharing this world 
 with God, and in the legendary lives of the more 
 famous monks the Devil and his demons and the 
 powers of good contend on almost equal terms. I 
 have already stated my opinion as to the histor- 
 ical background of this whole phase of Christian 
 thought, including the eschatology of which it 
 forms a part. It is Zoroastrian and Persian, and 
 I am prepared to believe that Origen's theory of a 
 ransom paid by Christ to Satan was somehow 
 drawn, though perhaps indirectly, from this source. 
 It was characteristic of the Zoroastrian dualism 
 that it viewed Ormuzd as the representative of 
 goodness, and light, and joy. All badness and 
 darkness, physical, intellectual, or moral, all the 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 87 
 
 miseries and sorrow of this world, including sick- 
 ness and death, were the work of Ahriman. 
 Ormuzd was always the beneficent friend of man, 
 and revealed his beneficence through mediating 
 instruments such as Zoroaster, Sosiosh, and Mithra. 
 The conception of a mediator who should propi- 
 tiate such a being by offerings of appeasement was 
 wholly foreign to Zoroastrian thought. The Mith- 
 raic cult illustrates the growing sense of the moral 
 evil and misery in the world, and of the power for 
 evil of Ahriman and his allies. The tauroholium^ 
 though so materialistic in form, was a means to- 
 ward a moral regeneration and new spiritual life 
 in this world and the next. The myth which lay 
 behind it of Mithra's slaying a buU with his own 
 hand was based on the conception of Mithra as the 
 great mediating power between good and evil, be- 
 tween man and his arch enemy Ahriman. He was, 
 in the eyes of his worshipers, the sole regenerator 
 and savior from sin and death, and all moral evil. 
 One cannot study deeply the Zoroastrian Mithraic 
 faith without a growing sense of its lofty, pure, 
 and spiritual character. It is no wonder, in an 
 age when the moral nature and instincts of men 
 were being aroused to a new eagerness for religious 
 light and truth to heal the moral maladies of the 
 declining empire, that this Oriental reformed cult, 
 behind which was the dim but attractive figure of 
 one of the world's saints, should have arrested and 
 drawn the hearts of many seekers after truth, and 
 even rivaled that other religion, coming from the 
 
88 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 same Oriental quarter, whose teachings and offers 
 of spiritual good were in such general harmony, — 
 both working for the regeneration and salvation of 
 men. 
 
 I have alluded to Origen's conception of the 
 work of Christ in the atonement, so strangely sug- 
 gestive of the Mithraic doctrine. It is interestiug 
 to note that in another direction he was led toward 
 a similar Mithraic conclusion. M. Jean ReviUe, in 
 his " La Religion sous les Severes," has weU said 
 that " the cult of Mithra offers very great analo- 
 gies to the cult of the Gnostics." The Gnostics 
 were in fact essentially dualistic Zoroastrians in 
 Christian disguise, and we must not forget how 
 widespread were the Gnostic heresies in the 
 Christian church in this period. Irenseus recounts 
 about a hundred different Gnostic sects. Origen 
 and his Alexandrian school formed a sort of medi- 
 ating position between the church and the Gnostic 
 parties. Origen himseK was inclined to a free and 
 tolerant speculation. One of his speculations, which 
 afterward was used to his discredit, was his theory 
 of the final restoration of aU souls. Even Satan in 
 his view might be restored to holiness. This idea 
 was based on his doctrine of God as good and de- 
 siring the salvation of all moral beings, and of free 
 will by which all such beings could be recovered 
 from sin if so disposed. Now both these ideas 
 are in complete accord with Zoroastrian theo- 
 logy. This is not the place to discuss the matter 
 further. I wiU only add that Origen's influence 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 89 
 
 was great and pervasive in the early development 
 of Christian theology, and it is my own belief 
 that the Zoroastrian religion explains not only the 
 widespread Gnostic heresies, but also the dualistic 
 element which entered so deeply into Christian 
 soteriology and eschatology, and which has contin- 
 ued to leaven Christian theological thought even 
 to the present day.^ 
 
 The subsequent triumph of Christianity and ex- 
 tinction of Zoroastrianism in its later Mithraic 
 form used to be regarded by Christian historians 
 as evidence of the superiority of the former, and 
 of its miraculous and divine origin. In fact, the 
 decisive blow was struck by Christian emperors. 
 Their whole policy — from the time of the politic 
 and tolerant Constantine, with the exception of 
 Julian the New Platonist and perhaps that also of 
 Valentinian, who, according to Ammianus Marcel- 
 linus, though a Christian, stood evenly balanced 
 between the two religious parties — was directed 
 to the suppression of all the Ethnic religions and 
 rites. In 377 the prefect of Rome ordered the 
 temples of Mithra to be closed ; and when Theodo^ 
 sius in 394 entered Rome a conqueror he issued 
 
 1 Outside of distinctively Christian ideas the dualistic explana- 
 tion of the world and its moral mysteries has of late had a strong 
 attraction for philosophical thinkers. James Mill, according to 
 the statement of his son, J. S. Mill, agnostic as he was on the 
 whole subject, regarded dualism as the most satisfactory and prob- 
 able of all the theories in vogue. I may add that the French histo- 
 rian Michelet, in a little book, Bible de VHumanite, concludes 
 a review of the leading creeds of the world by expressing his own 
 decided preference for the dualistic Zoroastrian. 
 
go THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 an edict commanding the entire suppression of aU 
 pagan worship. Every temple was shut, and many- 
 fanes made sacred by ancient tradition were ruth- 
 lessly violated. Perhaps the most violent act was 
 the sacking of the House and Temple of Vesta in 
 the Forum, whose cult had come down from the 
 very origin of Rome itself, and was held in the 
 highest veneration. The worship of the goddess 
 was broken up. The vestal virgins were driven 
 out. Their House, that had been sacred from all 
 intrusion for a thousand years, was ransacked, 
 its treasures scattered, and the doors barred. 
 Whether Christianity itself in this period of its 
 prosperity and growing power could have endured 
 such treatment and outlived it cannot be told, 
 since, fortunately, no imperial pagan reaction 
 came. But Gibbon's remark seems historically 
 just, that no religion can long survive when its 
 outward worship is completely suppressed ; and the 
 conjecture of Kenan in this connection is not with- 
 out warrant : " One might say that if Christianity 
 had been arrested in its career by some mortal 
 malady, the world might have been Mithraistic." 
 Force and violence have played a great part in the 
 religious conquests of the world. The acts of 
 Theodosius were repeated by Charlemagne in the 
 conversion of the Saxons, our own ancestors, only 
 with increased wantonness and barbarity. And as 
 one gazes to-day on the ruins of the Temple and 
 House of Vesta which the spade of the archaeologist 
 has opened to our view, with its statues of vestals 
 
PERSIAN ZOROASTRIAN TRINITARIANISM 91 
 
 once famous in history, one is reminded irresistibly 
 of similar ruins of beautiful English abbeys, with 
 like statues of famous abbots and monks, that were 
 suppressed and dismantled by the strong, tyran- 
 nical hand of Henry VIII., their inmates driven 
 out and suffered to wander and die in penury, and 
 their very names given over to calumny and re- 
 proach, until at last a new revision of history has 
 done them too tardy justice. The forcible over- 
 throw of Zoroastrian Mithraism and of English 
 monasticism may have been for the providential 
 good of the world ; but the manner in which it was 
 done is no less abominable and worthy of condem- 
 nation. It is, and always must be, against good 
 morals to " do evil that good may come," and the 
 verdict of the Apostle against all such iU-doers re- 
 mains unchallenged : " whose damnation is just." 
 But again history has its revenges, and I confess 
 to a high satisfaction in being able to contribute 
 my mite to such a result in this study of the Zo- 
 roastrian religion ; and with this thought in mind 
 I cannot better close this chapter than by quoting 
 a single passage from its sacred books : " We wor- 
 ship the souls of the holy men and women^ horn 
 at any time and in any place^ whose consciences 
 struggle^ or will struggle^ or have struggled for 
 the good,^^ 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 
 
 We now pass to the third Aryan chapter of 
 trinitarian evolution, — in some respects the most 
 remarkable of all, and of special interest to the 
 Christian scholar in view of its direct historical 
 relation to the evolution of the Christian trinity. 
 
 The Greek religion first appears in Homer and 
 Hesiod as a fully developed polytheism. The 
 instinct and love of the beautiful in nature and 
 in art, which so distinguished the Greek people, 
 is well illustrated in their polytheistic mythology. 
 On the ethical side the Greek gods and goddesses 
 do not appear to advantage when compared with 
 those of other Ethnic religions, especially with the 
 Indian or Zoroastrian divinities. Plato prohibited 
 the reading of Homer in his ideal republic because 
 of its immoral stories. How far this charge may 
 be explained away by considerations drawn from 
 the naturalistic origin and symbolical character of 
 the Greek mythology cannot here be fully dis- 
 cussed. There is no doubt, however, that recent 
 philological and archaeological studies have done 
 much toward setting the matter in a new light. 
 But, from the hterary and artistic point of view, 
 the superiority of the Greek mythology to all 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITf 93 
 
 others known to history is unquestionable. The 
 Iliad and the Odyssey are filled with narratives 
 and pictures in which the Greek gods and god- 
 desses are the chief figures that are unrivaled in 
 ancient literature. Greek art, which remains even 
 in its ruins to-day the wonder of the world, had its 
 birth in the Greek religion, and it continued to 
 draw its inspiration from this source throughout 
 its golden age. The sublimest forms of Greek ar- 
 chitecture were temples, its most perfect statues 
 were of the patron divinities of these temples, and 
 its lost art of coloring was lavished on their deco- 
 ration. The Parthenon, built in the days of Peri- 
 cles, was a miracle in stone of the religious genius 
 of Greece. 
 
 I have aUuded to the symbolism which char- 
 acterizes the Greek mythology. Such symbolism 
 is equally characteristic of aU mythologies, and 
 it is in part the key to a correct interpretation 
 of them. The grotesqueness, and even hideous- 
 ness, to our refined taste, of some mythological 
 incidents and sculptures connected with the Ethnic 
 mythologies seem to indicate the comparatively 
 barbarous character of the people among whom 
 they originated. Like men, like gods. The 
 artistic superiority of Greek mythology simply 
 proves the keener artistic sensitiveness and crea- 
 tive power of the Greek mind. In comparing the 
 different Ethnic mythologies, the question is not 
 so much one of morals as it is one of artistic men- 
 tal development. It has not been clearly under- 
 
94 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 stood, until quite recently, how fundamental 
 symbolism is in human thought and language, and 
 how deeply imbedded certain symbols are in the 
 traditions of the race. It may seem strange that 
 the immoral stories in Homer should not have 
 been sifted out in the long course of years in 
 which those poems were being gathered and edited, 
 or that the uncouth descriptions and images of 
 divinities, such as are found even in Indian poly- 
 theistic literature and art, should have held their 
 ground, and even grown more and more grotesque 
 as Hindoo culture advanced ; but it must be re- 
 membered that nothing is so tenacious in its grasp 
 on tradition or popular faith as the use of symbols 
 which have become venerable by time, however in- 
 artistic they may be, if they are only expressions 
 of some truth that is held in reverence. Language 
 itself, which is the great vehicle of all communicar 
 tion among men, is essentially a system of symbols. 
 Every religion is full of symbolism, not only in its 
 forms of worship, but also in its dogmas. 
 
 This is weU illustrated in the sign of the cross, 
 which in Christian times has been made so es- 
 pecially significant of Christian truth. It may be 
 a surprise to some of my readers to be told that 
 this symbol of the cross is as old as history itself. 
 Indeed, its origin is hidden in prehistoric times. 
 The Greek or Maltese cross, with its four arms 
 of equal length, which is worn by Koman Popes 
 on the breast, appears on the breasts of Assyrian 
 kings nine or ten centuries before the birth of 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 95 
 
 Christ, as is witnessed to by Assyrio-Babylonian 
 cylinders in the British Museum. If these clay 
 tablets were unaccompanied by vouchers their 
 genuineness might well be suspected, but when we 
 learn that evidence which cannot be gainsaid and 
 which has come to us from every quarter of the 
 world is at hand in marvelous abundance, aU doubt 
 becomes unavailing. Perhaps there is no more 
 important, and surely no more wonderful, archaeo- 
 logical line of recent discovery than that which has 
 dealt with the subject of symbols and the deep- 
 seated character of their influence on mankind 
 from the beginning of human life on this earth. 
 These symbols are almost entirely of a religious 
 and sacred character, representing human concep- 
 tions of the mysteries of nature and life and divin- 
 ity. We have seen how prominent in all the early 
 Ethnic religions was the worship of the sun as the 
 great representative in the visible world of divine 
 power and life and blessing to men. The sun-god, 
 by whatever name he was called, in the different 
 languages or mythologies of nations, was the most 
 universally venerated divinity in the whole pan- 
 theon. It is no wonder, then, that symbols of the 
 sun should be found to be the most ancient and 
 universal of all. These symbols were varied in 
 form, according to the aspect of the god repre- 
 sented. The circle and the wheel are illustrations, 
 representing the form of the sun and his course 
 through the heavens, and also his vitalizing power. 
 The wheel suggests motion, and its spokes suggest 
 
96 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 the sun's rays which penetrate everywhere, impart- 
 ing heat and life and light in every form. These 
 religious ideas were the nuclei of others. A whole 
 theology and philosophy might be symbolized by 
 the circle and wheel. How easily they may sug- 
 gest eternal motion and its eternal source, and 
 hence the eternal divine power and goodness and 
 benevolence? But among all these symbols the 
 cross stands out as supreme in its dignity and in 
 the universality of its use. It is to be found in all 
 parts of the world, from Iceland to the Ganges, 
 and in both hemispheres. Historical investiga- 
 tions have wholly failed to trace its origin. Anti- 
 quarian excavations have revealed it everywhere. 
 Schliemann found it in the ruins of prehistoric 
 Troy. It has been figured not only on the breasts 
 of Babylonian kings, on the vestments of Greek 
 gods and goddesses, — on the tunic of Athene and 
 on the breast of Apollo, — but also on tombs and 
 altars in Gaul, Spain, and Scandinavia. If its 
 exact significance cannot always be ascertained, its 
 general character is clear beyond dispute. The 
 conclusion forced upon us is that the cross, as a 
 sacred symbol, belonged to the earliest traditions 
 of the race, and represented religious ideas which 
 formed the original credo of the ancestors of man- 
 kind. 
 
 The old idea that this sign is original with 
 Christianity is of course exploded. The new sig- 
 nificance that was given to it and the way in which 
 it was developed after the time of Constantine in 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 97 
 
 the fourth century are matters of Christian his- 
 tory into which I cannot go at length. For the 
 sake of those, however, who are not critically ac- 
 quainted with the historical origins of Christian- 
 ity, I wiU say that the symbol of the cross in its 
 original and ancient significance is to be entirely 
 distinguished from the meaning that came to be 
 attached to it in Christian tradition. The new 
 Christian symbolism was connected with the man- 
 ner of Christ's death. Whether the wood on which 
 he was impaled was cruciform is uncertain. The 
 Greek word a-Tavp6<s means an upright stake. A 
 cross-piece was not essential. The more common 
 form of it in Christ's day seems to have been a T. 
 This ignominious instrument of punishment came 
 to be idealized by Christian believers into a sign 
 of glorification and triumph. Whether there was 
 at first any direct historical connection between 
 the old Ethnic symbol and the new Christian sign 
 is quite obscure. Probability is against it, for 
 the two figures on which the symbolism was based 
 were at first quite unlike. There was little resem- 
 blance between the equal-armed cross which was 
 the usual religious symbol of the Ethnic religions 
 and the cn-avpds or upright stake, even with the 
 added cross-piece at the top, such as was used in 
 crucifixion. The so-called Latin cross, which was 
 distinguished by the lengthening of the lower arm, 
 was a much later Western form : while the cruci- 
 fix in which Christ is represented as hanging on 
 the cross did not come into use as a symbol until 
 
98 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 as late as the seventh century. Thus the very- 
 forms of the Ethnic and Christian crosses suggest 
 a whoUy different origin. No doubt the Christian 
 symbol was at first whoUy independent of the pa- 
 gan, deriving its significance from the method of 
 Christ's death. But when we take into view the 
 fact that the Christian church grew largely out of 
 pagan soil and that many ancestral pagan ideas 
 and customs were merely transformed and adopted 
 into the new faith, it ceases to be surprising that 
 the Ethnic symbol of the cross and even its forms 
 should gradually become blended with those of the 
 new Christian religion. Certainly the original 
 difference between the significance of the Ethnic 
 symbolism and that of the Christian was radical. 
 The pre-Christian cross, in its various forms, has 
 nothing to do with death or any mode of it: it 
 rather symbolizes life, material and spiritual. One 
 of its most common forms, found everywhere, is 
 the so-called swastika or gammated cross — a 
 Hindoo word taking its name from the bending of 
 the four ends. It has been suggested, and with 
 not a little probability, that the curving of these 
 ends is intended to represent the idea of motion 
 or gyration, like that of the wheel. These two 
 symbols of the cross and the wheel are closely 
 related and are often found together, and some- 
 times were united into one composite emblem ; and 
 it is my own impression that the original idea be- 
 hind both symbols is that of motion as the starting- 
 point of all life and of the world itself. The idea 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 99 
 
 of God as the divine mover is not far off. This 
 view of the origin of things, which was thus ex- 
 pressed by the imaginative faculties of early man 
 in symbolic forms, was adopted by Aristotle and 
 made the key to his philosophy, in his view that 
 the eternal movement of the world necessarily im- 
 plied an eternal mover and that such a principle 
 of motion could be none other than God, 
 
 I have referred to the obscurity attaching to the 
 way in which the Ethnic cross, which was a sacred 
 symbol of life, motion, the world, and Deity, be- 
 came confounded with the Christian cross as a 
 symbol of Christ's redeeming death. The early 
 Christian Fathers frequently allude to the form of 
 Christ's death, and the term cross becomes a com- 
 mon expression for it. They also distinguish this 
 term from the pagan cross, with which they show 
 themselves acquainted, — expressly denying that 
 they are chargeable with any superstitious use of 
 the cross as an image or symbolical figure. The 
 practice of making the sign of the cross with the 
 hand appears quite early. Tertullian describes it 
 as common in his day, but the use of material 
 crosses is considerably later. Constantine set this 
 fashion by affixing a cross to his laharum or ban- 
 ner, and also by putting crosses on churches and 
 palaces. From Constantine's day the cross be- 
 came the great symbol of Christianity as a power 
 of life through death, — the instrument of death 
 being thus transfigured into the sign of a redeemed 
 and glorified life. As the Ethnic religions grad- 
 
100 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 ually decayed and finally became well-nigh extinct 
 in the Roman world, the Ethnic conception of the 
 cross as a sacred sign or symbol faded out and the 
 Christian view took its place, or it may rather be 
 said that the two conceptions were gradually and 
 unconsciously blended together. 
 
 It is interesting to examine the remains of 
 Christian art in the catacombs or early Christian 
 burial-places, and in early churches, and there note 
 the curious mixture of pagan and Christian sym- 
 bols of the cross. For example, there is figured 
 on a Christian monument together with the mono- 
 gram of Christ the swastilca or gammated cross, 
 which is a purely Ethnic symbol and which tended 
 to disappear in subsequent Christian times. This 
 peculiar form of the cross, with its four ends bent as 
 if to symbolize motion, is found again and again in 
 the catacombs ; but the most remarkable example, 
 perhaps, is a mosaic of Christ represented as the 
 Good Shepherd, on whose tunic the gammated 
 cross is twice pictured. These paintings show that 
 the artist had either confounded or consciously 
 blended together Ethnic and Christian ideas. 
 Such amalgamations are not isolated cases; they 
 are common in early Christian art. In the cata- 
 comb of Saint Calixtus the pagan Orpheus is 
 painted as captivating the wild beasts with his 
 lyre directly under the Virgin Mary and the Child 
 Jesus ; and the pagan myth of Cupid and Psyche 
 is found pictured on Christian sarcophagi. These 
 examples only illustrate the persistence of ancient 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 101 
 
 survivals, especially in the form of religious sym- 
 bolism. Perhaps the most curious of them all is 
 seen in the custom of the Popes of Rome, continued 
 to this day, of wearing on their breasts the Greek 
 cross, — a close imitation of the cross worn by As- 
 syrian kings in the ninth century B. c. We should 
 expect a Roman Pope to wear a Latin cross ; yet 
 the Greek cross is a direct historical survival of 
 the Assyrian cross. Christianity was the off- 
 spring of Judaism, as Judaism was in its turn the 
 offshoot of the Assyrio-Babylonian Chaldaeism. 
 Abraham " The Hebrew," through his descendants, 
 is the direct historical connecting link between the 
 Assyrian king and the Roman Pope.^ 
 
 ^ A good example of a similar transfer of a pagan symbol to 
 Cliristian use is the nimbus or aureole, which began to be used as 
 a Christian sign of saintliness or divinity in the fifth or sixth cen- 
 tury. Before this it had become common as a sign of dignity on 
 the heads of emperors and empresses. Its origin is hid in anti- 
 quity. Seme regard it as derived from India, where it encircled 
 the heads of the Hindoo mythological gods. In Ethnic Greek 
 and Latin literature the nimbus represented the glory that in- 
 vested a divine being. Thus Virg^ describes Juno as " nimbo 
 succincta" Later Christian art made it a special symbol of 
 Christ's divine nature. The Virgin Mary soon received the same 
 sign, and subsequently it became a perquisite of all specially holy 
 personages. There is, no doubt, a close relation between the 
 Ethnic cross and the nimbus as sacred symbols. Both seem to 
 be connected with the sun, and represent different aspects of it. 
 It is not a far cry that they should be transferred to Christian 
 symbolism as signs of the " Sun of righteousness." A curious il- 
 lustration of the amalgamation of the two signs and of their com- 
 mon derivation from Ethnic sources is given in a mosaic of the 
 sixth century in a Christian church at Ravenna, where the Em- 
 peror Justinian is painted with a nimbus around his head. Near 
 him stands the Archbishop Maximianua, who holds a LcUin cross 
 
102 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 I trust that this digression has not been with- 
 out its interest and instruction. I have been led 
 to introduce it in order to enforce the fact that 
 the Ethnic polytheistic mythology was essentially 
 a system of symbolism. This was preeminently 
 true of the Aryan rehgions, which were forms of 
 nature worship. Their divinities were largely im- 
 personations of natural forces and phenomena ; 
 and in this personifying process the Greek genius 
 found f uU play. In fact all the Ethnic theogonies 
 and cosmogonies are mythological stories which 
 are the work of the imagination of early man, 
 using for material the natural phenomena in the 
 midst of which he lived. The only difference 
 
 in his hands, while a soldier near by grasps a wheel-shaped shield 
 on which is figured the monogram of Christ, — the six limbs of 
 the monogram clearly representing the spokes of the wheel. 
 But more sig^nificant still is the opposite mosaic of the Empress 
 Theodora. She also has a nimbus around her head, and, further, 
 two Greek crosses distinctly marked on her breast ; while the 
 garments of one of her attendants are covered with small Greek 
 crosses, and a curtain has for its chief ornament fig^ures of the 
 swastika or cross with bent arms. Whether consciously or not, 
 here are brought together in a single series of Christian mosaics 
 symbols of most diverse origin in form and meaning — the circle, 
 the wheel, the Greek cross, the gammated swastika, the Latin 
 cross, the decussated cross or monogram of Christ. Perhaps the 
 most interesting feature of all is the Greek cross on the breast of 
 Theodora. It is another historical link between the Ethnic As- 
 syrian kings and the Christian Popes, giving further evidence 
 that the tradition of the Ethnic cross as a sacred religious symbol 
 was never broken, but only changed in its symbolical character 
 with the lapse of time. For a full account of the history of the 
 cross as a mystical symbol and of the persistency of such sym- 
 bolical survivals, with many illustrations, see La Bdigion des 
 Gaidois, par Alexandre Bertrand, Paris, 1897. 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 103 
 
 between the Greek myth-maker and his Aryan 
 or Semitic or Turanian neighbor was that his 
 imaginative fancy was somehow of a finer mould 
 than theirs. Whether his religious consciousness 
 was more fully developed is another question, the 
 answer to which must depend on a deeper study of 
 the Greek character and religion. Certainly the 
 two great poems known as the Homeric belong to 
 a class of literature that immensely out-distances 
 all the products of the other Ethnic religions in 
 the mythological age, and make us wonder whence 
 they came, and what was the real source of their 
 inspiration. 
 
 Opening the Iliad with the view of seeking the 
 trinitarian elements which may be found, at first 
 sight its polytheism seems to overshadow the 
 whole scene. Gods without number, and of all 
 sorts and conditions from the highest to the lowest, 
 are inextricably mingled with demi-gods and heroes 
 and human beings. But ere long a principle of di- 
 vision among them appears. The oldest Greek 
 trinitarianism seems to have arisen from the trinal 
 character of nature, as it appeared to unscientific 
 minds, with its three regions of land, water, and sky. 
 Hence the first nature-trinity, consisting of Zeus, 
 Poseidon, and Hades, — Zeus being the great god 
 of the sky, Poseidon the god of the sea, and Hades 
 the god of the earth and of the underworld. The 
 generative, or family idea, also appears in this first 
 triad. Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades were brothers 
 who divided among themselves the common inher- 
 
104 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 itance. Such is the myth as given more fuUy in 
 the Theogony of Hesiod. But though it is plainly 
 found in the background of the Homeric mytho- 
 logy, it is already supplanted by a later trinitarian 
 evolution, namely, the trinity of Zeus, Here, and 
 Athene. Of the older triad only Zeus remains, 
 which means that the Olympian brother, that is, 
 the sky-god, has reduced his rival brothers to a 
 sort of subjection, and has installed himself at the 
 head of the whole pantheon. Zeus is henceforth 
 the "father of gods and men," and supreme over 
 all things. In this second stage of trinitarian 
 movement the naturalistic principle yields to the 
 generative or family idea. The members of the new 
 trinity are aU sky-gods, and are united together by 
 the closest family relationship. Here or Hera is 
 both the sister and the wife of Zeus, and hence 
 shares with him his regal supremacy and honors. 
 Athene also is the daughter of Zeus, being doubly 
 related to him, since she is " dvSpoOia," that is, a 
 " man-goddess," which means that she was bom 
 directly through her father's agency without a 
 mother, — the legend being that she sprang from 
 the head of Zeus. This rather startling myth is 
 only the opposite side, carried to its extreme, of the 
 very common myth or legend, illustrated in many 
 cases, of a parentage from the mother without a 
 father except in some unnatural way. The close 
 connection between Here and Athene is visible all 
 through the Iliad ; and their common subordination 
 to Zeus is clearly defined. But the subordination 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 105 
 
 principle is also carried to the third person of this 
 Homeric trinity. Athene is as much subordinate 
 to Here as Here is to Zeus, and here in this relation 
 of subordination comes already to view the media- 
 tive principle which we have found so characteristic 
 of the Ethnic trinitarianism, and which will have 
 a remarkable development in the further progress 
 of Greek thought. In the Iliad, Athene is usually 
 the messenger sent by Zeus or Here on errands of 
 help and mercy. Thus Here sends her to the 
 Grecian host on an embassy of peace, " With thy 
 gentle words restrain thou every man." She is 
 often made a mediator between men and Zeus. 
 Prayers are offered to her by Greek heroes on the 
 eve of battle. Thus Diomede prays : " Rejoice, O 
 goddess, for to thee, first of aU the inunortals in 
 Olympus, will we caU for aid." And so Odysseus : 
 "Harken, goddess, come thou a good helper of 
 my feet." The helpful and gracious character 
 of Athene is thus made conspicuous. Once she is 
 compared to " a mother." 
 
 Turning next to the Odyssey, at once we per- 
 ceive a notable change. Plainly it is a work of 
 later date than the Iliad, and represents a later 
 stage of trinitarian evolution. Zeus remains still 
 at the head of the Homeric trinity, but Here re- 
 tires into the background, being mentioned but 
 twice, and Athene, who was so subordinate in the 
 Iliad, becomes from the outset the central divine 
 figure of the epic, and remains such to the very end. 
 It is noticeable also that ApoUo, who in the Iliad 
 
106 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 held the fourth place in the order of the heavenly 
 gods, in the Odyssey rises to the place of Here. 
 He is a son of Zeus, and especially favored by him. 
 Four several times Apollo is united with Zeus and 
 Athene as forming a sort of trinity in adjurations 
 and prayers, as, for example, when Telemachus 
 addressed his mother, Penelope, " Would to Father 
 Zeus, and Athene, and Apollo that the wooers in 
 our haUs were even now thus vanquished." The 
 order of the triad we note is also changed. Athene 
 has risen from the third place, which she always 
 held in the Iliad, to the second, and she holds this 
 rank in every adjuration. Thus her very position 
 in the trinity seems to fit her for the mediating 
 mission which she assumes and sustains through- 
 out |the poem. It sheds a new and interesting 
 light on the mediatorial character of the second 
 Person of the Christian trinity, when we find the 
 same mediating function joined to the second Per- 
 son in so many Ethnic triads; for example, Mar- 
 duk in the Babylonian triad, Vishnu in the Hin- 
 doo, Mithra in the Zoroastrian, and Athene in the 
 Greek Homeric. 
 
 This chapter in the Greek trinitarianism is so 
 suggestive and important that it demands a some- 
 what closer study. The Odyssey, as compared 
 with the Iliad, is much fuller of human interest. 
 The Iliad is a true martial epic, enacted on a wide 
 stage, with a grand superhuman machinery at 
 work to carry out the counsels of Zeus, in the 
 midst of the plottings and coimter-plottings of 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 107 
 
 divine, superhuman and human agencies. The 
 Odyssey is no less an epic, but it revolves around 
 a single person, Odysseus, who is the true hero of 
 the poem, and gives it its name. The great theme 
 of the whole action is the adventures of this Greek 
 hero in his efforts to return to his home in spite 
 of the machinations of Poseidon, the ruler of the 
 waves. Thus a personal human interest gathers 
 around the story from the start. But this human 
 element is made still more powerfid by the en- 
 trance of another person, whose sad fortunes, grow- 
 ing more and more pathetic to the last, form one 
 of the sweetest idyls of all literature — the noble 
 and lovely Penelope, the patiently waiting wife of 
 the long-lost husband. No wonder her story has 
 touched the hearts of men as few others have. In 
 the ruins of Pompeii there stiQ is to be seen, on 
 the walls of a room, in colors as fresh as if painted 
 yesterday, a picture of Ulysses and Penelope when 
 they first met after his return home. He has not 
 yet made himseM known to her. Disguised as a 
 beggar, as he was, she plainly struggles in her 
 thoughts and feelings between despair and doubt 
 and growing hope. It is a scene that is entran- 
 cing in its simple human realism. The face and 
 attitude of Penelope is one that haunts the specta- 
 tor ever after. 
 
 Yet the true central personage of the Odyssey 
 is neither Ulysses nor Penelope. They are but 
 counters in the divine game which has for its 
 source of interest and meaning the active agency 
 
108 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 of the goddess Athene, mediating between heaven 
 and earth, and representing the divine compassion 
 and love in her efforts, crowned at last with tri- 
 umphant success, to save a sorely tried man from 
 the toils of harsh fate, and restore him to home, 
 wife, son, and happiness. I have spoken of Pe- 
 nelope as perhaps the most attractive woman in 
 Greek literature, but her human picture fades be- 
 fore the sublime form of the "man-goddess" as 
 she plays her part of a divine mediator and mes- 
 senger and friend of men. Such a story ought not 
 to be given in any abstract, but read in full, to 
 feel its real force and significance ; but I will try 
 to set forth its pith, keeping in mind the point of 
 view from which I have approached it. 
 
 When the action of the epic begins, Ulysses has 
 been a wanderer for ten years. Penelope is nearly 
 at her wit's end in her devices to postpone a deci- 
 sion concerning the wooers who are wasting her 
 substance and daily becoming more imperious in 
 their wooing. The poem opens with a council of 
 the Olympian gods, in which Athene intercedes 
 with Zeus for Odysseus: "My heart is rent for 
 Odysseus the hapless one, who far from his friends 
 this long while suffereth affliction on a sea-girt 
 isle." The heart of Zeus is touched and he con- 
 sents to assist his daughter in her mission of res- 
 cue. Athene at once descends to Ithaca to stir up 
 Telemachus, Odysseus's son, to attempt to find his 
 father. In this mission she assumes " the sem- 
 blance of a stranger. Menus, the captain of the 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 109 
 
 Taphians." This is the first of several assump- 
 tions of a human form, or divine incarnations. 
 She next appears as Telemachus himself, going 
 around among the citizens and inciting them to 
 assist him in his quest. Her third appearance is 
 in the form of Mentor, an old friend of Odysseus, 
 and in that form she accompanies Telemachus as 
 his adviser and friend, in his search among his 
 father's comrades for some knowledge of his where- 
 abouts. These incarnations are repeated contin- 
 ually in various ways throughout the poem, and 
 illustrate the directness of Athene's mediatorial 
 agency in her relations with men. She does not 
 remain " in the heavenly places," but breaks the veil 
 between heaven and earth and comes into visible 
 contact with the object of her care, now as a man, 
 now as a woman, anon as a bird. Could the com- 
 pleteness of the divine condescension be more viv- 
 idly disclosed ? One of the most suggestive touches 
 of the Homeric realism is where Athene, in the 
 form of Mentor, accompanying Telemachus to Py- 
 los, the home of Nestor, is invited, as if a mortal 
 man, to take " the cup of honied wine " and offer 
 it in prayer " since all men stand in need of the 
 gods," and herself prays to Poseidon that " Tele- 
 machus and I may return when we have accom- 
 plished that for which we came hither with our swift 
 black ship." "Now as she prayed on this wise, 
 Jierself the while was fulfilling the prayer J^ Or 
 is anything more touching than what soon follows, 
 when the aged Nestor, indulging in reminiscences 
 
110 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 of the Trojan war, and striving to comfort the 
 young Telemachus concerning the wooers that were 
 " planning mischief within the halls," uttered these 
 words in the very presence of Athene herself: 
 "Ah, if but gray-eyed Athene herself were in- 
 clined to love thee, as once she cared exceedingly 
 for the renowned Odysseus in the land of the Tro- 
 jans where we Achaeans were sore afflicted, — for 
 never yet have I seen the gods show forth such 
 love as then did Pallas Athene standing manifest 
 by him, — if she would be pleased so to love thee 
 and to care for thee, then might certain of them 
 clean forget their marriage," aU unconsciously 
 declaring what was already true, and soon to be 
 manifested in the wooers' doom. 
 
 But now the scene changes. Meanwhile the 
 wooers are becoming more and more clamorous, 
 and the heart of Penelope is growing sadder and 
 more despairing. She prays to Athene, who " hears 
 her prayer," and rushes to her help. This time 
 she " fashions a phantom, after the likeness of a 
 woman," who comes into Penelope's sleepless 
 chamber and cheers her with the assurance that 
 "a friend who hath power, even PaUas Athene, 
 pitieth thee in thy sorrow, and hath sent me forth 
 to speak these words unto thee." And now again 
 the scene changes to Odysseus, himseK, who has 
 been detained for eight years by the nymph Ca- 
 lypso, and is vainly sighing to be permitted to 
 continue his voyage home. Athene has instigated 
 Zeus to interfere again in his behalf. Odysseus 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 111 
 
 once more resumes his course homeward and 
 reaches the shore of Phaeacia. On his way to the 
 city of Alcinoiis the king, Athene meets him in the 
 guise of " a young maiden carrying a pitcher," and 
 offers to conduct him to her father's palace. As 
 they walked through the midst of the Phaeacian 
 mariners, the goddess "shed a wondrous mist 
 about him, for the favor that she bore him in her 
 heart." The king receives him kindly, and the 
 long story of his ten years' adventures follows. 
 Then Alcinoiis sends him on his way and he is 
 landed on the shores of his own country. Here 
 the last great act may be said to begin. To at- 
 tempt to describe it would only mar its thrilling 
 beauty and charm. Enough to say that Athene 
 now comes into the foreground more completely 
 than ever and becomes the inspiring mover and 
 conductor of the whole final line of action by 
 which Odysseus is made known to his son and 
 friends, the wooers are vanquished and slaugh- 
 tered, and Penelope, the constant wife, is restored 
 to her husband's arms and to the old life and 
 joy. Not a single step is taken, not a deed is 
 done, but " by the grace of Athene." The closing 
 scene is full of the divine aspect of mercy. The 
 Ithacans determine to revenge the death of the 
 wooers, and atta<}k Odysseus and his friends, 
 but through strength given by Athene in answer 
 to the prayer of the aged Laertes the attack is 
 repulsed, and all the attacking party would have 
 been slain had not Athene, once more in the 
 
112 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 form of Mentor, called aloud : " Hold your hands 
 from fierce fighting, ye men of Ithaca, that ye may 
 be parted quickly without bloodshed." Thus the 
 battle was stayed. The Odyssey closes with these 
 words: "Thereafter Athene set a covenant be- 
 tween them with sacrifice, she, the daughter of 
 Zeus, lord of the sBgis, in the likeness of Mentor 
 both in fashion and in voice." It cannot be lost 
 sight of in this sweet cantata of " Peace on earth, 
 good will to men," that Athene, who has wrought 
 this peaceful result and sealed it with a covenant, 
 leaves the scene " in fashion as a man." I know 
 not how this sketch may affect others, but for 
 myself, as I lay down the Odyssey, I do it with the 
 clear conviction that as a religious poem it stands 
 unrivaled in Ethnic literature. Surely its picture 
 of the divine character, as revealed in the Homeric 
 trinity, especially in its two foremost members, is 
 one of marvelous dignity and power, shading con- 
 tinually into an ineffable lovableness and grace. 
 Who the creator of this wonderful poem was can- 
 not be known. It comes to us out of the shadows 
 of the prehistoric world. But the creation itself, 
 in its three chief characters of Odysseus, Penelope, 
 and above all Athene, is in my view par excellence 
 the supreme vision of Aryan faith. The Homeric 
 conception of Athene reaches the highest water 
 mark of Greek religious thought, -^schylus and 
 Sophocles may have struck a few deeper and 
 higher notes, but the Odyssey remains the true 
 Greek Bhagavat-Gita, the " Divine Song." 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 113 
 
 I cannot leave this great religious poem without 
 alluding to one other instructive feature of it, 
 namely, that Athene, the second mediating person 
 of the Homeric trinity, is a woman, thus repre- 
 senting the feminine element in human nature. 
 The introduction of a woman into the central 
 place of mediator in the triad is a new step of 
 evolution in the Ethnic trinitarianism. It wiU 
 appear later in the Egyptian triad of Osiris, Isis, 
 and Horns, where Isis, the sister and wife of 
 Osiris, will assume a sort of mediatorial role, and 
 will become one of the most popular of the foreign 
 divinities in later Roman times. But Isis is only 
 a faded image of Athene. In the Greek " man- 
 goddess," " the eternal womanly " of Goethe's 
 Faust finds its highest expression. If Christ, ac- 
 cording to Paul's description of him, apparently 
 drawn from Philo, is "the man from heaven," 
 Athene is "the woman from heaven" as truly. 
 When we seek for the completest expression of 
 that form of mediatorship which manifests it- 
 self most clearly and attractively to satisfy our 
 human needs, is it not the form of motherhood? 
 Scripture itself bears us out in this affirmation. 
 The prophet makes God to say that he will com- 
 fort us as "one whom his mother comforteth." 
 No figure surely is fuller of the divine love and 
 compassion than this one. One cannot read the 
 Odyssey without being struck with the true 
 motherly character of Athene. Once she is di- 
 rectly compared to " a mother." How mother-like 
 
114 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 she broods over Odysseus in all his misfortunes 
 as if he were her own child I And she acts the 
 same part in her relations with Telemachus and 
 Penelope. AH through the poem she is always 
 the same sweet, gracious, dearly loving, seK-for- 
 getting woman, playing the mother's part, how 
 well ! I cannot help regarding this conception of 
 mediatorship in its feminine form as the highest 
 touch of rehgious faith and feeling, even in the 
 Odyssey itself. There is but one other figure in 
 religious history or literature that can compare 
 with it, that of Mary the 'mother of Jesus. And 
 is it not remarkable that both Athene and Mary 
 should have received, as a unique cognomen, the 
 same term " irapOevo^ " or virgin. Athene was the 
 virgin queen, as Mary became the virgin mother. 
 And, from this point of view, is it any wonder 
 that Mary the mother of Jesus, in after times 
 when her son had been elevated in the faith of 
 his followers to a divine rank, should have been 
 transfigured into a hallowed virginity, and even 
 raised to that place of mediatorship and interces- 
 sory power and grace which her son had once held ? 
 How natural, from a human point of view, it was 
 that as the masculine element of mediation in the 
 second Person of the trinitarian dogma was more 
 and more confounded with that of absolute and su- 
 preme deity, the feminine element should be pushed 
 forward in the person of Mary the virgin mother 
 until finally she has become to all Catholic hearts 
 the real mediator between man and God, and the 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 115 
 
 immediate object of intercessory prayer. Nay, the 
 wonder ceases that in the old historic Catholic 
 Church, represented to-day in the Roman Com- 
 munion, the mother of Jesus is being recognized 
 as true queen of heaven, enthroned by the side of 
 Christ himself, and that already Catholic theolo- 
 gians are seeking to add a fourth person to the 
 divine trinity . In that new dogma, Goethe's " eter- 
 nal womanly," imaged in far off ancient times in 
 the Homeric Athene, will have found its true 
 place to all Catholic souls. Nor can the question 
 be avoided what the Protestant position must be. 
 If a divine mediation through a masculine human 
 incarnation be accepted as a revealed truth, why 
 not also a feminine incarnation as well? Does 
 not the one suggest and logically include the 
 other? Certainly all true moral mediation in 
 human experience has a double form, based on the 
 duality that exists in human nature. Fatherhood 
 and brotherhood are not enough. Motherhood 
 and sisterhood must be added to complete the ties 
 which bind all human society. Must not the 
 same be true of the highest form of moral in- 
 fluence and union, namely, that between man and 
 God. Why, then, should not a divine mediator- 
 ship appear in fashion as a woman as weU as " in 
 fashion like a man ? " As a matter of fact the 
 dogmas of the divine Christ and the divinized 
 Mary sprang from the same historical source and 
 rest on the same fundamental moral grounds. 
 Protestants have long since laid aside the dogma 
 
116 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 of Mary, as it was developed in Christian tradi- 
 tion, and classed it among the superstitions of the 
 dark ages ; but they do not all see that the same 
 historical process which overthrows the faith in 
 Mary as the virgin mother and queen of heaven 
 must overthrow the kindred dogma of Christ's 
 deity. 
 
 Before leaving the Greek mythological trinita- 
 rianism and passing to the development of the trin- 
 itarianism of the Greek philosophy, some space 
 should be devoted to what may be fitly called an 
 appendix to the Greek mythological chapter, 
 namely, some account of the trinitarian elements 
 in the Eoman religion. A common Aryan back- 
 ground lies behind the historical accounts of both 
 Greek and Eoman religious ideas, and there are 
 some plain indications of a direct influence exer- 
 cised by Hellenism upon that remarkable prehis- 
 toric chapter of Etruscan civilization, both in art 
 and in religion, which in its turn seems to have 
 had much to do in the moulding of the primitive 
 Roman forms of religious faith. In later historic 
 times, when Eome had extended her dominion 
 over the Greek world, and had deeply imbibed the 
 Greek culture, there resulted an amalgamation of 
 the Eoman and Greek mythology and polytheism, 
 so that there was a heterogeneous fusion of Latin 
 and Hellenic divinities both in character and in 
 name, and the term Graeco-Eoman properly cov- 
 ered the whole religious as well as political field. 
 But while all this is true, it is equally true, and to 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 117 
 
 be distinctly and carefuUy noted, that the Roman 
 religion as it first appears in history was a com- 
 pletely original and indigenous evolution out of 
 Italian soil. This religion was as characteristically 
 polytheistic as the Greek, but more abstract and 
 less the result of the poetical imagination. Ro- 
 man mythology had no Homer or even Hesiod to 
 record in imperishable verse its religious flights of 
 fancy. Such genius was clearly wanting to the 
 Roman character. So complete was its polytheis- 
 tic tendency that, as Mommsen weU says : " The 
 number of gods became as great as the incidents 
 of earthly life." The Roman was practical rather 
 than idealistic, and his religion became " shriveled 
 into a dreary round of ceremonies." It is not 
 surprising, then, that in place of a Hesiodic Theo- 
 gony, or a Homeric Epic, we should have a Roman 
 Calendar, with its meagre record of sacred and 
 secular days and their accompanying festivals, as 
 our chief historical guide to a closer acquaintance 
 with the Roman religion. But as we study this 
 calendar and its history concerning the chief reli- 
 gious festivals that filled the Roman year, while 
 the completely and widely polytheistic character 
 of Roman religious faith is vividly brought out, 
 another fact emerges with equal prominence, 
 namely, that at the official head of the whole poly- 
 theistic pantheon there was a triad of gods, 
 Jupiter, Jimo, and Minerva, to whom a special 
 worship was accorded. In fact, the whole Roman 
 religious faith and cult was centred in one spot, 
 
118 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 with its temple and ritual, and in one great day 
 and rite. That spot was the Capitoline Hill, on 
 which was built the three-celled temple, with its 
 three altars and images of Jupiter CapitoHnus, 
 Juno, and Minerva. These three divinities " con- 
 stituted the official triad of the Roman religion." 
 They were by eminence the " Dii populi Romani." 
 Special " prayers were addressed to them for the 
 public prosperity." Especially on one great festi- 
 val day, — the " Dies natalis templi Capitolini," 
 or " Lectisternium," as it was popularly called, 
 from the most striking scene in the pageant, — the 
 images of the three Capitoline divinities were 
 brought out of their several cells, placed on 
 couches and carried about the city, and then 
 feasted together. The origin of this unique reli- 
 gious custom and of the trinitarian feature which 
 chiefly distinguishes it is obscure. Scholars trace 
 its source to the Etruscan kings, who brought to 
 Rome their own religious ideas and worship as 
 well as civilization. The architectural division of 
 the Capitoline temple into three parts, with three 
 special cells, seems to be Etruscan. A curious 
 passage in Servius, a commentator on Virgil of the 
 fourth century, supports this conjecture : " Those 
 wise in the Etruscan discipline say that among the 
 Etruscan builders cities were not considered as 
 truly complete in which three gates were not dedi- 
 cated, and also as many temples of Jupiter, Juno, 
 and Minerva." Fergusson, in his " History of Ar- 
 chitecture " (i. 282), gives a plan of an Etruscan 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 119 
 
 temple which is divided into three parts, a central 
 nave and two aisles, with three corresponding 
 doors, and three ceUs for the divinities. There is 
 no doubt a direct historical connection between the 
 Roman basilica of Imperial times, with its three- 
 fold division, and the Etruscan temple, as there 
 plainly is between the Roman basilica and the 
 early Christian church, with its final development 
 into the Gothic cathedral. It is indeed a curious 
 and noteworthy inference which appears inevi- 
 table, if these premises are well founded, namely, 
 that the trinitarian idea reaUy lies behind that 
 threefold principle of division which has been the 
 ruling feature of Graeco-Etruscan, Roman, and 
 Christian religious architecture from prehistoric 
 times to the present day. A side view is thus 
 opened of peculiar significance into that tendency 
 of the primitive Aryan man to recognize a trini- 
 tarian character in all things, and to give it ex- 
 pression in public and sacred buildings. It is quite 
 well established that the Roman Capitoline trinity 
 was of Etruscan origin, and that the Etruscan reli- 
 gious and artistic ideas were derived from Greece. 
 This explains the correspondence of the Capito- 
 line trinity — Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva — with 
 the Homeric trinity of Zeus, Here, and Athene ; 
 for Jupiter is the equivalent of Zeus Pater or 
 Father Zeus, while Juno, though in name merely a 
 feminine counterpart of Jupiter, — being origi- 
 nally Jovina, the feminine of Jove — represents 
 in character and function the Greek Here, and 
 
120 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Minerva is a Latinized Athene, the goddess of wis- 
 dom. In Virgil the Capitoline triad has become 
 more fully identified with the Greek, Juno has be- 
 come the sister-wife of Jupiter, as was Here that of 
 Zeus, and Minerva has taken on more completely 
 the various attributes of Athene, as inventress of 
 the arts and as the friend of mankind. It is a 
 question, however, whether in the original Italian 
 religion these divinities corresponded so closely to 
 their later Greek counterparts, or had such fuUy 
 developed personal qualities. But such a question 
 need not concern us here. This at least is true, 
 that very early in Roman history, and long before 
 Greece directly influenced Rome, the Capitoline 
 triad and its cult was f uUy established on that hill 
 which became the hearthstone and religious centre 
 of the Roman commonwealth, and remained ever 
 after the point around which the whole religious 
 system of Roman rites and festivals revolved. 
 After the political union of Rome and Greece was 
 consummated in the second century b. c, the 
 amalgamation of the two religions went on apace. 
 Still, it was never quite complete. 
 
 Virgil well represents the Roman religion at 
 the beginning of the empire. Jupiter, Juno, and 
 Minerva in the ^neid are everywhere recognized 
 as the Latin equivalents of Zeus, Here, and Athene. 
 Yet there are marked differences of character, 
 showing that the old Latin ideas persistently held 
 their ground. The Jupiter of Virgil is more just, 
 perhaps, than the Zeus of Homer, but he lacks the 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 
 
 121 
 
 humanness of Zeus which brings him so much 
 nearer to human hearts. This is especially true of 
 Minerva as compared with Athene. In the ^neid 
 she is a wise counselor and helper of men, but she 
 somehow lacks that gracious and tender bearing 
 which makes the Athene of Homer so lovable in 
 the eyes of all whom she approaches to succor and 
 save. The ^neid represents a higher conception 
 of moral law and its predestined consequences, — 
 Jupiter himself being under its fatal power, — but 
 the larger moral freedom of the Greek Homeric 
 theology elevates it to a plane of moral activity and 
 responsibility that certainly more than compensates 
 for its allowance of aberrations from the stricter 
 fatalism of the Virgilian dogma. In the introduc- 
 tion to the translation of the ^neid by Messrs. 
 Lonsdale and Lee a statement is made with which 
 I quite agree : " The author of the ' Christian 
 Year ' has said that, next to Sophocles, Virgil is 
 the most religious of the poets of heathenism. The 
 word religious is ambiguous, and it would be diffi- 
 cult to agree with this opinion, if the word reli- 
 gious is taken in its usual sense. But if by religion 
 is meant a belief in fate, then it is quite true that 
 the ^neid is the epic of destiny. We might take 
 as a motto for it Virgil's own line thus rendered 
 by Dryden : — 
 
 * But ah, what use of valor can be made, 
 When heaven's propitious powers refuse their aid ? ' 
 
 No Stoic dissertation can set forth the power of fate 
 more determinately." But if the ^ueid is " the 
 
122 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 epic of destiny," quite as truly is the Odyssey the 
 epic of moral freedom. Virgil was a true poet of 
 the Augustan era, with aU its splendid civilization 
 and culture. His great poem is its noblest epitaph. 
 But Virgil was a child of his age. The Eoman 
 world of his day had lost the simple faith of youth, 
 and had fallen into that state of cold doubt and 
 skepticism which may be seen in its best form in 
 the writings of Cicero. The last religious refuge 
 of such an age is the doctrine of fate. It was out 
 of such a fatalistic reaction that the Stoic panthe- 
 istic philosophy arose, with its lofty but cheerless 
 ethics of unconditional resignation. Virgil had 
 been educated under Epicurean influences, but in 
 later life his religious sympathies tended toward 
 the conservative reaction set on foot by Augustus. 
 His epic poem is an effort to reinstate the ancient 
 religion among the " doubting Pilates " of his day. 
 In a sense the effort was a splendid success. He 
 painted the mythological polytheism of early Italy, 
 in its later HeUenized form, in colors whose bright- 
 ness and richness time cannot dim. But after aU 
 they were the colors of the sunset, and the ^neid 
 wiU ever remain the pathetic vision of a dying 
 faith. To attempt to compare such a poem with 
 the Odyssey is reaUy unjust to both. They belong 
 to two utterly different spheres of religious thought. 
 The pessimistic and melancholy temper of the 
 Augustan age is reflected in Virgil himseK and in 
 his profoundly sad verse. A sympathetic critic 
 speaks of "his majestic sadness, his grace and pity." 
 
THE GREEK HOMERIC TRINITY 123 
 
 Such in truth is the impression which the JEneid 
 leaves on the reader. From beginning to end it 
 is bathed with the sober hues of a fatalism that 
 broods darkling over aU skies. The joyous spring- 
 time of the Homeric world, with its evergreen isles 
 and bright many-voiced waves of ocean, has" gone 
 forever, and in its place are the melancholy autum- 
 nal days of an age that is disillusioned and waits 
 hopelessly for what may come. If the Odyssey is 
 the Bhagavat-Gita or " Divine Song " of the Eth- 
 nic Bible, the ^neid is its Book of Ecclesiastes. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 THE EVOLUTION OF THE GREEK PHILOSOPHIC AL 
 TRINITARIANISM 
 
 The Greek mythological age may be said to 
 have ended with the Persian wars at the beginning 
 of the fifth century B. c. These wars were fol- 
 lowed by a rapid upward movement of Greek civil- 
 ization which quickly culminated in its famous 
 golden age, producing the most wonderful out- 
 burst of social, literary, artistic, and religious de- 
 velopment that the world had yet seen. It was 
 the age of Herodotus, ^schylus, Sophocles, So- 
 crates, Pericles, Thucydides, Xenophon, Phidias, 
 and Polygnotus. What makes it especially note- 
 worthy for us in our present study is the fact that 
 it prepared the way for that remarkable evolution 
 of metaphysical thought which resulted in the philo- 
 sophical idealism of Plato and Aristotle. It was 
 by these great thinkers, who borrowed their inspi- 
 ration from Socrates, that the educated Greek 
 world was carried over from the old mythological 
 and polytheistic conception of divinity to that new 
 ground of philosophical theism which became the 
 foundation of all later theologies. A single para- 
 graph from Plato's Timaeus (40 Steph.), in which 
 with the most exquisite irony he politely bows out 
 
GKEEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 125 
 
 of existence the old polytheistic gods, may be 
 truly said to mark the epoch-making transition 
 from that theory of divine multiplicity which had 
 hitherto characterized more or less completely aU 
 Ethnic thought, to the new conception of God's 
 essential unity, which was henceforth to rule in 
 philosophy. But while Plato was a philosophical 
 theist or monist, he left a way open for the admis- 
 sion of a multiplicity of divine and semi-divine be- 
 ings in the ideal sphere by his dualistic mediational 
 doctrines. Dualism lay at the basis of Plato's 
 spiritual philosophy. It was essential in his view 
 to the defense of all real spiritual existence that a 
 radical line of division should be drawn between 
 spirit and matter. The earlier Greek philosophers 
 from Thales to Anaxagoras had built their systems 
 on the assumption of an original material monism. 
 Heracleitus indeed started out on a reactionary 
 dualistic path, but failed to foUow his own lead. 
 Anaxagoras took a step further, declaring that 
 behind motion in the phenomenal world there must 
 be a mover, but left his pregnant suggestion with- 
 out critical analysis. It was reserved for Socrates 
 and Plato, his great disciple, to subject this sugges- 
 tive hint of Anaxagoras to critical dialectic treat- 
 ment, out of which came the idealistic dualism of 
 Plato and his school. This doctrine rests on the 
 assumption that there is a radical and eternal dis- 
 tinction in fact as weU as in thought between the 
 ideal or spiritual sphere and the phenomenal or 
 material. This dualistic view is modified by an- 
 
126 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 other assumption, namely, that the ideal world is 
 the truly real, and is the pattern and cause of aU 
 temporal and phenomenal things ; so that duality 
 is but a development in time of an original unity 
 above time. It is noticeable here that the radical 
 line of cleavage is between spirit and matter, or 
 between the eternal and the temporal. Man, as a 
 creature with a body, belongs to the material and 
 temporal. Hence he is naturally separated from 
 God and the heavenly realm. Now appears the 
 ground for Plato's mediation ideas. How can God 
 be brought into moral relation with men? For 
 Plato believes in the divine personal goodness and 
 disposition to care for his human creatures. But 
 God himself " cannot mix with men." Thus a 
 mediative system is needed, and such a system of 
 mediating instrumentalities forms a leading fea- 
 ture of Plato's philosophy. This system begins in 
 the very process of creation itself by which the 
 material world is brought into being. In the 
 Timaeus, which contains Plato's cosmogony, three 
 principles or classes of natures are described : 1. 
 Intelligible or ideal being which is uncreated and 
 eternal. 2. The generated imitation or copy of 
 ideal being, that is, phenomena or the created 
 world. 3. Matter, which with Plato is without 
 positive qualities, and means simply space viewed 
 as the receptacle or "nurse of generation." It is 
 by the union of the first and third principles, 
 namely, eternal ideas and infinite space or matter, 
 that the phenomenal world is generated or pro- 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 127 
 
 duced. How can this be done ? Here the neces- 
 sity of the mediating element is seen. This prin- 
 ciple of mediation on which all creation depends is 
 called by Plato soul (t/^x^). Soid is itself a pre- 
 liminary creation of God, which Plato conceives as 
 a sort of mixture of idea and space, or rather per- 
 haps an emanation from the divine mind (vovi) 
 which under spatial or material conditions becomes 
 personalized into a mediating being who thus is 
 made the agent in the production of the world. 
 This curious piece of pure speculation shows to 
 what shifts Plato was driven by his dualistic 
 theory. Mediation is its necessary corollary, and 
 this principle of union and communication between 
 the upper and lower worlds is steadily employed 
 throughout his metaphysical writings. He has a 
 system of demonology which forms a sort of medi- 
 ating bridge between heaven and earth. These 
 demons, or good angels, are the bearers of com- 
 munications from one side to the other. Through 
 them prayers are carried up to God, and divine 
 responses are given to men. Even nature is in- 
 troduced into this mediating system. Hence 5uch 
 oracles as that at Delphi, where priestesses were 
 inspired by vapors issuing from a cave, Plato's 
 doctrine of divine inspiration, in which he seems to 
 have implicitly believed, was founded upon the 
 mediative principle. Here, then, in the very nature 
 of the Platonic philosophy, a foundation was laid 
 for a trinitarian development. In fact, no such 
 development was clearly visible in Plato himself. 
 
128 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 The signs of it which some Christian writers, like 
 Cudworth, have found, belong to dialogues that 
 are now known to be spurious. But a germ lay 
 concealed there which later Platonists were sure 
 to bring to light. Plato was no trinitarian in the 
 fuU sense of the word ; he had no trinity of gods ; 
 he was a strict monotheist. But his mediation 
 theory, so fundamental in his dualism, was a direct 
 pointer, as we have seen so often in other Ethnic 
 religions, to a trinitarian result. Out of it came 
 at last the famous logos (Xoyos) doctrine which has 
 played so prominent a part in Christian theology. 
 I have already briefly discussed this logos doctrine 
 in its rise and evolution in pre-Christian thought, 
 in my previous volume on the " Evolution of Trin- 
 itarianism ; " but it is now necessary that it should 
 receive a more extended treatment, in order that 
 one may f uUy understand the historical background 
 of the later New Platonic trinity of which Plotinus 
 was the great expounder. The term Xoyos was 
 ordinarily employed in classic Greek in the sense 
 of reason or the faculty of intelligence, and also 
 for the expression of reason and thought in lan- 
 guage, namely, word or speech. The first is its 
 constant meaning in Greek philosophy, and such 
 is its significance in the logos doctrine. It was an 
 unfortunate error in the Vulgate Latin version of 
 the New Testament that the Greek term Aoyo? in 
 the proem of the Fourth Gospel, which was plainly 
 used in its philosophical sense, and should have 
 been translated by the Latin equivalent ratio, was 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 129 
 
 translated by the term verhum, whicli fails wholly 
 to give its real meaning. This blunder was per- 
 petuated in the King James English version, and 
 a strange spirit of reverence has led recent scholars 
 to adhere to this error in the new revised version. 
 The true translation is: "In the beginning was 
 the reason or intelligence of God." Such was its 
 meaning as used by Plato, and by Greek philoso- 
 phers before and after him. With this meaning 
 it came to be employed for such forms or fruits of 
 intelligence as law, order, especially the divine law 
 or order of things. Such was its use by Heraclei- 
 tus, who may be said to have introduced the word 
 into philosophical language. Whether Heracleitus 
 ever gave to Aoyos a personal meaning is not clear. 
 My own impression is against it. Heracleitus 
 scarcely rose to any full philosophical conception 
 of a personal God, or of a reason of God. By 
 reason (Ao'yos) he meant the principle of eternal 
 order and law which he found behind all the 
 changes and movements of the material world. 
 Even Plato's use of it is not personal as a rule ; 
 it is only an attribute of personality. His more 
 usual term for the divine intelligence is vovs (mind), 
 which he sometimes substitutes for Oeoq (God), 
 since the divine intelligence is the essential interior 
 principle of the Divine Being. Plato, however, 
 frequently used the term Xoyos (reason) as the 
 equivalent of vov^ (mind). In the later Platonic 
 school the two terms came to be used synonymously, 
 and finally the three terms, ^€os, voOs, Xdyos, were 
 
130 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 aU employed to mean the Divine Being in Ms es- 
 sential eternal character. The term in Plato for 
 the mediating principle is never voOs or Aoyos, but 
 ilrvxn, namely, the world soul, which became the 
 author of aU other individual souls and mediated 
 between them and God. A sort of semblance of 
 trinity might be suggested as existing in Plato, in 
 his use of ^€os, vors, and ifrvxn ; but what has been 
 said shows that Plato had no such idea in his 
 mind. He made no personal distinction between 
 ^€os, voOs, and A.oyo9, and his world soul Qlrvxv) was 
 not an eternal divine being, but a created mediat- 
 ing being whom God made to be the connecting link 
 between himseK and created things, or, in more phi- 
 losophical language, between idea and phenomena. 
 How, then, came the logos doctrine of later 
 Greek philosophy with its trinitarian appendix to 
 be traced to Plato ? The answer to this must be 
 found in one of those common evolutions of lan- 
 guage by which words gather new meanings and 
 even change places with other words, — a lin- 
 guistic process due attention to which would have 
 saved Christian theologians from not a few mis- 
 takes. The evolution began in the gradual substi- 
 tution of Xoyos for vovs as the divine reason or 
 intelligence. This change appears prominently in 
 Philo, — the famous Jew of Alexandria, — and 
 also in the early Christian Alexandrian philoso- 
 phers, especiaQy the Gnostics ; and through such 
 channels it went into Christian theology. It is in 
 this form that it appears in the Fourth Gospel. 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 131 
 
 Along with this hnguistic evolution went another, 
 namely, the substitution of \6yos for if/vxy, as the 
 great Platonic principle of mediation. Aoyos, as 
 has been said, was never used by Plato to repre- 
 sent the mediation element, "^vxrj was his philo- 
 sophical word always for such mediation. In his 
 more popular dialogues he sometimes substitutes 
 such terms as Sat/xwv or epo?, but these personificar 
 tions are drawn from the mythological vocabulary 
 of his age. Here, again, Philo is the principal 
 medium of evolution between Plato and later times. 
 Philo substituted Xoyos for xlruxrj as the central 
 principle of mediation between God, the transcen- 
 dent ineffable One, and his creatures. In fact, the 
 kayo's of Philo is the strict counterpart, on the 
 mediational side, of the ifruxn of Plato. On an- 
 other side a clear difference is to be observed, but 
 this difference is to be explained by the fact that 
 Philo has left the strict theistic position of Plato 
 and anticipates the monistic evolution which will 
 culminate in the pantheism of Plotinus. It can 
 now be easily seen how the Aoyos mediation doc- 
 trine can be traced through the evolution of the 
 Platonic dualistic philosophy back to Plato him- 
 self, although he did not use the term Aoyos, but 
 ilruxv^ for his mediating principle. On the whole, 
 it may be said that Philo is the historical founder 
 of the Aoyos theology. He placed the Aoyos as the 
 great principle of divine mediation in the forefront 
 of his philosophical system, and introduced the 
 word /xco-mys (mediator) into theological language. 
 
132 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 To the Philonic school Paul plainly owed his own 
 use of this term, which became the keynote of his 
 mediating system. The same is true of the un- 
 known author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The 
 remarkable proem of the Fourth Gospel ceases to 
 be so remarkable when its historical source is thus 
 discovered. How the dogma afterwards took shape 
 in Christian theological thought and finally re- 
 sulted in the complete trinitarianism of the Nicene 
 Creed my previous book unfolds. The very cen- 
 tre and heart of that creed is its A.oyos mediation 
 doctrine, and history shows that this doctrine has 
 its source in, and is directly evolved out of, the 
 Platonic philosophy. 
 
 But even in Philo we have not yet reached a 
 philosophical trinity. Philo is religiously a true 
 Jew, and still holds to one personal God. Yet 
 his Xoyo^ as mediator (fiea-Lrrjs) has already assumed 
 a prominence that threatens to make God abdicate 
 his old throne as the direct Father and Savior of 
 his chosen people. The Aoyos has become the mes- 
 senger, the high priest, " the man from heaven," 
 the " first begotten son," the medium of prayer 
 and offering, the friend of man. No such doctrine 
 is to be found in the Old Testament. There God 
 himself directly approaches men and deals with 
 them as their own heavenly Father and Redeemer. 
 Whence, then, did Philo, true Jew as he was, 
 gather his mediation ideas and foist them into his 
 interpretation of the Old Testament writings ? 
 The answer has been already given. A Jew in 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 133 
 
 religious faith, Philo was educated in Greek 
 schools, where he had drunk deeply of the Platonic 
 philosophy. But if no trinity yet emerges in Philo, 
 two things only are wanting to bring about such a 
 result. 1. That his " reason " (Xoyos) or " media- 
 tor " (fieo-tTiys) should become a strict person ; and 
 2. that a third being should be added. As to the 
 first point, already in Philo himself there is a re- 
 markable wavering between a personal and imper- 
 sonal " reason," so that there is great diversity of 
 opinion among scholars as to which view should be 
 taken. To me this question has no special interest. 
 Philo's half-personal, half -impersonal use of " rea- 
 son" (Xoyos) is simply an evidence of the wavering 
 and hesitancy that appears throughout his writ- 
 ings, indicating the half-unconscious drift of his 
 thought from theism to pantheism, or from the 
 personal to the impersonal view of divinity. But 
 so strongly personal at times is his language in re- 
 ference to the mediator that Christian writers such 
 as Paul, the writer to the Hebrews, the author of 
 the Fourth Gospel, Origen and his school, were 
 easily led to regard it as denoting a personal medi- 
 ating being. Thus the foundation is already laid 
 in the Platonic Philo for a second person in the 
 Godhead, and when later the doctrine of a third 
 person, the Holy Spirit, began to grow in the 
 Christian church, it was not difficult to find the 
 germs of it in Philo himself as weU as in the Old 
 Testament. 
 
 If Philo was in a sense the founder of the Xoyos 
 
134 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 "doctrine, which by a curious fate became trans- 
 planted into Christian theology, and paved the 
 way for the Christian trinity, it was Plutarch who 
 more truly formed the historical bridge between 
 the older and newer Platonism, and prepares us 
 for the final evolution which will give us the full- 
 fledged New Platonic trinity of Plotinus. 
 
 With Plutarch we reenter the direct line of 
 evolution of Platonism, — Philo representing a 
 side line which has become famous because of its 
 unique influence upon Christianity. Before di- 
 rectly taking up this last chapter of the Greek 
 philosophical trinity, it will be well to notice its 
 peculiar character in general, which consists in the 
 fact that it rests entirely on a speculative basis, 
 and allows no strictly mythological element to 
 enter in to qualify or corrupt it. As we have al- 
 ready seen, Plato eliminated from his metaphysical 
 scheme all fabulous materials. He sometimes 
 illustrated his doctrines by myths and polytheistic 
 traditions, but these were mostly a mere literary 
 garniture ; and if he seemed to accept them as con- 
 taining something of truth, he held them loosely 
 as remaining shreds of his traditional faith, not as 
 constituent elements of his metaphysical specula- 
 tions. This character which was given to Plato- 
 nism at the start was preserved to the end. It is 
 owing to this cardinal fact that the later Greek 
 philosophical trinity as finally set forth by Plo- 
 tinus will be the most logically consistent and 
 completely speculative piece of metaphysical con- 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 135 
 
 struction that has ever appeared in the world. 
 When it is compared with the two other Aryan 
 trinities, the difference from this point of view wiH 
 be readily seen. Zoroastrianism from beginning to 
 end is full of mythological elements. It is hardly 
 known whether Zoroaster himself was a historical 
 or a mythical character. Sosiosh, the Zoroastrian 
 " savior," was a complete myth, and Mithra, the 
 " mediator," was originally a mythological divinity 
 of the prehistoric polytheism. The only philoso- 
 phical rival of the Plotinian trinity is the Hindoo 
 TrimurtL But though this trinity becomes as 
 plainly metaphysical and pantheistic as that of 
 Plotinus himseK, its whole historical basis is laid 
 in the earlier mythology, and the very names of 
 its triune members are those of mythological gods 
 who had done duty in the earlier polytheistic cult. 
 But this fact wiU find its best illustration in the 
 analysis I shall give of the Plotinian trinity ; and 
 I refer to it now that it may be kept clearly in 
 view as we pass on to trace the historical evolution 
 which culminated in Plotinus. 
 
 Plutarch lived in the first century of the Chris- 
 tian era. There is no evidence in his writings of 
 any acquaintance with Christianity. He called 
 himself a Platonist, but he represents the philoso- 
 phic current of his age which was moving strongly 
 towards a monistic view of the world. This move- 
 ment had its chief philosophical exponent in Stoi- 
 cism, and Plutarch, while opposing the Stoics at 
 different points, shows how much he was influenced 
 
136 THE ETHNC TRINITIES 
 
 by the pantheistic atmosphere around him. The 
 ruling feature of Plutarch's Platonism is its medi- 
 ation system. Mediation is his one solvent for 
 every philosophical dilemma. It was this me- 
 diation principle in Plato's dualism that made 
 Plutarch a Platonist. But his treatment of this 
 principle is original and peculiar. Plato had in- 
 troduced mediating elements to bridge over par- 
 tially the great chasm that existed between his 
 two orders of being, the ideal and the phenomenal. 
 But the chasm still remained. With Plutarch 
 the real chasm no longer exists. The mediating 
 powers have completely filled it. Dualism has be- 
 come monism. The new philosophic key, used 
 also by the Stoics, is evolution. The creation in 
 time of Plato has given place to an evolution from 
 eternity, and this evolution has no gaps in its pro- 
 gress from the original first principle of existence 
 to the lowest form of matter. This, of course, is 
 what we call New Platonism, and its path is 
 straight henceforth to its extreme result in Ploti- 
 nus. Yet Plotinus, as well as Plutarch, called 
 himself a follower of Plato, because starting with 
 Plato's idealism he, with Plutarch, adopted to its 
 fullest extent the associated principle of media- 
 tion. The three test words of New Platonism, as 
 a philosophy, are idealism, mediation, evolution. 
 The first two belong to Plato himself, while 
 the third is the new note which changed Platonism 
 into New Platonism. This change was radical; 
 for the new evolution principle led to a magnify- 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 137 
 
 ing of the mediation principle, which metamor- 
 phosed the dualism that Hes at the foundation of 
 theism to a monism which is the direct road to 
 pantheism. How far Plutarch was aware of this 
 profound change one cannot tell. He gives no 
 sign. But his work entitled " Isis and Osiris " ^ 
 is interesting as showing how ready he was to ac- 
 cept a trinity, such as he found in the Egyptian 
 religion of his day, from the standpoint of the 
 Platonic dualism. The " Isis and Osiris " gives 
 evidence that Plutarch found in Platonism a sort 
 of a trinity. But how ? one may well ask. I can 
 conceive of but one answer, from the philosophic 
 point of view. It was the new evolution keynote 
 that enabled Plutarch to accept so easily the idea 
 of a trinity of gods, thus forming a convenient 
 bridge between the original One^ the Father of 
 Plato, and the many mediational divine and semi- 
 divine beings which filled the chasm between the 
 two worlds of eternity and time. We shall find 
 this very bridge employed by Plotinus in the re- 
 markable chapter of the " Enneads," entitled " The 
 Three Hypostases " (*0t rpcts vTroorao-cts). 
 
 The " Isis and Osiris " of Plutarch is so curious 
 and suggestive, as a stage in the evolution of 
 Greek trinitarian ideas, that it demands further 
 notice. This work is an attempt from the media- 
 
 ^ I assume the genuineness of this production ; for, whether 
 genuine or not, it harmonizes with the general tone and character 
 of Plutarch's genuine writings, and, if not from the hand of 
 Plutarch himself, must be the work of a disciple. 
 
138 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 tional and eclectic point of view to explain the 
 Egyptian polytheism. Plutarch assumed that all 
 religions are essentially one in spirit and aim, and 
 that a conunon truth underlies all the diversified 
 forms of religious faith. This eclectic liberalism 
 had its root in the original spirit and philosophy of 
 Plato, — a spirit drawn from the inquisitive and 
 critical method of Socrates, — but it grew more 
 and more into a vital principle of judgment and 
 conduct with the evolution of Platonism into New 
 Platonism, which sought to find in philosophy a 
 common ground of agreement and harmony for 
 the divergent religious systems in the world. This 
 irenic, tolerant element characterized the later 
 New Platonic writings, and is the secret of their 
 undying charm, — a charm that sheds a halo 
 around the writings of Plutarch himself, and has 
 placed him in the calendar of pre-Christian saints. 
 The subject-matter of the " Isis and Osiris " is 
 a myth concerning three Egyptian gods which had 
 become popular in the later religion of Egypt, and 
 also among the Komans who were inclined in Plu- 
 tarch's day to accept foreign cults, — Egypt being 
 now a Roman province. As a Platonist Plutarch 
 seeks to find the esoteric truth which this exoteric 
 myth contains. The warp and woof of the essay is 
 a comparison which is instituted between the triple 
 myth of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, and the three fun- 
 damental principles of Platonism. Thus the basis 
 is laid for a philosophical triad, which Plutarch 
 discovers under the disguise of the Egyptian poly- 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 139 
 
 theism. It is interesting to observe how ready- 
 Plutarch is to accept a trinitarian view of things. 
 " The better and more divine nature," he says, " is 
 made up of three principles ; " " and we may con- 
 jecture that the Egyptians reverence the most 
 beautiful kind of triangle (the right-angled), be- 
 cause they liken it to the nature of the universe." 
 He proceeds to call three the " perfect " number. 
 He suggests that in Hesiod's Theogony " the first 
 ^YQ elements of creation " are reducible to three, 
 and this recalls to him " the fable of Plato's which 
 Socrates has related in the Symposium," in which 
 three persons. Wealth, Poverty, and Love, figure. 
 Thus Plutarch brings Hesiod, Plato, and the 
 Egyptian myth into philosophical harmony by 
 means of a trinity which he finds in the very nature 
 of things, — a passage which reminds one of the 
 extract from Aristotle previously quoted, in which 
 he describes a principle of threeness in nature, and 
 suggests that it lies behind the trinitarian rites in 
 the worship of the gods. Plutarch was thus pre- 
 pared from his own philosophic background to em- 
 ploy a trinitarian key in the interpretation of the 
 Egyptian polytheism. Such a key is for him the 
 best bridge from unity to multiplicity and vice 
 versa; and the same philosophical assumptions, I 
 may here say, which induced Plutarch to build 
 such a trinitarian bridge, lie behind aU the philoso- 
 phical trinities of history. Let me now describe 
 this bridge as Plutarch built it. 
 
 The Egyptian myth included a fourth god, Ty- 
 
140 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 phon, who represented the evil principle. Plu- 
 tarch here applies the Platonic dualism, and treats 
 the Egyptian Typhon as equivalent to the Platonic 
 principle of matter, which is the spring of what- 
 ever is defective and evil in the world. It is to be 
 noted, however, that Plutarch goes beyond Plato, — 
 becoming almost if not quite a Zoroastrian. Plato's 
 matter was wholly negative in character. For him 
 there is only one positive principle of life and be- 
 ing, namely, the good. But Plutarch seems to 
 hold to two eternal active principles, one good, the 
 other evil, and refers to Zoroaster as holding the 
 same view. In this Plutarch leaves the track of 
 his master. Probably the explanation is to be 
 found in the character of Typhon, as given in the 
 Egyptian myth, which made him an active agent 
 for evil. But in explaining the rest of the myth 
 Plutarch returns to thoroughly Platonic ground. 
 Osiris, Isis, and Horus represent the trinal charac- 
 ter of " the better and more divine nature." 
 Plutarch plainly supposed himself to be simply 
 following out Plato's own principles, for he speaks 
 of Plato in this connection as " adopting into his 
 system chiefly the religious notions of the Egyp- 
 tians." Whether Plato actually borrowed from 
 the Egyptians or not, Plutarch plainly thought so, 
 and accordingly regarded his own trinitarian inter- 
 pretation of the Osiris myth as a genuine product 
 of Platonic principles. It is not necessary to our 
 purpose to go at length into Plutarch's curious 
 adaptation of the Platonic philosophy to the Egyp- 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 141 
 
 tian mythology. A simple statement of it will be 
 enough to show how far advanced already we are 
 on the philosophical trinitarian road towards the 
 complete New Platonism of Plotinus, and that the 
 root and seed of it all is traceable to Plato him- 
 self. 
 
 Plutarch makes Osiris the superior principle of 
 good, the eternal reason or intelligence (Xoyos), the 
 fountain head of aU intelligence in aU things, and 
 the final as well as efficient cause of the world. 
 As such Osiris corresponds to Plato's Zeus or 
 Father, " idea of the good," the " intelligible 
 One." Hence Plutarch calls Osiris " the first 
 god," al^o " the benefactor." Isis is made the sec- 
 ond or female principle, being passive, receptive, 
 the mediating instrument of generation. Hence 
 she is called the wife of Osiris, being the medium 
 of the active agency of the first god or Xoyos, and 
 so termed " nurse " and " mother." Here Isis is 
 made to correspond to the Platonic principle of 
 matter as a purely passive, negative element, and 
 not a direct, efficient cause of evil. Horus repre- 
 sents the result of the united action of the first 
 and second gods. He is thus the son of Osiris and 
 Isis, made in his Father's image, son of the Aoyo?, 
 the sensible image of the intelligible being or idea 
 of good. In this view Horus represents Plato's 
 phenomenal world, which was created or generated 
 from the divine or eternal reason, by the mediation 
 of the world soul, which was a prior creation of 
 that reason (vovs, Xoyos). It can be seen at once 
 
142 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 that Plutarch leaves out of his comparison of the 
 Platonic and Egyptian trinitarianism the world 
 soul or mediating principle, which plays so large a 
 part in Plato's system, and, further, confounds the 
 negative material element of Plato with Typhon, 
 the active agent of evil in the Egyptian myth. 
 He seeks to cover these gaps by his doctrine of 
 Isis, who is made to represent Plato's matter, the 
 passive nurse of generation, and also his " world 
 soul," or active mediating principle. Isis thus has 
 an active as well as passive aspect, is mother as 
 well as wife, the active soul Qpvxn) ^-s well as 
 medium and " nurse " of the generating activity of 
 the first god (vovs, \6yo%). The result of this skill- 
 ful manipulation is that he is able to bring the 
 three principles of existence of Plato, namely, 1. 
 Intelligible being or idea, 2. Phenomena or indi- 
 vidual things, 3. Matter or space as the receptacle 
 or nurse of generation, into apparent harmony 
 with these three mythical beings, Osiris, Isis, and 
 Horus. How far he was successful in his inter- 
 pretation does not here concern us : the point of 
 interest is that in his interpretation Plutarch gives 
 us his construction of Platonism, which in his view 
 has a trinitarian basis, and is in essential philoso- 
 phical accord with the Egyptian triad as philoso- 
 phically explained. 
 
 As to the character of this trinity which Plu- 
 tarch finds in the Platonic philosophy and the 
 Egyptian religion, it is to be remarked that it dif- 
 fers considerably from the mythological triads of 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 143 
 
 the earlier Ethnic religions. Had Plutarch treated 
 the myth of Osiris, Isis, and Horus in a historical 
 and critical way, he would have found many in- 
 teresting points of relationship between it and the 
 mythological triads of his Graeco-Roman ancestors. 
 The Osiris of Egypt is the Zeus of Homer in 
 one aspect. So Isis closely corresponds in some 
 of her attributes to Athene. But Plutarch did not 
 approach the subject as a critical historian. His 
 standpoint was that of a philosophical eclectic, 
 and his consequent effort to harmonize an Egyp- 
 tian myth with a Greek speculation must be ac- 
 counted a failure. It failed to do justice to either 
 side. Plutarch's triad has no real affinity with 
 the Egyptian mythological trinity, and is equally 
 a spurious development of the Platonic dualism. 
 As I have said, Plato was no trinitarian. His 
 construction of deity was whoUy theistic without a 
 tinge of real tritheism. His philosophical dualism 
 led him to his doctrine of three ultimate principles 
 of existence ; but his duaKsm left his theistic doc- 
 trine of God untouched. If any question could 
 arise, it would be whether his dualism did not in- 
 volve pantheism, not whether it led to tritheism. 
 The historical significance of Plutarch's " Isis and 
 Osiris " is, that it so clearly shows which way the 
 theological winds around him were blowing. A 
 trinitarian theory of the universe and also of deity 
 is somehow in the air, and Plutarch takes kindly 
 to it. He is ready to mould his Platonism into a 
 trinitarian form, and the Egyptian myth just suits 
 
144 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 his purpose. But why is he so ready to turn his 
 own philosophy into a trinitarian direction ? Be- 
 cause his Platonism, as I have shown, has admitted 
 a new evolution principle which has radically 
 transformed it, and a trinity of some sort is the 
 very bridge he needs as a passageway from the 
 unity of original being to the multiplicity of the 
 phenomenal world. In the history of Greek phi- 
 losophy Plutarch stands midway between Plato 
 and Plotinus. He opened the path from theism 
 to pantheism, which Plato hesitated to enter, but 
 which Plotinus carried through to its logical re- 
 sult, employing the philosophical materials fur- 
 nished by Plato himself. Plato had never ad- 
 justed his theistic faith to his idealistic, dualistic 
 philosophy. If he was conscious of the contradic- 
 tion which existed he gives no hint of any such 
 consciousness. He could leave this hiatus the 
 more easily since he made no pretense of forming a 
 philosophical system. His dialogues contain other 
 similar speculative inconsistencies, which were 
 only partially hidden under the veil of irony in 
 which he so often indulged, on purpose, appar- 
 ently, to afford a suitable hiding-place whenever 
 he needed it. Thus it became the great aim of 
 Plato's disciples to systematize the fruitful but 
 unadjusted speculations of their master. It was 
 this motive that developed the New Platonic evo- 
 lution. From Plato to Plotinus this effort is the 
 sovereign note everywhere visible. It does not 
 come within the scope of this survey to trace this 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 145 
 
 evolution any further than is required by the 
 trinitarian factor which so essentially belongs to 
 it. Enough to note here that only one of two 
 courses was open to Plato's disciples, — either to 
 surrender the Platonic metaphysical idealism and 
 fall back on a crude dualism as the basis of the 
 Platonic theism, or to surrender Plato's theism 
 altogether and to allow his metaphysical ideal the- 
 ories to run their logical course into a consistent 
 pantheism. The latter alternative was the one 
 accepted. Thus the further history of Platonism 
 is marked by the steps taken in this direction. 
 Plato's metaphysical speculations were made the 
 basis of further speculative thought, while his 
 theism gradually dwindled to a mythological meta- 
 phor, — theistic terms being employed with a pan- 
 theistic meaning. Two steps especially are to be 
 noted in this pantheistic advance. 
 
 First, Plato treated God as a personal being, 
 the Creator and Father of the world, representing 
 him, however, in his ideal theory as the "idea 
 of the good." But how can an idea, which is a 
 pure abstraction, be a person or a seK-conscious 
 agent ? Plato left the knot as he foimd it ; but 
 his followers avoided the dilemma by a logical step 
 which eliminated it. Behind Plato's concrete per- 
 sonal mind (voGs or \0y05) the New Platonist placed 
 the abstraction of simple existence (^rb Iv, to ov), 
 — a purely logical formula, without attributes or 
 qualities, and possessing nothing but a subjective 
 reality ; for how can an abstract idea exist except 
 
14f$ THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 in a concrete mind endowed with the power of 
 abstraction ? But such a logical starting-point of 
 being suited the speculative tendencies of this 
 profoundly metaphysical age. Moreover, the basis 
 of it had been laid by Plato himself. In his 
 " Republic " Plato had described the " idea of the 
 good" as the "universal author of all things 
 beautiful and right, parent and lord of light in 
 this world, and the source of truth and reason in 
 the other " (Rep. 517), thus plainly identifying 
 the " idea of the good " with God himself ; and yet 
 in another passage (509, B.), he had described this 
 same " idea of the good " as " above aU essential 
 or individual being " (to iTriKuva t^s ovo-tas). This 
 isolated expression, which Plato had casually 
 dropped from his pen without explanation or repe- 
 tition, became the New Platonic definition of the 
 highest or first deity. Evolution of a pantheistic 
 sort, as we have already seen, explained the rest. 
 Plotinus, as we shall see, made great use of this 
 definition. His first hypostasis (vTrocrraorts) or 
 principle of being is a pure impersonal abstraction, 
 " the one " (to Iv), a simple principle of unity 
 without a single quality of any sort ; yet he again 
 and again calls this abstraction God or Father, 
 and, in describing it, uses the personal pronoun 
 in the masculine gender. Unless this peculiarity 
 of Plotinian nomenclature is borne in mind, the 
 reader of the Enneads will often be led astray. 
 
 The second step grew out of the question 
 whether the eternal ideas of Plato's metaphysical 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 147 
 
 world were interior to the divine reason or ex- 
 terior and independent. I am aware of the oppos- 
 ing views entertained by critics concerning this 
 vexed question which lies at the very root of the 
 Platonic philosophy ; but the more thoroughly one 
 enters into Plato's point of view, the clearer grows 
 one's conviction as to his real position, and what 
 the study of Plato's dialogues plainly indicates is 
 amply sustained by the later Platonic evolution. 
 The key to that evolution is to be found only in 
 the right understanding of Plato's own doctrine of 
 ideas, which was incontestably, that they are not 
 apart from and independent of God, but are inte- 
 rior to the divine reason (vow or Xoyos), and are 
 employed by God as the patterns and causes of aU 
 phenomena. This is the doctrine of the Republic, 
 where Plato made the " idea of the good," which 
 he placed at the summit of the ideal world, to be 
 identical with God himself. So, also, in the 
 Timaeus, God the father and creator forms all 
 things after the pattern of the eternal ideas con- 
 tained in his own reason (^Xoyo';'). But New Pla- 
 tonism tended to the opposite view. As it reduced 
 the first absolute God to mere oneness without 
 attributes, it could not look upon the ideas which 
 were the types and causes of things as inhering in 
 this first God. The world of ideas was located in 
 the mind of a second God, who was himself the 
 principle of intelligence (vovs) generated by a nat- 
 ural evolution from the first God. 
 
 These two steps led the way to the fuUy devel- 
 
148 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 oped New Platonic trinity. This trinity first ap- 
 pears in a crude shape in Numenius. Numenius 
 was a philosophical writer of the latter half of the 
 second century, and thus stands midway in time 
 between Plutarch and Plotinus. He claimed to 
 be a regenerator of philosophy, and sought to re- 
 turn to the pure fountains of Pythagoras and 
 Plato. In Socrates and Plato he thought that he 
 found a real divine trinity. This trinity he de- 
 scribed as " three gods," — a " first god," who was 
 the absolute one (vovs), self-conscious yet unable 
 to create or actively employ the ideas that inhered 
 in the divine intelligence ; a " second god," who by 
 generation from the first god became the active 
 embodiment of the eternal ideas and the Demiurge 
 or maker of the world ; and the " third god," who 
 was generated from the second god, and was the 
 active intelligent principle of the created world. 
 Thus we have for the trinity of Numenius, 1, the 
 Supreme Deity ; 2, the Demiurge ; 3, the Cosmos 
 or world. It will be seen that this view of the 
 principles of the divine being differs considerably 
 from that of Plato. Plato did not distinguish the 
 Demiurge or Creator from the Supreme God. His 
 strict theism prevented it. He treated the eternal 
 ideas which were the patterns and causes of things 
 as immanent in the divine being, and actively op- 
 erative in the divine mind in the construction of 
 the material universe. How Numenius could have 
 read his evolutionary pantheistic ideas into Plato 
 it is impossible to guess, as but a few fragments 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 149 
 
 of his writings have come down to us. He may- 
 have seen a spurious " Epistle " which was attrib- 
 uted to Plato and contained a passage that dis- 
 tinguished a " jfirst," " second," and " third " god. 
 This spurious epistle was plainly the work of some 
 New Platonic disciple. Whatever be the truth 
 about this, one fact becomes more and more clear, 
 that the whole Platonic school, from Plutarch on, 
 was drifting steadily toward a trinitarian panthe- 
 ism. The special significance of Numenius lies in 
 the fact that he pushed the trinitarian element to 
 the front, and thus directly prepared the way for the 
 Plotinian trinity. 
 
 A word or two more is required concerning the 
 speculations of Numenius, that the connection be- 
 tween him and Plotinus may be more clear. The 
 most marked peculiarity of the Numenian trinity 
 is its generation doctrine. Numenius calls his 
 three gods, TraTTTros, cKyovos, and aTroyovos, — literally 
 "grandfather, immediate offspring, and more re- 
 mote offspring," or, as it might be put, "Father, 
 son, and grandson." Thus the whole evolution of 
 the world is regarded as a generative process from 
 beginning to end. We have seen the generative 
 principle playing an important part in the Ethnic 
 mythological trinities. We also found it early in 
 the development of Platonism into New Platonism, 
 though not in Plato himself. Plato makes God an 
 active creator, not a passive instrument of genera- 
 tion. But the generative idea appears in Philo in 
 Lis Xoyos doctrine, and still more fully in Plutarch, 
 
160 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 who makes the third member of the triad the gen- 
 erated son of the first and second members. It 
 was reserved, however, for Numenius to apply the 
 generative principle to the whole trinity, and to 
 make the Supreme Being father of the second god, 
 the Demiurge, and grandfather of the third god, 
 the world. We shall see how completely Plotinus 
 accepted this fertile suggestion. 
 
 There is one other point in Numenius's scheme 
 which demands a word of explanation. What 
 does Numenius mean in calling the world a god, 
 and a member of tjie divine trinity ? Of course 
 his pantheism explains it in part. In his view the 
 whole universe, from the highest to the lowest 
 forms of existence, is one substance, and contains 
 one essential divinity. But a further word should 
 be added. Numenius derived from Plato the idea 
 that not only what we call the material world, with 
 its earth, sun, moon, and stars, was an animated 
 being as a whole, but also that each individual 
 body, earth, sun, or star, was an animal or living 
 intelligent being, deriving its animated life from 
 the world-soul, which dwelt in the universe as the 
 soul of man dwells in his body. How fruitful a 
 germ of pantheistic tendencies this theory was 
 needs no unfolding. The truth is that Plato's 
 idealistic dualism was a seed-bed of the most di- 
 verse philosophical tendencies. His doctrine of 
 nature was both idealistic and hylozoistic. Aris- 
 totle, in this respect, was a consistent disciple, and 
 
GREEK PHILOSOPHICAL TRINITARIANISM 151 
 
 hence we shall see in our further studies how phi- 
 losophical schools of the most antagonistic charac- 
 ter can claim these two great founders of Greek 
 speculative thought as their masters. We now 
 pass to Plotinus. 
 
CHAPTER Vni 
 
 THE GEEEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 
 
 There is a close historical connection between 
 Plotinus and Numenius. Porphyry, Plotinus's 
 disciple, tells us that the writings of Niunenius 
 were among those that were read in the school of 
 Plotinus for discussion and criticism ; but he takes 
 pains to add that Plotinus was not a mere fol- 
 lower of Numenius, but developed a " more accu- 
 rate " philosophy. This is plain at a glance. The 
 differences between Plotinus and Numenius are 
 palpable and radical, and show that Plotinus pro- 
 ceeded upon entirely original lines of philosophic 
 thought. Two points are sufficient to illustrate 
 this. First, Numenius made the Demiurge or 
 world-maker the second principle or member of 
 his trinity ; while Plotinus transfers the work of 
 the Demiurge to the third principle of the triad. 
 A second point of difference is still more radical. 
 Numenius made the Cosmos or world a member of 
 his trinity, — a rude device, showing how chaotic 
 and incomplete was his trinitarianism, and how 
 far he failed to understand the idealistic dualism 
 of Plato, whom he regarded as his forerunner. It 
 was Plotinus who revived the central truth of 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 153 
 
 Platonism and raised upon it a speculative meta- 
 physic in which the spiritual world as the eternally 
 real is carefully distinguished from the phenom- 
 enal. This fact is revealed in his new trinity, from 
 which the Cosmos or visible universe is discarded, 
 and in its place a new spiritual principle is substi- 
 tuted. On the whole, it is evident that Plotinus 
 was under no special obligations to any of his pre- 
 decessors, except so far as this, that he was a wide 
 student of Greek philosophy on aU sides, having 
 spent his early life in Alexandria, the headquar- 
 ters of all the Greek schools in the third century. 
 The two philosophers who most influenced him 
 were Plato and Aristotle. His references to Plato 
 are numerous, and he plainly regarded him as 
 his philosophical master. How far he was con- 
 scious of his wide variations from Plato it is not 
 easy to say. My own judgment is that he re- 
 garded himself as a true follower of Plato, but ex- 
 ercised freely the functions of a critic, and looked 
 upon his own philosophical system as a legitimate 
 and logical unfolding of Plato's speculations. In 
 fact, as has already been mentioned, while he ad- 
 hered to the spiritualistic idealism of Plato, he 
 dismissed entirely the Platonic element of person- 
 ality as fundamental to the spiritual realm, and 
 built the most complete metaphysical system of 
 idealistic pantheism that the world has seen. 
 The influence of Aristotle upon Plotinus is also 
 marked. His chief deviations from Plato are on 
 Aristotelian lines, especially his whole theory of 
 
IM THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 the origin of the world as an evolution of phenom- 
 enal movements and activities, which involve an 
 unmoved and motionless mover or principle of 
 motion. Plato made God an active causal agent 
 in the formation of the world, which had a begin- 
 ning ; while Aristotle held that the world must be 
 eternal, since the principle of all motion must be 
 eternal, and so eternally productive of motion in 
 the physical universe. Plotinus accepted the view 
 of Aristotle, and made it the basis of his trinita- 
 rianism. But while Plotinus shows a thorough 
 acquaintance with aU the great thinkers before 
 him in the Greek world, and even adopts many of 
 their ideas, it still remains true that his philoso- 
 phical system is essentially original. This is pre- 
 eminently true of his trinitarianism. 
 
 Before I proceed to a description of the Ploti- 
 nian trinity, I wish to emphasize this fact, so that 
 the profound significance of Plotinus as a religious 
 thinker, and of his religious system as compared 
 with other systems, may be duly impressed on the 
 minds of my readers. Of no other trinitarian 
 system can it be said that it is the creation of a 
 single religious genius. AU other Ethnic trinities, 
 as we have seen, were the slow result of a long 
 evolution, and their origins are hid in the darkness 
 of the primeval world, out of which they finally 
 emerged into the light of historical times. Neither 
 Zoroaster nor Buddha nor any single Hindoo sage 
 laid the foundations of the Zoroastrian or Hindoo 
 triads. The Greek mythological trinity which 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 165 
 
 forms so tender a background to the story of the 
 Odyssey had floated down into the Homeric world 
 from an unknown past. Plato was, on the whole, 
 the most creative trinitarian thinker before Ploti- 
 nus, and sowed the speculative seed which finally 
 produced the Plotinian trinity. But Plato himself 
 was not a trinitarian in any sense. He was a 
 monotheist; and before a trinity could emerge 
 from his theistic philosophy, the whole character 
 of it had to be changed. I have already traced 
 that change through Philo, Plutarch, and Nume- 
 nius. Not till the Platonic monotheism had become 
 a New Platonic pantheism could a metaphysical 
 trinity be built on Platonic foundations. This was 
 the truly original work of Plotinus. It is a his- 
 torical fact worthy of careful attention and remem- 
 brance, that the two great philosophical trinities of 
 the ancient world, the Hindoo and the New Pla- 
 tonic, are essentially pantheistic, and could have 
 been developed only from pantheistic principles. 
 Two words describe the essence of Plotinianism, 
 pantheism and trinitarianism, and in the Plotinian 
 system each element involves the other. It is in- 
 deed true that Plotinus does not baldly assert his 
 pantheistic ideas, though they lie at the basis of all 
 his thinking; but he places his trinity in the fore- 
 front of his philosophy, and makes his three hy- 
 postases or principles of being the root and centre 
 of his whole explanation of the universe, includ- 
 ing man in his origin, character, and destiny, and 
 also nature from the highest to the lowest forms 
 
166 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 of phenomenal existence. What establishes and 
 stamps as genuine the originality of this wonderful 
 system, viewed simply as a product of speculative 
 thought, is its completely metaphysical and trans- 
 cendental character. Every trinity before that of 
 Plotinus has mythological, legendary, or historical 
 elements incorporated more or less completely in 
 its composition. Even pliilosophers like Heraclei- 
 tus, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, and Plato himself, 
 frequently f eU back on mythological ideas in order 
 to bridge the speculative gaps in their thought. 
 But no such " wood, hay, stubble " are mixed with 
 the pure metaphysics of Plotinus. His " three 
 hypostases," The One, The Mind, The Soul (to If, 
 6 vovs, rj ^vxn), are in no sense mythological and 
 have no mythological background ; they are wholly 
 transcendental creations of the speculative reason, 
 — the result of the sublimest flights of abstract 
 thought, dealing with the great mysteries of the 
 world and man and God. Hence, although the 
 mediative principle drawn from Plato is conspic- 
 uous in the Plotinian trinity, it remains wholly 
 transcendental, never lowering itself to the point 
 of a divine incarnation. There is nothing in Plo- 
 tinus to remind one of the God-man, Krishna, in 
 the Hindoo trinity, or Sosiosh or Mithra in Zoro- 
 astrianism, or the Virgin Athene of Greek mytho- 
 logy. This fact grows the more remarkable, when 
 one considers that all the historical elements that 
 have entered into the development of the various 
 Ethnic trinities appear in the Plotinian, namely, 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 167 
 
 the peculiar significance of three^ the family or 
 generative principle, and the mediation principle. 
 Why, then, we may weU ask, did Plotinus leave 
 out the natural idea of a divine incarnation ? The 
 answer becomes plain only when the character of 
 Plotinus himself and of his speculative system is 
 clearly understood. The more I study the man 
 himself and his writings, the more fully I compre- 
 hend how aloof and apart he was from all external 
 influences, and how original was the character and 
 scope of his genius. Less creative and poetic than 
 Plato, he far excelled him in the rigid consistency 
 and reach of his speculations. No ancient thinker 
 has ever looked so steadily and unweariedly into 
 the face of eternal and spiritual realities as Ploti- 
 nus, — a man in truth of the sublimest faith in 
 the imseen God. Such a man, living so entirely 
 in the upper world, would naturally have developed 
 out of idealistic premises an abstract and logical 
 metaphysic that would have no room for any de- 
 scent to earth and time such as an incarnation of 
 God demands. In short, an incarnation is logi- 
 cally impossible in any strict and consistent meta- 
 physical scheme. Such a scheme must complete 
 itself on purely metaphysical lines. It cannot 
 descend from the metaphysical to the physical, 
 phenomenal, historical plane without violating its 
 own cardinal principles. And here is revealed the 
 secret of Plotinus's power as a thinker, and of the 
 tenacity of his grip upon critical thought. While 
 mythologies and speculative systems that are 
 
168 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 founded upon legendary traditions are fading out, 
 like a shore fog under the morning sun, the rigid, 
 logical, and intensely metaphysical system of Plo- 
 tinus is proving itself to be the most vital and 
 indestructible of the world's speculative treasures. 
 Whether it is to stand or faU, one thing is certain, 
 that neither scientific nor historical criticism can 
 directly touch it ; for it starts and remains far 
 above all merely phenomenal events, though in- 
 cluding them as shadowy and subordinate incidents 
 of its wonderful panorama of existence. With my 
 own historical instincts developed and fortified by 
 a life of historical study and teaching, I confess to 
 a strong disinclination to enter and tread such an 
 airy path. The Plotinian solution of the universe 
 is not for such as I. But at aU events the histor- 
 ical critic cannot treat it as he can mythological 
 and legendary cosmogonies. He can only acknow- 
 ledge that it lies whoUy beyond his own historical 
 and critical sphere. Yet this can be said ; if meta^- 
 physics shall prove to be the master key to the 
 world's enigmas, — which I am not yet ready to 
 grant, — commend me to the optimistic trinitarian 
 idealism of Plotinus. 
 
 I hope that I have in some measure, by these 
 preliminary statements, prepared the way for the 
 direct consideration of the Plotinian trinity. I 
 shall not attempt to unfold the subtleties of Plo- 
 tinus's speculations, except so far as may be neces- 
 sary for the explanation of his trinitarian views. 
 
 Strange as it may seem, the great aim of Plo- 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 159 
 
 tinus in aJI his metaphysical writings is wholly 
 practical and religious ; it is to defend the reality 
 of man's higher and immortal nature against the 
 materialism and skepticism of his age. Epicure- 
 anism, though decadent, still haunted men with 
 its denials of a future spiritual existence. Even 
 Stoicism, with aU its lofty ethical ideas, sanctified 
 and embalmed in the noble writings of Epictetus, 
 Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius, rested on a mate- 
 rialistic basis that could give no clear assurance of 
 a personal immortality. Against all such ideas 
 Plotinus sought to raise a solid barrier in his meta- 
 physical philosophy. This aim animates him aU 
 through his speculations, even in their most trans- 
 cendental flights, and imparts to them an intense 
 moral earnestness. No more serious explorer after 
 religious truth ever lived. In this respect Plotinus 
 belongs to that select class of " seekers after God," 
 " if haply they might feel after him and find him," 
 which includes such thinkers and seers as Buddha, 
 Zoroaster, Socrates, Plato, Plutarch, and Marcus 
 Aurelius. Equally for them all the great object 
 of their intellectual efforts was to find a resting- 
 place for religious faith, — a solid basis of security 
 and comfort mid the moral evils and mysteries and 
 uncertainties of this mortal life. At times in Plo- 
 tinus this moral enthusiasm breaks forth in pas- 
 sages of marvellous mystical insight and beauty, 
 which raise his strangely harsh and involved style 
 of thought to a rhythmic heavenly strain that sur- 
 prises and almost startles us. This moral and 
 
160 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 religious quality is well illustrated in the famous 
 chapter (En. V. 1.) : " Concerning the three sov- 
 ereign hypostases or principles of being" (HcptTwv 
 Tptwv apxiKiov vTToo-Tao-tcov), to which I now call spe- 
 cial attention. The very first sentence strikes the 
 ethical note which remains as a minor key through- 
 out, and at the close gathers every single various 
 chord into one grand melody : " How happens it 
 that souls become forgetful of God their Father, 
 though they have sprung from him and are wholly 
 of him, and are thus made ignorant of him and 
 also of their own divine nature ? " The question is 
 answered by tracing this obliviousness to the union 
 of the soul with matter, as a consequence of which 
 man is turned away from his divine source toward 
 lower corporeal things. "Hence souls seeing 
 neither God nor themselves despise themselves 
 through ignorance of their divine lineage." Plo- 
 tinus next proceeds to point out the true remedy, 
 namely, that they should be converted from things 
 below them " and be raised to the highest, the one 
 and the first." It is immediately after this exor- 
 diima that Plotinus develops his trinitarian doc- 
 trine as the one only divine method by which souls 
 thus fallen are redeemed, and, having finished it, 
 he returns to his starting-point, thus showing that 
 it has been in his mind aU along. Noting the dual 
 character of the soul as having a power of choice 
 between things within and above and things exter- 
 nal and inferior, he thus closes : " It is necessary, 
 therefore, if the soul would apprehend what is 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 161 
 
 higlier, that its attention should be turned inward. 
 Just as when any one, desiring to hear a voice that 
 pleases him, separates himself from other voices, 
 and opens his ear to the sweeter sound as it draws 
 near ; so here also it is necessary for the soul to dis- 
 miss external and sensible sounds, except so far as 
 may be needful, in order to keep pure and ready 
 for use its introspective power, with a view to 
 hearing voices from above." 
 
 Such, then, is the point of view from which Plo- 
 tinus proceeds to unfold his divine trinity. He 
 starts with the assumption that the human soul is 
 spiritual and consequently immortal. It has in- 
 deed become oblivious of its divine origin because 
 of its connection with the body. But this is only 
 a temporary condition. The true higher life of 
 the soul does not begin with temporal things or 
 end with them. This leads Plotinus to set forth 
 his doctrine of the soul. It has in its present 
 state two sides or aspects, — a lower side which 
 concerns itself with phenomenal and temporal 
 things, and a higher side that is turned toward the 
 intelligible and divine. Here Plotinus assumes 
 the truth of the Platonic dualistic idealism. He 
 distinguishes the eternal world of ideal spiritual 
 beings from the temporal world of phenomena. 
 This dualistic line between the spiritual and ma- 
 terial is drawn in the sharpest manner possible. 
 Soul and body belong to two different spheres of 
 being. The body has a material origin, while the 
 soul is descended from the spiritual world. But 
 
162 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 how are these two diverse spheres of being related 
 and bound together? Here Plotinus draws his 
 premise from Plato, but moves on to a more con- 
 sistent metaphysical conclusion. This premise is 
 one of the most curious speculations in the history 
 of philosophy, and to this day plays no small part 
 in philosophical thought. Let us see how Plato 
 was led to it. The question was how to find a 
 standing-place for the dualistic theory, and make 
 it harmonize with the unity of the world. It is 
 easy enough to assume dualism as a fact. The 
 fundamental differences between mind and matter 
 are patent to every thinker. But how to adjust 
 these differences and explain metaphysically the 
 nature and origin of the union between such di- 
 verse forms of being is and always has been the 
 Gordian knot of philosophy. In considering 
 Plato's manner of dealing with it one must re- 
 member his whole point of view. He lived in a 
 period of strong reaction from the Ionian physi- 
 cists, who had sought to find in nature and its 
 phenomena the origin of the world. Anaxagoras 
 had suggested that behind all phenomenal motion 
 and change there must be a mover or principle of 
 motion, and that such a principle must be simple 
 and beyond all mixture or change. This principle 
 he called mind (voCs). Out of this pregnant 
 thought was evolved the dualistic school of Socra- 
 tes and Plato. Its whole aim was to resist the 
 materialistic skepticism which in the Sophistic 
 schools was becoming more and more popular, and 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 163 
 
 to build on metaphysical foundations a spiritual 
 philosophy. The suggestion of Anaxagoras was 
 made the starting-point. Behind matter is mind. 
 Above the physical is the metaphysical. The true 
 eternal realities are ideal, not phenomenal. The 
 visible world has its basis in the invisible. All 
 individual concrete things are only copies in time 
 of God's eternal ideas, which are the patterns and 
 causes in the divine mind of this phenomenal uni- 
 verse. Plato shows little regard for scientific 
 studies. What little science there was in his day 
 was superficial guesswork, and led to no conclu- 
 sive results. Plato sought " a more excellent way,'* 
 — the way of metaphysical speculation. He 
 boldly entered the unseen transcendental sphere, 
 and established himself on the speculative princi- 
 ple that all real truth is eternally existent in the 
 mind of God. This is his famous theory of ideas. 
 But Plato was not a pure idealistic monist. He 
 held to the secondary reality of matter. He could 
 not, even from his idealistic point of view, deny 
 the facts before his eyes as to the temporal reality 
 of the visible world. How shall he unite the two 
 worlds? How shall God, with his eternal ideas 
 or patterns of things, become a creator? Plato 
 might have jumped the whole mystery in the He- 
 brew fashion, and declared that God created the 
 world by a simple fiat, " out of nothing," as it was 
 explained by Jews and Christians in later times. 
 But Plato was not to be caught in such a meta- 
 physical trap. "Out of nothing nothing can 
 
164 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 come " was as familiar to him as to Epicureans of 
 a later day. Here there appears the curious spec- 
 ulation on which he dares to risk his whole meta- 
 physical system. The facts to be explained and 
 harmonized are those which involve two separate 
 and seemingly radically different worlds. What 
 is the tie between them? How can dualism be 
 sustained? In this wise. The ultimate fact of 
 the material world is multiplicity involving motion 
 and change ; the ultimate fact of the spiritual 
 world is unity, and sameness, and unchangeability. 
 These two facts are the opposite poles of aU exist- 
 ence. But it must be remembered that such facts 
 are only subjectively and logically true. " Same- 
 ness and otherness " are mere abstractions and 
 generalizations of the mind, and are logically true 
 only so far as they are abstracted in thought from 
 real objects in nature and experience. But Plato 
 made this principle of logical division a metaphy- 
 sical one, and treated it as if it were an objective 
 cardinal truth in the nature of things. 
 
 This purely speculative and barren assumption 
 was adopted by Plotinus. " Sameness and other- 
 ness," he says, "are the first of things "(xptora). 
 How so logical and rigid a thinker as Plotinus 
 could have been willing to stand on so slippery a 
 speculation need cause no surprise. Let him who 
 has not sinned in this way cast the first stone. 
 But in judging him we must not lose sight of his 
 great object in laying down such assumptions. 
 He wishes to build a metaphysical system on 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 165 
 
 wMcli lie may rest his doctrine of the soul. Is 
 the soul mortal or immortal, of earth or of heaven ? 
 If immortal and of heavenly origin and mould, 
 how has it been so closely united with a mortal 
 body ? " Sameness and otherness " is the " open 
 sesame." Plotinus, like previous Greek philoso- 
 phers from Thales to Plato, started with oneness 
 as the ultimate principle of nature and the world. 
 Whatever that principle be, water, air, fire, the 
 imlimited, number, it was essentially one. All 
 schools down to Heracleitus allowed this. But 
 how explain the changes and processes of pheno- 
 mena ? " Otherness " involving multiplicity is the 
 counter principle through which nature acts, and 
 to which God himself is subject as the Demiurge 
 or world-former. Plato in the Timaeus represents 
 God as making the world-soul before the world it- 
 self, out of two elements : " the unchangeable and 
 indivisible, and the divisible and corporeal." Thus 
 was formed " an intermediate essence partaking of 
 the same and of the other ^'' By " the same " Plato 
 meant the eternal spiritual world " which always 
 is and has no becoming " or change, and by " the 
 other " he meant the material substratum of things 
 which Plato conceived as a purely negative princi- 
 ple, sometimes called by him " space," which, how- 
 ever, was a necessary condition of creation, " the 
 receptacle, and in a manner the nurse of aU gen- 
 eration." Thus the world-soul was formed out of 
 the two fundamental principles of things, "the 
 same and the other," and became the mediating 
 
166 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 element in the creation of the phenomenal world. 
 Such was Plato's dualistic conception of God, the 
 world-soul, and " the corporeal universe which was 
 formed within and around her." These Platonic 
 speculations are imbedded in the Plotinian philo- 
 sophy. 
 
 But we are seeking in all this curious transcen- 
 dentalism the germs of the Plotinian trinity, and 
 we are now ready to ask what trinitarian germs, if 
 any, does Plato's view contain. First, we have 
 the Supreme God, who is represented by Plato as 
 the principle of intelligence (voC?), of reason (\6yos^j 
 and of goodness, and the maker of a good world. 
 With this intent God first formed the soul (t/^x^) 
 as an intermediate being to be the instrument of 
 creation. Thus there emerges a second member 
 of the triad, namely, the Demiurge. But here the 
 evolution pauses. Let us now see how Plotinus 
 completes his trinity on Plato's foundation. It is 
 first of aU to be noted that Plato does not make 
 the world-soul an eternal principle of being. So 
 that he after all remains firmly monotheistic. The 
 world-soul is a creation in time, and not therefore 
 to be placed on a par, in any sense, with the eter- 
 nal God. In truth, Plato's world-soul which he 
 constructs so fancifully out of " sameness and 
 otherness " is simply a deus ex machina extempo- 
 rized for the purpose of bridging the troublesome 
 chasm between two separate worlds. It is just 
 here that Plotinus deviates from his master, and 
 the deviation is radical and profound. It is the 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 167 
 
 step already noted from theism to pantheism. 
 Plato's God was a self-conscious intelligent per- 
 sonal being, possessing reason (vovs, Aoyo?). Plato 
 called him Father and Creator. His first creative 
 act was the forming of the world-soul to be the 
 mediating instrument in the formation of the 
 world. This whole cosmogony disappears in Plo- 
 tinus, and gives place to a thoroughly pantheistic 
 view. Plotinus cannot conceive of the first prin- 
 ciple of the world as a personal mind (yovs), intel- 
 ligent and active. Such intelligence and activity 
 involves a primary principle behind it. Here Plo- 
 tinus introduces the AristoteKan axiom that motion 
 implies a mover who causes motion but is not 
 moved. The first principle or Absolute God of 
 both Aristotle and Plotinus is not an active being 
 who by his intelligence and causal energy brings 
 the world into existence, but a pure deus ex 
 machina, like Plato's, devised to fill the gap in 
 their philosophy. Aristotle stopped at this point ; 
 he did not take the further logical pantheistic step 
 and hold that the first principle was above all lim- 
 itations or qualities of any sort, and hence imper- 
 sonal. He described God as a mind (yov's) eter- 
 nally occupied in self-contemplation, and then left 
 him as it were swinging in the metaphysical air, 
 to be the football of philosophical critics who have 
 ever since wrestled over the never settled question 
 whether Aristotle was a theist or pantheist or 
 atheist. The truth is that Aristotle left this point 
 where he found it, since it lay beyond the field of his 
 
168 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 inquiries, wliicli were scientific rather than specu- 
 lative. But Plotinus was not satisfied with such 
 an iUogical result. If the first god is not subject 
 to motion and active intelligence, he cannot be a 
 truly intelligent being. Intelligence and the ex- 
 ercise of the eternal ideas which are the patterns 
 and causes of aU lower forms of life must belong 
 to a second and derived god. Thus the way is 
 prepared for the fuU-fledged Plotinian trinity: 
 "The One, The Mind, and The Soul" (rh Iv, 5 
 voi)s, ^ ^vxrf)' Behind the First God and Father 
 of Plato (6 lov or 6 voOs) another god is inserted by 
 Plotinus (to Iv), so that Plato's one and only God 
 becomes in Plotinus a second principle. The com- 
 pletely pantheistic character of the Plotinian sys- 
 tem is here seen. His First God is not a person 
 or even an active principle. Activity proceeds 
 from him, since he is the first cause of aU activity, 
 but the first principle itself can be defined only as 
 " The One." It is " superior to all essence," for 
 aU essence or active intelligent being is derived 
 from it, and what is derived must be inferior to 
 the cause of such derivation. I need not dwell on 
 the curious argument of Plotinus in defense of his 
 position that " The One " is the only proper name 
 of the " first hypostasis " or god. It is purely spec- 
 ulative, logical, and subjective. Most curious of 
 all, perhaps, is his idea that the first god is " The 
 One " because he is above or superior to number^ 
 as to everything else. But is not one a number as 
 much as two or three ? Why, then, is the first 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 169 
 
 principle any more superior to number than the 
 second or the third, and why is the first principle 
 any the less an essence than the second or third ? 
 Of course " one " is the actual initial terminus 
 of all numbers, and so Plotinus was compelled to 
 accept it as the logical basis of his trinity. It is a 
 remarkable evidence of his sense of the unreality 
 of his logical definition of " The One " that he so 
 constantly applies to it another name, namely, 
 « The Good ; " for what is " The Good " if not a 
 moral and personal being ? Plotinus was led to 
 this second definition of his first god by his Pla- 
 tonism. Plato's ideal theory culminated in " the 
 idea of the good," which Plato himself identified 
 with his personal God. Plotinus avoids this logi- 
 cal contradiction, — for ideas are abstractions, not 
 persons, — by separating all conscious ideas from 
 the First God and placing them in the Second God 
 (o vovs). Thus his First God is without ideas of 
 any sort, — a mere principle of unity and nothing 
 more. Why, then, did he so often style his first 
 principle " The Good " (^rb KaXw), thus taking 
 away with one hand what he had given with the 
 other? There is but one answer possible. In 
 every rigidly metaphysical system there must lie 
 somewhere, more or less concealed, a premise which 
 involves a logical break. In Plato it was his the- 
 ory of ideas which he treated as real entities inde- 
 pendent of and apart from aU individual pheno- 
 mena. But an idea is an abstract universal and 
 cannot be individualized. Yet Plato jumped this 
 
170 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 logical chasm, and identified his highest universal, 
 " the idea of the good," with a personal God. Plo- 
 tinus avoided this dilemma by adopting the pan- 
 theistic view of God, which placed him above all 
 personal qualities, but the same logical antinomy- 
 met him at another point. If God is above all 
 moral qualities and limitations, how can he be 
 called " good ? " But how could Plotinus build a 
 moral system issuing in a moral universe, with souls 
 that are on an upward road toward the highest 
 holiness and blessedness, without a moral or good 
 first principle? For according to his own fre- 
 quently expressed axiom, whatever is derived must 
 be inferior to its cause, and how then can an un- 
 moral first cause produce a moral world ? We must 
 not forget that Plotinus was from first to last a 
 moral and religious thinker. In the end metaphy- 
 sical consistency, in his case as in that of so many 
 others, had to give way to the interests of religion. 
 The^rs^ and second principles of Plotinus hav- 
 ing thus been developed out of Plato's one God, 
 the way is prepared for the third. In his doctrine 
 of " The One " and " The Mind," one metaphysical 
 question has been answered, namely, how an intel- 
 ligent active cause of the world can be specula- 
 tively connected with the eternal first principle of 
 aU being. But a second question now emerges : 
 how can the divine Mind put into operation the 
 ideas which are the patterns and causes of aU cor- 
 poreal phenomena and bridge the chasm which 
 separates mind from matter ? A third principle 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 171 
 
 is needed, inasmucli as the second principle is not 
 competent for this work by itself, since, as Ploti- 
 nus conceives, its sole activity and life consists in 
 turning itself toward the first principle and receiv- 
 ing its eternal energy of being and good. Only 
 by the generation out of Mind of a third principle 
 can the end be secured. This third principle is 
 the soul (^^vxrj^, which, being derived from Mind, 
 is inferior to it, and so is conceived of by Plotinus 
 as endowed with a double capacity, namely, to turn 
 towards Mind as its generative cause of life and 
 activity and also towards the material element 
 which Plotinus, as a Platonist, holds to be eter- 
 nally existent as a pure capacity or possibility of 
 life when a^ted upon and vitalized by " The Soul." 
 But where, we may ask, does Plotinus get this 
 double aspect and capacity of the soul ? If the 
 second principle of being, the Mind, has only a 
 capacity of turning toward its superior and cause, 
 — the first principle, the One or Good, — why 
 should not the same be true of the third principle, 
 the Soul ? But this natural question does not 
 seem to trouble Plotinus. The inductive method 
 of reasoning, which demands some basis of fact or 
 evidence from experience, was far from his sphere 
 of thought. It was enough for him that his grand 
 pantheistic scheme demanded it. Beyond his 
 three eternal metaphysical principles of being hov- 
 ered a secondary principle of matter on which the 
 three immaterial principles must operate, if the 
 world is to be formed, and it was the third subor- 
 
172 THE ETHiTIC TRINITIES 
 
 dinate principle, Soul, that was necessitated to do 
 this work. It is the same old problem which the 
 dualist always has to solve: how get across from 
 mind to matter. Plotinus cuts the knot by giving 
 to the third hypostasis, soul, a double character 
 and faculty. Soul, he says, has two or even three 
 parts. " One part of it always abides on high, an- 
 other part is conversant with sensible or corporeal 
 things, and another stiU has a subsistence between 
 them." Of course it is now easy for the soul to pre- 
 serve its relation to the two principles from which 
 it is generated and to which it must always turn, 
 and yet be " drawn downward " by its closeness to 
 matter, and become the generator of the material 
 world, and even temporarily forgetful, at least in 
 part, of its divine origin. Just here is the precise 
 point where the Platonic theism becomes the Plo- 
 tinian pantheism. Plato bridges the dualistic 
 chasm by a purely creative act, leaving the meta- 
 physical higher world stiU separate from the lower 
 phenomenal world ; but Plotinus fiUs the chasm 
 which he allows to exist in the nature of things by 
 extending over it the same generative power and 
 activity which he makes the essential bond and 
 force of his metaphysical trinity. 
 
 We have seen how important a part this theory of 
 generation has played in all trinitarian views ; but in 
 Plotinus for the first and the last time it is not only 
 made the fundamental characteristic of his trinita- 
 rianism but also is carried forward to the further 
 evolution of the whole universe. His whole evolu- 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 173 
 
 tion doctrine is founded on generation. The second 
 principle, Mind, is generated from tlie first princi- 
 ple, the One, and the third principle, the Soul, is 
 equally generated from Mind. He defends this 
 view by declaring that the very perfection of God 
 requires that he should generate an image of him- 
 self, catching his idea from Plato, who declared 
 that God, being good, must manifest his goodness 
 in the creation of a good world. But Plotinus goes 
 still further. The soul, too, since it is a true image 
 of God, must generate a true image of itself. This 
 image must be inferior to its pattern ; and as the 
 soul is the lowest form or principle of the spiritual 
 world, and as that which is next below it is matter, 
 its generative power must be exercised on matter, 
 and produce the material world. This generative 
 process is conceived by Plotinus as without begin- 
 ning. Not only does the Plotinian trinity exist 
 by eternal generation^ but the world is equally 
 eternal. The principle of progression which the 
 terms generation or evolution would seem to in- 
 volve is, with Plotinus, as he directly asserts, logi- 
 cal, not chronological. Closely connected with the 
 Plotinian theory of generation in the trinity is 
 that of subordination. The one is, in fact, involved 
 in the other. Hence the second principle is infe- 
 rior to the first, and the third to the second. So 
 the temporal or phenomenal world is inferior to 
 the ideal world, and in the lower world itself the 
 same law works through a downward movement to 
 the lowest possible forms of nature. 
 
174 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Two things are especially to be noted in this 
 scheme of the universe. In the first place, Ploti- 
 nus draws the line sharply, as we have seen, be- 
 tween the metaphysical and the physical at the 
 point next below the soul. His trinity is wholly 
 metaphysical. The soul itself is whoUy of spirit- 
 ual origin and nature, and even when individual- 
 ized in human bodies it may recognize its divine 
 parentage and know in its own moral conscious- 
 ness that it is homoousios (complete in likeness) 
 with God. After aU, then, it may be asked, is not 
 Plotinus a true dualist rather than a pantheist? 
 But note where his doctrine of generation carries 
 him. AU generation involves the transmission of 
 the essential nature of the author of generation. 
 If the soul, as the third principle of divinity, has 
 generated the world, then the world thus gener- 
 ated must contain the essential principle of divin- 
 ity, though in a lower form ; and this is precisely 
 the view of Plotinus. His reported last words 
 show this : " I go hence to carry the divine in me 
 to the divine in the universe," — a phrase which 
 contains the very essence of pantheism.^ 
 
 The second thing to be noted is this. It is curi- 
 ous to find Plotinus contending against the Chris- 
 tian Gnostic sect, which held to a long series of 
 divine emanations of which the preexistent Christ 
 in the form of vovs or Xoyos was the first, that such 
 a series of emanations must be limited to three, 
 
 ^ See critical note on Plotinus's pantheism at the end of this 
 chapter. 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 175 
 
 In short, lie held that the forms or principles of 
 the eternal divine being were in the very nature 
 of things confined strictly to a fixed number, 
 namely tJiree^ and that no increase or diminution 
 was possible, and he entered into a detailed argu- 
 ment to prove it. It is needless to say that Plo- 
 tinus here perhaps surpasses himself in this specu- 
 lative spinning of spiders' webs. But why was he 
 so solicitous to guard his doctrine of " three hypos- 
 tases ? " Was not his whole system Gnostic in 
 its essential character ? Had he not bridged the 
 dualistic chasm more completely than the Gnostics 
 themselves? Without the slightest doubt. Why, 
 then, did he go out of his way to attack them ? 
 The reason is clear. He feared the result of his 
 own speculations. How could he answer the ques- 
 tion inevitably raised concerning his system, 
 whether any real dualism was left ? His reply is 
 found in the line that he draws so insistently be- 
 tween " the three hypostases " and the rest of the 
 universe. But the question remains and will 
 not down : Why, from the Plotinian pantheistic 
 point of view, should the number of the divine 
 principles of being stop with three ? What subtle 
 metaphysical significance in the number three is 
 there which should make it give absolute law to 
 the mode of existence of the divine nature ? And, 
 further, why, on the Plotinian theory, should the 
 line of division between mind and matter occur 
 just at this point ? Why should not the descend- 
 ing force of generation lose itself so gradually and 
 
176 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 secretly in lower forms of life that it would not be 
 possible for any keenest metaphysical eye to see 
 it? Plotinus gives no answer. He does not even 
 seem aware that any answer is needed. But while 
 he was intent on preserving the form of dualism 
 by his doctrine of three hypostases, it must be re- 
 cognized that his trinity is as pantheistic as the 
 rest of his system. His three principles of being 
 " The One, Mind, and Soul," are not three per- 
 sonal individual beings. Plotinus did not employ 
 the term vTrooT-acris (hypostasis) with the meaning 
 afterwards applied to it by Athanasius or by Ori- 
 gen. I must refer the reader to my previous vol- 
 ume for an account of the changes of meaning that 
 this word underwent in the theological nomencla^ 
 ture of the fourth century. Enough here to say 
 that to Plotinus, as to Plato and Aristotle, vTroa-- 
 Ttto-is meant the underlying essence or principle of 
 things. He conceived of three such essential forms 
 as lying at the basis of aU existence. To the " one 
 or good " he would not allow even any hypostatic 
 character, since it was " superior to all essence " 
 and could not be numbered, as all individual be- 
 ings can ; so that we must regard his employment 
 of the term hypostasis to designate " the one " as 
 a yielding to the necessities of language, and to be 
 interpreted in an improper or metaphorical sense. 
 The second principle, mind, in the Plotinian trin- 
 ity was an hypostatic being, though not person- 
 alized, but only separated from " the one " by 
 " otherness " or difference. Hence Plotinus's spec- 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 177 
 
 Illation that " mind, essence, otherness, and same- 
 ness are the first existences," by which he meant 
 that " the one," being without aU qualities or defi- 
 nition, was beyond essence, and hence not a true 
 hypostasis or being, though " the first cause " of 
 aU being. The use made by Plotinus of the Pla- 
 tonic term " the same and the other " is curious. 
 No such distinction can apply, he thinks, to " the 
 one." It first begins to emerge in the second 
 hypostasis. Mind, and appears in the ideas of the 
 Mind, which can be numbered ; hence Mind is 
 essence, since it " can be circumscribed." But it 
 is in the third hypostasis, the soul, tha,t " oth- 
 erness " has fullest play. For soul comes into 
 contact with matter in which " otherness " or mul- 
 tiplicity has its true abiding-place. It is in tliis 
 way that " otherness " becomes a part of the bridge 
 over which Plotinus is able to pass from "the 
 one," which is only " the same," and hence un- 
 changeable, to " the many," that is, the pheno- 
 menal world. How airy and unsubstantial such 
 a speculative bridge is needs no argument. To 
 build on it a whole philosophical system would be 
 impossible to any one who had not a complete 
 faith in metaphysics as the key of all knowledge. 
 Such, indeed, was the faith of Plotinus, and having 
 constructed out of his own speculations this meta- 
 physical passageway from earth to heaven, which 
 might well be compared to the Zoroastrian bridge 
 of Chinevad, — so narrow that even the righteous 
 could not pass over it alone, without falling into 
 
178 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 the abyss below, — lie traveled it with a confidence 
 that is sublime. 
 
 It may be asked whether the trinity of Plotinus 
 is, after all, anything more than a playing with 
 words. Certainly it is not a tri-personal trinity. In 
 this respect it differs, as we have seen, from all the 
 mythological triads of the Ethnic religions, and 
 can be compared only with the Hindoo Brahmanical 
 trlmurti. But even in the Hindoo triad there is 
 a mythological basis and element, so that the Plo- 
 tinian trinity remains to this day the solitary ex- 
 ample of a pantheistic trinitarianism, which is 
 wholly consistent with itself. At a later point in 
 our study we shall compare the trinity of Plotinus 
 with that of the Christian religion. I may, how- 
 ever, anticipate that comparative survey so far as 
 to say that the logical tendency toward pantheism 
 which is inherent in every philosophical form of 
 trinity is illustrated in the Christian dogma in its 
 later Augustinian SabeUian form, and especially 
 in the present efforts of theologians who still wear 
 the trinitarian mask to harmonize their so-called 
 trinitarianism with a monistic philosophy. It is 
 interesting to observe that the old Platonic-Plo- 
 tinian speculative device of " sameness and other- 
 ness," with all its pantheistic implications, is still 
 employed as though it were really something more 
 than a metaphysical snare to catch the unwary. 
 
 I cannot leave this analysis of the Plotinian 
 trinity without once more bearing testimony to my 
 profound sense of the moral fervor of Plotinus's 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 179 
 
 writings. Such a brief analysis as has been at- 
 tempted can convey no adequate idea of the im- 
 pression which the Enneads make on the mind- 
 I have given a mere skeleton of the Plotinian 
 trinitarian philosophy. To see it clothed in its 
 proper body, and arrayed in the fair form of the 
 Plotinian mystical idealism, one must study deeply 
 and patiently that wonderful compound of specu- 
 lative thought which was gathered into the En- 
 neads by Plotinus's great disciple. Porphyry. 
 
 The extremely metaphysical character of Ploti- 
 nus's writings seems, at first sight, to indicate an 
 excessive intellectualism. But such is not the fact. 
 Metaphysic was for Plotinus the highest form of 
 truth, and truth was equally for him the life of re- 
 ligion. The words put by the author of the Fourth 
 Gospel on the Hps of Christ, " I am the way, the 
 truth, and the life," caught their idealistic mean- 
 ing from the same headspring that fed Plotinus's 
 soaring spirit. AU the loftiest spiritual natures 
 have always drawn their visions of divine truth 
 fi'om faith in an unseen ideal world, and from a 
 metaphysic that gives a foundation to the doctrine 
 of the soul's essential spirituality and divinity. I 
 do not forget the criticism of Augustine upon 
 "the Platonic books," in which, no doubt, the 
 works of Plotinus were included, as he compared 
 them with the scriptures, namely, that though 
 these books gave a vision of heavenly things and 
 " the land of peace," they failed " to show the way 
 thither." But surely such a view of " the land 
 
180 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 that is very far off " as Plotinus held up before 
 the soul has no small part to play in the enkin- 
 dling of its immortal yearnings and energies, and in 
 its true awakening from forgetfulness of its divine 
 original and home ; and such, in fact, is the effect 
 of a thorough study of this marvelous thinker. 
 Airy and unsubstantial though his metaphysic 
 may be, yet, once the bridge is crossed from 
 earth to heaven, the soul feels that somehow its 
 true eternal resting-place is reached. No one can 
 drink deeply of Plotinus without becoming con- 
 scious that the Plotinian stream was somehow 
 drawn from the fountains of eternal truth, how- 
 ever much we may criticise the channels through 
 which its living waters have flowed. Surely such 
 words as these with which the Enneads close have 
 a far off and supernal ring : " Such is the life of 
 the gods, and of divine and happy men free from 
 all external things here below, — a life above the 
 senses and its pleasures, — a flight of the Alone 
 
 to the Alone Q^vyri jxovov Trpos fiovov). 
 
 I have alluded to Porphyry, who wrote the life 
 of Plotinus and to whom we owe the preservation 
 of his master's teachings. A letter of Porphyry 
 to his wife Marcella, recently brought to light, is 
 a beautiful illustration of the New Platonic reli- 
 gious spirit. No more pious, or sweet and touch- 
 ing revelation of a man's inner spiritual life can 
 be found in epistolary literature, — written as it 
 was in aU the freedom of a private correspondence, 
 in a season of forced absence. With a pathetic 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 181 
 
 tenderness he turns the thoughts of his life-com- 
 panion away from his earthly self, whose separa^ 
 tion from her she is mourning, to that higher 
 spiritual self that is ever present with her, and 
 with which she may continually commune; and 
 from this point of view he leads her upward into 
 the larger spiritual life that is open to all good 
 and loving souls. The whole epistle is redolent 
 with the pure atmosphere of heaven. The writer 
 seems to live habitually in the clear vision of di- 
 vine things, while earth and time and all their 
 petty affairs fade out of view. Is it aU fine writ- 
 ing, a sort of " Epistle to Posterity ? " I cannot 
 think so. I would rather believe that Porphyry, 
 like his master Plotinus, was one of those seekers 
 after God who found Christ's own words true: 
 " Seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be 
 opened unto you." 
 
 In concluding this survey of the Ethnic trini- 
 ties and before proceeding to a comparison of 
 them with the Christian dogma, I wish to call at- 
 tention to the remarkable freedom of the Ethnic 
 trinitarian ideas from gross and degrading super- 
 stitions, and to the growing elevation and moral 
 purity of Ethnic thought in the progress of the 
 ages. The study of comparative religion has done 
 much to remove the traditional Christian preju- 
 dice concerning the real origin and character of 
 these religions. It has been the custom in Chris- 
 tian ecclesiastical history to apply the terms " pa- 
 gan " and " heathen " to them in a bad sense, as 
 
182 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 if they were essentially evil and false, — the 
 work of evil-minded men and even of diabolical 
 supernatural beings. Such views were born of 
 historical ignorance. Our survey shows that the 
 Ethnic religions, especially in their ideas of God 
 and of the supernatural sphere, are the result of 
 the earnest efforts of men, in the dawn of moral 
 consciousness and under the dim light of the earli- 
 est divine revelations, to learn the truth concern- 
 ing God and his relations to this world. The 
 crudeness of their ideas, as seen in the oldest 
 mythologies and cosmogonies, does not lessen our 
 sense of the truly moral and religious character of 
 such efforts to find God and to bring him down 
 within the reach of human scrutiny and faith and 
 worship. Rather our sympathy grows for these 
 ancestors of our race as we realize more fully how 
 meagre was their religious light compared with 
 ours. Surely there were men of great faith among 
 them, even if the objects of their faith seem to us 
 so allied to error and superstition. One cannot 
 read the Odyssey, or the JEneid, or the moral say- 
 ings of Buddha or Socrates, or the writings of 
 Plato, or Plutarch, or Seneca, or Marcus Aurelius, 
 or Plotinus, or Porphyry, without feeling assured 
 that these men had somehow learned the great se- 
 cret of communion with the higher world. Paul's 
 stern indictment against heathenism in the first 
 chapter of the Epistle to the Romans applies 
 equally to a degenerate Christianity. The wicked 
 practices of heathen men are no worse than those 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 183 
 
 of nominal Christians, and are not to be con- 
 founded with the efforts, often made with the lof- 
 tiest spirit of sacrifice, of either Ethnic or Christian 
 saints, to realize the moral ideals that flitted before 
 their aspiring souls. As we push back our inves- 
 tigations into primeval times, the religious light 
 grows dimmer, and religious ideas and beliefs 
 grow more naturalistic, and fanciful, and tinged 
 with a childish spirit of fear, but the reality of 
 this early religion is none the less clear, and from 
 it are plainly drawn whatever moral sanctions 
 have had power with men. Further, the upward 
 progress of the religious beliefs of men is equally 
 clear as the path of history from the beginning 
 is traced. Compare, for example, the early reli- 
 gious ideas of Egypt with the idealistic philosophy 
 of Plotinus. The passage from the Egyptian ani- 
 mal worship to the Plotinian transcendentalism 
 involves a religious evolution that is vast indeed, 
 outstripping, perhaps, any other like evolution in 
 human experience, whether in science, in history, 
 or in philosophy. 
 
 CRITICAL NOTE ON THE QUESTION OF PLOTI- 
 NUS'S PANTHEISM. 
 
 Mr. W. R. Inge of Oxford, England (Bampton 
 Lecturer, 1899), in a valuable and suggestive article in 
 the " American Journal of Theology," April, 1900, on 
 " The permanent influence of Neo-Platonism upon 
 Christianity," holds that Plotinus was not a pantheist. 
 He says (page 336) that Plotinus sought to " save per- 
 
184 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 sonality while insisting on unity." Does Mr. Inge sup- 
 pose that the " three hypostases " in the view of Ploti- 
 nus were individual personal beings? If so, I must 
 disagree with him entirely. In the Plotinian vocabulary 
 hypostasis (vTroo-racrts) did not mean an individual or 
 person. Plotinus used the term in the sense of Aristotle 
 as an underlying principle (apxr]) of existence. " The 
 One, Mind, Soul," were in no sense persons. They 
 were super-personal. Personality and separate individ- 
 uality for Plotinus involved connection with matter. 
 They had no place in the intelligible or ideal world 
 (Koa-fio? vorp-6<s) . Here the dualism of Plotinus signifi- 
 cantly appears. The two worlds are " separated " 
 (xoiptcrOeyTo) from each other : but the hypostases " are 
 not separated from each other " (V. 1, 6.) , because there 
 is nothing between them. Separation involving individ- 
 uality begins with the union of spirit and matter. Ploti- 
 nus supports his position with the assertion of Aristotle 
 that " the first principle is separate from matter." 
 Moreover, he declares that what is true of the first and 
 second principles is equally true of the third, the soul, 
 viewed in its higher aspect. " We must not inquire 
 after a place (xwpa) where we may establish it, but it 
 must be assigned apart (c^o)) from all place." Only 
 when the soul has become embodied in nature is it in- 
 dividualized and personalized. It is in harmony with 
 this view that Plotinus treats the human soul as descend- 
 ing from a pre-incarnate impersonal form of existence, to 
 awaken, when united with the body, to a self-conscious 
 state as an individualized person, and at death, as re- 
 turning from this separated corporeal condition to the 
 eternal unity of the all in all. I suspect that Plotinus's 
 use of the phrase " sameness and otherness " has mis- 
 led Mr. Inge. In one place (V. 1, 6, end) Plotinus 
 says that " the second principle, being generated from 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 185 
 
 the first principle, is present with it in such a way as to 
 be separated from it by otherness alone" The term 
 " separated " here must be interpreted in the light of 
 the preceding statement already quoted, where Plotinus 
 insists that the two principles are not separated. The 
 vacillation in language here observable illustrates the 
 speculative difficulty in which Plotinus as well as Plato 
 was involved. To defend his dualism he must intro- 
 duce separation somewhere. He begins with its nega- 
 tive or idealistic presence in the intelligible world, as a 
 sort of shadowy anticipation of its real existence in the 
 form of multiplicity and separateness in the phenome- 
 nal world. The assertion of Mr. Inge, that " the true 
 sign of individuality is nx)t separation hut distinction" 
 as applied to God in trinity, certainly savors of Sabel- 
 lianism, and, as applied to created moral beings, as 
 truly savors of pantheism. At all events, such lan- 
 guage is wholly foreign to Plotinus. For him, personality 
 with individual self-consciousness involves separation, 
 and separation is the attribute of matter. Hence his 
 doctrine of the ideal world and of its trinity is wholly 
 pantheistic. He allows a " distinction " in " the three 
 hypostases," to wit, of " otherness ; " but not of separate 
 personality. Persons belong only to the material world 
 of multiplicity and change ; but even their personality 
 is rather an accident than a fundamental attribute of 
 being. The human soul, on leaving the body, its tem- 
 porary abode, drops with the body all the accidents of 
 its bodily existence and returns to its previous ideal 
 state, where aU separation ends and where the one (to 
 €v) is the all (ttolv) and the all is one. The whole of 
 the Enneads is saturated with the Plotinian panthe- 
 ism; but I would call special attention to the fourth 
 and fifth Books of the sixth Ennead and will give a few 
 extracts in support of what I must regard as the only 
 
186 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 possible interpretation. In En. VI. 4, 15, Plotinus, 
 speaking of the relation of the soul to the body, and of 
 the comparative good and evil growing out of such a 
 relation, says : " Why is the liberation of the soul from 
 the body good ? Because while it is not of the body in 
 its nature, yet when it is spoken of as such through 
 union with it, it becomes somehow partial (fiepLKrj) rather 
 than universal (ck rov Travros) : for its energy is no 
 longer devoted to the whole, although being itself of the 
 whole. Just as if one who is learned in all knowledge 
 should confine himself to a single department of it. For 
 each soul when wholly separate from body is no longer 
 an individual (iKcto-ny) : but when separated from the 
 ideal world, not in place but in energy, it becomes some- 
 thing particular (to Kaff iKatrrov) and is a certain por- 
 tion of the whole rather than the whole itself, though 
 in another manner it is universal ; but when it presides 
 over nothing material and particular it is wholly uni- 
 versal, though retaining its capacity of partition." I 
 must here call attention to Mr. Inge's apparent misun- 
 derstanding of the use made by Plotinus of the term 
 cKacTTos (each) . He says : " Plotinus asserts personality 
 -— Sei (EKaarrov cKaorov cTvat." But Plotinus in the pas- 
 sage which I have quoted above confines the application 
 of the term l/caorrov to the world of matter ; it has no 
 place in the world of spirit. Does Mr. Inge mean that 
 " Plotinus asserts personality " in this present world 
 merely ? If so, I have no controversy with him. But 
 this is far from proving that Plotinus was not a panthe- 
 ist. No one of course denies that human souls in the 
 present bodily state are personal, in the sense of being 
 self-conscious beings. The question between the pan- 
 theist and the theist is whether such personal self-con- 
 sciousness is a temporary and accidental phenomenon 
 or an essential element in all moral existence. 
 
THE GREEK PLOTINIAN TRINITY 187 
 
 But if any doubt could remain, the following extracts 
 would seem decisive. " It is universally believed among 
 men that the one and same in number is everywhere 
 also a whole, since aU men from the movements of their 
 own free moral consciousness declare that God (t6v 
 ^eov) is in each of us as one and the same." " Under- 
 stand, then, that this God is not in one place or another, 
 but equally everywhere ; but if God is everywhere he 
 cannot be divided into parts, since, then, he would no 
 longer be everywhere, but individual parts of him (eKao-- 
 Tov avTov fiipos) would exist in different places," and no 
 longer form one whole. Besides, God would then be a 
 body (a-Mfjia). But if this cannot be, then it must fol- 
 low that in every particular man God is present with 
 him, and at the same time exists everywhere as the 
 imiversal whole." Plotinus proceeds to extend this 
 view to the whole trinity of the ideal world. "For 
 since there are in the intelligible world three several 
 classes of being in a certain order, suspended, as if in 
 one sphere from one point, without being separated by 
 intervals but all united with one another, it results that 
 where the first class of being is present, there also the 
 second class is, and also the third." Passing now to the 
 soul as existing in a human body and so to a certain ex- 
 tent separated from the ideal world, Plotinus enters into 
 a curious description of such a soul as belonging to both 
 worlds and illustrating both sameness and otherness. 
 And here he touches that key which he is continually 
 striking in his whole philosophy, namely, the soul's true 
 divinity. " As to us men our truest possessions and we 
 ourselves belong to real being (cts to ov), and naturally 
 ascend to it, being originally derived from it, and we 
 intuitively perceive the realities of that world, not need- 
 ing images or types of them, but directly discerning 
 them. From which it follows that we truly belong to 
 
188 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 that world (ta-fiiv eKctva)." " Hence as pure souls we 
 are one and aU {iravra apa ta-yiev hi). But when we look 
 without ourselves to the external world rather than to 
 that ideal world whence we came, we become ignorant 
 of our true condition as one (Iv ovTci). But should any- 
 one be able to turn himself in that upward direction, 
 either by his own power or through the aid of Athene, 
 he will perceive himself to be God and the aU (Otov tc 
 Kot ainov koX to irav ot/rerat)." Such is the bold con- 
 sistent pantheism of Plotinus. Some one may inquire 
 whether the soul's " perceiving itself to be God " does 
 not allow individual personality. Of course it does, for 
 Plotinus is here dealing with the soul in its present state 
 of separation and multiplicity. When, however, its re- 
 lease from the body occurs, all the conditions of its sep- 
 arated life will disappear and it wiU become like God 
 himself, the one-all whom Plotinus describes as neither 
 beholding himself (ovSc BXcn-ct 8c kavTov)^ nor exercis- 
 ing any intellectual apprehension, and of whom nothing 
 can be predicated or known by perception or intelli- 
 gence (En. VI. 7, 41). Pantheism can go no further. 
 Mr. Inge says: "Plotinus is no Buddhist." If he 
 means that Plotinus did not hold to the final absorption 
 of the soul's present conscious personal life at death 
 into the super-conscious Nirvana of pantheistic Bud- 
 dhism, how does he interpret the above quoted pas- 
 sages, or in fact the Enneads as a whole, for they are 
 marvelously consistent throughout in their fundamental 
 premises ? 
 
PART II 
 
 THE RELATIONS OF THE ETHNIC 
 
 TRINITIES TO THE CHRISTIAN 
 
 TRINITY 
 
" The conversion of ecclesiastical and confessional Christianity 
 into historical Christianity is the work of Biblical science." — 
 Hbnbi-Fbedbbic Amibl. 
 
 " The true historian — he who most sympathetically, as well as 
 correctly, reads to the present the lessons to be derived from the 
 experiences of the past — I hold to be the only latter-day prophet. 
 That man has a message to deliver." — Charles Francis Adadis, 
 President of the Massachusetts EKstorical Society. 
 
CHAPTER I 
 
 EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 
 
 The law of historical evolution is universal and 
 knows no break in its line of continuity. This is 
 a first principle of the scientific or historical 
 method. It holds true as weU in the history of 
 religion, as in that of nature or of human life, in 
 its practical, social, or intellectual movements. 
 Otherwise there could be no history of religion. 
 Our previous studies have given ample evidence 
 that the religious ideas of men, from the earliest 
 times, have moved along the same line of historical 
 evolution that has governed all other earthly things. 
 The consideration upon which we now enter can- 
 not therefore he treated as exceptional. The rela- 
 tions of the Ethnic trinities to the Christian 
 dogma have a plain historical foundation. The 
 close internal relations which wiU be considered 
 later, both of resemblance and difference, naturally 
 suggest and involve a common external back- 
 ground and source in history. Already, in our 
 survey of the Ethnic trinities, indications of such 
 relationship have appeared, having their basis and 
 spring in the common religious nature of man. 
 But when we enter the field of Christian origins 
 
192 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 such indications become the very material and 
 substratum of religious history itself. No histori- 
 cal breach occurs, but the old evolution moves on 
 in the ordinary historical channels, though provi- 
 dential changes and reformations of a remarkable 
 character take place. Such changes and reforma- 
 tions were not new in the history of religion at the 
 time of Christ's coming. Witness the Hebrew 
 monotheistic reformation under Moses, the great 
 Persian religious movement in the time of Zoro- 
 aster, the founding of Buddhism, one of the most 
 remarkable religious epochs in human annals, and 
 finally, that wonderful period of intellectual and 
 moral iUuminism in the Greek world, heralded by 
 Socrates, and developed into immortal literary 
 form by Plato, by means of which the old super- 
 stitious faith in an idolatrous polytheism was 
 shattered, and the basis of a spiritual doctrine of 
 God and the soul laid in the Platonic idealistic 
 philosophy, and the way thus providentially pre- 
 pared for the reception of Christianity. This new 
 religion was a natural outgrowth of the earlier 
 Mosaic reformation and of the Jewish monotheistic 
 faith which was built upon it. At the beginning 
 of the Christian era, Judaism had become cor- 
 rupt and the needed reformer appeared in Jesus 
 of Nazareth. No more truly historical event has 
 ever occurred than the advent of the Nazarene. 
 He was of Jewish ancestry and training, and came 
 forth from his Galilean home filled with a true, 
 evangelistic zeal, as a religious reformer, against 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 193 
 
 the false religionists of his day. His great effort 
 was to revive the older prophetic teaching, in all 
 its living spiritual power, in place of the dead, 
 formal, and hypocritical orthodoxy of the later 
 Jewish Pharisaism. Further on I shall dwell more 
 fully on the character of his messianic mission. 
 My present object is to mark the fact that this 
 new religious epoch began in a completely histor- 
 ical way and was a natural development out of 
 previous chapters of religious history. The ap- 
 pearance of Jesus Christ can just as easily be 
 accounted for, from a historical point of view, as 
 that of Zoroaster or Moses or Gautama or Socra- 
 tes. One divine providential purpose and move- 
 ment, working through history according to one 
 universal law of good, though " at sundry times 
 and in divers manners," lies behind them all. 
 
 The mysteries of the divine selection and call- 
 ing and administration by which such religious 
 epochs are brought about are closed to the his- 
 torian's ken ; but the earthly human movements 
 themselves, with aU their religious results, are 
 wholly within the range of historical research, 
 and, thanks to the new science and history, are 
 being brought out more and more clearly into the 
 light of open day. Should any one here bring 
 forward the legends concerning a miraculous birth 
 of Christ, in the opening chapters of Matthew and 
 Luke, or the philosophical proem of the Fourth 
 Gospel, concerning a divine incarnation, the histor- 
 ical reply must be that such legendary and philo- 
 
194 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 sopMcal growths did not first gather around the 
 life of Christ, but were the common accompani- 
 ment of all remarkable religious epochs and 
 characters, as our previous studies have illustrated 
 in the case of Zoroaster, Buddha, and Plato. Later 
 legends represented them aU as miraculously bom 
 of virgin mothers through a divine parentage ; and 
 one of them, Buddha, became also the medium of 
 a divine incarnation. It is needless to add that 
 such ideas form the common stock of all ancient 
 mythologies, which show how ingrained they were 
 in the earliest traditions of the race. For a fuller 
 critical account of the Christian legends and the 
 way in which they arose, I must refer my readers 
 to my earlier volume. Such legends do not come 
 directly within the historical field, but must be 
 cast aside as misgrowths of a credulous and un- 
 critical age. Even were they accepted as true, it 
 would not affect the position which the historical 
 student must take, namely, that the evolution of 
 religion in its ordinary natural movement is able 
 to explain in a strictly historical way the appear- 
 ance of Christ and his religion. 
 
 I proceed, then, to trace the evidence of histor- 
 ical relations between the Ethnic trinities and the 
 Christian dogma. Such evidence seems scarcely 
 necessary when it is considered that the Christian 
 religion has hitherto been regarded as, beyond all 
 other religions, a historical one and based on his- 
 torical facts. The traditional dogmatic apologists 
 of Christianity have made much of the assured 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 195 
 
 fact that the chief articles of the Christian creeds 
 were actual historical events, while the Ethnic 
 religious ideas were purely subjective delusions 
 bom of the mythological imagination or specula- 
 tive reason, which alike were under the control of 
 a fallen and depraved nature. Frequently in 
 theological literature such matters as the virgin 
 miraculous birth of Christ, his resurrection and 
 ascension, his incarnation and his preexistent con- 
 dition as the second person of the trinity, and 
 even the trinity itself, are described as historical 
 facts in contrast with similar legends and dogmas 
 current in the Ethnic religions, which are treated 
 as inventions of Satan, or at least as superstitious 
 and wicked forms of error. So recent and learned 
 a writer as Rev. J. K. lUingworth, the Bampton 
 lecturer for 1894, and the author of a work on 
 "Divine Immanence," published in 1898, in a 
 chapter of the latter book, on " The Incarnation 
 and the Trinity," allows himself to use such 
 language as this ; " Viewed, then, in the light 
 of its history, the doctrine of the trinity is no 
 metaphysical invention, like the Platonic 'ideas' 
 or the Aristotelian 'form,' but simply the ex- 
 pression in philosophical language of what had 
 entered the world as a statement of fact — the 
 fact that there is plurality, triune plurality, in 
 GodJ^ " Accordingly, it wiU be noticed that Hil- 
 ary here, like Augustine after him, bases the doc- 
 trine of the trinity on the simple fact, namely, the 
 baptismal formula of the Christian church." I 
 
196 THE ETHNIC TKINITIES 
 
 confess that I marvel as I read these statements by 
 a prominent English divine, — not merely in view 
 of the confusion of the dogmatic and the meta- 
 physical and historical points of view so curiously 
 revealed, but even more at the apparent historical 
 ignorance so naively displayed. Yet Mr. lUing- 
 worth must be aware that the baptismal trinitarian 
 formula was not " a simple fact " of original Chris- 
 tianity, but the result of a historical evolution 
 from the original norm which was simply a baptism 
 in the name of Christ. The evolution from the 
 one name to three names accompanied the corre- 
 sponding evolution of monotheism into trinitarian- 
 ism. As to Mr. lUingworth's assertion, that the 
 trinity philosophically expresses "a fact," and is 
 therefore " no metaphysical invention, like the 
 Platonic ' ideas,' " I will only ask the reader to 
 postpone judgment to the conclusion of this his- 
 torical survey. But it has not been my object, in 
 referring to Mr. Illingworth's book, to criticise it, 
 so much as to illustrate with it the insistence of 
 Christian apologists on the real historicity of the 
 Christian religion. Allowing, then, its true his- 
 torical character, it must foUow that Christianity 
 forms an essential part of the history of religion 
 as a whole. It is true that the counter-assump- 
 tion has usually been implied, namely, that all 
 other religions are wanting largely in this note of 
 historicity or historical credibility. But recent 
 studies in comparative religion have demolished 
 completely all such assumptions. What do we 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 197 
 
 mean when we speak of a religion as historical? 
 Do we mean that its doctrines, as philosophical 
 formulas, are historical events ? Such a statement 
 carries its falsity on its very face. Philosophical 
 formulas are ideal abstractions, whether true op 
 false ; but abstraxstions are creations of the mind, 
 not concrete historical events. The history of 
 theology, both Christian and Ethnic, shows how 
 such abstract doctrines concerning God and man 
 and the world have been slowly evolved as civili- 
 zation has advanced. But to call such notions of 
 God and man and nature "facts of history" is 
 an abuse of language which one seeks for in vain 
 outside of theologians themselves. History and 
 historical credibility, in the scientific meaning of 
 these terms, apply equally to all rehgions. Bud- 
 dhism, Zoroastrianism, Mohammedanism, are as 
 truly historical religions as Christianity. Every 
 religious idea that ever appeared in the world is 
 historical, just so far, and so far only, as it has 
 succeeded in propagating itself among men, who 
 are the only mediums of historical events. Mor- 
 monism, for example, is having a very concrete 
 historical place in any complete survey of the 
 world's religions, as American history conclusively 
 shows. It is not, then, the truth or falsity of a 
 religion that is the test of its historicity, but 
 whether it entered human life, with all its truth 
 or falsehood, as a hard, concrete fact, and became 
 a blessing or bane to human souls. Comparative 
 religion as a historical science deals only with 
 
198 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 matters of historical fact. A complete historical 
 survey of the world, as far back toward the origins 
 of mankind as research allows, reveals a multitude 
 of religions and of religious ideas, infinitely diver- 
 sified, and yet wonderfully homogeneous ; and it 
 has been the task of the historical student to seek, 
 by a comparative and discriminating analysis, 
 the elements which look toward community of 
 origin and faith on the one hand, and toward diver- 
 gence and complexity as the result of differences 
 of environment or of free speculative thought, 
 on the other. The gain not only to science, but 
 also to religion itself, of such a comparative study 
 must be plain to every candid mind. But such a 
 study, to be fruitful, must rest on a purely scien- 
 tific and historical basis. All religions alike must 
 be treated in their purely historical aspects, and 
 accepted as equally having a place in the provi- 
 dential history of the race. As a historical 
 religion, then, Christianity must come under the 
 same historic laws of natural, providential evo- 
 lution as any and every other. Almost all 
 the more recent religions of the world have 
 started from a single historical founder whose new 
 conceptions of truth have been historically devel- 
 oped into philosophical and dogmatic systems of 
 one sort or another. These different systems 
 have frequently affected each other and led to 
 modifications which have resulted in new lines of 
 theological evolution. In this respect it will be 
 found that Christianity is no exception to the 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 199 
 
 general rule. In a passage wMch reveals a pro- 
 foundly philosophical and critical spirit, H. F. 
 Amiel in his " Journal Intime," says most truly : 
 " What we call Christianity is a vast ocean into 
 which flow a number of spiritual currents of dis- 
 tant and various origin, — certain religions, that 
 is to say, of Asia and of Europe, the great ideas 
 of Greek wisdom, and especially those of Plato- 
 nism. Neither its doctrine nor its morality, as they 
 have been historically developed, are new or spon- 
 taneous. What is original and specific in Chris- 
 tianity is Jesus, — the religious consciousness of 
 Jesus.^^ It has been the traditional dogmatic view 
 that Christianity, with all its accretion of dogmas 
 and rites gathered in the course of centuries, was 
 a new religion throughout, introduced into the 
 world by Jesus of Nazareth, who broke the con- 
 tinuity of history and of historical religions 
 through a divine incarnation which miraculously 
 transcended aU ordinary natural laws and became 
 the witness and seal of a direct and perfect reve- 
 lation of God, who in Jesus himself was thus ac- 
 tually " manifest in the flesh " to men. This view 
 made the person of Jesus the very substance of 
 truth. The imknown author of the Fourth Gospel 
 makes Christ say : " / am the truth." Of course, 
 then, Christ's teachings, in contrast with those of 
 aU other religious prophets and sages, were of 
 heavenly origin, and hence infallible ' and perfect. 
 Christianity thus became differentiated from aU 
 other religions as the one divine gospel, with the 
 
200 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 seal upon it of God himseK, while those religions 
 were of human fabrication, — the work of men 
 who " did not like to retain God in their know- 
 ledge." Christianity, therefore, was the only true 
 religion, and other religions were false. How en- 
 tirely without historical foundation this whole view 
 is I need not here do more than simply declare. 
 Every page of history contributes its quota of evi- 
 dence in its refutation. That it should have been 
 accepted as true, unhistorical as it was, in the 
 Dark Ages, when civilization almost expired, and 
 the Christian religion itseK became a system of 
 degrading superstitions, is not surprising. How 
 could it have been otherwise, when earth and air 
 were filled with supernatural beings whose diabol- 
 ical nature and power were mostly exercised in 
 tormenting and terrifying poor humanity, and God 
 had, to human view, almost left his own world. 
 It was in such an age that Christianity completed 
 its dogmatic and ritualistic forms, — a time of in- 
 tellectual and moral gloom, when history became 
 a " lost art " and legend and fable filled the 
 whole horizon of human life with delusion and 
 fear. The real surprise begins when, in the 
 closing days of the nineteenth century, under the 
 light of a new science and history which has so 
 thoroughly dispelled the ghosts of past ignorance, 
 men with professed historical learning could uphold 
 so groundless an assumption. 
 
 Going back now to the historical origin of Chris- 
 tianity in the life and teachings of its founder, we 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 201 
 
 ask : What was its historical starting-point ? In 
 other words, wherein did Jesus of Nazareth show 
 himseK a religious genius and leader, and what 
 was the new truth which became the seed of a new 
 religion ? Certainly the answer is not to be found 
 in any new dogmas which he gave to the world. 
 Christ's teaching was ethical rather than dogmatic. 
 So far as he had what we may call a theology, it 
 was derived from his Jewish ancestors and from 
 their Scriptures. His doctrine of God, man, sin, 
 a future life, heaven, hell, was not original at all, 
 but was a part of the accepted creed of his own 
 day. As to those later Christian dogmas, such as 
 incarnation, miraculous virgin birth, trinity, etc., 
 which were the result of a slow evolution and can- 
 not be attributed to Christ himself, should it be 
 claimed that as Christian doctrines they originated 
 in Christ's own teachings, and should the claim be 
 allowed, even then history shows that such dogmas 
 were not original with Christianity. Miraculous 
 births and divine incarnations were common ap- 
 pendages of new religious movements ages before 
 Christ's day. As to the trinity, though Mr. lUing- 
 worth claims that " it was implicit in the Chris- 
 tian creed," and " was not borrowed from Plato or 
 any other Ethnic source " (Bampton Lectures, 
 1894, p. 66^, I can only express my surprise 
 that any scholar in these days should dare to make 
 such a claim, and refer my readers, for the abun- 
 dant evidence in disproof, to my " Critical History 
 of the Evolution of Trinitarianism " and to the 
 
202 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 fuller testimony of the book in hand. I will 
 simply add that if there is one historical fact that 
 is more assured to me than any other in the his- 
 tory of Christian theology, it is the fact that the 
 Christian trinitarian dogma, with its cardinal 
 logos doctrine, is the direct lineal descendant of 
 the Platonic dualistic idealism. 
 
 Nor, again, does the newness of the gospel con- 
 sist in its philosophy. To caU the " good news " 
 which Christ proclaimed to men a new philosophy 
 is a gross misrepresentation of the whole spirit 
 and method of the great teacher. Christ had not 
 been educated in any philosophical school, whether 
 Jewish or Greek. There is no evidence that he 
 had any acquaintance with the metaphysical ideas 
 which were floating in the intellectual atmosphere 
 of his time. Not even the rabbinical thought of 
 scholastic Judaism seems to have affected him any 
 further than to draw forth his aversion and antag- 
 onism. He did not teach " as the scribes.*' His 
 whole spirit and method were different from theirs. 
 While they were under the yoke of a theological 
 tradition, he spoke out of the free spontaneous in- 
 tuitions of his own moral nature. Even less, if 
 possible, was he affected by the various Greek 
 philosophical schools that were beginning to break 
 down the partition walls of Jewish isolation. 
 Neither Palestinian Sadduceeism nor Alexandrian 
 Philonism ever disturbed with their skeptical or 
 mystical clouds the intellectual serenity of his 
 Galilean soul. No wonder that dwellers in Jeru- 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 203 
 
 salem should have " marveled " as they listened to 
 a gospel so strange to their ears, and should have 
 said : " How knoweth this man letters, having 
 never learned?" And Christ's reported answer 
 shows this at least, that he regarded his gospel 
 not as the product of education or philosophy, but 
 as the immediate offspring of his own moral rela- 
 tion with God : " My teaching is not mine but his 
 that sent me." It is true that Christianity was 
 afterwards developed into a philosophical creed, as 
 is true of all religious ideas, but this historical 
 process cannot be traced to its founder. Paul, as 
 we shall see, was the historical bridge between the 
 " good news " of Jesus of Nazareth and the specu- 
 lative philosophy of the Nicene Creed. 
 
 Nor, again, was the Christianity of Christ a 
 new system of ethics. Much has been made of 
 this point in the traditional apologies and polemics. 
 But here, also, historical comparative investigation 
 has disillusioned the whole religious field. If 
 purity of ethics was to be the great test of reli- 
 gious systems, there are other religions that would 
 not suffer greatly when compared with Christian- 
 ity. Innumerable passages can be quoted from 
 the reputed sayings of Zoroaster, Confucius, Gau- 
 tama, Socrates, and Plato, inspired with a purity 
 and sweetness of moral temper that strongly re- 
 mind one of Christ's own teaching. Surely human 
 ethics reaches its highest form in the doctrine of 
 universal love and benevolence, or in the kindred 
 doctrine that the great aim and end of moral life 
 
fl04 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 should be to become like God. Yet the former 
 doctrine is written on every page of Buddhistic 
 literature, while the latter doctrine was emphasized 
 by Plato in words that stir every ethical sentiment 
 of the soul. Christ's " new commandment " that 
 men should love one another was not " new " in 
 history, though he by his own life and teaching 
 gave it a new meaning and power. Righteousness 
 is the central ethical word of the Bible, but where 
 can a purer or more searching delineation of it be 
 found than in the second book of Plato's Repub- 
 lic ? To devote one's whole life, even to its end, in 
 a death of martyrdom, to the work of contributing 
 in the highest possible degree to the moral welfare 
 and progress of one's feUow-men, is surely the 
 highest ideal of a moral life ; but where can a 
 more touching example of such a life be found 
 than that of Socrates as given in the Memora- 
 bilia of Xenophon and in the Phaedo of his dis- 
 ciple Plato ? Does the life of Jesus of Nazareth, 
 devoted to these same high moral ends, ecHpse all 
 others, the secret of its superior attraction does 
 not lie in a new ethics, but elsewhere. What is 
 this secret ? What is it that is original and 
 unique in the beginnings of Christianity ? There 
 is but one answer, — and he that runs may read 
 it, — when, dismissing all traditional conceptions, 
 one holds up directly before his eyes the actual 
 historical Hfe of Christ and catches the spirit that 
 moved it as a principle and spur of moral action. 
 Surely it was, as Amiel wrote, Christ's "moral 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 205 
 
 consciousness," full to overflowing of his sense of 
 relationship to God as his Father, and to man as 
 his brother, involving a double mission of obe- 
 dience to God in doing the work given him to do, 
 and of ministry to men who were equally the chil- 
 dren of the common Father in heaven and the 
 common heirs of his love and grace. Here is the 
 headspring of the gospel Christ preached. The 
 parable of the prodigal son sums it all up in one 
 wonderful story. This was the keynote of Christ's 
 messiahship. There was no theology, or philosophy, 
 or ethics in it, but simply a new exposition of the 
 moral character of God and of man's moral rela^ 
 tionship to him, — an exposition that was born in 
 the religious consciousness of Jesus himself and 
 filled his life more and more blessedly with its 
 precious revelations. These revelations, brought 
 to light in his own moral experience, were the sub- 
 stance of his teaching. And what was the doc- 
 trine that formed its centre and circumference ? 
 Simply this : God's moral character is summed up 
 in love, and as such is revealed in all ways to all 
 his moral creatures : and hence the highest form of 
 morality in man, who was made in God's moral 
 image, is to grow in the divine likeness, so that 
 the whole moral law of the gospel is summed up 
 in the "new commandment," "Love one another." 
 Love, then, in Christ's teaching, became the es- 
 sence of religion. For religion, as its very name 
 indicates, is a binding and unifying principle. 
 Hence its essential element cannot be dogma or 
 
206 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 philosophy, which separate into sects and schools. 
 But love, on the contrary, is the great harmonizing 
 force in the moral kingdom, and by it Christ's 
 words are fulfilled " that they all may be one." 
 Moreover, love has in it a moral principle which 
 becomes a passion and inspiration for action. The 
 author of " Ecce Homo " has well described it as 
 " the enthusiasm of humanity." It is not a " dry 
 light " like a metaphysical or ethical formula, but 
 a flame of fire, the fire of a moral nature all alive 
 with a moral consciousness that is in constant liv- 
 ing conununion with God, and longs to pour out 
 its ardent life in a loving ministry to needy hu- 
 man souls. Here, then, we stand at the fountain 
 head of the Christian religion, and can mark the 
 true beginnings of its history. 
 
 Jesus was a Jew of Semitic race. His teaching 
 was in the Hebrew- Aramaic language, a dialect 
 kindred with the Phoenician and Arabic. It is 
 true that a few disciples seem to have been 
 gathered out of the Greek and Roman world into 
 which Judaea had been politically incorporated; 
 but during the life of the founder the proclama- 
 tion of his gospel was confined to Aramaic Pales- 
 tine, so that Christianity was, at the outset, an 
 Aramaic Semitic religion. The original apostles 
 were all Jews and of Aramaic speech. It is an 
 interesting though not a practical question, what 
 the fortunes of Christianity would have been had 
 not the dispersion of the Jews in other coun- 
 tries, and especially throughout the Graeco-Roman 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 207 
 
 Empire, brought large numbers of them into 
 close acquaintance with the Greek language and 
 culture. Had Judaea remained closed to outside 
 influences and been kept in political and linguistic 
 isolation, what human probability that the religious 
 reformation attempted by Christ would have suc- 
 ceeded in Palestine or been carried forth into the 
 Greek world ? The Jews, we know, rejected him 
 en masse, and no avenue would have been opened 
 for the preaching of his gospel to the Gentiles. 
 Christ's religious movement might have been 
 stifled in its very birth. Here are to be seen two 
 of the " divers ways " in which the divine provi- 
 dence has worked in history for the evolution of 
 good to mankind : first, in the wide dispersion of 
 the Jews among the Gentiles, and the breakdown 
 of the political barriers which made them for ages 
 " a peculiar people ; " and secondly, in the remark- 
 able training of Paul, who, though a Jew, was 
 born and educated in a Greek city, Tarsus, and 
 thus was made acquainted with both the Hebrew- 
 Aramaic and Greek languages, and also with 
 Jewish-Rabbinic and Greek philosophical ideas. 
 Without Paul, we may say that the whole history 
 of Christianity would have taken an entirely 
 different shape. So much sometimes seems to 
 hang on a single individual. So far as history 
 can speak, no other individual appeared in his day 
 that could have taken his place, or have done the 
 unique work that he did. Never perhaps was the 
 hand of providence more conspicuously revealed in 
 
208 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 human affairs. For Paul, as has already been 
 said, was the great historical bridge from a pro- 
 vincial Aramaic religious movement to its oecumen- 
 ical extension over the world. If Christ was the 
 true founder of the Christian religion, Paul was as 
 truly the founder of the Grseco-Roman Christian- 
 ity. He gave the original Semitic gospel of 
 Jesus its new philosophical setting which prepared 
 the way for its entrance into Aryan thought and 
 faith. This is well illustrated by the term fna-LTrjq 
 (mediator), which is the central keynote of Paul's 
 theology and which he plainly borrowed from the 
 Greek Platonic Philonism.i It was through Paul, 
 the "Apostle to the Gentiles," that Christian 
 churches were planted in the non-Semitic Aryan 
 world, — in other words, among a people who 
 spoke Greek (or Latin) instead of Aramaic. 
 This significant change is marked by the fact that 
 the New Testament has come down to us in Greek 
 rather than in Aramaic-Hebrew. The tradition, 
 whether historical or not, that the gospel, after- 
 wards ascribed to Matthew, was originally written 
 in Hebrew, has a historical basis in this fact. 
 The full significance of such a transfer cannot be 
 realized until it is understood that the centre of 
 political power and the great historical currents 
 which were chiefly to mould the world's future had 
 already passed into the hands of the European 
 Aryan people. The question whether the Semite 
 
 1 See note at the end of this chapter for reply to Dr. Lyman 
 Abbott's criticism on my view of Paul. 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 209 
 
 or the Aryan should rule and direct the civiliza- 
 tion of the human race was settled in the war 
 between Rome and Carthage, when the world's 
 fortunes for the moment seemed to hang in the 
 balance as swayed by the military genius of one 
 man, " the wily Hannibal." The battle of Zama 
 settled the question in favor of the Aryan. 
 Even Mohammed, with his Semitic Arabian reli- 
 gious reaction, was not able to reverse the issue. 
 And as the political and social character of man- 
 kind was to be moulded through the Aryan mind, 
 so was it to be with its religion. Paul was him- 
 self a true Semitic Jew, but he was born in a 
 Greek city and received an Aryan education, and 
 thus was fitted to translate a Semitic gospel into 
 Aryan forms of thought and speech. It is not 
 needful to dwell at length on the historical con- 
 sequences of Paul's work. What is here to be 
 kept in view is the fact that this transfer of 
 Christ's religion from Aramaic Palestinian soil to 
 the Aryan Grseco-Roman world was a radical and 
 critical point in its whole history, and further that 
 it was brought about whoUy by ordinary historical 
 processes. Neander has introduced his " History 
 of the Christian Religion " with an account of 
 what he caUs " the preparations for Christianity." 
 No historical religion was ever more wonderfully 
 prepared for by thoroughly historical providential 
 movements than Christianity itseK. And an ap- 
 peal to such visible historical preparation is the 
 true basis of every Christian apology. 
 
210 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 With the entrance of Christianity into the 
 Greek world, a new chapter in its history begins. 
 It became the religion of Greek communities, and 
 at once was modified by Greek social, political, 
 and philosophical ideas and usages. It is in- 
 deed difficult to realize how much is involved in 
 the passage of a religion from one race and 
 language to another wholly distinct race and 
 language. Mr. Flinders-Petrie, in a course of 
 lectures on " Keligion in Ancient Egypt," seeking 
 to place his English hearers at the right point of 
 view, well said : " We must feel that the greater 
 part of mankind has had systems of language 
 which would be wholly incapable of expressing our 
 ideas." The reverse, of course, is equally true. 
 The differences between the Semitic and Aryan 
 languages are radical. They belong to two com- 
 pletely distinct types of speech. The very roots 
 and forms of inflection are wholly diverse. Not 
 only so, the histories of the Semitic and Aryan 
 peoples have been on lines as diverse as their 
 languages. Two different types of civilization 
 were developed by them. Here is the historical 
 reason why the Semitic Phoenician Carthaginians 
 could never amalgamate with the Aryan Greeks 
 or Romans when they came into contact. One or 
 the other must yield. In fact, the Aryan race 
 and language showed itself the stronger, both in 
 war and in peace. Equally was the Aryan type 
 of religious thought and faith to prevail in religion. 
 How could it be otherwise? Religious beliefs 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 211 
 
 have their basis in the ideas of men concerning the 
 cardinal questions of philosophy, namely, the views 
 held concerning the world and man and God. 
 When Christianity entered the sphere of the 
 Greek language and culture, its very philosophy 
 suffered a radical change. Paul himself caught his 
 new philosophical keynote of a mediator, as has 
 been already explained, from his acquaintance with 
 the Greek language and thought. His immediate 
 Christian theological successors, Justin Martyr, 
 Clement of Alexandria, Origen, were steeped in 
 the Platonic Greek philosophy and drew from it 
 the metaphysical groundwork of their Christian 
 theology. Justin Martyr who was, after Paul, the 
 true founder of that Greek type of Christianity 
 which ultimately prevailed over the original Se- 
 mitic Ebionitic type, was a Platonic philosopher 
 before he became a Christian, and it is to him 
 that we owe, so far as history sheds light on the 
 subject, the introduction of the logos doctrine 
 into the dogma of the trinity. The effect of this 
 new Greek logos mediation idea was radical. The 
 whole Jewish conception of God and his relations 
 to men which Christ as a Jew had retained in his 
 new gospel was modified, and the Ethnic Greek 
 conception which rested on the need of a meta- 
 physical divine mediation principle supplanted it. 
 Thus Christianity from the middle of the second 
 century passed through a complete metamorphosis 
 and became Aryan to the core. What saved to it 
 a Semitic leaven which remained indeed vital in 
 
212 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 many ways, was the fact that the Jewish Old 
 Testament writings, on which Christ had built his 
 religious reform, became the Christian Bible, and 
 has remained an essential part of the sacred books 
 of Christianity down to the present day. The 
 part, however, that was played by the Old Tes- 
 tament in early Christian dogmatics was com- 
 paratively small. Thanks to Paul's Greek educa- 
 tion and to the Hellenic character of the early 
 Fathers from Justin Martyr to Origen, Christian 
 theology became thoroughly HeUenized. In the 
 course of a century or more, the Semitic religion 
 of Christ was evolved into a completely Aryan 
 form. The fuU account of this historical move- 
 ment may be found in my previous book. It is 
 only needful here to remind those who have read it 
 that the central dogma on which everything else 
 hangs is that of Christ as the true logos of God 
 and the divine mediator between God and man ; 
 and that this dogma had its historical origin in 
 Greek philosophy. 
 
 1 have thus made sufficiently clear, I trust, the 
 fact of a close historical connection between the 
 Ethnic religions and Christianity. Christ's gospel 
 sprang out of Judaism, and forms a special chap- 
 ter in the history of the Old Testament Jewish 
 religion. Judaism in its turn had its historical 
 beginnings in the Ethnic Babylonian-Chaldaic re- 
 ligion of the ancestors of Abraham, who emigrated 
 from "Ur of the Chaldees." With Paul a new 
 chapter begins when the Judean gospel was trans- 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 213 
 
 lated into the Greek language and thought, and 
 its further history is inextricably mixed with that 
 of Ethnic-Greek religious ideas, at first in the way 
 of opposition, and later in that of combination 
 and absorption. No Christian theologian of the 
 second, third, or fourth centuries can be under- 
 stood without a full acquaintance with the Ethnic 
 philosophy of his day. This is especially true of 
 those who laid the foundations of the leading 
 Christian philosophical schools, and helped to 
 frame the creeds which became orthodox and 
 oecumenical. Justin Martyr, Origen, Athanasius, 
 Augustine, were first of all philosophical thinkers, 
 building their theories of God, man, and nature 
 on a philosophy which they borrowed from Plato, 
 Aristotle, Plotinus, and the Stoics. We are thus 
 prepared to proceed to a consideration of the in- 
 ternal relations between the Ethnic trinities and 
 the Christian trinitarian dogma. 
 
 Note (see p. 208). — A review of " The Evolution of 
 Trinitarianism '* in " The Outlook " (December 15, 
 1900), presumably by Dr. Abbott, takes issue with my 
 view of Paul's mediational Christology. Dr. Abbott 
 declares that I make Paul an Arian. This can be 
 true only in the sense that all the early Fathers were 
 Arians. The mediation theory Hes at the very founda- 
 tion of the whole Greek theology. It was drawn, 
 as we have seen, from Plato through Philo, and was 
 fuUy developed in the logos doctrine. Athanasius held 
 it as strongly as Arius ; both were equally dualistic. 
 The question between them was not whether Christ 
 
214 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 was a mediator between God and man, but just how 
 much was metaphysically involved in such a function. 
 Both of them held to the subordinationism of Origen, 
 but while Athanasius was disposed to lessen it to a 
 minimum, Arius reacted toward the opposite pole, and 
 thus was led to declare that Christ was not derived 
 from God by eternal generation, as Athanasius held, 
 but was a creature of God, with a beginning in time, 
 though the highest of all creatures and the instrument 
 of their creation, and hence capable of assuming medi- 
 ational functions. This is what is known in church 
 history as Arianism. To confound Paul's mediation 
 ideas with the fourth century doctrine of Arius argues 
 a strange want of acquaintance with the history of 
 the evolution of the Greek trinitarianism. Whatever 
 Paul's ideas were concerning the metaphysical charac- 
 ter of the relation of Christ to God, he gives no clear 
 theological statement of them. Certainly he was no 
 Arian. The time had not come for such a step. It 
 took three centuries to develop it. Paul was a prac- 
 tical, not a speculative thinker. He laid hold of the 
 dualistic mediation theory as a good practical basis for 
 his faith in Christ as the true Saviour of men. Whether 
 he regarded Christ as metaphysically more than a 
 man is doubted by such scholars as Pfleiderer, and 
 certainly several passages in his Epistles look strongly 
 that way. I refer especially to 1 Timothy ii. 5 and 1 
 Corinthians xv. 47. But other passages, such as Phil, 
 ii. 5 and 1 Corinthians xi. 3, seem to me to show con- 
 clusively that Paul regarded Christ as superhuman 
 and of heavenly origin, though it is equally plain that 
 he never thought of making him identical with God 
 himself, or in any sense an Absolute Being. Thus one 
 class of passages serves to correct and limit the inter- 
 pretation to be given to another class. 
 
EXTERNAL OR HISTORICAL RELATIONS 215 
 
 Dr. Abbott criticises my use of 1 Timothy ii. 5, 
 because of its doubtful genuineness. But if 1 Timothy 
 ought not to be quoted in behalf of my view of Paul's 
 Christology, what right has Dr. Abbott to base his own 
 view on another passage in the next chapter of the 
 same Epistle ? He defends his use of it by declaring 
 that it " has been rightly accepted as a true summary 
 of the Apostolic doctrine," but such a defense would 
 be equally good for my use of the famous passage 
 "There is one God, one mediator between God and 
 man, himself man, Christ Jesus : " for it gave the key- 
 note to the later Greek Christology, though, as I have 
 shown, the term /Aco-tn/? (mediator) gave way to 
 another Philonic word, logos, which became the com- 
 mon term for Christ as mediator. Thus Athanasius 
 employs the term fxecrirrjs but once, so far as I am 
 aware, while the term logos is sprinkled all over his 
 writings. But I am not so ready to give up the genu- 
 ineness of the Pastoral Epistles as Dr. Abbott seems 
 to be. No letters of Paul are more full of internal 
 evidence of Pauline authorship. The Pauline flavor runs 
 all through them. Take the passage, " For I am ready 
 to be offered," etc. ; if Paul did not write it, my faith 
 in the authenticity of all the so-caUed Pauline Epistles 
 would be greatly shaken. I am quite ready to believe 
 that these Epistles have suffered interpolation along 
 with other New Testament writings ; but there is not 
 the slightest evidence of the interpolation of 1 Tim. 
 ii. 5. In fact, it is to my mind a decisive proof of its 
 genuineness that it harmonizes so completely with 
 Paul's other Epistles which are full of the mediation 
 view, with its natural corollaries of subordination and 
 personal distinction. And this, I take it, is the real 
 point of Dr. Abbott's objection to my interpretation of 
 Paul's Christology. He holds that " The New Trmita- 
 
216 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES. 
 
 rianism " was Paul's trinitarianism, namely, that Christ 
 was the manifestation of God in the flesh, in the sense 
 that God's real being and divinity was incarnated in 
 Jesus of Nazareth, so that, so far as Christ was divine, 
 his divinity was identical with God's divinity. Hence 
 his dislike of the fxea-iTT)^ (mediator) doctrine, which as 
 a Platonic dualistic theory has always in Greek trini- 
 tarianism involved a metaphysical subordination of 
 the second person to the first person. Dr. Abbott 
 thinks that on this point I " misunderstand Paul and 
 also the modern trinitarianism," and he believes that 
 *^ orthodoxy has returned, after traveling a long circuit, 
 to the spirit of Paul." This may be so, but surely not 
 in Dr. Abbott's way. To make Paul square with 
 " Modern Trinitarianism " one must do exegetical vio- 
 lence to the whole drift of Paul's teachings. Take the 
 famous Kenotic passage in Phil. ii. To make it har- 
 monize with Dr. Abbott's view, one must distort it 
 from end to end. Its plain natural meaning is that 
 Christ, as subordinate to God, though of divine nature, 
 obediently accepted the mediatorial function and be- 
 came incarnate, and as man humbled himself to die on 
 the cross ; and that on this account God " highly 
 exalted him,^' etc. This is the historical Christian 
 doctrine of mediatorship as held by all the early Greek 
 Fathers, including Arius and Athanasius. To read into 
 this passage the Augustinian Sabellianism or the 
 latest " New Trinitarianism " would require a heroic 
 exercise of exegetical dexterity. Let me suggest one 
 passage more for Dr. Abbott's consideration, which 
 sheds an interesting sidelight on this subject, — 1 Corin- 
 thians xi. 3 : " The head of every man is Christ, and 
 the head of the woman is the man, and the head of 
 Christ is God." The key to the understanding of this 
 is Paul's view of woman as inferior in nature to man 
 
EXTERNAL O^ HISTORICAL RELATIONS 217 
 
 and therefore subject to him. This is made clear by 
 what follows. Hence Paul's four orders of being: 
 woman, man, Christ, God. As man is superior to 
 woman, so Christ is superior in nature to man, and 
 God superior to Christ. The logic here is perfectly 
 plain and complete, and it lets us into the very heart of 
 Paul's Christology. 
 
 Leaving out of view the Philonic ftccrmy? in 1 Tim. ii. 
 5, Paul's mediation doctrine stands out clearly in his 
 teaching. In fact, the evidence of a Greek Philonic 
 influence in the Epistles that are universally accepted 
 as genuine is so strong that the genuineness of the 
 Pastoral Epistles is amply sustained in their use of 
 the term ftccrm/s. Paul uses other Philonic expressions 
 besides this one. For example, 1 Corinthians xv. 47, 
 " The first man is of the earth earthy ; the second man 
 is of heaven " is a direct reminiscence of Philo, who 
 says : " There are two kinds of men. The one man is 
 heavenly, the other is of the earth " (Philonis Opera, i. 
 50). In the eighth chapter of the same Epistle there is 
 another clear Philonic expression : " One Lord Jesus 
 Christ, through whom are all things." This view of 
 Christ as the mediating instrument of creation is pre- 
 cisely the doctrine of Philo concerning the Logos, and 
 the only difference between Paul and Philo is that 
 Paul puts Christ in place of the Logos (Philonis 
 Opera, i. 162). The very passage in 2 Corinthians v. 
 18, 19, a portion of which Dr. Abbott quotes as " the 
 keynote of Paul's doctrine," "all things are of God, 
 who reconciled us to himself through Christ," etc., has 
 a thoroughly Philonic ring, making the Philonic dis- 
 tinction between God as the originating cause (e/c tov 
 6eov), and Christ as the instrumental means (Sia ^ptoTov) 
 of redemption. Philo makes much of this distinction 
 between cac (from) and 8ta (through) , deriving it from 
 Aristotle. 
 
218 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Thus much in vindication of my view of Paul's 
 mediation theory. It was Augustine who through his 
 ignorance of Greek theology paved the way for a 
 Sabellian doctrine that broke down the very founda- 
 tions of the Pauline Greek mediation view. I have 
 illustrated this in my discussion of Anselm's theory of 
 the atonement. " The New Trinitarianism " follows 
 the same lead. It has no real mediation doctrine 
 simply because it has no ground on which it can rest. 
 
 Dr. Abbott regards my account of the evolution of 
 Trinitarianism as " fatally defective " because I have 
 " failed," as he thinks, " in my interpretation of Paul." 
 His argument here is at least curious. Paul, he holds, 
 is " the starting-point of the Christological evolution." 
 Failure to start right vitiates all that follows. But 
 suppose that Paul is not the historical point of de- 
 parture, what then? Now, rightly or wrongly, my 
 starting-point of all Christian history is Christ himself. 
 How can the evolution of Christology be made to begin 
 with Paul, who never saw Christ and whose Apostolic 
 calling was at least half a generation after Christ's 
 death? Behind Paul was Christ's own messianic 
 career and the traditions of his teaching which are 
 gathered up in the Acts and Synoptic gospels. " The 
 fatal defect" of Dr. Abbott's whole criticism is its 
 " failure " to interpret correctly the historical environ- 
 ment of early Christianity. Biblical exegesis walks 
 with uncertain steps without the aid of history to il- 
 luminate its path. See a suggestive article in the 
 " Biblical World," March, 1901, by Prof. B. W. Bacon, 
 on " Exegesis as a Historical Study." 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE INTEKNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 
 
 As soon as a direct comparison is instituted 
 between the Ethnic trinities and the Christian 
 trinity, it immediately strikes the observer that 
 all these trinities fall alike under the common law 
 of historical evolution. We have seen how true 
 this is of the Ethnic trinities, and it is equally true 
 of the Christian dogma. Every trinitarian theory 
 of God that has ever been developed has started 
 either from a polytheistic or from a monotheistic 
 doctrinal basis. The Ethnic trinities, as a rule, 
 formed a stage in the movement from plurality to 
 unity, though there were exceptions in the case of 
 the philosophical trinities, such as the Hindoo and 
 the Plotinian, where, in a pantheistic way, the 
 movement was from unity to trinity. The Chris- 
 tian dogma did not start from a polytheistic or 
 pantheistic ground, but from Jewish monotheism ; 
 but the development from one God to a trinity was 
 just as completely a historical evolution as any 
 other. This has already been fuUy set forth in 
 " A Critical History of the Evolution of Trinitari- 
 anism," especially in respect to the second person. 
 Readers of that book will remember how com- 
 pletely in the background was the question of the 
 
220 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 third person. As was there noted, the Christian 
 dogma of the trinity had its spring in the theory, 
 borrowed from Greek philosophy, of the need of a 
 mediator (/Aco-tn^s) between man and God, and in 
 the ascription to Jesus Christ of such a nature 
 and function. This was the new view introduced 
 by Paul into Christian theology, which grew after- 
 ward into the logos doctrine, in the hands of Jus- 
 tin Martyr and his successors. Thus Christianity 
 theologically is essentially a Christology^ or doc- 
 trine of Christ as a second person in the Godhead. 
 Indeed, strange as it may appear, had it not been 
 for the natural and historical tendency seen in all 
 trinitarian movements toward the evolution of 
 duality into triality, the Christian doctrine of God 
 might have remained that of a " duad " instead of 
 a " triad." The same may be asserted of every 
 Ethnic trinity. In the Egyptian and the Baby- 
 lonian trinities there was constant action and re- 
 action from triality to duality and vice versa, — 
 polytheism tending to reduce itself to triality and 
 then to duality, and finally to unity ; and conversely 
 the doctrine of one God resolving itself into that 
 of a duad, and in turn into that of a triad, and 
 thus paving the way for a return to the polythe- 
 istic belief which has ever haunted the race. In 
 fact, the religious consciousness of man has always 
 fluctuated, like a pendulum, between the two ex- 
 tremes of polytheism and monotheism in its con- 
 ception of divinity, according as its sense of the 
 plurality of natural phenomena and forces has 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 221 
 
 swayed its emotions and thoughts, or as its more 
 educated sense of the unity of nature and natural 
 law, and of God as its author, has determined its 
 philosophy. 
 
 A vivid picture of this evolutionary uncertainty 
 and fluctuation is given in the Babylonian epic of 
 creation, — of very early though uncertain date, — 
 where chaos with its mass of multiplied unorgan- 
 ized elements is personified in Tiamat, who is 
 made the progenitor of Lakmu and Lakamu. 
 These divinities, representing the " monster " world 
 of half-chaotic things, became in their turn the 
 ancestors of Anschar and Kisha, who represent a 
 second stage of movement toward order, and from 
 whom springs the great Babylonian triad of Anu, 
 Bel, and Ea. It is through this triad of gods that 
 the third stage of evolution takes place, namely, 
 the creation of the world. Behind this picture lies 
 a complete polytheism which forms its substantial 
 background. Plainly, when this epic was written, 
 the Babylonian triad had already been evolved, 
 and a place had to be found for it among the ear- 
 lier traditions. The epic reveals the manner in 
 which it was done. Chaotic multiplicity is mytho- 
 logicaUy personified in Tiamat, the principle of 
 disorder ; and then, through two successive rising 
 stages of evolution, two pairs of nature gods are 
 formed, who are made the progenitors of Anu, Bel, 
 and Ea. Other examples might be given. In 
 fact, the Ethnic trinities are shown to be in a con- 
 tinued state of flux, not only from duality to trin- 
 
222 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 ity or quartemity, or to multiples of a triad, but 
 also from one triad to another, as in Hindooism, 
 from Varuna, Indra, and Agni to Brahma, Vishnu, 
 and Civa, and in the Greek world, from Zeus, Here, 
 and Athene, to Zeus, Athene, and Apollo, and then 
 to the philosophical Plotinian triad of t6 Iv, 6 vovs, rj 
 i}/vxV' The remarkable thing about it all is that the 
 idea of trinity is so persistent, holding its ground 
 tenaciously, while so Proteuslike in the shapes it 
 assumes. The same is substantially true of the 
 Christian trinity ; of course not so fully or with 
 so much of fluctuation, for polytheism affords a 
 much wider field of change than monotheism, but 
 the fact of constant evolution is just as clear and 
 decisive. 
 
 I propose to illustrate this now in the case of 
 the third person, the Holy Spirit, especially in its 
 earlier evolution. As the idea of trinity is not to 
 be found in the Old Testament, which is strictly 
 monotheistic, it is needless to enter into any dis- 
 cussion as to the meaning of the compression Holy 
 Spirit in that part of the Bible. Enough to say 
 that it is never used by itself to express a person. 
 When employed it is always an adjxmct, as in the 
 passage, " Take not thy Holy Spirit from me." 
 The " Holy Spirit of God " is a monotheistic para- 
 phrase of God himself. This is the Old Testa- 
 ment doctrine throughout. In the New Testament 
 we first find " the Holy Spirit " used separately, 
 but its adjunctive or adjectival use still continues, 
 and indicates the real meaning of the expression 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 223 
 
 when used separately, as in the clause : " God is 
 a spirit." Certainly Christ nowhere employed the 
 expression in any way to indicate that he believed 
 in the personality of the Holy Spirit as distin- 
 guished from the personality of God. This is 
 shown by his interchange of the phrases " Holy 
 Spirit " and " Spirit of God." Let it be noted 
 here that the reduction of the gospel to writing 
 was made long after Christ's day, and that mean- 
 while the form of Christian tradition was under- 
 going a clear process of evolution. This, no doubt, 
 has not a little to do with the history of the expres- 
 sion " Holy Spirit." But even the Synoptic gos- 
 pels, as we have them, stiU continue the Old Tes- 
 tament monotheistic tradition, and Professor Cary 
 (" Synoptic Gospels," p. 29) justly says : " ' Holy 
 Spirit ' throughout the Synoptics is equivalent to 
 the ' Spirit of God ' or ' the divine Spirit,' spoken 
 of here in verse 35 (Luke) as the power of the 
 Most High. Never has the Hebrew mind been 
 able to accept the idea of a division of personality 
 in the divine nature, neither had the conception 
 of a personal Holy Spirit been developed in the 
 Christian church at the time of the writing of our 
 gospels. It is not to be lost sight of that we have 
 here to deal with ideas held by men who were 
 Jews before they were Christians." Let me add 
 in support of Professor Gary's statement, that the 
 Talmud, which represents Jewish orthodox tradi- 
 tion as far back as Christ's day, and surely cannot 
 be taxed with any trinitarian tendencies, again and 
 
224 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 again uses the expression " Holy Spirit " as equiv- 
 alent to the spirit of God. For example, " Through 
 the reward of faith the Holy Spirit rested upon 
 Israel ; " where " Holy Spirit " is plainly synony- 
 mous with God's active immanent presence and 
 blessing. Paul is here an important witness, 
 since he lived before the gospels were written. 
 Not only does Paul use the terms " Holy Spirit," 
 " Spirit of God," " Spirit of Christ," interchange- 
 ably, and without any apparent difference of mean- 
 ing, but on two separate occasions, when he gives 
 his doctrine of God in a thoroughly formal and 
 credal way, he ignores the Holy Spirit entirely. 
 (1 Cor. viii. 6 ; 1 Tim. ii. 5). How could he do 
 this, if he held to a trinity of divine persons? 
 Paul's theology of God was the Jewish monothe- 
 ism of his ancestors ; but he added to it his new 
 doctrine of Christ : " There is one God, one medi- 
 ator also between God and man, himself man, 
 Christ Jesus." It is true that there are in Paul's 
 Epistles a few passages that might bear a trinita- 
 rian meaning if supported by more direct evidence. 
 But such corroborative evidence is wanting. No 
 one can read those Epistles and note how fre- 
 quently and closely Paul connects the Spirit with 
 God and with Christ, without feeling assured that 
 he had no clearly defined doctrine of the Spirit as 
 a distinct Person. When the expression Spirit or 
 Holy Spirit is used separately, the context always 
 makes it clear that God or Christ is intended. 
 Take, for example, Romans viii. 9, 14, 16 : " The 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 225 
 
 Spirit himself beareth witness," is explained by 
 the previous clause, " as many as are led by the 
 Spirit of God," and by a still earlier passage, " if 
 so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. But if 
 any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none 
 of his." A similar passage occurs in 1 Cor. ii. 10- 
 14. The fact that Paul had no decided trinitarian 
 view is well illustrated in 1 Cor. vi. 11 : " But ye 
 were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, and in the spirit of our God." Surely here 
 was a fine opportunity to turn the duad into a 
 triad, but Paul ignores it, and plainly because in 
 his view the sanctifying and justifying power of 
 God is specially manifested in him as a Holy 
 Spirit. An equally good opportunity was given in 
 2 Tim. iv. 1 : " I charge thee in the sight of God 
 and of Jesus Christ," but Paid, does not add " and 
 of the Holy Spirit." StiU, it seems probable that 
 already in Paul's day the tendency was growing to 
 invest the Spirit of God with personal attributes. 
 And there is a single passage in Paul's Epistles 
 where this trinitarian tendency is plainly hovering 
 over the apostle's mind. I refer to the trinitarian 
 benediction (2 Cor. xii. 14). If this is not a later 
 interpolation, it bears marks that cannot be easily 
 overlooked of a well-defined trinitarianism. 
 
 But supposing it to be genuine, and an indica- 
 tion of Paul's trinitarian tendency, one cannot 
 help asking why such a benediction was never 
 repeated. Why were all Paul's other benedictions 
 in the name of God, or of Christ, or of both ? 
 
226 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 And then, further, why was every doxology of 
 Paul, without a single exception, addressed to God 
 alone? There is but one satisfactory answer. 
 Paul believed in " one God " and in the one Holy 
 Spirit of God. Christ was for him a mediator 
 between God and men, but not God himself. As 
 such a mediator Christ was a proper object of 
 intercessory prayer. God was properly addressed 
 in Christ's name. But God alone was the one 
 object of worship and praise. Hence every dox- 
 ology was to him. On the whole, without enter- 
 ing upon a fuller critical discussion of New Testa- 
 ment texts, it can be said without hesitation, that 
 while a clear tendency is discernible in the New 
 Testament writings towards a trinitarian view of 
 God culminating in the Fourth Gospel, of which I 
 shall speak later, there is no evidence outside of 
 that gospel of any distinctly developed doctrine 
 of the Holy Spirit as a third person in a trinity. 
 Whether this tendency is regarded as greater or 
 less, the only historical result that can be relied 
 on is that an evolution is begun which will natu- 
 rally complete itseK in the f uUy developed trinity of 
 the fourth century. 
 
 This conclusion is amply sustained by the 
 evidence of the earliest post-apostolic Fathers. 
 Especially important are the Epistles of Clement, 
 Barnabas, and Polycarp, and " The Teaching of 
 the Twelve Apostles." These four writings I have 
 placed in their probable chronological order, 
 though some critics would assign an earlier date 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 227 
 
 to the "Teaching." The Epistle of Clement is 
 undoubtedly the earliest post-apostolic document 
 that has come down to us. Lightfoot fixes its 
 date " about the year 95." In many ways this 
 Epistle is of great importance. It shows that the 
 gospel was still largely communicated orally. No 
 clear sign is given of aquaintance with our present 
 four gospels, though the writer may have had 
 some apocryphal gospel in his hands. By the 
 " Scriptures " he always means the Old Testament. 
 Thus proof is furnished, which other evidence of 
 the same nature makes entirely convincing, that 
 our present gospels were written after a consider- 
 able traditional evolution of the Christian faith 
 had already taken place. 
 
 On the question of the Holy Spirit the evidence 
 of Clement is quite indefinite. The expression 
 " Holy Spirit " is used several times in the plain 
 sense of the spirit of God or of Christ, as when 
 the Old Testament Scriptures are described as 
 the " true utterances of the Holy Spirit," and 
 when the apostolic preachers are said to have been 
 " proved by the Spirit." There is also one passage 
 in the newly discovered portion of the Epistle 
 which has a decided trinitarian ring and indicates 
 the tendency which was in the air towards the 
 later trinitarian dogma : " As God liveth, and the 
 Lord Jesus Christ liveth, and the Holy Spirit." 
 This surely proves, if it be genuine, that the 
 trinitarian idea was growing. But, on the other 
 hand, it is equally clear that a trinity has not yet 
 
228 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 been fuUy developed, for the two doxologies are 
 strictly monotheistic, and the benedictions at the 
 beginning and end of the Epistle make no allusion 
 to the Holy Spirit, though both God and Christ 
 are mentioned. This view that the trinitarian 
 evolution is only begun, especially in the case of 
 the third person, is supported by the testimony of 
 the Epistles of Polycarp and of Barnabas, which 
 belong to the second quarter of the second century. 
 In neither of these Epistles is there any reference 
 to the Holy Spirit or to a trinity. The benedic- 
 tions are not trinitarian. The Epistle of Poly- 
 carp begins : " Peace from God Almighty and 
 from the Lord Jesus Christ be multiplied," and 
 the conclusion is similar. The Epistle of Barna- 
 bas begins and ends with a simple Christian 
 salutation. Both of these Epistles have a thor- 
 oughly primitive air. Neither refers to John or 
 the Fourth Gospel, nor is any gospel named ; but 
 Christ's sayings are quoted as if from oral tradi- 
 tion, for example : " As the Lord said, ' The 
 spirit truly is willing, but the flesh is weak.' " 
 There is, indeed, in the present text of Barnabas 
 an apparent exception : " As it is written, ' Many 
 are called, but few are chosen,' " but its genuine- 
 ness is very doubtful. If it is not an interpola- 
 tion, it is " the first example in the writings of 
 the Fathers of a citation from any book of the 
 New Testament preceded by the authoritative 
 formula ' it is written.' " ^ But if Barnabas really 
 
 1 Apostolic Fathers, T. and T. Clark, p. 107. 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 229 
 
 was acquainted with any written gospel, is it not 
 strange that he gives no other sign of acquaint- 
 ance, either by mention or by a clear citation ? The 
 fact is that there is no evidence of the growth of 
 a New Testament canon tiU. the time of Justin 
 Martyr. Whenever in the earlier Fathers the 
 expression " the Scripture " is employed, the 
 reference is to the Old Testament. Passages are 
 also given which are plainly from apocryphal 
 books. Polycarp, indeed, exhibits a thorough 
 acquaintance with Paul's Epistles and quotes 
 freely from them, — a fact which makes the ab- 
 sence of quotation from any gospel still more 
 noticeable. I have dwelt on these points as help- 
 ing to show how uncertain and fluxive is the gen- 
 eral condition of Christian thought and belief a 
 hundred years after Christ's death. If any one 
 of the four gospels is known, it is not directly re- 
 ferred to, or certainly quoted from, neither is the 
 name of any author given. The same indefinite and 
 fluxive character is seen in the trinitarian develop- 
 ment. Polycarp and Barnabas represent a sort 
 of half-way house from monotheism to trinitarian- 
 ism. They hold to one God and one Lord Jesus, 
 but go no further. 
 
 " The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles " is 
 closely connected with the Epistle of Barnabas in 
 general character. In some respects it seems the 
 most primitive of all the post-apostolic writings, 
 reminding one of the Book of Acts. As in that 
 book, Christ is again and again called God's 
 
230 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 " servant Jesus " (ttols). The indications of de- 
 pendence on oral tradition rather than on written 
 gospels are clear and decided. Christ's teaching 
 is always referred to as " the gospel," and the 
 plural " gospels " is never employed, as came to 
 be the case when the gospel was reduced to writ- 
 ing by several hands. The passage from oral to 
 written tradition may be gauged quite accurately 
 by this mark. The singular term gospel is em- 
 ployed by all the post-apostolic Fathers until 
 Justin Martyr, who is the first to refer to certain 
 gospels which he caUs " Memoirs of the Apostles." 
 Other evidence, as that of Papias, shows that 
 this was the very period when oral tradition was 
 giving place to written gospels. I cannot accept, 
 therefore, the judgment of several recent critics, 
 that the clause at the close of chapter xv., " So 
 do ye, as ye have it (^x^O ^^ *^® gospel of our 
 Lord," is an allusion to a written gospel. The verb 
 €X€T€ simply indicates present possession, but gives 
 no direct clue to the manner in which such posses- 
 sion was attained. Such a clause has little weight 
 against the whole tenor of " The Teaching," which 
 continually refers to Christ himself and his pro- 
 phets and apostles as the sources of the teaching : 
 " The Lord commandeth ; " " The Lord hath 
 said ; " " Him that speaketh to thee the word of 
 the Lord," etc. The prominence given in " The 
 Teaching " to the work of " apostles and pro- 
 phets " and to exhortations as to the way in which 
 they were to be received affords strong evidence 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 231 
 
 that the teaching of the gospel was oral rather 
 than written. " Whoever cometh and teacheth 
 you all these things^ before spohen^ receive him." 
 
 Examining now the " The Teaching " for light 
 on the question of its trinitarianism, we find it in 
 close agreement with the Epistles of Clement, 
 Polycarp, and Barnabas. With the exception of a 
 single passage, to which I shall soon refer, it indi- 
 cates the same indefinite and inchoate character. 
 Its doctrine of God is strictly monotheistic. No 
 trace appears of the Pauline Greek "mediator" 
 element. Christ is the servant of God and the 
 Lord or master of his disciples. It is the Pales- 
 tinian Messianism, not the Alexandrian Logos 
 doctrine. The doxologies are addressed to God 
 alone. Only in a single passage is there a hint of 
 a trinitarian tendency, namely, in the formula of 
 baptism, which appears for the first time in com- 
 plete trinitarian form : " Baptize in the name of 
 the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost." When or how this formula originated is 
 whoUy unknown. The only sign of it in the New 
 Testament is in Mat. xxviii. 19, where Christ 
 is represented as giving it to his disciples. The 
 plainly unhistorical character of this passage is 
 proved by the fact that after Christ's death the 
 form of baptism was " into Christ " and not into 
 the Trinity, Paul knows nothing of the trinitarian 
 formula. It thus becomes evident that the verse 
 at the close of Matthew is an interpolation of a 
 later time, or that the whole gospel in its present 
 
232 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 shape was composed well on in the second century ; 
 and this agrees with the indirect and negative 
 testimony of the Epistles of Clement, Polycarp, and 
 Barnabas. 
 
 It may here be noted that the evolution of 
 Christian trinitarianism is mainly traceable along 
 three lines of evidence : the form of benediction, 
 the baptismal formula, and the developing creed 
 of the church ; and it will be found that the order 
 above given is in fact the chronological order of 
 comparative evolution. Paul gets as far once as 
 a trinitarian benediction, though he never aUudes 
 to the trinitarian formula of baptism or suggests 
 any trinitarian creed. So " The Teaching of the 
 Twelve Apostles " gives the trinitarian baptismal 
 formula, but is altogether silent as to the doctrine 
 of the trinity. 
 
 It is an interesting question in this connection, 
 when the so-called Apostles' Creed was originally 
 written, and what was its first form. Its name 
 rests entirely on legendary ground. In its present 
 shape it is as late as the seventh or eighth century. 
 Professor Sanday's suggestion that there was an 
 earlier creed behind it is quite probable, but if so, 
 it is now lost. The earliest form of a creed that 
 is similar in character to the Apostles' Creed is 
 found in Irenaeus, in the latter part of the second 
 century, and a like form is also given in Tertullian 
 a little later. There is no reference, however, in 
 either of these writers to the " Apostles' Creed," 
 as would naturally have been the case had the 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 233 
 
 tradition of such a creed with apostolic authority- 
 been in vogue in that day. Irenaeus expressly de- 
 clared that his creed was generally accepted by 
 the church. How eagerly would he have appealed 
 to the authority of the apostles, had the creed put 
 forth in their names been already extant ! While, 
 therefore, the materials of the Apostles' Creed 
 were undoubtedly gathering in the course of the 
 second century, the creed itself, even in its original 
 form, cannot be assigned to an earlier date than 
 the third century. The significance of this creed 
 lies in the fact that it is based in its very form 
 as well as substance on the trinitarian conception. 
 Its twelve clauses (according to the legend, con- 
 tributed by the twelve apostles) are subdivided 
 into three parts, each revolving around one of the 
 three persons of the trinity. The traditional title 
 of this creed has undoubtedly had largely to do 
 with the veneration that has been accorded to it in 
 the Western church since it came into general use 
 in the early Middle Ages. But the belief that it 
 represents the real creed of the church of 1;he early 
 post-apostolic age must be given up. It is a 
 Latin, not a Greek, confession, and is undoubt- 
 edly an offshoot of the growing creed of the Ro- 
 man church. The Greek church knew nothing of 
 it, as was declared in the Council of Florence in 
 the fifteenth century, when an effort was made to 
 heal the schism between the Greek and Latin 
 churches. To say, as Dr. Schaff has done, in his 
 History of the Church : " The Apostles' Creed in 
 
234 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 its present shape is post-apostolic ; but in its con- 
 tents and spirit truly apostolic," conveys a whoUy 
 false impression as to the real facts. It is nei- 
 ther apostolic nor post-apostolic in the historical 
 meaning of that term. No early Greek Father 
 makes any allusion to it. Its thoroughly trinita- 
 rian character makes it a historical anachronism 
 when dated at any point earlier than Irenseus, 
 about 180. I have introduced the question of the 
 Apostles' Creed, so called, here, — though properly 
 it should come in later, as representing a later 
 stage of evolution, — because the traditional idea 
 of it, which is whoUy unhistorical, is so ingrained 
 in the popular Christian mind. The impression is 
 widely spread to-day that, whatever view may be 
 taken of the Nicene and other later creeds, the 
 Apostles' Creed is essentially apostolic, and con- 
 tains essential gospel truth. Christian scholars 
 like Dr. Schaff, who show in their writings that 
 they are aware of the facts, have helped to per- 
 petuate this mistaken view, in the interests, I 
 suppose, of what they regard as " the faith once 
 delivered." Dr. Schaff declares that " it has the 
 authority of antiquity and the dew of perennial 
 youth beyond any other document of post-apos- 
 tolic times, and is the only strictly oecumenical 
 creed of the "West, as the Nicene Creed is the only 
 oecumenical creed of the East." In the last clause 
 of this statement Dr. Schaff has innocently given 
 proof that his own assertion was false. How about 
 the " oecumenical " standing of the Apostles' Creed 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 235 
 
 in the East f And if it was not " oecumenical in 
 the East," how could it have " the authority of 
 antiquity " ? Dr. Schaff has simply made a his- 
 torical jump of several centuries without any 
 adequate evidence to sustain it. It is a pure leap 
 in the air. The so-called Apostles' Creed repre- 
 sents, not an original dogma of the gospel, but an 
 evolutionary development that did not reach its 
 fuU limit until it appeared as a Latin creed of the 
 Western church in the eighth century. Before 
 leaving this special topic and returning to the his- 
 torical survey of the growth of early apostolic 
 trinitarianism, I would add that, if any one wishes 
 to gain a vivid idea of the evolutionary character 
 of creeds, let him read a small book by an English 
 Oxford scholar of conservative instincts, C. A. 
 Heartley, entitled, " Harmonia Symbolica," which 
 gives a full account of the slow and hesitating way 
 in which the creeds of Christendom, especially the 
 Western, were developed. 
 
 To return, we have found in the first stage 
 of the post-apostolic period, as represented by 
 Clement, Polycarp, Barnabas, and " The Teaching 
 of the Twelve Apostles," only sporadic tendencies 
 toward a trinitarian view of God. These tenden- 
 cies we have noted along three lines of movement, 
 namely, the Christian benediction, the formula of 
 baptism, and the growth of the trinitarian dogma. 
 Everything has thus far been tentative and flux- 
 ive. Nothing like a " creed " has yet been at- 
 tempted. The benediction and doxology are still 
 
236 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 monotheistic. The baptismal formula has become 
 changed in one single instance^ we know not how 
 or just when, from " into Christ "to " into the 
 Father, the Son, and Holy Ghost." There is one 
 further piece of evidence left us in the first period 
 which has a unique significance and interest. No 
 documents of this early age have been more the 
 subject of controversy, as to their authenticity and 
 historical authority, than the Ignatian Epistles. 
 The conclusion of Bishop Lightfoot is certainly 
 one that conservative scholars to-day generally 
 accept, namely, that the seven longer Epistles 
 have been so largely interpolated as to have lost 
 all independent authority ; but that the sJiorter 
 Epistles are genuine and historical documents. I 
 am not ready myself to accept the historicity of 
 the shorter Epistles, for they bear unmistakable 
 traces of legend as well as interpolation ; but 
 surely there can be no doubt as to the strength of 
 Lightfoot's destructive criticism in the case of the 
 longer Epistles. Assuming, then, that these Epis- 
 tles represent an interpolated and amended recen- 
 sion of the shorter ones, let us consult them for 
 the light they may shed on the points before us. 
 First, on the trinitarian tendency of the Christian 
 benediction. Three of the seven Epistles close in 
 this way, and, in the longer version of all of them, 
 the Holy Spirit is included with God the Father 
 and the Lord Jesus Christ, while it is absent from 
 all three in the earlier shorter Epistles. Take the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians, for example. The 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 237 
 
 shorter version reads : " Farewell in God the 
 Father and in Jesus Christ, our common hope." 
 In the longer form there is added " and in the 
 Holy Ghost." In the Epistle to the Philadel- 
 phians the shorter version reads : " Fare ye well 
 in Christ Jesus, our common Lord ; " the longer 
 version reads : " Fare ye weU in the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, our common hope in the Holy Ghost." 
 The Epistle to the Smyrnians gives a further 
 evolution : " Fare ye well in the grace of God " 
 becomes " Fare ye well in the grace of God, and 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ, being filled with the 
 Holy Spirit and divine and sacred wisdom." The 
 close of another Epistle, namely, that to the Mag- 
 nesians, makes clear the real doctrine of the 
 shorter Epistles : " Fare ye well in the harmony 
 of God, and possess ye a steadfast spirit which is 
 Jesus Christ" (Lightfoot's translation). There 
 is no allusion here to any third person. But 
 the longer version gives a trinitarian twist to the 
 original text: "Fare ye well in harmony, ye 
 who have obtained the steadfast Spirit, in Jesus 
 Christ, by the will of God." 
 
 If now we turn our attention to the line of de- 
 velopment of the trinitarian dogma in its creed 
 form, we shall find a similar evolution. There are 
 one or two suggestions of a trinity in the shorter 
 Epistles, but in the longer Epistles there are com- 
 plete trinitarian statements which are wholly want- 
 ing in the shorter. For example : "If any one 
 confesses the Father and the Son and the Holy 
 
238 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Spirit" (Phil. vi.). Again, "The Comforter is 
 holy and the Word is Holy, the Son of the Father." 
 Perhaps the most remarkable passage is the follow- 
 ing, which has a suggestive credal air : " Since 
 there is but one unbegotten being, God, even the 
 Father, and one only-begotten Son, God, the Word 
 and man, and one Comforter, the Spirit of truth " 
 (Phil. iv.). No one who is at aU acquainted with 
 early church history can help noting the strange- 
 ness of such dogmatic language, put in the mouth 
 of a Christian bishop who was supposed to have 
 died a martyr in the opening years of the second 
 century. Two words in these statements prove 
 conclusively that they are interpolations, — " Com- 
 forter" and "Word." Neither of these terms is 
 ever used in the shorter Epistles. Moreover, they 
 do not appear in any authentic writing till nearly 
 two generations after the supposed date of the 
 Ignatian Epistles. I shall refer to this matter later, 
 and will only add here that I know of no more 
 striking and conclusive testimony to the incomplete 
 and fluxive character of the early trinitarianism 
 than the results brought before us by the compar- 
 ative study of the Ignatian Epistles. In truth, 
 the transparent interpolations of the longer Epis- 
 tles are suggestive indications and omens of the 
 great movement which wiU mark the next stage of 
 evolution which we are now to consider, namely, 
 that from a duad to a triads brought about by 
 the influence of Greek philosophy. 
 
 This stage is represented in its origin by Justin 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS -- RESEMBLANCES 239 
 
 Martyr, about the middle of the second century. 
 As my present object is not to trace the whole 
 trinitarian evolution, but simply that of the third 
 person, I shall omit any detailed account of the 
 introduction by Justin Martyr and his immediate 
 successors of the Greek logos doctrine into Chris- 
 tian theology. This is the real philosophical basis 
 of Christian trinitarianism. Henceforth what was 
 before indefinite and fluxive tends to become defi- 
 nite and fixed, since it has found a philosophical 
 centre around which to revolve. From the time of 
 Justin the doctrine of the second person assumes 
 the dogmatic mould which it has substantially pre- 
 served ever since. The later Nicene discussions 
 all assumed the logos doctrine, but developed dif- 
 ferences as to its precise theological character. 
 Not so with the question of the third person. The 
 word trinity does not appear until Theophilus 
 (168-188), who for the first time employs the 
 term rpta?, which corresponds to the Latin trinitas, 
 StiU, the tendency towards a dogmatic trinitarian 
 statement is greatly strengthened by the new logos 
 doctrine. Justin Martyr himself makes one dis- 
 tinct allusion to three persons : " Having learned 
 that Jesus Christ is the son of the true God him- 
 self, and holding him in the second place, and the 
 prophetic Spirit in the third " (1 Apol. xiii.). He 
 also gives the baptismal trinitarian formula in his 
 account of the mode of baptism (1 Apol. Ixi.). 
 But the trinitarian dogma still sits lightly on him, 
 as is shown by another passage in the same 
 
240 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Apology (vi.), where, in refuting the charge of 
 atheism, he mentions the various objects of Chris- 
 tian worship : " God, and the Son who came forth 
 from him, and the host of good angels who follow 
 and are made like to him, and the prophetic 
 Spirit." Here the order of superiority seems 
 clearly to be given, and the Holy Spirit is plainly 
 viewed as a sort of heavenly messenger rather than 
 as a member of the trinity. Dogmatic writers have 
 attempted to give another translation of this pas- 
 sage, but such a begging of the question is foolish 
 and vain. Neander explains it rightly as showing 
 a " wavering " on Justin's part " between the idea 
 of the Holy Spirit, as one of the members of the 
 Triad, and a spirit standing in some relationship 
 with the angels." This question whether the Holy 
 Spirit is a divine member of the trinity or a crea- 
 ture was long debated in the early church, and was 
 not dogmatically settled tiU the Nicene age. Ori- 
 gen as well as Arius held that the Holy Spirit was 
 a creature, with a beginning in time. It is notable 
 that Justin, while making much of the logos .doc- 
 trine, as regards the second person, makes no men- 
 tion of the Paraclete, or Comforter. This is very 
 significant, as showing that the doctrine of the third 
 person is much less in discussion than that of the 
 second. Surely, if the doctrine of the third per- 
 son were at the front, and the Fourth Gospel was 
 also in their hands, Justin, Athanagoras, Tatian, 
 or Theophilus would have made use of the re- 
 markable fourteenth and fifteenth chapters of that 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 241 
 
 gospeL But this is not the case. Irenaeus is the 
 first among the early Fathers to aUude to the Par- 
 aclete and to quote from the Fourth Gospel in con- 
 nection with it. It is also a fact worthy of atten- 
 tion that Irenaeus is the first Father to give a 
 distinct creed or dogmatic formula on a trinitarian 
 basis. The church Fathers from Justin Martyr to 
 Irenaeus hold steadfastly to the logos doctrine, 
 but waver concerning the dogma of the third per- 
 son. Athanagoras in a remarkable passage says : 
 " The Holy Spirit himself also, which operates in 
 the prophets, we assert to be an effluence of God, 
 flowing from him and returning back again like a 
 beam of the sun." This certainly is far from the 
 fully developed Nicene doctrine, and strikingly 
 suggests the coming SabeUianism that already lurks 
 in the air. A little later, Theophilus of Antioch 
 gives us another curious illustration of the still 
 undeveloped character of the doctrine of God, es- 
 pecially as regards the third person. He is giving 
 an account of the successive days of creation : " In 
 like manner also the three days which were before 
 the luminaries are types of the trinity of God and 
 his Word and his Wisdom." Here, to be sure, 
 there is a fuU trinity ; but the Holy Spirit is left 
 wholly out, and its place is taken by a term which 
 was often applied to the second person, but never, 
 so far as I am aware, to the Holy Spirit in a per- 
 sonal sense. In another passage Theophilus de- 
 scribes the Logos, or second person, as " the Spirit 
 of God and governing principle and wisdom." 
 
242 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 But all this wavering and uncertainty ends with 
 Irenseus ; and I need not pursue the subject fur- 
 ther, except to say in general that a third stage 
 of evolution begins with him, in which the doctrine 
 of a full trinity, including the Holy Spirit as a 
 personal divine though subordinate being, is dog- 
 matically set forth in creed definitions. Promi- 
 nent in this stage, especially at first, is the use of 
 the Fourth Gospel and its doctrine of the Paraclete. 
 Tertullian, whose Montanism led him to make much 
 of the Fourth Gospel, was a stout opponent of all 
 anti-trinitarian ideas, which were now rife in the 
 church. In short, we have now, in the third cen- 
 tury, entered the era of dogmatic controversy, 
 which will continue on into the Nicene and post- 
 Nicene age. In this controversial period, which 
 is characterized by the influence of the mystical 
 Fourth Gospel, and by the deep infusion of the 
 speculative spirit of Greek philosophy, Origen had 
 a conspicuous place. He was the first to unfold, 
 on the basis of the Fourth Gospel, the doctrine of 
 the " Holy Spirit, whom our Lord and Saviour in 
 the Gospel according to John has named the Par- 
 aclete." Christ, in his description of the Para- 
 clete, according to Origen, "wished to enlighten 
 his disciples regarding the nature and faith of the 
 trinity." The whole chapter in the work De Prin- 
 cipiis (B. II. c. vi.) is of great historical signifi- 
 cance, and may be said to have laid the foundation 
 of the completed dogma concerning the Holy Ghost 
 as the third person, which appears in the Niceno- 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 243 
 
 Constantinopolitan creed. Yet it must not be 
 forgotten that Origen held the Holy Spirit to be 
 a creature, occupying a midway position between 
 God and man, and not to be for a moment con- 
 founded, any more than the second person, the 
 Logos of God, with the eternal God himself. Ori- 
 gen was what might be fitly termed a mo7iotheistic 
 trinitarian, as Paul might be styled a monotheis- 
 tic dualist, and he thus represents the haK-way 
 movement of the pendulum from the position of 
 Paul to that of Athanasius. 
 
 My aim in following the history of the third 
 person of the Christian trinity thus far has been 
 to illustrate the fact that the law of historical evo- 
 lution is common to all trinitarian ideas. Such a 
 common law, working alike in the Ethnic and 
 Christian trinities, must involve further radical 
 resemblances. The truth is that the fundamental 
 religious ideas that are to be found in all the his- 
 torical religions are the outgrowth of a common re- 
 ligious nature in man, and we may therefore expect 
 to find common religious elements in all such reli- 
 gions, however diversified they may become under 
 varied providential environments and influences. 
 This is just as true of trinitarian ideas as of any 
 other form of dogma. We are prepared, then, to 
 find that the fundamental causes which led to the 
 development of the Ethnic trinities have worked 
 equally in the evolution of the Christian trinity. 
 We found three fundamental grounds or causes 
 of the trinitarian evolution in the Ethnic religions, 
 
244 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 namely, (1) the peculiar sacredness attaching to 
 three as a number in the early ideas of men; 
 (2) the faifmly or generative 'principle^ which lies 
 at the very basis of human life and society ; (3) the 
 mediation theory^ which grew out of the sense 
 of distance of man from God, and of the need 
 of some go-between who should be the medium of 
 prayers and gifts. Were we wholly unacquainted 
 with the history of the Christian religion, we 
 should expect to find in it, after our historical 
 survey of the Ethnic trinities, the same general 
 principles and causes working toward a trinitarian 
 doctrine of God. The Christian trinity, in fact, 
 is not only historically connected with the Ethnic 
 trinities, but has also an intimate logical and in- 
 ternal relationship. The causes that contributed 
 in the most marked degree to the development of 
 the Ethnic trinities are equally visible in the his- 
 tory of the Christian dogma. This comparison, 
 in order to be made clear and definite, will neces- 
 sitate a cursory resume of some of our previous 
 studies. 
 
 It is impossible, as we have said, to trace the 
 triadal or triple idea, in its connection with the 
 gods, to its historical source. It lies behind all 
 historical records. So the special occult signifi- 
 cance or sacredness of certain numbers seems to 
 be one of the earliest traditions of the race. The 
 traditions in Genesis in regard to the origin of the 
 Sabbath show how early seven must have become 
 a specially sacred number. The explanation there 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 245 
 
 given, in the account of creation, is of course 
 wholly mythological and unscientific ; it assumes 
 a creation of the world in six days and a resting 
 of God afterwards, as if he could become weary. 
 How unhistorical this assumption is I need not 
 say, in the light of recent scientific discoveries. 
 The real explanation of the sacredness of seven is 
 to be found in a growing sense of the occult power 
 of certain numbers, especially odd ones, as com- 
 pared with even. The superstitions that gath- 
 ered in the ancient world around the supposed 
 lucky character of odd numbers, and the unlucky 
 character of even ones, form one of the most curi- 
 ous chapters in history. It was not a mere conceit 
 of Virgil that led him to say : " God takes delight 
 in odd numbers." He was voicing a deep-seated 
 sentiment that had come down from prehistoric 
 times. Roman life and tradition was full of it. 
 The calendar was arranged in obedience to it. 
 "Five wax candles" were scrupulously used at 
 weddings. The steps leading to temples dedicated 
 to religion were made of unequal numbers, as if 
 the entrance itself to sacred places might thus be 
 consecrated and become a sort of via sacra. The 
 number three, as among so many peoples, was 
 regarded as peculiarly mystical and sacred. ^ The 
 remarkable division of the Etruscan temples into 
 three parts with three doors was apparently the 
 result of the same superstitious feeling concerning 
 three as an odd or lucky and in a peculiar sense 
 ^ See Granger's Worship of the Bomans, p. 150. 
 
246 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 divine number. We are thus prepared to join 
 three with seven as peculiarly sacred in the eyes 
 of the earhest races. But other numbers were 
 also smgled out as notably significant. The Py- 
 thagorean philosophy, which gives us the earliest 
 theory of number, singles out 3, 7, and 10 as 
 perhaps the most occult and sacred of all, — 10, 
 though an even number, being compounded of the 
 first four digits (1+2+3+4 = 10). Three and 
 ten were specially distinguished as the perfect 
 numbers, — three because it contains " the begin- 
 ning, the middle, and the end," and ten because 
 it includes in itself the whole essence of number. 
 The celebrated " Tetractys," or quaternary num- 
 ber, which was made up of the addition of the first 
 four digits, equaling ten, had a mystical mean- 
 ing and power, as being " the source and root of 
 the eternal nature," and hence became the usual 
 form of the Pythagorean oath. It is plain that 
 the Pythagoreans closely connected numbers, and 
 especially the numbers three and ten, with their 
 whole view of nature and of the gods. As we 
 have already noted, Aristotle was struck with this 
 view, and, after quoting the Pythagorean dictum 
 concerning three as " the complete or perfect num- 
 ber," he traces this perfection to nature^ as if 
 there was a fundamental threeness in the very na- 
 ture of things and hence somehow involved in the 
 divine nature ; and to this fact he ascribes certain 
 trinitarian features in the rites of the Greek reli- 
 gion. How much is to be made of this remarkable 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 247 
 
 passage one cannot say. Aristotle makes no fur- 
 ther allusion to the subject; but it certainly con- 
 tains evidence that somehow the triadal principle 
 as revealed in nature and in what may be called 
 the divine mathematics, had taken deep root in the 
 ideas of men, and makes it easier to understand 
 how the theory of triads should have had so large 
 a place in the history of religions. Of course 
 these Pythagorean and Aristotelian philosophical 
 theories are comparatively late in the history of 
 religion. They belong to what may be called the 
 age of Ethnic scholasticism. The Ethnic trinities 
 had their origin in the spontaneous mythologizing 
 intuitions of man's religious nature long before 
 philosophers had begun to theorize on primitive 
 beliefs. But Greek philosophy always worked on 
 the religious materials which lay imbedded in the 
 earlier traditions, and it cannot be doubted that 
 the earliest man began quickly to use his imagina- 
 tion on the arithmetical elements of the divine 
 order exhibited within and around him. How 
 large a part this may have played in the develop- 
 ment of the triads that appear already formed 
 when the light of history dawns it is impossible 
 to say. Philosophy had its rise much later. But 
 the doctrine of numbers in their mystical signifi- 
 cance was certainly an attractive one to the 
 Greeks, among whom philosophy originated, as is 
 illustrated in Pythagoreanism, which had a wide 
 influence ; and it was out of Greek philosophical 
 traditions that Plotinus drew his trinitarian theory 
 
248 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 and its scholastic conclusion that God not only 
 existed in trinity but could exist in no other way, 
 either in duality or in quaternity, thus reaching 
 the position that trinity is of the essence of the 
 divine being and hence an absolute necessity. 
 
 Turning now to the history of the Christian 
 trinity, and asking ourselves how much the triple 
 idea had to do with its development, the same 
 obscurity hangs over its origin as was the case 
 with the Ethnic trinities. Philosophy did not 
 begin to enter into the question until the Nicene 
 and post-Nicene age. But when we realize that 
 the earliest Christian theologians were students 
 and admirers of Greek philosophy, and especially 
 revered such thinkers as Pythagoras and Plato 
 and Aristotle, we cannot err in believing that 
 they easily sympathized with their theories of 
 the occult relations of certain numbers such as 
 three or seven or ten to nature and religion and 
 God. Pythagoras seems to have been held in 
 gTcat repute by the Greek Fathers generally. He 
 is quoted or referred to by Justin Martyr, Clem- 
 ent of Alexandria, and Origen, as if of high 
 authority, and Clement, after quoting a passage 
 from the Pythagoreans, describes their utterance as 
 " written through the inspiration of God." The 
 philosophical trinitarianism of Athanasius was 
 based on the assumption that trinity was as ab- 
 solutely essential to the mode of existence of the 
 Divine Being as his omnipotence and omniscience 
 and other natural attributes. Such an idea did 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 249 
 
 not spring from the teacliings of Christ or even 
 of Paul. Whence did it arise, if not in the 
 philosophical scholasticism of the Pythagorean- 
 Platonic-Aristotelianism of which Athanasius drank 
 so deeply ? It may be suggested that he owed it 
 quite as much to the Fourth Gospel. This is 
 indeed possible, but the writer of that gospel 
 drank quite as deeply of the same spring. This 
 inclination to regard threeness as an essential 
 feature of God is seen in Augustine's use of trin- 
 itarian analogies found in nature, and especially 
 in the triple division of the faculties of the soul. 
 As I have already noted, his work on the trinity 
 is largely employed in tracing such analogies, 
 and thus trying to prove that the triple character 
 which seems to pervade God's handiwork must 
 intimate and reveal a corresponding triplicity in 
 himself. It was reserved for a much later age 
 to raise the question already raised by Plotinus, 
 whether God could exist in any other way than by 
 a trinity. But it was a question that was logically 
 bound to arise in the Christian dogma as weU as 
 in the Ethnic. Plotinus, in his own pantheistic 
 way, placed the scholastic capstone on the Greek 
 trinitarianism by his assertion against the Gnostics 
 that the Divine Hypostases could he no more and 
 no less than three, and the same curious conclusion 
 has been reached by our present-day theologians 
 in their position that God as a self-conscious and 
 social being must exist in a tri-personal form. Of 
 the bad psychology involved in what is called the 
 
260 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 " social trinity " I have already spoken. I here 
 refer to it to illustrate how thoroughly the Ethnic 
 tendency to find triality in nature and in deity is 
 continued and finally summed up in the history of 
 the Christian trinity, with the metaphysical and 
 transcendental conclusion that trinity is the abso- 
 lutely necessary form of the divine existence. 
 
 But we must look deeper for the most radical 
 resemblances between the Ethnic trinities and the 
 Christian, and the further we go, the more remark- 
 able the resemblances become. Our previous stud- 
 ies of the Ethnic trinities showed how deeply seated 
 in the earliest religious ideas of the race were those 
 of generation and mediation. Both of these ideas 
 underlie the oldest mythologies and theogonies. 
 As the generative principle was the foundation of 
 the human family, it was naturally transferred to 
 man's conceptions of the origin of the gods. The 
 mythological trinities are as a rule composed of 
 male and female divinities, thus laying a basis for 
 triads consisting of husband, wife, and child, or, 
 in other words, of father, mother, and son or 
 daughter. If, as sometimes was the case, the 
 triad was wholly masculine, each member of the 
 triad had his female companion, and one member 
 was, in such a case, usually a son of one of the 
 pairs. But it was the rule rather than the excep- 
 tion that a goddess was a member of the triad, 
 and sometimes even two out of the three were 
 feminine, as for example, in the Homeric trinity, 
 Zeus, Here, and Athene, and also in the Koman 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 251 
 
 Capitoline triad, Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva. In 
 the Egyptian triad of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, Isis 
 alone is feminine. But whatever be the propor- 
 tion of the masculine and feminine elements in 
 the mythological Ethnic trinities, the generative 
 principle is fundamental to them all. There is 
 always a god who represents fatherhood, and one 
 who represents sonship ; and if motherhood is not 
 directly represented in the triad itself, it is always 
 in the background, and its presence is implied. It 
 was often in this way that triads became enlarged 
 to four deities or doubled or tripled. Sometimes, 
 for instance, the masculine triad was supplemented 
 by a feminine triad. Thus the Ethnic trinities 
 were really supposed to be families, in which the 
 three essential family constituents were united to- 
 gether, — father, mother, and son. The influence 
 of philosophical abstract thought upon the mytho- 
 logical trinities tended to eliminate the family 
 conception, or at least to break up its symmetry 
 and completeness ; yet it is very significant that 
 Plotinus, who gives us the most abstract trinity 
 that was ever conceived, foUows Plato in calling 
 his first principle, " The One," by the name of 
 Father, and makes generation the power of ema- 
 nation through which his metaphysical trinity is 
 evolved. If his to ev, 6 vo9s, -^ ifrvx^ are too pro- 
 foundly impersonal and pantheistic to form in any 
 true sense a household, they at least are brought 
 into metaphysical relationship by the generative 
 law on which the household rests. 
 
262 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 How, now, does the Christian trinity stand re- 
 lated to the generative family conception ? We 
 need not go far for the answer. Fatherhood and 
 sonship are its vital elements. The whole eco- 
 nomy of salvation in the Christian religion, as it 
 was developed in the course of the first three 
 centuries, was siunmed up in the offices of God, 
 the Father of mankind, and of his Divine Son, 
 who came into the world to carry out his Father's 
 plan of grace. Not only so, but, further, the 
 generative principle which fatherhood and son- 
 ship involve, if these names are truly significant, 
 and not merely symbolic, is made the metaphy- 
 sical corner-stone of the fully developed Nicene 
 trinitarianism. In fact, the controversies of the 
 Nicene age revolved around the question whether 
 the Son was eternally generated from the Father 
 or was merely a creature like other created beings. 
 This was the precise issue between Arius and 
 Athanasius. The triumph of the Athanasian ho- 
 moousian doctrine was indeed a conservative vic- 
 tory in more senses than one ; for it signalized the 
 retention in Christian trinitarian theology of that 
 Ethnic idea which had its origin in prehistoric 
 ages, and seems to have been the germ of all the 
 Ethnic trinities of which the history of religions 
 gives account. It is no wonder that in our day 
 there should have been a strong reaction against 
 a form of trinitarianism that bears so plainly the 
 marks of its mythological parentage. The sharp, 
 terse wit of Emmons, which made his dictum, 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 263 
 
 *' Eternal generation is eternal nonsense," so 
 famous, had its edge and point in the query 
 whether there could be any generation without 
 a beginning. But how about the added query 
 whether generation itseK, as applied to God, is not 
 a crude materialism. Emmons might well have 
 given a double edge to his wit. " Eternal genera- 
 tion " is no more nonsensical as a theological spec- 
 ulation concerning God than temporal generation ; 
 and the retention of the generation idea, whether 
 with or without the adjective " eternal," in theo- 
 logical language, only shows how fundamental it 
 is to aU trinitarian forms of thought. 
 
 But, looking at the interior relations of the 
 Christian trinity, two features of it seem at first 
 sight to differentiate it quite completely from the 
 Ethnic trinities, namely, the absence of the femU 
 nine element^ and the doctrine of the procession 
 of the Holy Spirit, These peculiar features are 
 the result of the peculiar historical origin of the 
 Christian dogma. Jesus of Nazareth, around 
 whom the Christian trinity grew, was himself a 
 man of Jewish stock and parentage. He had a 
 human mother as well as father. In fact, while 
 legend played around the story of his birth and at 
 length invested him with a divine paternity, no 
 question was ever raised as to Mary's true mother- 
 hood ; so that when Christ began to be looked at 
 as of divine nature, the true Son of God, it was 
 impossible to complete the trinity with Mary, as 
 would naturally have been the case. The legend 
 
264 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 of the miraculous conception of Mary, wMch soon 
 attached itself to that of Jesus, paved the way for 
 the later deoroKo^ dogma, namely, that she was the 
 true mother of God ; and this in turn laid the basis 
 of her own divineness which culminated in the 
 Mariolatry of the Middle Ages. But the dogma 
 of Mary was of comparatively slow growth. Mean- 
 while the vacant place in the trinity was left unfilled. 
 These historical facts help explain the slowness 
 and fluctuating character of the evolution of the 
 third person. The doctrine of the Holy Spirit as 
 a separate person, and as the third member of the 
 trinity, was really a sort of makeshift or accident. 
 From our historical standpoint of the comparative 
 study of religions, it becomes more easily explicable 
 why the Holy Spirit of God became separated 
 from God himself, and was added to the Father 
 and the Son to form a trinity. It was a sort of 
 historical necessity that the vacant place should 
 be filled, and thus a duad became a triad. The 
 Ethnic trinities were so many signal lights to re- 
 mind Christian theologians that their own trinity 
 was yet incomplete. I would not suggest that 
 Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Origen were directly 
 conscious of such a trinitarian influence from 
 Ethnic tradition, but the very air around them 
 was full of trinitarian voices. However this may 
 have been, a curious light is shed on the substitu- 
 tion of the Holy Spirit for the natural third per- 
 son, namely, the divine mother of Jesus, in an 
 extract which has been preserved, from the Gospel 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 255 
 
 of the Hebrews, — an early gospel which after- 
 wards came to be regarded as heretical, and thus 
 passed out of use and is largely lost. In this 
 gospel, in the account of the baptism, the Holy 
 Ghost is represented as saying to Christ : " Thou 
 art my first-born son," and further on, in the ac- 
 count of the temptation, Christ himself is made to 
 say : " My mother, the Holy Spirit, lately took 
 me by one of my hairs and carried me to the great 
 mountain Tabor." Here appears the feminine 
 element, so fundamental in all the Ethnic trinities, 
 striving to assert itself on Christian soil. It was 
 the Ebionitic and heretical character of this Gospel 
 of the Hebrews that may have prevented the Holy 
 Spirit from appearing in the Trinity as the divine 
 mother of Christ. There was indeed one difficulty 
 which could not easily be surmounted, namely, the 
 substitution of the Holy Spirit for Mary, the 
 historical mother of Jesus, who was growing more 
 and more sacred in Christian tradition. Then 
 there was a stiU further difficulty. In the early 
 legendary account of Christ's birth, which was 
 accepted as historical fact, the Holy Spirit was 
 made the masculine agent in Christ's conception 
 (Matt. i. 18, 20 ; Luke i. 35). The Gospel of the 
 Hebrews must have followed a different legendary 
 tradition. Under such circumstances it is not 
 surprising that the feminine element failed of 
 being represented in the Christian trinity. But 
 the later history of the cultus and dogma of Mary, 
 the so-called " Virgin-mother," gives added evi- 
 
256 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 dence that the loss of the feminine element has 
 always been felt in the Christian consciousness. 
 The popularity of the cultus of Mary, and the rapid 
 growth of the dogma of her bodily assumption and 
 enthronement in heaven at Christ's right hand — 
 where she becomes the chief intercessor for man, 
 thus taking the place of Christ, her Son, who has 
 now largely taken the place of the Father as Lord 
 and Judge — vividly indicate how strongly the 
 feminine element, as representative of grace and 
 mercy in God, has always appealed to the human 
 heart. There is no more realistic and pathetic 
 chapter in Christian history than that which re- 
 cords the gradual divinization of Mary the mother 
 of Jesus. In the second century she was the " Vir- 
 gin-mother." In the fourth and fifth centuries she 
 became the ^cotkoos, or mother of God. Already 
 she has been transformed into a semi-divine being. 
 Then legend followed legend to prepare her for 
 her new sphere and office in the heavenly world. 
 Her miraculous birth had already taken its place 
 in the post-apostolic apocryphal traditions. Her 
 miraculous bodily assumption from the grave to 
 heaven was only a logical afterpiece. Then fol- 
 lowed her coronation by the Father or the Son and 
 her installation as " Queen of heaven." The 
 Christian art of the Middle Ages, employed to 
 decorate the great churches and stimulate the 
 faith of the people that thronged them on festival 
 days, is fuU of paintings illustrative of this won- 
 derful historical evolution. Only one step fur- 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 257 
 
 ther remained. That was, to invest her with 
 the trinitarian title which her functions already 
 involved. 
 
 It is noticeable in all this process of the deifica- 
 tion of Mary, that the dogma of the Holy Spirit is 
 losing recognition. It remains, indeed, in the creeds, 
 but it has gone out of the practical faith of men, 
 — as is witnessed by the innumerable pictures in 
 the churches, which represented the popular beliefs 
 and especially the religious conceptions and rites 
 that fed their spiritual Hf e. The Holy Spirit is 
 not whoUy absent from these paintings, but every- 
 where the cultus of Mary, " Our Holy Mother," 
 and " Queen of heaven," is made the centre of at- 
 traction and worship, rivaling and more and 
 more uniting itself with that of Christ, her Son. 
 Nothing is more irresistible than the logic of a 
 historical evolution. A religious intuition of the 
 heart is surely destined sooner or later to become 
 a dogma of intellectual belief. A cultus at last 
 becomes a creed. It is understood on Catholic 
 authority that " a congress was called in the city 
 of Rome, some time since, for the purpose of pla- 
 cing the worship of the ' Holy Mother ' in a more 
 distinct and authoritative position among the arti- 
 cles of belief and practice." What the result of this 
 movement was has not transpired. But it was not 
 the first effort in this direction. More than thirty 
 years ago Albert Reville, the present rector of the 
 University of Paris, declared, in a small but nota- 
 ble book, " Histoire du dogme de la Divinite de 
 
258 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Jesus Christ : '* " More than one serious attempt 
 has already been made in the Ultramontane camp 
 to join in some way Mary to the Trinity, and, if 
 Mariolatry continues longer, it will come to pass.'* 
 In the light of such facts, a remark of Renan, in 
 one of his essays, having in mind the tendencies of 
 modern Catholic Christianity, has a new signifi- 
 cance : " Mary has entered of full right into the 
 Trinity ; she far excels the Holy Spirit. She com- 
 pletes the divine family, for it would have been 
 a marvelous thing had the womanly element in 
 Christianity failed to succeed in mounting to the 
 very bosom of God." Such pictures as " The In- 
 coronata," where Mary, placed between the Father 
 and the Son, receives the crown from the former 
 and the homage of the latter, or where Christ, 
 seated at Mary's side, puts the crown on her head, 
 or as " The Last Judgment," in which Christ and 
 Mary sit side by side in separate glories, as if 
 sharing together the offices of judgment and mercy, 
 — such pictures may seem to us Protestants super- 
 stitious and even blasphemous, but it must not be 
 forgotten that they testify truly to the religious 
 faith of the whole Christian church down to the 
 sixteenth century, and they declare more vividly 
 than words can how deeply fixed in the human 
 soul is the sentiment of its need of the divine 
 mercy, and how intimately related is the Christian 
 trinity in its radical affirmations to its Ethnic 
 elders. Nor let us Protestants be too critically in- 
 clined towards what may seem to us superstitious 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 259 
 
 features of Catholic faith. Are our skirts quite clear 
 of similar superstitions ? Is not the cult of Mary 
 herself growing among us ? Is she not the Virgin- 
 mother somehow set apart from all other woman- 
 kind ? Not long ago I heard a Protestant minister 
 of New England ancestry and faith, and who 
 abides in regular standing in the Congregational 
 brotherhood, refer, in no ironical fashion, but with 
 the utmost seriousness, to " the divine madonnaJ*^ 
 Let who will cast a stone at this distinguished 
 Congregational preacher. For myself, I am not 
 a Catholic, nor am I catholically inclined, but my 
 historical studies have only deepened my feeling 
 of charity and even sympathy for every sincere 
 religious belief, though it may have its source in 
 unhistorical and superstitious traditions; for I 
 have learned how tenacious is the grasp of a sin- 
 cere though ignorant faith on the objects of its 
 trust, and how affiliated are all such objects, when 
 search is made for their historical roots, in the 
 common religious nature of man. 
 
 The absence, then, originally, of the feminine 
 element in the Christian dogma of the trinity does 
 not indicate any radical difference in its internal 
 character, when compared with that of the Ethnic 
 trinities. Fortuitous historical circumstances pre- 
 vented its admission for a while, but the generative 
 principle, which was as fundamental to the Chris- 
 tian dogma as to the Ethnic, really required it, 
 and the development of the cultus of Mary was 
 the natural result. In the Catholic church, which 
 
260 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 historically represents the Nicene and post-Nicene 
 Christianity, the dogma and rites of Mary have 
 become a vital part of its system. The Protestant 
 revolt was directed rather against rites than dog- 
 mas. Hence it was that Mary was thrown down 
 from her lofty pedestal. But the old dogmas and 
 creeds logically include the doctrine and cultus of 
 Mary which grew spontaneously in the Middle 
 Ages. If those creeds are true, and Mary was the 
 real mother of the God-man, then the special honor 
 and cultus of Mary is defensible. Hence it is that 
 conservative Protestantism to-day, in its reactionary 
 tendencies, is taking more and more kindly to a 
 sort of haK-and-half Mariology. Surely, if Jesus 
 is indeed God himself, and Mary was his virgin- 
 mother, why should she not be honored as such, 
 and be even entitled to a seat at her divine Son's 
 right hand in glory ? The logic of history rarely 
 fails. There is in it a divine method and provi- 
 dence. It is my profound conviction that the pre- 
 diction of Reville concerning the tendencies in the 
 Catholic church towards the inclusion of Mary 
 in the Christian trinity will ultimately be verified, 
 and my conclusion, as a historical observer, is 
 equally clear that those Protestants who are de- 
 voted to the old Catholic dogmas must finally 
 reach — though the steps taken towards it may be 
 uncertain and slow — the same goal. 
 
 Turning now to the other point raised, namely, 
 the Christian dogma of the procession of the Holy 
 Spirit, it is to be noted that it does not appear in 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 261 
 
 the creeds until the fourth century. The Nicene 
 Creed of 325 simply alludes to the Holy Spirit, 
 without constructing any dogma about it. This 
 shows that no theological discussion had yet arisen 
 on this point. Whether the Holy Spirit was a 
 person or only an influence was not quite clear. 
 As late as the latter part of the fourth century 
 Gregory Nazianzen regarded the question as unset- 
 tled and not essential to orthodoxy. What, then, 
 was the common view of the Holy Spirit's relation 
 to God ? Plainly it was one of derivation or ema- 
 nation, analogous to that of the second person, or 
 Son. But why was it that the theory of genera- 
 tion is not applied also to the Holy Spirit as well 
 as to the Son? The answer seems clear. Its 
 clue is given in the Fourth Gospel. Here is found 
 for the first time the theory of the Paraclete 
 (Comforter), and of his procession from the Fa^ 
 ther. The proem of that gospel had set forth, 
 after the manner of Philo, the theory of the Logos 
 of God, the only begotten Son of the Father, and 
 had identified this preexistent Logos with Jesus of 
 Nazareth. Generation and procession are simply 
 two forms of derivation from God. No doubt the 
 phrase in John xv. was rhetorical rather than 
 theological; but though it slumbered for nearly 
 two centuries, it was at last caught up when con- 
 troversy began to arise as to the precise relation 
 of the Holy Spirit to God. It is remarkable that 
 when the doctrine of the third person is first set 
 forth theologically, in the creeds of the middle of 
 
262 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 the fourth century, express allusion is made to the 
 language of John xv. and to the term " Paraclete " 
 (Comforter). Athanasius, who became the great- 
 est defender of the homoousian character not only 
 of the second person but also of the third, rested 
 his defense primarily on the Fourth Gospel. There 
 can be no historical doubt, therefore, that the 
 Fourth Gospel is responsible for that peculiar the- 
 ory of the third person which became incorporated 
 in the so-called Constantinopolitan amendment of 
 the Nicene Creed, and has ever since been retained 
 as a fixed shibboleth of orthodoxy. I will not here 
 stop to consider the light shed by this bit of his- 
 tory on the question of the authorship and date of 
 the Fourth Gospel. What is plain, at all events, 
 is that the author of that gospel derived his trini- 
 tarian ideas concerning the eternal generation of 
 the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit from 
 Alexandrian Philonic sources, and that their ac- 
 ceptance by Christian theologians in the third and 
 fourth centuries was due to the fact that the 
 authorship of the Fourth Gospel was attributed to 
 John, the Galilean apostle. The question here 
 arises whether the language placed on the lips of 
 Christ concerning the Paraclete and his procession 
 from the Father was ever really spoken by him. 
 Certainly it is remarkable that no such language 
 can be found in the Synoptic gospels. The very 
 word " Paraclete," or Comforter, is clearly of Greek 
 origin, and is traceable to the same Philo who gave 
 the Greek term " Logos " to Christian theology. In 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 263 
 
 fact, the two words belong to the vocabulary of a 
 common Greek philosophy. Christ taught no 
 such Logos or Paraclete doctrine, unless we accept 
 the apostolicity of the Fourth Gospel. There are 
 stiU those who are ready to defend such apostoli- 
 city and to hold that Christ spoke the very words 
 of the long discourses and prayer in chapters 
 xiv.-xvii. But the weight of critical authority 
 more and more settles itself on a substantial agree- 
 ment with the conclusions of Professor B. W. 
 Bacon, in his recently published volume : " An 
 Introduction to the New Testament." Professor 
 Bacon holds that the Fourth Gospel is a post-apos- 
 tolic writing by an unknown author who gathered 
 the materials from composite sources, employing 
 " trustworthy data and genuine logia,'" but " ex- 
 panding them into dialectic discourses," "in a 
 manner wholly incompatible with the clear histor- 
 ical recollection of an eyewitness." Professor 
 Bacon further adds : " With all due allowance it 
 is impossible to regard the set discourses of John, 
 as a whole, as other than literary compositions by 
 the author (unknown) of the Johannine Epistles." 
 I am in substantial accord with these conclusions ; 
 though I must add that I regard them as quite 
 conservative, and it is my decided feeling that his- 
 torical criticism in its progress will grow more and 
 more hesitant about allowing even so much. I 
 think Professor Bacon has yielded quite as much 
 to the genuineness of original logia in the set dis- 
 courses as the evidence warrants. He weU says : 
 
264 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 " Few will deny that in this gospel the prerogative 
 of the ancient historian to place in the mouth of his 
 characters discourses reflecting his own idea of what 
 were suitable to the occasion has been used to the 
 limit." 1 The bearing of this critical conclusion on 
 the point before us is clear. If the language of 
 John XV. 25 cannot be regarded as that of Christ 
 himself, but only an intei"pretation of what a writer 
 of the second century supposed to be the spirit of 
 his teaching, and in accord with the literary habit 
 of his day put into his mouth, it is impossible to 
 quote them as a truly gospel foundation for the 
 article of the creed on the third person. Here, 
 also, it is important to remember that the Fourth 
 Gospel makes no figure in early history till after 
 the middle of the second century, and that the 
 doctrine of the Paraclete does not appear till near 
 the end of that century, — a strange thing cer- 
 tainly, if the Fourth Gospel was apostolic and in 
 the hands of the apostolic Christians. What the 
 form of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed, as 
 regards the third person, would have been, had the 
 Fourth Gospel not been written, cannot of course 
 be determined. Without it, certainly, there would 
 have been no doctrine of the Paraclete as a distinct 
 person. Philo, indeed, used the term, but applied 
 it to the Logos, as he did the term mediator. 
 To the last discourses of the Fourth Gospel must 
 
 1 For my own historical judgment on the general question, see 
 Appendix A, on "The Johannine Problem," in A Critical His- 
 tory of the Evolution of Trinitarianism. 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 265 
 
 we look, and to them alone, for the historical ori- 
 gin of the dogma of the procession of the Holy 
 Spirit. 
 
 We are now in a position to be able to deter- 
 mine quite clearly what the real meaning of 
 " procession " was, when adopted into the creed. 
 Philo and the author of the Fourth Gospel were 
 Alexandrian Platonists, but representing the ten- 
 dency which was now growing towards the New 
 Platonic monism. The key word, as we have 
 seen, of that philosophy was evolution, or deriva- 
 tion. AU things proceeded, in one way or other, 
 from the one God, whether by generation or some 
 other form of evolution. " The Paraclete who 
 proceedeth from the Father " is genuine Greek 
 Platonic language, and can bear but one interpre- 
 tation. Athanasius and Gregory of Nyssa, who 
 had more influence than any others in the final 
 formation of the completed creed, were thoroughly 
 versed in the Platonic philosophy. The difference 
 to them between the mode of derivation of the 
 second person and the third was simply one of 
 form, not of substance. Generation and proces- 
 sion were essentially the same, and the persons 
 thus derived, though seemingly in different ways, 
 were equally homoousio% and in the same sense 
 divine. Thus the apparent difference between the 
 Ethnic trinities and the Christian trinity in the 
 matter of the form of derivation of the third 
 person fades into a purely superficial distinction ; 
 and, in this case, as in the case of the absence of 
 
266 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 the feminine element, circumstances entirely for- 
 tuitous seem to have prevented the Christian 
 trinitarianism from being based on the generation 
 family principle throughout. 
 
 But it is the mediation element, after all, that 
 binds the Ethnic trinities and the Christian trinity 
 in closest and most intimate relationship. This 
 fact is so patent that I need not dwell upon it at 
 any length. The whole Christian trinity and aU 
 the doctrines that hang upon it, have as their 
 very centre and crown the divine mediatorship 
 of Christ, the Son of God, who was sent by his 
 Father on the mission of healing the alienation 
 wrought by sin, and reuniting God and his human 
 creatures in one moral kingdom. The whole 
 scheme of salvation circles around the word 
 /Aco-tTiys, introduced into the Christian theology by 
 Paul, and the kindred word A.oyos, derived from 
 Philo and Greek philosophy. Add the word 
 irapaKXrjTo? (Paraclete), and in these three Greek 
 words, all directly Philonic, and more indirectly Pla- 
 tonic, we have the keynote not only to Christian 
 trinitarianism, but also to Christian theology in its 
 whole range. I scarcely need add that mediatorship 
 is equally the keynote of the Ethnic trinities. In 
 fact, it was plainly the strongest bond of the Ethnic 
 trinitarianism, working more efficiently than all 
 others to preserve its substance and form, exposed 
 as it was constantly to the disintegrating effects of 
 polytheism on the one hand and pantheism on the 
 other. The great question of religion and religious 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 267 
 
 faith has always been from the beginning of time, 
 how man shall be able to enter into such relations 
 of amity and communion with God as shall insure 
 his help and favor. To establish such a basis of 
 religious trust has been the end of every religion 
 that history gives any account of. And, as we 
 have seen, more and more prominent in the his- 
 tories of the Ethnic religions has grown the medi- 
 ative principle. The terms "Father" and " Son," 
 "Mediator," "Messenger," "Friend of Man," 
 " Savior," are by no means peculiar to Chris- 
 tianity. They are found scattered over the sacred 
 books of the East, and later in the West, in 
 Greek mythologies and philosophies, until at last, 
 in the complete New Platonism of Plotinus and 
 Proclus, they reach their height of moral and 
 religious significance, and remind us that we have 
 entered somehow into a truly Christian atmos- 
 phere and faith. When we read of Sosiosh, the 
 " benevolent " one and " savior," and of Mithra, 
 the "mediator," in Zoroastrianism, of Krishna, 
 the incarnate god-man, in Hindooism, of ^scula- 
 pius, the " a-oiT-qp " or " savior " in Greek religious 
 rites, we are indeed made to feel that we are " not 
 far from the kingdom of God." The more closely 
 the Ethnic religions are studied, the more deeply 
 one realizes that the very foundations of the Eth- 
 nic trinities were laid in the need felt by the hu- 
 man heart of some favorable and friendly medium 
 between weak man and those heavenly powers that 
 rule earth and sea and sky and the nether world 
 
268 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 below. Whichever member of a trinity, whether 
 Father or Son or Mother, becomes in human ap- 
 prehension the mediating friend of man, at once 
 he or she is made the most prominent and popular 
 object of worship and sacrificial rites. The very- 
 development of some of the Ethnic trinities seems 
 to have come about along this mediating line. 
 The need of a go-between to mediate with the 
 highest and most distant deity led to the evolution 
 of a second person who as a son of that high- 
 est deity could be the bearer to him of human 
 prayers and sacrifices and offerings. It was the 
 need still felt of another go-between to fill the 
 chasm not wholly closed between the Son and 
 man, that sometimes led to another addition, thus 
 making a trinity complete. The function of " in- 
 tercessor" was strongly marked in some of the 
 Oriental cults. The investigation of the analo- 
 gies furnished by several of these religions has 
 been a fascinating subject of late with Oriental 
 scholars. A competent foreign critic, reviewing 
 one of these attempts to find historical analogies 
 between one of the Babylonian triads with its 
 " intercessor," and one of the Zoroastrian trinities 
 with its " mediator," while refusing to accept the 
 evidence as full proof of any actual borrowing, 
 concludes : " Man, terrified at finding himself 
 before the power of the divine majesty, places 
 intermediaries between his God and himself, who, 
 being divinized in their turn, demand still other 
 intermediaries " (" Kevue de I'histoire des reli- 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — RESEMBLANCES 269 
 
 gions," 1898, i. 240). A prolonged study of the 
 Christian and Ethnic religions has convinced me 
 that this critic's words bring us to the fountain 
 head, not only of all the trinities that have ever 
 been evolved, but also of all the various religions 
 that have been developed around them. Other 
 causes contributed their share of influence, but 
 more influential than all has been this most radi- 
 cal of human religious instincts, with its inex- 
 tinguishable fears and hopes. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 INTERNAL RELATIONS — DIFFERENCES 
 
 In our consideration of the internal resem- 
 blances that are visible in a comparison of the 
 Ethnic and Christian trinities, we had occasion to 
 note several differences that seemed at first sight 
 to be of a radical character, but on closer exami- 
 nation resolved themselves into superficial features 
 that only served to make the resemblances more 
 striking. Such were the absence of the feminine 
 element, and the derivation by procession rather 
 than generation of the Holy Spirit. We have 
 now to notice other differences which do not so 
 easily yield to critical examination. Attention 
 has already been called to the historical origin of 
 the Christian trinity as an outgrowth of faith in 
 Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah. The 
 raising of Christ from the position of a man to that 
 of a divine being is the historical starting-point of 
 the Christian trinity. Here is a point of radical 
 difference between the Christian trinity and aU 
 the Ethnic trinities. No Ethnic trinity centre^ 
 in or starts from a man. If Zoroaster was a his- 
 torical personage, he never became a member of 
 a trinity, though in later legend he was invested 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — DIFFERENCES 271 
 
 with semi-divine functions. Gautama was also 
 raised in later Buddhistic tradition to the place of 
 a god, as an incarnation of Buddha ; but no trinity 
 of di\dne persons grew up around him. Moham- 
 medanism is a Semitic religion closely akin to 
 Judaism, but though Mohammed proclaimed him- 
 self a reformer and prophet like Moses and Christ, 
 he never was raised by his followers to a divine 
 rank. All the mythological trinities had their 
 origin in the religious imagination of the early 
 man. So the philosophical trinities, such as the 
 Hindoo and the New Platonic, were the offspring 
 of the speculative reason. Plotinus became in- 
 deed a sort of divine man in the eyes of his admir- 
 ing disciples, but he was himself the sole author 
 of the Plotinian trinity, and it never occurred to 
 the most speculative of his followers to introduce 
 the name of their master into a trinity of such 
 transcendental abstractions as " The One, the In- 
 telligence, and the Soul." It is true that the early 
 Christian Fathers grazed on Ethnic soil in laying 
 the philosophic foimdations of the Christian trin- 
 itarian dogma, but it remains no less true that 
 without Jesus Christ there would have been no 
 Christian trinity, and that he has remained its 
 true theological centre throughout aU its history. 
 It has even been made the great apologetical argu- 
 ment for the truth of the Christian trinity that it 
 had a true historical origin, while aU Ethnic trin- 
 ities are claimed to be unhistorical creations of 
 fancy or philosophy. I have already shown how 
 
272 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 wanting in historical verity this position is. The 
 evolution of the Ethnic trinities is as much a mat- 
 ter of history as is that of the Christian dogma. 
 There is, indeed, one element of truth in the 
 Christian apology. Jesus Christ was a historical 
 person, and he not only became the historical 
 founder of a new religion, but he also was raised 
 after his death, in the faith of his disciples, to a 
 divine rank, and to membership in a trinity of 
 divine beings. But these historical facts concern- 
 ing the evolution of a trinity out of the Jewish 
 monotheism do not make the Christian trinity it- 
 self, as a religious dogma, a historical eternal 
 truth, any more than the corresponding facts con- 
 cerning the evolution of the Ethnic trinities prove 
 them to be valid statements concerning the nature 
 of God. A fatal fallacy is involved in this apolo- 
 getical argument. It assumes as historical fact 
 what should first be proved, namely, that Jesus of 
 Nazareth was really born of a virgin by an imme- 
 diate act of divine power, making unnecessary the 
 cooperation of Christ's putative father, and fur- 
 ther, that this miraculous birth contained within 
 itseK a real divine incarnation of God. But such 
 proof has never been furnished, and in the nature 
 of things cannot be. Were it capable of being 
 given, it would involve the utter and fatal sub- 
 version of God's own universal and eternal laws, 
 and of those ultimate principles on which human 
 science and history rest. But, fortunately, no 
 such conflict between science and faith can arise. 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — DIFFERENCE^»§4ialS2Si^^ 
 
 The only direct human witness would be Mary 
 the mother of Jesus herself, and she never ap- 
 peared in evidence. Further, historical criticism 
 has made clear the legendary character of the tra- 
 ditions that slowly gathered around the birth and 
 infancy of Jesus. While, then, it is true that 
 Christ as a man is the historical starting-point of 
 the Christian trinity, it is not true that the dogma 
 itself any more rests upon historical grounds, as 
 an article of religious faith, than the Ethnic trini- 
 ties. All trinitarian doctrines are divisible into 
 two classes, the mythological and the philosophi- 
 cal. The Christian trinity belongs to the latter 
 class. Such a doctrine of God cannot be con- 
 founded with any historical human being, such as 
 Jesus of Nazareth. Christ himseK was a mono- 
 theist, not a trinitarian. Paul, Justin Martyr, 
 and Origen, who may be styled the three chief 
 originators of Christian trinitarianism, drew their 
 theological ideas from Greek philosophy. The real 
 difference, therefore, between the Ethnic trinities 
 and the Christian on this point dwindles to the 
 single fact that the Christian religion slowly de- 
 veloped out of its original monotheism a trinita- 
 rian dogma borrowed from Greek philosophy, and 
 installed its founder in it as "very God of very 
 God ; " what no Ethnic religion ever did. 
 
 Another difference that arrests attention in this 
 comparative study is that the Christian trinity, 
 after reaching its full development, remains sub- 
 stantially fixed in its trinitarian form, adhering to 
 
274 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 the three persons of whom it was originally com- 
 posed, and also to the methods of derivation by 
 which these were related to each other ; while the 
 Ethnic trinities exhibit a much more facile and 
 fluxive character, — easily exchanging one trinity 
 for another, doubling or triphng them, or still 
 further pluralizing them, as in the case of the 
 Egyptian. Yet it is not to be forgotten that the 
 Christian dogma passed through a considerable 
 period of flux and change, until it became stereo- 
 typed at length by the formation of creeds, which 
 were henceforth made authoritative and unchange- 
 able as canons of orthodoxy. The Ethnic trinities, 
 on the other hand, had a freer development, and 
 were never fixed in creeds. The dogmatic spirit 
 which so characterized the Nicene age is thus 
 largely responsible for the arrest of freedom and 
 fluidity in Christian trinitarian speculation. To 
 become heretical on the single question of the 
 form of the trinity as set forth in the Nicene 
 Creed exposed any theological leader to excom- 
 munication and even exile and death. This ex- 
 ternal cause, rather than anything radical in the 
 nature of the Christian trinity, explains the ap- 
 parent inflexibility of the Christian dogma as 
 compared with the Ethnic trinities. It is one of 
 the most significant facts of history, — showing 
 how deep-seated and influential is the religious 
 sentiment in man's nature, — that no human pas- 
 sion is so quickly aroused to the point of bitter 
 and relentless persecution as the passion of reli- 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — DIFFERENCES 275 
 
 gion when it becomes wedded to some particular 
 form of dogmatic belief. The annals of the 
 Ethnic religions cannot be said to be wholly free 
 from these perversions of the religious nature. 
 But this can be said, that when Ethnic history is 
 compared with the Christian on this point, the 
 balance is overwhelmingly in favor of the Ethnic 
 religions. Let it be remembered here that Mo- 
 hammedanism does not count among them. It is 
 half-brother to Christianity, having a common de- 
 scent from Judaism. Indeed, the more one studies 
 Ethnic history, the more one is surprised and im- 
 pressed by the intellectual and religious liberty 
 that was universally enjoyed, except on rare occa- 
 sions of special excitement. I have already ad- 
 verted to the remarkable spri'it of toleration shown 
 in the Buddhist faith throughout its long history, 
 reminding one of the teachings of Christ and his 
 gospel. Alas ! that Christianity afterwards should 
 so far have deteriorated from that gospel of the 
 founder, and should have made so poor a show 
 when compared with its great Eastern rival. It 
 is still further to be noted that the Ethnic trini- 
 ties, as well as the Christian, gradually became 
 crystallized into fixed trinitarian forms, which 
 have remained with little change for ages. This 
 was especially true of the philosophical Ethnic 
 trinities, with which the Chi*istian trinity may 
 more properly be compared. The Hindoo and 
 Plotinian trinities in their full pantheistic form 
 became as fixed as the Christian trinity, and 
 
276 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 even more so, for the Western nations that were 
 converted to Christianity have been much more 
 progressive than the Orientals, and the great 
 movements that have agitated Latin Christendom 
 have given to Christian theology a fluxive charac- 
 ter that has made the law of evolution active in 
 all its history, even down to the present day. 
 
 There is stiU another point of comparison 
 where a noticeable difference is discernible between 
 the Ethnic and Christian trinitarianism. The 
 Ethnic trinities have as a rule been connected 
 with polytheistic or pantheistic religious ideas, 
 or a mixture of both. The Vedic trinities had a 
 polytheistic background. The later Hindoo tri- 
 murti was compounded of a strange mixture of 
 pantheism and polytheism. The Christian trinity, 
 on the other hand, starting from monotheism, was 
 considerably free from such tendencies in either 
 direction. There is no doubt that the original 
 Jewish monotheistic element was the means of pre- 
 serving Christianity for some centuries from the 
 polytheistic and pantheistic influences that were in 
 the air around it. But the Christian doctrine of 
 angels and devils, which came directly from Juda- 
 ism, contained a polytheistic leaven that in the 
 course of time leavened the whole lump. These 
 beings, good and evil, were of superhuman or semi- 
 divine nature, and were the usual messengers from 
 the upper world to the earth, sent on errands of 
 mercy or judgment. There is no doubt that the 
 Jews of the Captivity received their ideas con- 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS — DIFFERENCES 277 
 
 cerning spirits dwelling in the upper air from 
 their Zoroastrian Persian masters. Such in gen- 
 eral, indeed, were the lower gods of the Ethnic 
 polytheism. The Greek pantheon of Olympus 
 was filled with such beings, — gods and goddesses, 
 — who were all obedient to Zeus, the " Father of 
 gods and men." The Greek doctrine of demons, 
 or gods of a stiU lower and lesser sort, was of later 
 origin, but had already come into New Platonic 
 speculation in the time of Plutarch. Plato, in the 
 Timaeus, made one God the creator and father of 
 this world, employing as his instruments lower 
 gods, whom he first created and then bade fulfill 
 his decrees concerning the further creation of the 
 world and men. This view comes very near to 
 the Christian doctrine of angels. It can be seen, 
 then, that there was not so great a difference, 
 after all, between Ethnic and Christian ideas 
 as to the divine or semi-divine beings who in- 
 habited the celestial regions. It was mostly a 
 matter of names. The Ethnic polytheism that 
 lay behind the Ethnic trinities was not essentially 
 different from the Jewish and Christian doctrine 
 of angels and devils who were all under God's 
 rule and willingly or unwillingly did his bidding. 
 We know how prominent became this feature of 
 Christian theology in the fourth and fifth centu- 
 ries, when bad as well as good spirits from the 
 upper world were believed to range freely over 
 the earth and enter into close relations with hu- 
 man kind, with power to injure or to bless. In 
 
278 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 fact, the monotheism of Christ and early Chris- 
 tianity had abeady largely given place to a thor- 
 oughly polytheistic conception of the relations of 
 the upper world to this world. Satan practically 
 divided this lower sphere with God ; and the mes- 
 sengers and servants of both beings were busy in 
 the discharge of their various functions. Wherein 
 such views differed from the so-called polytheism 
 of the Ethnic religions it is not easy to say. 
 Here, also, is the explanation of the rapid growth 
 of saint and image worship, as well as that of the 
 Virgin Mary. The line between the divine, 
 superhuman, and human became so dim and in- 
 distinct that it was easily crossed, and men and 
 women, if reputed to be peculiarly holy, came to 
 be treated as if transfigured into superhuman or 
 even divine beings. The truth is that during the 
 Middle Ages the Christian church was practically 
 polytheistic, — a fact that was fitly illustrated when 
 a bishop of Rome in the seventh century dedicated 
 to " Mary and all the saints " the Pantheon, a 
 pagan temple, which, as its name shows, had been 
 dedicated to all the gods of polytheism. 
 
 I am sure that my readers are by this time pre- 
 pared to hear me confess the surprise which I 
 have experienced in the progress of these com- 
 parative studies. It was my fuU expectation at 
 the outset to find differences between the Ethnic 
 trinities and the Christian trinity quite as radical 
 as the resemblances ; but this survey has revealed 
 the fact that the resemblances are fundamental, 
 
INTERNAL RELATIONS— DIFFERENCES 279 
 
 while the differences are superficial, and on closer 
 scrutiny are seen to rest on external and fortui- 
 tous rather than internal grounds. The historical 
 conclusion to which one is forced to come is cer- 
 tainly plain, namely, that all the varied forms of 
 monotheistic, trinitarian, polytheistic, or panthe- 
 istic religion in the world have one common root 
 in man's religious nature, and that all the differ- 
 ences which have been developed in the movements 
 of history apparently so radical and complete are 
 traceable to differences of environment, modifica- 
 tions of human feeling and thought brought about 
 by natural peculiarities of ra<?e, isolation of tribes 
 and even families from each other in early bar- 
 barous times, and more especially by the different 
 degrees of civilization and culture to which the 
 various peoples of the world have attained. As 
 Christians we do the highest honor to Jesus of 
 Nazareth when we let history, which is one of 
 God's methods of providential revelation, teU the 
 whole truth about him. It was in a degree par- 
 donable to men, " in the times of ignorance," to 
 hold a blind faith and even to faU into gross 
 superstitions. Like age, like people, like reli- 
 gion. What could be expected in the almost total 
 eclipse of intellectual Hfe in the so-called Dark 
 Ages (seculum obscurum) of mediaeval Christen- 
 dom but a religion of credulity and fear and 
 cruelty, — a religion which I venture to character- 
 ize as forming the most terrible religious chapter 
 in all history, and only to be compared with the 
 
280 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Shamanism of savage tribes. The excuse for the 
 execrable deeds of that unhappy time was the 
 profound ignorance of the people. But we live in 
 a different world. Slowly but surely the day has 
 dawned, and the shadows of error and delusion 
 have disappeared. Science and history have 
 opened the once closed book of God's ways in 
 nature, in providence, and in human life. Man 
 has found his rightful place in God's universe. 
 Truth revealed gradually and "in divers ways," 
 according to human capacity to receive it, is be- 
 ginning to show its real eternal nature behind all 
 the more or less obscure and distorted forms of 
 religious faith ; and as God's law of evolution de- 
 velops man's intellectual and moral powers more 
 and more fuUy, so his eternal truth will corre- 
 spondingly brighten until it shall become the Sun 
 of the whole moral world and its " true light " 
 forever. 
 
 Surely the excuse of the " times of ignorance " 
 cannot be ours. With increased light and know- 
 ledge comes increased responsibility. The long 
 historical past over which our survey has extended 
 brings in its train a solemn message. It is for 
 Christians of to-day to read it aright. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE PEOVIDENTIAL MISSION OF CECRISTIANITY 
 AS A WORLD-BELIGION 
 
 The comparative survey now concluded of the 
 chief religions and faiths of the world, especially 
 as to the nature of the Divine Being and his re- 
 lations with mankind, has brought us to a point 
 of view where a wide and comprehensive outlook 
 is possible of the present providential mission of 
 Christianity as a coming world-religion. It may 
 be asked at the outset whether such unity of 
 religious beliefs and sentiments and principles of 
 conduct is possible or even desirable. But why 
 not ? All things in this age of ours are tending 
 towards unity in all directions as never before. 
 The central forces of society are moving from iso- 
 lation and provincialism towards cosmopolitan 
 forms of life. The cosmos of science under the 
 law of natural evolution finds itself repeated in 
 a cosmos of moral order and unity. The unity of 
 nature and material law involves the essential 
 unity of man and of the moral kingdom. Christ 
 built his gospel on this very truth, and its ideal 
 was that " all may be one." As the real principle 
 of the gospel is becoming understood and prac- 
 
282 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 ticed, the unification of society in all its various 
 forms goes on apace. It is beginning to move 
 even in politics as weU as in commerce and in dif- 
 ferent departments of international relationship. 
 Already the dream of a far-off millennium when 
 the nations shall learn war no more seems real- 
 izable, as one notes how widely the principle of 
 unity of race and of a common human brother- 
 hood is triumphing over the barbarous ideas of 
 racial separation and antagonism and hatred. 
 Why now in aU this movement should not religion 
 take the lead ? All men are essentially one in 
 religious nature and in moral instincts, hopes, 
 fears, and aspirations. The foundations of the 
 religious life are laid deep in the common religious 
 instincts and yearnings of humanity. Science, 
 history, and philosophy unite in affirming the unity 
 of the Supreme Power that moves and guides the 
 universe. If the moral consciousness distinguishes 
 a moral kingdom with its own moral laws from 
 the natural cosmos with its physical laws, it also 
 seeks behind both realms of being a single first 
 cause, — 
 
 " One God, one law, one element, 
 And one far-off divine event, 
 To which the whole creation moves ; " 
 
 and if this be true, why should not a common re- 
 ligious faith and bond, making all human souls 
 " of one heart and of one mind," become an ac- 
 complished fact, and not be allowed to remain a 
 millennial ideal ? Such a consummation is not a 
 
CHRISTIAKITY AS A WORLD-RELIGION 283 
 
 mere vision of the religious fancy, but a clear 
 affirmation of the Christian consciousness that 
 grows more pronounced and emphatic under these 
 last revelations of God's providence, which is de- 
 claring more plainly than ever before the " good 
 news " of a coming world-wide era of justice and 
 peace and unity. 
 
 I am not here thinking of traditional concep- 
 tions of external unity which have had rule so 
 long, but which historical criticism has swept 
 away with so much other rubbish. External 
 church organizations indeed have their uses ; but 
 when outward unity is made a fundamental princi- 
 ple of the Kingdom, it becomes subversive of the 
 very unity it seeks to reach and preserve. Every 
 form of externality is limiting and divisive in its 
 very nature. The radical trouble with Christendom 
 to-day, and equally with all the religions and re- 
 ligious organizations of the world, is that each 
 church or established religious cult claims to be 
 the true kingdom of God on earth, with the im- 
 plication that all other churches so called lack, 
 more or less completely, the notes or marks of that 
 kingdom. The same is true of all credal tests. 
 They are barriers to unity. History shows only 
 too clearly that they have always been the great 
 promoters of strife and discord. As we look back 
 over the long history of trinitarian ideas, as 
 sunmied up in the Ethnic and Christian trinities, 
 what is the impressive lesson taught, if not this, 
 that no true religious unity can ever come out of 
 
284 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 religious dogmas and the assertion of them as 
 essentials of religious harmony? What is the 
 ground of hope to the historical observer to-day, 
 as he surveys the religious field, if not just this, 
 that our new age with its new scientific and 
 historical light is breaking down the barriers 
 which the long reign of dogmatic faith has reared 
 and strengthened into fortresses of defensive war- 
 fare, and is thus opening the way for the spread 
 everywhere of true spiritual freedom and charity 
 and love and peace and unity ? Yes, history, ma- 
 ligned as it has been, is already proving itself to 
 be, as its principles and methods are allowed to 
 work more consistently and thoroughly, the provi- 
 dential herald of God's one kingdom of hberty and 
 love to our whole human race. 
 
 But, if such a religious unity is possible and to 
 be sought, the question at once arises, which one 
 of the great historical religions that have hitherto 
 shared with each other the moral dominion of the 
 world is best fitted for this unifying task. Nor 
 is the question as easy to answer as at first sight 
 appears. Christianity is one of the younger reli- 
 gions of the earth. In numbers it is surpassed by 
 other religions. It is not the only religion that 
 has the missionary proselyting spirit so essen- 
 tial to any religious propaganda. Over against 
 it there rise still, as during all the centuries since 
 Christ first proclaimed his new gospel, religions 
 that are hoary with the hallowed traditions of age, 
 and have become intrenched in the faith and 
 
CHRISTIANITY AS A WORLD-RELIGION 285 
 
 affections of millions of devotees, with a long suc- 
 cession of prophets and sages, and sacred writings 
 that are as venerable and dear to them as our Old 
 and New Testaments are to us. And it is impor- 
 tant here to note that all the efforts of Christen- 
 dom for these nineteen centuries, by sword or by 
 gospel, to overthrow these intrenchments, have 
 been utterly vain. I do not forget some special 
 Christian missionary movements which for the 
 time seemed f uU of hope ; but the new seed never 
 sank into the soil of pagan life, — whether because 
 the ground was not good or the seed not rightly 
 sown, we will not decide. Still less would I speak 
 depreciatingly of the last missionary crusade that 
 has given our own age so conspicuous a place in 
 Christian annals. No doubt much good has been 
 done. Foundations have been laid. The Scrip- 
 tures have been translated into many non-Christian 
 languages. This is certainly a good and great 
 work. But have the dense masses of the Hindoos, 
 the Chinese, the Buddhists, the Mohammedans, 
 been at all thoroughly reached and moved ? Have 
 the religious systems whose devotees far outnumber 
 Christian believers yet been assailed in their cen- 
 tres of influence and overthrown ? Certainly not. 
 Is it not time, then, to ask how such ramparts of 
 dogmatic and traditional defense can be broken 
 down ? History, in its marvelous evolution, and 
 history alone, gives the answer. How clearly is 
 divine providence working to-day to solve the pro- 
 blem that has seemed so difficult ! Never before 
 
286 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 could it be said, as it can be to-day, that Christian- 
 ity has the promise of the future. The great 
 political powers of the world are Christian. The 
 world's commerce, science, culture, hterature, are 
 in Christian hands. What, then, we are ready to 
 ask, is the vital principle in the Christian religion 
 that has given it this position of intellectual and 
 moral power and armed it for the work of the 
 world's evangelization? History again is our 
 guide. It tells us in language not to be mistaken, 
 that, not by ecclesiasticism or creeds or dogmatic 
 barriers and defenses, has Christianity grown to 
 its present stature, but by that leaven of Christ's 
 original gospel which has continued to work in 
 saintly lives, even in darkest periods of supersti- 
 tion, until, like an underground river, in these post- 
 Reformation times it has regained the surface of 
 Christian society and is renewing its life and 
 strength in the fresh divine revelations of our age. 
 What the essential quality of that gospel leaven 
 is we have already seen. Christ's kingdom was 
 of the spirit. Its ruling force was love. " By this 
 shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye 
 have love one to another ^^ (John xiii. 35). How 
 hollow and sad does past Christian history appear 
 when the real meaning of these words forces itself 
 on our minds ! What a false religion had Chris- 
 tianity become when, under the banner of Christ's 
 cross, it came to be a source of division and strife 
 and bitterness ! And all because it had missed 
 the true meaning of Christ's gospel, and made its 
 
CHRISTIANITY AS A WORLD-RELIGION 287 
 
 essence to consist in constrained unity of church 
 authority and creed, instead of the freedom of 
 brotherly love. " If any man wiUeth to do his 
 will, he shall know of the teaching whether it be 
 of God." " Ye shall know the truth, and the 
 truth shall make you free." ^ These words Christ 
 himseK explained when he gave his "new com- 
 mandment." Here, then, is the true trinity of the 
 Christian gospel : Love^ truths freedom ; for love 
 leads to truth, and truth leads to freedom. What 
 now follows ? This : that such dogmas as those 
 of the trinity or the metaphysical deity of Christ 
 and kindred ones are not of the essence of the 
 gospel; for they are matters of the head, and 
 in their very nature create division, while the 
 gospel of Christ is an experience of the heart and 
 engenders brotherhood and unity and charity. 
 So that when the question is put before us : how 
 shall Christianity go forth to evangelize the world? 
 the answer rings sharp and clear from the lips of 
 history itself: not by any effort to break down 
 and destroy the Ethnic religions and erect the 
 Christian dogmas on their ruins, — a feat which 
 nineteen centuries have proved to be impossible, — 
 but rather to reopen the too long closed fountains 
 of the original gospel proclaimed by Jesus himself 
 
 1 Let me here say once for all that I quote Christ's sayings 
 from the Fourth Gospel only when they are in full harmony with 
 the Synoptic gospels. There can be no doubt that in the passages 
 here used the unknown writer has set forth in language of 
 wonderful power and beauty the central elements of Christ's 
 teaching. 
 
288 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 on the hiUs of Galilee and Judasa, whose essential 
 notes are love and truth and freedom. 
 
 But let us not misunderstand the true import 
 of Christ's words. He did not mean that it is of no 
 consequence what dogmas a man may hold, or that 
 mere love and obedience will solve aU religious 
 problems for us ; but he did mean that the way 
 of approach to such problems is not by dogmatic 
 authority, but by each man's own moral conscious- 
 ness working on all questions of truth through the 
 moral exercises of love and liberty. Obey the 
 new moral law of Christian love, and that love 
 shall make you free in the truth. Can anything 
 be simpler or plainer? And yet how Christian 
 tradition has distorted and falsified it, until a man 
 named with the name of Christ could put his 
 pagan or even Christian brother to a cruel death 
 because of a purely dogmatic or speculative dif- 
 ference, and think he was " doing God service." 
 How clear aU this becomes in the light of the 
 comparative history of religions ! Take, for exam- 
 ple, the dogma of the trinity. In some form or 
 other this dogma is one of the most ancient and 
 widespread in the annals of human belief and 
 thought. A close analytical comparison reveals 
 the fact that aU the leading trinities, the Christian 
 included, have been developed from certain com- 
 mon religious intuitions and sentiments. As these 
 trinities have grown more metaphysical and specu- 
 lative, they have become too abstract for the ordi- 
 nary comprehension of uneducated people. Yet 
 
CHRISTIANITY AS A WORLD-RELIGION 289 
 
 such dogmas have been taught by the church in 
 its creeds as if they were of the essence of faith 
 and really necessary to salvation. Was such a 
 yoke ever put on human consciences before in this 
 whole world's history ? But how can such a yoke 
 be put on the devotees of non-Christian religions ? 
 Notice that, if Christianity proposes to convert the 
 world on the basis of its dogmas, dogma must be 
 met with dogma. The question must be as to the 
 form of the dogma to be held. How vain such an 
 appeal must be, our missionaries have been learn- 
 ing only too well. On this very question of the 
 trinity, — the special subject of our studies, but 
 also, in fact, the real vital centre of all dogmatic 
 theology, — the educated Hindoo or Mussulman 
 will unflinchingly hold his ground against the 
 Christian missionary who is seeking to convert 
 him, and if he does not convince his opponent that 
 his doctrine of God is purest and best, he will cer- 
 tainly convince himself. This survey has shown 
 that no keener thinkers have ever speculated on 
 trinitarian lines than the master minds of Hindoo- 
 ism or New Platonism. Compare Origen, Atha- 
 nasius, or Augustine with the unknown builders 
 of the Hindoo trimurti^ or with Plato and Ploti- 
 nus, and whither, think you, must the palm go? 
 Is it not enough to note that these Christian theo- 
 logians freely acknowledged their indebtedness to 
 their Ethnic masters ? 
 
 But history itself shows us " a more excellent 
 way." Paul had learned enough of Christ's gos- 
 
290 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 pel to declare it, in the most inspired chapter of 
 Apostolic literature, the 13th of 1 Corinthians, — 
 that famous panegyric of love, — where he says : 
 " Though I have aU knowledge it is nothing with- 
 out love." Let Christianity, laying aside its ex- 
 ploded traditions and creeds that were the product 
 of ages of Christian decline and darkness, write on 
 its banners Christ's parable of the prodigal son, 
 and Paul's chapter on knowledge versus love, with 
 its truly ^trinitarian close, "But now abideth 
 faith, hope, love, these three, and the greatest of 
 these is love,^^ and the triumph of Christianity as 
 the world's religion will be only a question of time. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 THE UNEEADINESS OF CHKISTENDOM FOR THE 
 FULFILLMENT OF ITS MISSION 
 
 But I must not forget, in my idealistic ardor, 
 that Christianity is not yet ready to take up its 
 march to final victory. It stiU clings to its swad- 
 dling clothes and listens with unwilling ears to the 
 Zeitgeist — the Carlylian " Sartor Resartus " — • 
 that would fain reclothe it for its higher destiny. 
 In Paul's language, it still " speaks as a child, 
 feels as a child, thinks as a child," and cannot 
 realize that the time has come when it should " be- 
 come a man and put away childish things." The 
 passage from childhood to manhood is indeed the 
 most critical and even tragical stage in the moral 
 history of an individual or of an age. It is like 
 the change from the grub to the butterfly, — the 
 taking on of new faculties — a veritable birth into 
 a higher and nobler life. Such a spiritual regen- 
 eration cannot but be attended with sharp pangs 
 and overwhelming anxieties. Jesus himself seems 
 to have foreseen what bitter experiences would be 
 the lot of his disciples in the future progress of 
 his kingdom, and forewarned them in words that 
 grow fuller and fuUer of prophetic meaning as the 
 
292 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 ages go by : "A woman when she is in travail 
 hath sorrow, because her hour is come, but when 
 she is delivered of the child she remembereth no 
 more the anguish, for joy that a man is bom into 
 the world " (John xvi. 21). Christianity is pass- 
 ing through such a bitter crisis in its life to-day. 
 It is nothing less than a " TraXtyycvco-ta." Nothing 
 so radical has ever before happened in all its his- 
 tory. From the day (Oct. 1, 1859) when Charles 
 Darwin so modestly published, in his immortal 
 book " The Origin of Species," the results of his 
 physical researches, and showed that all the pro- 
 cesses of nature, including even the development 
 of species, were imder a single law of natural evo- 
 lution, and hence required no special miraculous 
 creative intervention of God, the whole aspect of 
 nature and the universe, of history and its philo- 
 sophical interpretation, of religion and God, has 
 completely changed. Of course the movement at 
 first was slow and hesitating. But the intimate 
 relation of the new doctrine of evolution to previ- 
 ous scientific discoveries was quickly seen, and the 
 grand unity of unalterable law, with aU that it in- 
 volves in aU departments of knowledge, has already 
 become an accepted axiom among all scientific, 
 historical, and philosophical scholars. So radical 
 is the whole change of view that it can only be 
 compared to a new birth where " old things have 
 passed away and all things have become new." 
 We have not only a new astronomy and geology, 
 but also a new science of nature and of life, a new 
 
UNREADINESS OF CHRISTENDOM 293 
 
 biology and anthropology ; and out of all this new 
 scientific light must come in its order and time a 
 new philosophy and theology, — a new conception 
 of God and his relation to the universe and to 
 man, — a new view of man and of his relations to 
 nature, to his brother man, to history, and to God. 
 It is the fortune or misfortune of our age that it 
 is in the very midst of the agonizing throes that 
 must attend this great new birth of the opening 
 century. Fortunate are they whose eyes are 
 opened seasonably to hail the coming " heir of all 
 the ages." Does the human mother welcome the 
 natal hour when " a man is born into the world " ? 
 Why, then, should not this age so honored and 
 blessed of God hail the new scientific and histor- 
 ical evangel ? 
 
 In the previous chapter I called attention to the 
 providential mission of Christianity as a world-re- 
 ligion ; and the serious question remains, how shall 
 Christendom be made ready for the work given it 
 to do ? Such a question cannot be answered until 
 the causes of its present unreadiness are thoroughly 
 scrutinized and clearly understood. Let us, then, 
 look over the Christian world and see what the 
 real situation is. First, it is divided into two great 
 camps, the Catholic and the Protestant, which 
 have been in open or concealed warfare from the 
 outbreak of the Protestant Reformation to the 
 present day. No doubt this scientific age is mak- 
 ing deep inroads into the prejudices and misunder- 
 standings which have hitherto kept these two great 
 
294 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 bodies apart. But the antagonistic principles upon 
 wliich both rest remain firm and must prevent any- 
 real union so long as these principles are adhered 
 to. What a spectacle is presented to non-Chris- 
 tian peoples, when missionaries come to them 
 claiming to represent one common religion of 
 Christ, and who yet treat each other as "aliens 
 from the commonwealth of Israel," if not as open 
 enemies. But this is not all. Protestantism itself 
 is split up into sectarian parties and churches, 
 established or non-established, large portions of 
 which do not regard or treat the rest as true 
 Christian organizations. I gladly recognize the 
 rapid strides that are being taken among us to- 
 ward a more Christian unity and fraternity. It 
 is the most promising sign of the times. But it 
 must not be overlooked that these fraternizing 
 movements as yet extend only over small sections 
 of Protestant Christendom, and are sporadic and 
 inchoate ; and the most that can be said of them is 
 that they give evidence, not to be mistaken, of the 
 partial silent penetration of God's new revelations 
 into the minds and hearts of men. Can it even 
 now be said that the spirit of denominational and 
 churchly sectarianism is dying out to any great 
 extent in the great organized Protestant churches ? 
 I think not. It must be remembered that Con- 
 gregationalism is but a comparatively small frac- 
 tion of the whole Christian body. It is among us 
 that the cardinal Christian principles of liberty 
 and fraternity have taken deepest root ; but how 
 
UNREADINESS OF CHRISTENDOM 295 
 
 chary are our churches to see and accept all that 
 this principle involves! As history shows, no- 
 where has the dogmatic spirit been more regnant 
 than at the very headquarters of Congregational 
 Protestantism, and wherever that spirit lives 
 Christian freedom in the truth and in love cannot 
 be allowed its full birthright. Such is the condi- 
 tion of things within our Christian churches. 
 
 But what is to be said of that larger Christen- 
 dom which includes the masses of nominal Chris- 
 tian peoples ? It is just here that the historical 
 outlook is most discouraging. Nothing is more 
 certain than that our churches, as Christian organ- 
 izations, representing traditional Christianity, are 
 for some reason slowly losing their hold upon the 
 outside world. I am not now raising the question 
 whether the original religion of Christ or the reli- 
 gious spirit in general is declining. The contrary, 
 in my view, is true. I am speaking of our church 
 organizations that have held the position of Chris- 
 tian leadership and authority hitherto and have 
 claimed to truly represent Christ and his gospel. 
 It is a fact which cannot be gainsaid, that this age 
 is witnessing a movement away from organized 
 Christianity such as was never before known in 
 its history. Explain it as we may, the fact must 
 be accepted as one of the most significant of our 
 times. Figures here are of small account. The 
 real question is, what are the leading moral and 
 religious forces in human society and life, and 
 whither are they tending? I am aware that 
 
296 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 dijfferent answers may be given, according to the 
 point of view, and it must remain a matter to a 
 large degree of individual opinion. But it is my 
 own deliberate judgment, formed from a long and 
 careful survey, with some exceptional opportunities 
 for reaching a true result, that traditional Chris- 
 tianity, with its old creeds and dogmas and forms, 
 is passing as a religious force out of the great 
 currents of thought and belief among the intelli- 
 gent masses of men and women with a rapidity that 
 is simply alarming to every open-eyed Christian 
 observer. Let it be understood that I am not 
 attempting to decide whether the organized Chris- 
 tian forces or the unorganized moral forces of the 
 outside world are now the stronger, but simply to 
 discern whither the drift is to-day. Organized 
 religion, like organized law, always has behind it 
 the power of custom and legal rescript and organ- 
 ized instrumentalities and that weight of unthink- 
 ing attachment to what is old which is always to 
 be found on the traditional conservative side. But 
 even laws that remain on the statute book eventu- 
 ally become a dead letter when the ruling forces 
 of society cast them aside, and such is the drift of 
 these forces to-day as respects those dogmas and 
 rites of Christianity which science and historical 
 criticism have found to be the outgrowth of the 
 ages of blind faith and superstition. Social and 
 moral and even religious leadership is silently but 
 surely passing from our organized religious bodies 
 to that great judgment-seat of the educated masses 
 
UNREADINESS OF CHRISTENDOM 297 
 
 of our multitudinous city and country commu- 
 nities. There was a time, and not so long since, 
 when the churches and church leaders and reli- 
 gious newspapers could move public sentiment 
 from centre to circumference on any religious 
 question that pertained to ecclesiastical or doc- 
 trinal orthodoxy. How far this is from true to- 
 day all know. Moral leadership among us no 
 longer depends on church membership. Would 
 we learn whither the moral forces are running and 
 whence their head-springs, we have only to ask 
 what intelligent people are reading most, and what 
 is the character of the literature that is passing 
 through the largest number of editions. Are our 
 novels and daily and Sunday secular newspapers 
 and magazines written and edited as a rule by 
 members of our churches, and in the interest of 
 the dogmas of traditional orthodoxy? He must 
 be an ignorant man or a brave man who will 
 assert it. The Zeitgeist leavens our literature 
 as well as our science and history, and through 
 these channels is flooding Christendom with its 
 new religious ideas. Let this tide sweep on a few 
 years longer and can there be any doubt what the 
 result must be? One of two things will surely 
 happen. Either organized Christianity will cease 
 to be a ruling force, or it will have been regener- 
 ated to a new life and thus able to regain its wan- 
 ing moral authority. 
 
 Thus, as we draw towards the conclusion of our 
 comparative historical survey, we find the Chris- 
 
298 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 tian religion exposed to dangers both without and 
 within. Without, the ancient Ethnic religions 
 remain fixed in their ancestral boundaries, with 
 dogma ranged against dogma, and superstition 
 against superstition, and ready still to meet Chris- 
 tianity on its own ground of dogmatic argument ; 
 within, schism, sectarian rivalry, and disagreement 
 — the fruits of national and civil religious wars 
 whose wounds are not yet healed — stiU divide it 
 into numerous opposing camps fighting imder dif- 
 ferent banners ; and last, but not least, the trans- 
 formed spirit of a new age has risen up against its 
 traditional dogmas and pretensions and threatens 
 to cast it wholly aside. 
 
 But our survey is not yet complete. It remains 
 for us to take a closer view of the organized 
 church, and see how far it is prepared to meet 
 and solve the problems that are forcing themselves 
 upon its attention and are menacing its very life. 
 Such a view reveals two great and imminent 
 perils growing out of its intellectual and moral 
 condition. These perils will form the subject of 
 the two following chapters. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 TWO PEEIL8 OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 
 
 I. Igmyrance 
 
 It is one of the most remarkable facts of our 
 times tliat large numbers of our intelligent minis- 
 ters and cburch members who are quite alive to 
 the significance of the new revelations of God and 
 his truth that have recently been made through 
 scientific and historical channels, and are ready to 
 accept the law of natural and historical evolution 
 up to a certain point, yet shut their eyes persist- 
 ently against the results of this law when it is 
 brought, as it must be, into the sphere of religion 
 and its dogmatic traditions. Such persons will 
 not allow "the faith once delivered," as they 
 fondly call these traditions, to be disturbed. Not 
 a few churches to-day are declaring that scientific 
 and historical criticism is a traitor in the Christian 
 camp. Such a charge is indeed strange as com- 
 ing from educated men, and can be explained only 
 as illustrating the tremendous power of a dog- 
 matic presupposition. It may be hoped that, with 
 the inevitable decay of the dogmatic spirit, this 
 class of opponents of religious progress will soon 
 disappear. But a more serious question arises 
 
300 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 when the position of the less educated members 
 of the churches throughout Christendom, Catholic 
 and Protestant, is considered. Here it is not a 
 case of a dogmatic presupposition which shuts the 
 eyes, but that of a real and profound ignorance as 
 to the character of the changes which science and 
 history are bringing about in all matters of human 
 life, and especially as to the effect of these changes 
 on religious dogmas. This class stiU forms the 
 majority of church members in all Christian or- 
 ganizations. It does not require a very large 
 acquaintance with the history of the church to 
 enable one to realize what a dead weight in the 
 path of all religious or theological movement such 
 a mass of ignorance is. The fact that this class is 
 so sincere in its beliefs only makes the danger the 
 greater. Religious conscientiousness when stimu- 
 lated by bigotry is capable of the highest unreason. 
 Nothing is so stubborn or so fanatical as a wrongly 
 instructed conscience, as Paul showed in his own 
 case by his own confession. Only skillful leader- 
 ship is required to fix a large portion of Christen- 
 dom in an attitude of hostile opposition to the 
 strongest intellectual and moral currents of our 
 times ; and such leadership is not wanting. This 
 is true not only of the Catholic authorities, but also 
 of a considerable portion of the Protestant church 
 officials. Even in our free and independent Congre- 
 gational churches there are those who would raise 
 the old cry of heresy in order to excite an ignorant 
 prejudice if it could be of any avail. So that it 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 301 
 
 becomes a serious question whether the great body 
 of church members throughout Christendom is not 
 on the point of breaking with the dominant reli- 
 gious spirit of the age, and of thus widening the 
 chasm between the organized church and the out- 
 side world. Already it can be seen that large 
 numbers of intelligent representative men and 
 women are looking elsewhere than to. the church 
 for religious leadership and authority ; and this is 
 the reason undoubtedly why so many of this class 
 hold themselves aloof from church membership. 
 No wonder that churchmen are marking the drift 
 away from our church organizations, and are devis- 
 ing ways and means to arrest it. But " forward 
 movements," — to use the phrase now in vogue, — 
 along old lines of Christian activity, will be found 
 largely futile. Spasmodic revivalistic meetings 
 here and there will heal the hurt slightly. The 
 disease is deeper than the old methods of diagnosis 
 reach. To be effectual the remedy must go as 
 deeply as the disease and work healing from the 
 roots. The real ailment is not mere worldliness 
 and unspirituality, as is so generally assumed. 
 These religious defects are of course always inci- 
 dental to man's life on earth ; but in the present 
 state of our churches they are only symptomatic 
 of a deeper trouble. The radical ailment is to be 
 found in the fact that our churches are still 
 wedded to forms of religious truth and to churchly 
 theories and methods that are out of joint with 
 our times. For such a disease there is but one 
 
302 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 efficacious remedy. As so often in political emer- 
 gencies, so now in religion, what is imperatively 
 demanded is a campaign of education^ — a forward 
 movement all along the line in harmony with the 
 new revelations of God's truth. I am not insensi- 
 ble to the signs of movement in the church itself. 
 I know how widespread is the spirit of inquiry 
 within the church as well as without, and how 
 greatly the interest in Bible study has been quick- 
 ened in these latter years. But everything depends 
 on the character of such study. Take the case of 
 the young in our Sunday-schools and Bible classes. 
 Better no study at all than a study along the old 
 lines of theological instruction. Nothing can be 
 worse for a child to-day than to have its mind filled 
 with religious ideas and impressions that will be 
 found in later years to rest on unhistorical tradi- 
 tion. Yet the teachers in our Sunday-schools are 
 too often young persons who are utterly unfitted 
 to explain the Scriptures, being ignorant of the 
 simplest principles of Biblical criticism. If there 
 was ever a time when our best educated Christians 
 should be put in charge of the religious instruction 
 of the young it is now. In every community a 
 class should be formed of aU candidates for the 
 post of a religious teacher, which should be placed 
 under the direct supervision of some person whose 
 fitness will win the respect and confidence of the 
 community at large. 
 
 Moreover, it is a time when timidity of reli- 
 gious leadership should cease, and give place to 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 303 
 
 courageous action. Too long has the excuse been 
 that the people are not prepared for such religious 
 changes. Such an excuse implies lack of faith in 
 God and his providence, as weU as failure to read 
 the signs of the times. Knowledge is running to 
 and fro, and is increased as never before. The 
 new science and history permeates not only our 
 higher institutions of learning and our literature, 
 but even the very air we breathe, and for the 
 church to ignore such a fact is to be false to its 
 highest and plainest moral duty. To faU back in 
 such a crisis on God's care of his church and quote 
 Christ's words, " The gates of heU shall not pre- 
 vail against it," is worse than in vain. What 
 Christ meant by his "church" he himself ex- 
 plained : " Where two or three are met together 
 in my name, there am I in the midst of them." 
 To make this the charter and refuge of any his- 
 torical organization is to miss and falsify the deep 
 spiritual significance of Christ's words. Yet it is 
 not surprising that such a false interpretation was 
 soon accepted. The world was not ripe for a 
 spiritual church when Christ entered it. As early 
 as the second century Christian leaders began to 
 misunderstand the teachings of their master. Ire- 
 nseus, stanch churchman that he was, opposing 
 heretics and schismatics, asserted that "where 
 the church is, there is the spirit of God," from 
 which he drew the inference that all who were 
 separate from the church, as an external organiza- 
 tion, were cut off from the influences of the Holy 
 
304 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Ghost. Only one step more needed to be taken 
 to complete this wholly unchristian view, namely, 
 that the church with its bishops in historical suc- 
 cession from the Apostles, and with the sacra- 
 ments administered by them, is the true kingdom 
 of God on earth, outside of which there is no con- 
 fident ground of salvation ; and this step was taken 
 a little later by Cyprian, the first highchurchman 
 clearly known to history. Of course such a high- 
 church doctrine has little footing among us who 
 are descendants of the Pilgrim Puritans of New 
 England, but I am not so sure that the idea is 
 not deeply rooted in the minds of many good 
 Congregational people that our church organiza- 
 tions as organizations are somehow of truly di- 
 vine origin and authority (^jure divine'), and are 
 the only representatives and repositories of God's 
 truth and grace. Such persons ought to read 
 carefully the seven epistles to the seven churches 
 of Asia, and remember that the warnings there 
 uttered were afterwards historically fulfilled. 
 Those " seven candlesticks " were " moved out of 
 their places," and " the seven churches which are 
 in Asia " have been extinct so long that history 
 fails to preserve any definite account of their dis- 
 solution. Nor was this case an isolated one. The 
 same thing has happened again and again in 
 Christian annals. Let me give a single further 
 illustration. In the second, third, and fourth 
 centuries the most flourishing churches in Chris- 
 tendom were those in North Africa. For a time, 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 305 
 
 in the persons of Cyprian and Augustine, this 
 portion of the Christian world became the very- 
 centre of ecclesiastical and theological influence. 
 But what is the case to-day ? Not only are all 
 these churches extinct, but Christianity itself has 
 departed, leaving no trace behind but a few dismal 
 ruins, and Mohammedanism in its most bigoted 
 form fills the land. Surely history proves one 
 thing, if nothing else, that no institution, however 
 sacred its claim, can live simply on its past. Least 
 of all can such an anachronism have any chance 
 of life to-day. The church, hke all things else, 
 cannot hope to survive in its present form if it 
 loses the respect and confidence of men ; and this 
 is one of the dangers that beset our Christian 
 organizations to-day. How can intelligent men 
 and women whose ears are filled with the new 
 voices of God's providence respect an organization 
 that claims to speak in God's name and yet re- 
 mains deaf to such divine voices and even strives 
 to stifle them ? It is simply impossible. 
 
 But ignorance is not the only peril that 
 threatens the organized church ; there is another 
 peril, and perhaps it is the greater. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 TWO PERILS or ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 
 
 II. Insincerity 
 
 If it be true that " ignorance is the mother of 
 superstition," it is equally true that insincerity 
 is the mother of hypocrisy. When Christ called 
 the orthodox leaders of his day " hypocrites," he 
 probed them to the core, and his bold words cost 
 him his life. It is the cardinal peculiarity of this 
 moral vice that it juggles with itself and wears 
 with a kind of honesty the face of the loftiest vir- 
 tue ; the deceiver is also self -deceived. Its root 
 lies hidden in the darkest corner of the soul, 
 covered with all the multitudinous motives that 
 govern moral action. The notable thing about it 
 is that its favorite haunt has always been in that 
 region of human nature where the religious sen- 
 timents and emotions, with all their superstitious 
 accompaniments, are centred and hold sway. 
 History shows that in no sphere of human society 
 has hypocrisy played so large a part or entailed 
 on the world such calamitous results as in that of 
 religion. It is one of the noblest features of 
 Christ's gospel that its keynote is complete sin- 
 cerity in thought, word, and deed. Paul, too, seems 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 307 
 
 to have caught the real spirit of his master. But 
 Christianity quite early became infected with 
 ideas inherited from pre-Christian ethics. The 
 history of Christian casuistry in the matter of 
 truthfulness and the lawfulness of deception in cer- 
 tain exceptional cases is deeply interesting and in- 
 structive. A book might be written on it. Only 
 a summary, however, can here be given, simply 
 that we may understand the real character of the 
 moral danger that now threatens Christendom. 
 
 The ethical system of Plato and Aristotle, from 
 which the Graeco-Roman Christianity so largely 
 drew its ethical ideas, was in the main a noble 
 one and based on just moral principles. Plato, 
 in his Republic, which deals with justice, strikes 
 at once the keynote of his whole ethical philo- 
 sophy, when he quotes a passage from ^schylus, 
 in which the poet describes the good man as not 
 wishing merely to appear to be good to others, but 
 to be good in reality : Ov yap SoKecv apto-ros d\X* 
 €tvat OeXci. " The true lie," Plato says, " is hated of 
 gods and men," and he adds in explanation, " no 
 one will admit falsehood into that which is the 
 truest and highest part of himself or about the 
 truest and highest matters." Plato further holds 
 that God " can never lie or deceive in any way," 
 since such deception is contrary to his whole 
 nature. It was on this ground that Plato opposed 
 the use of Homer and other poets in education, 
 because in their poems the gods were described as 
 " deceiving mankind." But Plato recognized cer- 
 
308 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 tain cases where a " lie in words " is necessary ; 
 for example, in dealing with sick or insane persons. 
 Hence he was led to make a curious distinction 
 between " the true lie " and the " lie in words," 
 which latter he defines as " only a kind of imita- 
 tion and shadowy image of a previous affection 
 of the soul, not a pure unadulterated falsehood." 
 Such a verbal lie, he holds, may " in certain cases 
 be useful and not hateful." Yet realizing, as 
 Plato plainly did, how easily this exception to the 
 rule might be taken advantage of in the inter- 
 ests of injustice, he added the following express 
 limitation : " Truth should be highly valued ; if, 
 as we were saying, a lie is useless to the gods, 
 and useful only as a medicine to men, then the 
 use of such medicines should be restricted to phy- 
 sicians ; private individuals have no business with 
 them." Here follows a sentence which has be- 
 come famous in Christian ethics, where Plato de- 
 clares that " the rulers of the state may be allowed 
 to lie for the public good," while aU private per- 
 sons should be forbidden this privilege and pun- 
 ished for practicing it. It is thus clear that 
 Plato's ethics were essentially sound ; and his 
 famous exception must be allowed in some cases 
 to hold good. No man of common sense would 
 hesitate to deceive an insane man or a robber or 
 a murderer, if by such deception he could prevent 
 an act of frenzy or a crime. This was just what 
 Plato meant by his " royal lie." But what was 
 plainly an exceptional and superficial element in 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 309 
 
 Plato's ethics of truthfulness grew more and more 
 to be an important element of Christian morals, 
 and in the form of the " officiosum mendacium " 
 has had a remarkable history. Plato's theory of 
 the " royal lie " seems to have entered Christian 
 ethics 'largely through Philo, who uses it in ex- 
 plaining certain apparently contradictory passages 
 in the Old Testament in relation to the character 
 of God. Here, however, Philo goes beyond Plato, 
 making God the chief agent in the use of falsehood 
 for the good of men, whereas Plato denied that 
 God could have anything to do with deception in 
 any way whatever, and restricted its use to human 
 rulers for the good of the state. This Philonic 
 enlargement of Plato's exception deeply affected 
 Christian thought. Its leaven clearly appears in 
 the writings of Origen, who as a theologian and 
 exegete was the most influential Father of the early 
 church. The influence of Aristotle should also be 
 noted. In his " Nicomachean Ethics " Aristotle 
 treats of truthfulness (iv. 9), illustrating his gen- 
 eral doctrine of virtue as a mean between extremes, 
 and making truthfulness to be the mean between 
 exaggeration or overstatement and dissimulation 
 or concealment of the real truth. With Plato, 
 Aristotle makes truthfuhiess essentially an inward 
 moral state rather than an outward act, though he 
 does not make SP much of Plato's discrimination 
 between the " true lie " and the " verbal lie," and 
 regards truthfulness in words as the natural ac- 
 companiment of truthfulness of soul. The vir- 
 
310 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 tuous man, he says, " is true in life and word, 
 simply because he is in a certain moral state." 
 Thus Aristotle corrected in a degree the vacil- 
 lating tendency of Plato; and it is due to the 
 reputation which he enjoyed in the Middle Ages 
 that the great Catholic schoolmen, such as Peter 
 Lombard and Thomas Aquinas, were saved from 
 defending the " officiosum mendacium " in its 
 most glaring forms. Yet their treatment of the 
 whole subject is implicit proof of the hold which a 
 perverted Christian tradition continued to have 
 even on the minds of the most enlightened leaders 
 of the Catholic church. 
 
 There was another source of Christian ethics 
 concerning truthfulness which cannot be over- 
 looked. The Old Testament was the first Chris- 
 tian Bible, and the accounts of the deceptions prac- 
 ticed by Abraham, Jacob, Rahab, David, and other 
 Hebrew saints had no little influence in neutraliz- 
 ing the natural effect of the teaching of Christ and 
 Paul. The use made of such Old Testament ex- 
 amples by Thomas Aquinas and others in defense 
 of the " officiosum mendacium " is highly sugges- 
 tive, and helps us to understand the ease with 
 which exceptions to the law of truthfulness gained 
 entrance into Christian morals. I can give only a 
 few illustrations of the process by which such vio- 
 lations came to be regarded as lawful. It began 
 very early in the efforts to defend Christianity 
 against pagans and heretics. It was assumed that 
 the end sanctified the means ; that truth might be 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 311 
 
 violated in defense of " the truth." A new prin- 
 ciple of interpretation was applied to Scripture 
 which enabled any dogma to be foisted into it, 
 namely, that of a double or triple sense of a pas- 
 sage. Augustine went so far as to declare that a 
 dozen different interpretations might be given to 
 the opening chapters of Genesis, and all of them 
 be true. Behind this vicious exegesis is to be seen 
 Philo's theory that God may indulge in a sort of 
 deception in his revelations of himself to man. As 
 the church began to proceed with increasing se- 
 verity against the various heretical schools that 
 were springing up, it became customary for such 
 persecuted sects to practice concealment of their 
 peculiar opinions, on the ground that the end sanc- 
 tified the means, and that the truth is not for all 
 men. This led the orthodox party to descend to 
 a like dissimulation, in order to discover the real 
 doctrines of their opponents. A bishop of Antioch 
 went so far as to pretend to be in full agreement 
 with a leader of one of these sects, and in this 
 way managed to extort a confession from him 
 which was then used against him and his whole 
 party. As the spirit of dogmatism and persecu- 
 tion increased, and controversies arose within the 
 church itself, the same practice of evasion and con- 
 cealment entered the ranks of orthodoxy. So far 
 was this carried that in the General Council of 
 449, known as the " Robber Synod," bishops were 
 forced to sign blank papers which were afterwards 
 filled out by the party in the majority with such a 
 
312 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 creed as they desired. These men confessed their 
 mendacious conduct afterwards at the Council of 
 Chalcedon, and excused it on the ground of com- 
 pulsion and fear. A vivid illustration of the sad 
 demoralization that befeU Christian morality in 
 the matter of truthfulness is found in the way in 
 which the Origenistic party in the sixth century 
 parried an attack of their enemies. When a synod 
 had condemned the doctrines of the great Origen, 
 the party leaders, to use the language of Neander, 
 " sacrificed the truth, to save their own interests 
 and that of their party. They likewise subscribed 
 the decrees of the synod and consequently nothing 
 could be done to them." It is no wonder that the 
 noble moral feelings of Augustine rebelled against 
 these lax principles which were passing from the 
 East to the West. When it was proposed that 
 the church should employ the dissimulation prac- 
 ticed by the Priscillianists against them, Augustine 
 opposed it earnestly and wrote his work, " Contra 
 Mendacium^^^ in which he was led to take an ex- 
 treme position, holding that under no circumstances, 
 even to save honor or life, was a falsehood in 
 thought, word, or deed morally allowable. Augus- 
 tine had previously been induced to go to this 
 extreme by a controversy with Jerome, who de- 
 fended the dissimulation of Peter at Antioch. 
 But, powerful as Augustine was, he could not 
 overcome the current that was flowing more and 
 more strongly toward the allowance of prevarica- 
 tion in all cases where the interests of Christian 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 313 
 
 truth were supposed to be at stake. It is impos- 
 sible here to illustrate the infamous excesses to 
 which the doctrine of legitimate falsehood was car- 
 ried. The whole history of mediaeval Christianity 
 is filled with the most shocking examples. Per- 
 haps the most famous illustration — famous in 
 view of its superabounding infamy — was the 
 treatment of John Huss, whose safe-conduct, given 
 to him by the Emperor Sigismund, was canceled 
 by the General Council at Constance on the ex- 
 press ground that no faith was to be kept with 
 heretics, it being assumed that if a man was con- 
 victed of a certain crime the church was absolved 
 from the guilt of committing a worse one. Surely 
 the lowest depths of moral baseness were reached 
 in this act of the largest council ever assembled 
 in Christendom ; and it is no wonder that the 
 blush which mantled the face of Sigismund, when 
 Huss fixed his eye upon him before the whole 
 council and reminded him of the safe-conduct 
 he had given without any conditions, is historic. 
 What Christian man does not himself blush as he 
 reads the pitiful story ? 
 
 But why, it may be asked, have I stopped to 
 indulge in this historical digression ? I answer, 
 because it lies behind and explains, as nothing 
 else can, the deep current of insincerity in matters 
 of religion which is stiU eating as a canker into 
 the heart of Christendom. We have heard much 
 of Jesuit casuistry, as if it were peculiar to the 
 Catholic church. It is true that the " officiosum 
 
314 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 mendacium " with its fatal leaven remained in the 
 old historic church after the Protestant revolt, 
 and that the Jesuit order has undoubtedly made 
 great use of it. But it is a historical blunder to 
 assume that the Lutheran Reformation involved 
 any radical change in traditional theology or ethics. 
 Not only were the great creeds and dogmas of the 
 old church retained, but they were even stiffened 
 and made more than ever the essentials of Chris- 
 tian faith ; and deeply imbedded in these dogmas 
 and in the methods of defense of them was the 
 " officiosum mendacium " with its allowance of dis- 
 simulation and falsehood "that good may come." 
 The historical fact is that the Protestant revolt did 
 not quite break the chains of mental and moral slav- 
 ery which the church had been forging for centu- 
 ries and binding more completely on the necks of 
 men. Even our own Puritan forefathers, who had 
 come as pilgrims to these shores that they might 
 have " freedom to worship God," when once settled 
 here straightway began to forget the lesson which 
 persecution at the hands of their own Protestant 
 brethren in the mother country had only half 
 taught them. The history of the New England 
 Congregational churches is tragical with the bitter 
 wrestlings, even in their birth, of the two sons 
 whom Paul described as " the child of bondage " 
 and " the child of liberty," and though in this new 
 age the child of liberty named by Paul " the child 
 of promise " is fast nearing its full manhood, the 
 end is not yet. Let it not, then, be too hastily 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 315 
 
 assumed that even the Protestant portion of Chris- 
 tendom is wholly free from its long inherited curse 
 of mental and moral slavery. The great error of 
 the church has always been its assumption of au- 
 thority over the souls of men in all matters of 
 faith and dogma ; and the natural fruits of dog- 
 matic authority have always been and always wiU 
 be insincerity, hypocrisy, cant, and aU their evil 
 brood. Until that yoke is completely broken 
 everywhere in Christendom its results are bound to 
 appear. There are other forms of dogmatic bond- 
 age besides fear of death. The halter and the 
 stake have indeed been banished. Heterodoxy is 
 no longer treated as a crime. But the more hid- 
 den and insidious forms of theological persecution 
 — suspicion, prejudice, calumny — have by no 
 means lost their power ; and they are doing their 
 enslaving work as truly and effectually to-day, 
 within the limits of the church, as ever in its his- 
 tory. In fact, the more hidden and stealthy are 
 the processes by which these intimidating forces 
 act, the more effective do they become, within the 
 sphere of their influence. Kemember that I am 
 not speaking of the outside world, whose mental 
 and religious freedom is quite complete. It is the 
 members of our church organizations with whom 
 I am now concerned, who are under the sway of 
 historical church traditions ; and my object is to 
 make clear the fact that the peril which above all 
 others menaces the church, as a Christian organi- 
 zation, to-day, is an inherited virus of insincerity 
 
316 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 and hypocrisy whose poison permeates the whole 
 body. Does this statement surprise any one, and 
 call forth protest or denial ? Let iis, then, look 
 facts squarely in the face. It is difficult on such 
 a point to call witnesses. Nor do I intend to do 
 so; but I make my appeal to the inner moral 
 consciousness of men, both within the church and 
 without it. What is the most startling fact in the 
 present theological situation ? Is it not that our 
 church leaders throughout Christendom have been 
 hiding themselves behind theological makeshifts 
 of every kind, setting forth new truth under old 
 labels, or old truth under new ones, filling old 
 bottles with new wine or new bottles with old in- 
 gredients, so that hearers are mystified and left 
 in complete theological confusion? Let me give 
 a single illustration from my own personal observa- 
 tion. Some years since I fell into a conversation 
 with a minister of my acquaintance on the subject 
 of Christ's miraculous birth. He told me of his 
 troubles over it, and of the way he took to solve 
 them. He went to a friend who stood in high 
 moral as well as literary repute, and put the ques- 
 tion to him, whether he believed that Jesus was 
 born in a miraculous way. The reply came quickly 
 and sharply : " Impossible ! Impossible ! I can- 
 not believe it." This answer from a man for whose 
 moral consciousness the minister had the greatest 
 respect seems to have ended his dilemma. He 
 had made his appeal to the practical, intelligent, 
 common sense of a highly respected man of the 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 317 
 
 world, and the answer lie received seemed to have 
 settled the question for him completely and finally. 
 Yet years after this occurrence my ministerial ac- 
 quaintance was reciting the Apostles' Creed in his 
 church services every Sunday, in which are the 
 words : " Jesus Christ, who was conceived by the 
 Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary." I do not 
 give this case as if it were remarkable. No doubt 
 it is being repeated in the history of not a few 
 pastors and churches. Perhaps there are those 
 who see no wrong in it, and would defend it as a 
 lawful use of the " qfficiosum mendaciumy But 
 how does the world judge it ? Will not the strict- 
 est moralist declare that no better example could 
 be given of a low moral sense of what the law of 
 Christian veracity demands ? There is no form of 
 insincerity that is so injurious to the principle of 
 truthfulness as that which hides itself in such a 
 way and wears the garb of a pious dissimulation. 
 So deeply ingrained in our religious life has the 
 habit become that such an illustration of it as I 
 have given no longer attracts attention. It is re- 
 markable how long men can continue to live under 
 the forms of an old tradition, even when its real 
 life is utterly gone. How true to nature is Ten- 
 nyson's description of " Use and Wont," — 
 
 " Old sisters of a day gone by, 
 
 Gray nurses, loving nothing new." 
 
 Most men disHke to be disturbed or awakened out 
 of their intellectual or religious slumbers. Should 
 another Rip Van Winkle awake from a half cen- 
 
318 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 tury's nap and enter one of our churches on the 
 Lord's day he would scarcely realize how long he 
 had slept. Some innovations would arrest his at- 
 tention. The congregation would take a somewhat 
 larger part in the service, and a new note might 
 strike his ear occasionally in the quality of the 
 preaching ; but the general order of exercises would 
 have the old familiar air. He would recognize at 
 once the old forms of Scripture reading with the old 
 interpretations, involving the old assumptions, the 
 old hymns of Watts and Wesley, with all their 
 crude materialism, the old-time formidas of prayer, 
 from prayer-books of the sixteenth century, and 
 even from stiU earlier times ; and he might shut his 
 eyes for another nap, assured that all is well, — 
 never realizing that the most stupendous intellec- 
 tual revolution of history has left its mark on every 
 phase of human thought. I remember well the 
 moral shock which I experienced when I first 
 learned that the Calvinistic trinitarian hymns of 
 Dr. Watts, which had fed the religious faith of 
 my childhood, were written by an Arminianizing 
 Arianizing Sabellian. But in what respect was 
 Dr. Watts worse than ministers and churches to- 
 day, who stiU sing his hymns and others Hke them, 
 and excuse themselves by professing to accept 
 their theological truth "for substance of doc- 
 trine." But such illustrations are mere straws on 
 the surface of the deep stream. This is the real, 
 the transcendent issue. Most, if not all, educated 
 men are aware that the Darwinian law of evolu- 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 319 
 
 tion in its fuU application in all departments of 
 science, and in historical research, has radically- 
 changed aU the old conceptions of nature, of man, 
 and of God. They know well that the very foun- 
 dations of the old traditional theology are utterly- 
 broken down, and that wholly new forms of truth 
 must take their place. Yet how few of our church 
 leaders are ready to make fuU acknowledgment 
 of this, and honestly take their stand on it ! A 
 tacit conspiracy of silence has shut their mouths. 
 And how is this policy defended ? It is said that 
 " Kant once confessed that though he would never 
 say anything he did not believe, he believed many 
 things he would never say " (Paulsen, " System of 
 Ethics," 682). Paulsen well adds : " A Greek 
 might have replied to him, ' In that case I do not 
 care very much for what you have to say, for I 
 desire to know, not what you are allowed to think 
 with the consent of the high authorities, but what 
 you actually think yourself." Kant has here well 
 expressed the trend of recent theological apology as 
 regards a full and honest confession of Christian 
 faith. Aristotle made truthfulness to consist in 
 the avoidance of two extremes, — the expression 
 of what is false and the repression of what is true. 
 It is the second extreme — called by Aristotle 
 dissimulation — that is so rife to-day. And the 
 Greek pagan was ethically right. A negative 
 lie is as truly a lie as a positive one. Intentional 
 deception, which is the essence of a falsehood, 
 is equally behind both forms of it. A man who 
 
320 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 recites with a congregation a creed which he does 
 not believe, except with a mental reservation, is 
 guilty of an act of dissimulation which no casuistry 
 can excuse, and which the enlightened moral con- 
 sciousness of every man must condemn. It is 
 the peculiar moral quality of the " officiosum men- 
 daciuTYi^'' in either of its forms, and especially in 
 that of the " suppressio veri^'' that it so success- 
 fully arrays itself in angelic garb. To do a little 
 evil that great good may come has been the favor- 
 ite appeal of the tempter from Eden down, and 
 never has he applied his arts more skiUfuUy and 
 successfully than in these recent times in the very 
 heart of Christendom. Strange, indeed, that the 
 old Greek Aristotle should become the ethical 
 teacher of a degenerate Christianity ! Yet not so 
 strange. The taint is in the very blood of many 
 generations. The old distinctions between the 
 church and the world, ecclesiasticism and secular- 
 ism, religion and morahty, what is true and right in 
 religious things and what is true and right in tem- 
 poral things, — distinctions which lay behind the 
 whole church theory of the " officiosum menda- 
 cium^'^ — have not yet faded out, even among Pro- 
 testant theologians. 
 
 The history of modern Biblical exegesis furnishes 
 many memorable illustrations of this. Pious and 
 scholarly exegetes have applied canons of inter- 
 pretation to Scripture which they would never 
 have dared to apply to any other book in the 
 world, — it being assumed that the Bible, as the 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 321 
 
 Word of God, is to be discriminated from aU 
 human writings, and so is to be interpreted on dif- 
 ferent principles. The worst of it is that these 
 principles are often utterly discordant with ordi- 
 nary rules of human interpretation. Is it surpris- 
 ing, then, that such unnatural scriptural exegesis 
 should often involve evasions of the Aristotelian 
 law of truthfulness ? Let me give a single instance, 
 which I choose out of many equally a propos^ be- 
 cause it brings out so clearly how close is the 
 affinity between the theological dissimulation that 
 infects the Christianity of to-day and that of the 
 early church. In the opening verses of the sev- 
 enth chapter of the Fourth Gospel there occurs a, 
 conversation between Jesus and his brethren which 
 from the earliest times has troubled Christian 
 exegetes. "We are told that in view of the ap- 
 proaching Feast of Tabernacles Christ's brethren 
 ironically urged him to go into Judaea and show 
 himself publicly. The reply of Christ was a simple 
 refusal. " Go ye up unto the feast ; I go not up 
 unto this feast because my time is not yet fulfilled.'* 
 Such was the reading of the text in the time of 
 Porphyry and of Jerome. The later change from 
 ovK to ovTTO), which appears in the Textus receptus^ 
 and is translated " not yet," in the King James 
 version, was made, according to Alford, " to avoid 
 offense." What the "offense" was is made known 
 to us by Jerome. In a work against the Pelagians, 
 who held strongly to free wiU and the natural 
 power of every man to avoid sin, Jerome quotes 
 
322 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 many passages of Scripture to show the contrary. 
 He even quotes Christ as saying, " I can of my- 
 self do nothing," and then, in further illustration 
 of Christ's inability, he adds, "he denies to his 
 brethren that he is going up to the Feast of Tab- 
 ernacles, and afterwards it is written that when 
 his brethren had gone up then he himself went 
 up, not openly, but as if in secret. He denied 
 that he should go^ and did what he had before 
 denied. Porphyry barks at this, charging Christ 
 with fickleness and inconstancy, not knowing that 
 all yieldings to temptation should be referred to 
 the flesh (nesciens omnia scandala ad carnem 
 esse Teferendci)^ The things to be especially noted 
 in this passage from Jerome are that Jerome's text 
 had ovK^ not ovttw, and that he does not attempt 
 to evade the natural meaning of it, but explains 
 Christ's evasion of the truth on the ground of his 
 temptable human nature. Porphyry brought a 
 similar charge against Peter and Paid; and Je- 
 rome, in his defense of them, is led to give a curi- 
 ous interpretation of Gal. ii. 11-14, asserting that 
 the altercation which arose between Peter and Paul 
 and Peter's apparent dissimulation were the result 
 of their different points of view, and that really 
 both of them were exercising the highest Chris- 
 tian prudence. He even suggests that the conten- 
 tion between them was feigned (simulatd) in the 
 interests of peace between Jewish and Gentile 
 Christians, and he defends the whole transaction 
 on the ground that dissimulation for the time may 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 323 
 
 be useful (utilem vero simulationem et assumerv- 
 dam in tempore)^ referring to two Old Testament 
 examples, that of Jehu in the matter of the priests 
 of Baal, and that of David in the case of Abime- 
 lech. It was this distinct avowal of the lawful- 
 ness at times of a deception which involved a lie 
 that led Augustine to write to Jerome a letter 
 which was the beginning of a sharp though friendly- 
 controversy. One of Jerome's letters in reply is 
 of prime importance in the hi'story of Christian 
 morals. In it he informs Augustine that his posi- 
 tion was not new, but that many Fathers before 
 him, especially Origen, had held the same view, 
 and adds apologetically that they did not so much 
 defend a lie as treat it as an act of honorable 
 temporizing and prudence (" non officio sum men- 
 dacium sed honestam dispensationem et pruden- 
 tiam "). Thus Jerome showed himself ready, 
 with Origen and others before him, to defend the 
 use of a lie even by Christ in the interest of pru- 
 dence and utility. It did not even occur to him 
 that a change from ovk to ov-n-oi would lessen the 
 difficulty. It was the later refinements of theolo- 
 gical exegetes that led to the interpolation of ovtto). 
 But this refuge has failed since the discovery that 
 the original text was ovk rather than ovtto). How 
 now were the words of Christ to be defended, and 
 he be saved from an open falsehood ? Was the 
 view of Jerome to be accepted, which allowed 
 mendacity on Christ's part, but excused it as an 
 infirmity of the flesh? The development of the 
 
324 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 dogma of Christ's absolute sinlessness made it im- 
 possible. Some other solution of this moral puzzle 
 must be found. It is here that my illustrations 
 of modern exegesis become appropriate, and afford 
 telling evidence of the tendency to suppress or 
 distort the truth in matters of religion. Lardner, 
 in his work " The Credibility of the Gospel His- 
 tory," deals with this question quite at length. 
 He allows that the earlier reading was ovk, and 
 that Christ's reply to his brethren's advice was, 
 " I go not up to the feast." He then adds : " Sup- 
 posing this to be the true reading, 1 see not any 
 reason for the charge of inconstancy, or of our 
 Lord's altering his intention. The context shows 
 that he had spoken of deferring his journey to 
 Jerusalem for a short time,, not that he had re- 
 solved not to go at all to the feast. He went to 
 the feast ; and he always intended to do so ; but 
 he went not up to that feast so soon or so publicly 
 as he did at some other seasons." Without rais- 
 ing any question as to the correctness of Dr. Lard- 
 ner's interpretation, I have this to say, that his 
 explanation does not exculpate Christ at all, or 
 even attempt to, from the charge of an intentional 
 deception of his brethren. They could not read 
 his inner intentions, and plainly accepted his words 
 in their natural meaning. The real question is, 
 not whether Christ changed his mind, but whether 
 he deceived his brethren and meant to do so, I 
 quite agTce with Dr. Lardner that Christ did not 
 change his mind, but how about the deception that 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 325 
 
 lurks behind Christ's words, " I go not up to this 
 feast " ? Dr. Lardner here is silent. How must 
 we interpret this silence ? Did he wish to conceal 
 the difficulty under a disingenuous evasion of it, or 
 was he ready to excuse Christ's reply as a lawful 
 mendacium f I leave it for my readers to judge. 
 The work of Dr. Lardner belongs to the eigh- 
 teenth century. 
 
 My second illustration is from the commentary 
 of Dean Alford, whom I have been accustomed to 
 regard as one of the noblest and most honest of 
 Christian writers. Accepting ovk as the true read- 
 ing, and explaining correctly the reason of the 
 later interpolation, Alford then says : " It is of 
 little import whether we read ovk or outtw; the 
 sense will be the same, both on account of the 
 present ava/3atVa> (not avafiya-o/xaL, which would 
 express the disavowal of an intention to go up), 
 and of ovTTO) afterwards. Ovk dj/a/JatVco would mean 
 ' / am not at present going up.' " As one reads 
 this amazing comment, a momentary doubt arises 
 whether Alford's scholarship was at fault or his 
 moral sincerity. His suggestion that the use of 
 the present, di/aySatVo), confines the act of going up 
 to the " present " time and must be translated, " I 
 am not at present going up," is in violation of one 
 of the commonest laws of all languages, let alone 
 the New Testament Greek. How often do we use 
 the present tense when the reference is to some 
 future act ? Buttmann, in his Graromar of New 
 Testament Greek, remarks that " the present fre- 
 
326 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 quently stands when things still future are spoken 
 of, and consequently comprises within itself the 
 future force of the word," and adds that this 
 " phenomenon is common in all ages and all lan- 
 guages." Among other illustrations he refers to 
 the passage now under discussion. He also refers 
 to Matt. XX. 18, where the same present dvajSatVo) 
 is used in a plainly future sense. Winer, in his 
 Grammar, takes virtually the same ground, though 
 more guardedly, holding that "an action still 
 future is mentioned as already present, because it 
 is unalterably determined." This is precisely the 
 case in hand. Christ used the present, " I go not 
 up," because he wished his brethren to understand 
 it was not his intention to go up. Alford, on the 
 contrary, declares that " the disavowal of an inten- 
 tion to go up " would require the future d>'a/3i}o-o/iai. 
 I confess that I am somewhat at a loss to give a 
 critical judgment on this curious piece of exegesis. 
 But surely Alf ord cannot be accused of ignorance of 
 Greek grammar, and least of aU of one of its most 
 common rules. Porphyry wrote in Greek as his 
 vernacular, and Jerome was Greek scholar enough 
 to translate the New Testament into Latin, yet it 
 never occurred to either of them that Christ's use 
 of the present implied that he meant to be under- 
 stood as saying, " I am not at present going up." 
 Alf ord was quite as good a Greek scholar as either 
 Porphyry or Jerome. He must have known, as 
 well as they, that the natural interpretation of the 
 original text required the admission that, if the 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 327 
 
 account be true history, Christ intended to deceive 
 his brethren. 
 
 How, then, was AKord led to write this extraor- 
 dinary statement ? There can be but one satis- 
 factory answer. He held as an article of faith 
 that Christ was God. He also accepted the 
 Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel. He 
 was thus ready to hold to the historicity of all the 
 accounts in that gospel, and to believe that the 
 words here imputed to Christ were actually uttered 
 by him. Here, then, was an apparent falsehood 
 put into Christ's lips. How could it be explained 
 so that Christ's perfect sinlessness might be left 
 unimpeached? Porphyry had charged him with 
 moral fickleness. Jerome had defended his want 
 of truthfulness by referring it to human weakness. 
 But Alford could not accept either view. He felt 
 called upon to defend Christ's moral perfectness at 
 all hazards. Here, then, if ever, was a case where 
 a " useful dissimulation " might be allowed, if not 
 in the conduct of Christ himself, at least in the 
 exegesis of his loyal disciple. If a more humiliat- 
 ing bit of commentary can be found than this, I 
 know not where to look for it. Yet, after aU, Al- 
 ford was not a sinner above others. I have char- 
 acterized his exegesis of this passage as " humiliat- 
 ing," not because it is worse than other examples, 
 but because it was the dernier ressort of a scholar 
 usually so free from exegetical refinements. If I 
 am asked whether I think that Alford was con- 
 scious of any disingenuousness, I reply at once, 
 
328 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 surely not. " The Life, Journal, and Letters," 
 edited by his widow, reveal a character of singular 
 openness and honesty. He had the courage of his 
 convictions. But he was a true son of the Church 
 of England, and accepted the Nicene Creed with- 
 out any qualification as absolute truth. His 
 churchly conservatism is seen in his attitude toward 
 Bishop Colenso's book on the " Pentateuch." In 
 a letter to Colenso he distinguished " the believing 
 point of view " from " the unbelieving (critical) 
 point of view." "The former," he said, "assumes 
 Jesus Christ to have been the Son of God. If he 
 was, the Pentateuch is historical, for he treats it 
 as such,'''' Such a theological a priori assumption 
 strikes at the root of the inductive historical 
 method of critical investigation. It is here that 
 AKord's deficiency as a commentator comes clearly 
 to view. He was simply a textual, not a historical 
 critic. His defense of the Johannine authorship 
 of the Fourth Gospel is a good illustration. He 
 builds his argument on the crumbling foundations 
 of unhistorical legend. Here was the fatal flaw in 
 Alford's fitness to deal with the passage before us. 
 Assuming the strict deity of Christ and the com- 
 plete historicity of the Fourth Gospel, how could 
 he save Christ from mendacity except by a strain- 
 ing of the text ? It is pathetic to think how close 
 at hand lay the "key of knowledge" which he 
 sought in vain to find. We must not forget that 
 Alford's " New Testament " was published before 
 Darwin's " Origin of Species," and while historical 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 329 
 
 criticism was yet in its infancy. Could lie only 
 have grasped the historical fact that the Fourth 
 Gospel is not Johannine, but the work of an un- 
 known writer of the middle of the second century, 
 and that the long conversations and discourses im- 
 puted to Christ are not to be regarded as really 
 his beyond certain logia which tradition had 
 brought down from Apostolic times, how different 
 would his exegesis have been ? I confess, for my- 
 seK, that if the light I have gained on the " Jo- 
 hannine Problem " had brought me no other boon 
 than this, that Christ is thereby saved for me from 
 Porphyry's charge of fickleness and from Jerome's 
 acknowledgment of falsehood, or from the lame 
 defenses of later exegetes such as Lardner and 
 AKord, I should be more than repaid for my long 
 and anxious search. If the words, " I go not up," 
 were not actually spoken by Christ, but were the 
 work of a writer a century after Christ's death, 
 then Christ is absolved from all responsibility for 
 them; and the law of truthfulness and sincerity 
 which he proclaimed so plaiuly in the Sermon on 
 the Mount stands unmoved and secure. 
 
 Yet this should be said iu palliation of Alford's 
 remarkable interpretation. He was the victim of 
 his theological environment, — an environment 
 that was the outcome of a long evolution of theo- 
 logical exegesis which rested on the ethical 
 theory that the officiosum mendacium was lawfid 
 when the interests of dogmatic truth required it. 
 Augustine's passionate protest against the ten- 
 
330 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 dency of his age had been without avail. Jerome, 
 Lardner, Alford, are only straws showing whither 
 the currents of exegetical ethics have been flow- 
 ing during the entire history of Christianity down 
 to the present day. 
 
 Let me add one or two further examples of the 
 manner in which other distinguished commenta- 
 tors of the conservative school have dealt with the 
 passage that has been under consideration. Few 
 men of the nineteenth century were more famous 
 for evangelical piety and learning than the German 
 Tholuck. In his commentary on John he thus 
 remarks on vii. 8, "If we foUow the external 
 authority of the Codices the reading of owo) must 
 be preferred. But it may be asked, whether apolo- 
 getic considerations have not given the preference 
 to oviro) before ovkJ* After referring to Porphyry's 
 charge of fickleness and to Jerome's defense, both 
 grounded on the earlier reading ovk, Tholuck adds : 
 " But if with Bengel, Griesbach, and KJaapp we 
 should read ov/c, no objection could be brought 
 against it. In a loose manner of speaking it may 
 become synonymous with ovttcd, as is clearly the 
 case in vi. 17." The case of vi. 17 is not so 
 " clear," and in fact has no relation to the case in 
 hand. But if it had it would not help us. Sup- 
 pose we allow that Christ spoke loosely^ using ovk 
 in the sense of ovtto), the question is, did his breth- 
 ren understand that he spoke loosely and meant to 
 tell them that he was simply deferring his visit to 
 Jerusalem, or did they understand him to say and 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 331 
 
 mean that lie was not going up at aU ? The con- 
 text surely can bear but one interpretation. They 
 did not suppose that he used ovk " in a loose 
 manner." Did Christ, then, intend to mislead 
 them by a douhle-entendre^ and if so, could a will- 
 ful deception be more complete ? In this quandary 
 Tholuck leaves us to our own devices. Comment 
 surely is unnecessary. 
 
 I now turn to a commentator who on the whole 
 is to be regarded as the leading living exegetical 
 scholar in the English church of the present 
 generation, as was shown by his being made 
 chairman of the British New Testament Revision 
 Company. I refer to Bishop EUicott. His inter- 
 pretation occurs in his " Life of Christ " (Am. 
 ed. 227). EUicott rejects Meyers's supposition 
 that Christ " here states his intention and after- 
 wards alters it " as not borne out by the context, 
 as it certainly is not. He also rejects " the ex- 
 planation of De Wette and Alford " which I 
 have given above, on the ground that " it seems 
 neither so simple nor so natural" as his own, 
 though he allows that it "is perhaps defensible." 
 What now is the exegesis which EUicott prefers 
 to the others mentioned and squarely adopts as 
 one that removes " the apparent contradiction that 
 has been found between our Lord's words and 
 his subsequent acts " ? He makes the key to his 
 explanation what he regards as a pecuUar char- 
 acteristic of the Fourth Gospel, namely, that Christ 
 is everywhere represented as " the reader of the 
 
332 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 thoughts and intents of the human heart," and 
 thus in his conversations with men " did not so 
 much reply to the words of the speaker as to the 
 thoughts which he knew were rising up within." 
 This he uses as a principle of interpretation in 
 John vii. 8. Christ's brethren asked him whether 
 he was going up to the feast. But the question 
 implied " a worldly and self-seeking spirit." They 
 wished him to go publicly and announce him- 
 self in a way to draw general attention. " It is 
 to the spirit and meaning of this worldly and self- 
 seeking request, rather than to the outward terms 
 in which it was couched, that the Lord answered 
 his brethren." " He does indeed not go up to the 
 feast in the sense in which these carnal-minded 
 men presumed to counsel him. He joins now no 
 festal company ; he takes now no prominent part 
 in the festival solemnities." But he goes all the 
 same^ in another sense of his language, which 
 sense, however, is of course wholly subjective and 
 not understood by his brethren, who took his words 
 literally and not spiritually. Such is Ellicott's 
 explanation, which does not explain, for it leaves 
 Christ in a worse moral plight than either of the 
 other interpretations, since it makes him deliher- 
 ately use a form of answer which he knew would 
 wholly deceive them. It is assumed, of course, by 
 EUicott that Christ was f uUy aware of the charac- 
 ter of their question, that it referred to his going 
 up and not merely to the manner of it, and that 
 his reply was not to their question^ but to a new 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 333 
 
 question which he had drawn out of it. Yet 
 Bishop Ellicott seems entirely satisfied with this 
 explanation as saving Christ from untruthfulness. 
 I am not here concerned whether this method of 
 exegesis has absolved Christ from the moral de- 
 linquency in which the authentic text of this 
 passage seems to involve him. My view of the 
 history of the text makes such a method wholly 
 unnecessary. What concerns me is, whether it 
 can absolve Bishop Ellicott himself from a like 
 delinquency. What must one think of the fine- 
 ness of moral fibre of a Christian commentator 
 who can descend to such a miserable " wresting 
 of the Scriptures " as this, — " Scriptures," be 
 it noted, which Bishop Ellicott regards as super- 
 naturally inspired, and, in the case in question, 
 the very language of the divine Son of God! 
 Far be it from me even to suggest a suspicion 
 that this eminent prelate has juggled with his con- 
 science in his scholarly commentaries. Like Al- 
 ford, Tholuck, and others, he was the creature of 
 his age and of its traditional environment, and 
 he only illustrates, in the very headquarters of 
 official churchmanship, that hereditary moral taint 
 the sources of which I have traced back to the 
 origins of Christianity. I will only add that 
 this comment of Bishop Ellicott is one of the 
 worst specimens on record, in my view, of the 
 spiritualizing method of interpretation which has 
 been so popular in recent exegesis, and which is 
 full of evidence of the unconscious disingenuous- 
 
334 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 ness and insincerity that is so ingrained in the 
 theological temper of our age. 
 
 I have dwelt thus at length on the subject of 
 Biblical interpretation, because it gives so clear 
 and conclusive evidence of the results of the 
 theory of the officiosum mendacium which has 
 played so influential a part in Christian theology 
 and life. Christian exegetical scholars have as a 
 rule been more free from the yoke of theological 
 dogma than professed dogmatic theologians. Je- 
 rome was much more free in his exegetical views 
 than Augustine. Alford was by no means a 
 hard-and-fast dogmatist. If the exegetes can go 
 so far in textual distortion to save an article of 
 the orthodox creed, what may we expect of the 
 metaphysical theologians? And if both exegetes 
 and theologians are ready to play fast and loose 
 with the law of veracity when the interests of 
 what they regard as the truth demand it, what 
 must we expect of the rank and file of Christians 
 who have been accustomed to reverence and follow 
 their chosen leaders? Can we wonder that our 
 churches are honeycombed with elements of in- 
 sincerity and hypocrisy, or that the world is ready 
 to ask whether Christianity itself in its organized 
 form, judging it by its moral exhibitions, is not 
 an imposture and a sham ? Surely, before the 
 church can hope to convert nominal Christendom, 
 still further, before it can become a missionary 
 force that shall conquer the unchristian world, it 
 mvi&t first he converted itself. 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 335 
 
 These words may have a severe and pessimistic 
 sound. But the writer is no pessimist. No one 
 can despair of the future who reads with any clear 
 intelligence the signs of the times. Outside of 
 the church at least there is readiness for the light, 
 and freedom of thought, and an end of religious 
 bigotry and dishonesty. And these moral forces 
 are beginning to react on the church itself with 
 silent but irresistible potency. Marvelous indeed 
 would it be if it should come to pass that the 
 unrecognized outside " sleeping partners " of the 
 true kingdom of God should be the real leaders in 
 the moral progress of the race, rather than the 
 historical organizations that have so long assumed 
 to be the only representatives of Christianity. 
 Already such a movement has taken visible shape. 
 The Zeitgeist is becoming conscious of its power. 
 Organization, however deeply seated in old tra- 
 ditions, has ceased to be a fetich. The light of 
 God's truth is as universal as that of the sun, and 
 cannot be shut up in anybody's lantern, call that 
 lantern by any sacred name you wiU. It is this 
 that the world is finding out to-day, — thanks to 
 the new science and the new history. The church, 
 too, must soon learn the same lesson. It cannot 
 continue much longer to resist the influences 
 around it. Its closed doors and windows must 
 be thrown wide open to the free air and light of 
 heaven. And just here wiU begin the church's true 
 regeneration. With freedom will quickly come 
 an end of ignorance and of insincerity. Then 
 
336 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 with open eyes men will read God's new revela- 
 tions. Then it will be seen that the new truths of 
 science and of historical criticism are not of man's 
 building. Charles Darwin was not the author of 
 that wonderful law of evolution which is revolu- 
 tionizing all our conceptions of nature, of man, and 
 of God. He only discovered what God himself in 
 his own time had revealed, or, if one pleases, what 
 nature had disclosed of its previously hidden pro- 
 cesses as the providential interpreter of Him whose 
 works are " parts of his ways." Surely in these 
 days of God's outstretched hand human pride 
 should give place to humility. Man's wisdom has 
 indeed proved " foolishness." The garnered philo- 
 sophy of ages has shriveled up as a scroll in the 
 fire that tries every man's works. And why 
 should we cling to it or regret it ? The old monk's 
 counsel was good : " Regret not that which is 
 past." This is a day of promise and hope, not of 
 unavailing regrets ; a day of faith, not of skepti- 
 cism ; a day of optimistic courage and cheer, not of 
 pessimistic lamentations. And in that hope and 
 faith and cheer I seem to catch a vision of the 
 days to come. Christianity has been like one of 
 those old palimpsests where the original writing 
 was buried and lost under a later script. Christ's 
 own gospel had been transformed into "another 
 gospel which was not a gospel." But God's provi- 
 dence has given us the subtle critical art by means 
 of which the legendary accumulations of long ages 
 have been removed, and the original teachings of 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 337 
 
 Christ once more brought out clearly to view ; 
 and lo, as I look on that old standard under which 
 Christianity has so long fought, with its theological 
 shibboleths, — dead embers of forgotten contro- 
 versies, — a sudden and marvelous change comes 
 over it ; its traditional dogmatic creeds disappear 
 like a mist of the morning, and in their place I 
 read those recovered words of Christ which sum up 
 his whole gospel : " A new commandment I give 
 unto you, that ye love one another. By this shall 
 all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have 
 love one to another : " and yet again the scene 
 shifts and the vision of the seer of Patmos is 
 fulfilled : " I saw no temple therein : for the Lord 
 God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. 
 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of 
 the moon, to shine in it : for the glory of God did 
 lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And 
 the nations of them which are saved shall walk in 
 the light of it : and the kings of the earth do 
 bring their glory and honor into it. And the gates 
 of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there 
 shall be no night there. And they shall bring the 
 glory and honor of the nations into it." What 
 city is here described ? Not any outward city of 
 man's making, with its " temples " and " shut 
 gates ; " but the " New Jerusalem, coming from 
 God out of heaven." In that city, open and free, 
 and illumined by the sun of God's righteous 
 love, ''all the nations shall walk," and "there 
 shall be no night there." 
 
338 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 What interpretation should be given to this 
 apocalyptic passage cannot be exactly determined. 
 All apocalypse, as Neander has well said, has a 
 "germinant and springing meaning and accom- 
 plishment." The Revelation does not claim to be 
 history. It belongs to the realm of mystical theo- 
 logy, and must be interpreted by mystical or sym- 
 bolical methods. Moreover, the authorship of the 
 Revelation is unknown, so that it is impossible to 
 gain light from the author's environment or reli- 
 gious point of view. Yet, notwithstanding all this, 
 I cannot think that the radical thought of the 
 writer is doubtful. Whoever he was, he had 
 plainly somehow caught a glimpse of the final evo- 
 lution of God's kingdom on earth, and sought to 
 picture it in apocalyptic form. Beneath all its 
 imagery three characteristics of the end of all 
 things stand out clearly to view : 1. A world-wide 
 united brotherhood of God's people. 2. God's own 
 presence in their midst, making needless material 
 gates for protection or material temples for wor- 
 ship. 3. A final state of perfect harmony and 
 peace and joy ; — which being translated into the 
 new historical apocalypse of our own day should 
 read thus : 1. The harmonizing and union of all 
 the hitherto warring religions of the world through 
 Christ's gospel, with its new interpretation of di- 
 vine and brotherly love. 2. The tabernacling of 
 God among men through his seK-revelations as 
 immanent in nature, in the world, and in all human 
 souls, and thus becoming the spiritual bond of one 
 
PERILS OF ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY 339 
 
 universal kingdom of truth and justice. 3. The 
 £aial consummation of aU things in a world-wide 
 moral unity and peace. 
 
 Eighteen centuries have gone since the Kevela- 
 tion was written. Its jubilant hope, expressed in 
 " Behold I come quickly," still remains an unful- 
 filled ideal. It has been one of the objects of this 
 book to disclose some of the historical causes of 
 the delay of God's coming. 
 
 or 
 
CHAPTER Vni 
 
 THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY IN THE 
 TWENTIETH CENTURY 
 
 This comparative historical survey has on the 
 practical side reached its appropriate conclusion. 
 But there stiU remains a question which cannot be 
 without interest to aU Christian thinkers. Reli- 
 gious faith must by a law of the human mind 
 sooner or later be subjected to the inquisition of 
 the reason and its critical processes. History shows 
 that every religion tends to become a theology, and 
 to guard and limit itself with a dogmatic creed. 
 Hence the historical inductive method is called to 
 deal not only with the history of religions, but also 
 with their theological developments. 
 
 We have now reached a point of view where a 
 comprehensive survey may be taken of the present 
 religious possessions of the world and of their in- 
 tellectual and theological relations to each other. 
 In this way by the inductive process the founda- 
 tions may be laid of the new theology which is 
 to come. 
 
 It wiU be the aim of this chapter to set forth 
 the real character of the new theological problem 
 which the twentieth century finds at its door. This 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 341 
 
 problem has two distinct sides or aspects. One 
 aspect of it has to do with the relation of religion 
 to those scientific discoveries which have created 
 for man in the new revelations of nature and its 
 laws a new world. The other aspect of the pro- 
 blem grows out of those historical and critical in- 
 vestigations which have developed an entirely new 
 conception not only of the historical origins of 
 Christianity, but also of the origins and character 
 of the Ethnic religions. The results of science 
 and of the history of religions have together so 
 transformed the whole field of religious faith and 
 thought that a new philosophical or theological 
 construction has become inevitable. 
 
 It is not my purpose to go over again the ground 
 of my previous book. I do not propose now any 
 further attempt at a construction of the new theo- 
 logy. What I have in mind is simply, from the 
 wider and higher vantage ground reached in this 
 historical survey of the trinitarian ideas of man- 
 kind concerning God, to put the new theological 
 problem thus raised in its true historical setting, 
 and thus to help towards its solution. Such a pre- 
 liminary analysis and diagnosis is most needful. 
 Physicians of every school are always with us. But 
 most of the attempts to heal the religious maladies 
 of our times have been of two sorts : " Forward 
 Movements" in the churches and in missionary 
 organizations and " Reconstructions in Theology." 
 Plainly the theological doctors have become alive 
 to the fact that the patient is dangerously ill ; but 
 
342 THE ETHHIC TRINITIES 
 
 as to the character of the disease and the medicine 
 to be administered there is great diversity of opin- 
 ion. The mere list of remedies suggested only- 
 shows how much at sea the physicians are. As 
 usual the traditionalists and metaphysicians are on 
 hand with the old prescriptions. The question is 
 whether it is not high time for the historical doctor 
 to say his say. Strauss's keen and searching re- 
 mark, " The true criticism of dogma is its history," 
 may prove to be the very key we need. What 
 lasting good can come from " forward movements " 
 or from " theological reconstructions," if they pro- 
 ceed by wrong roads to take us only further away 
 from the end sought? The right start must be 
 made and the right line of direction taken, if a 
 Christian advance is to issue in a final success and 
 not in inglorious failure. To learn what the right 
 start is and what the right line of direction, we 
 need to use carefuUy and thoroughly the search- 
 lights of history. Such is the form of investiga- 
 tion now proposed. 
 
 " The new problem of theology in the twentieth 
 century " suggests at once a historical contrast 
 with the problem of the century just closed. What 
 was that problem and how was it solved ? When 
 the last century opened, the old theology in its 
 most rigid and scholastic form held the field and 
 was regnant in all orthodox circles. This theology 
 had two poles, a Sabellianized trinitarianism, 
 and a Calvinistic anthropology, which, however, 
 was rapidly yielding to the dissolving influence of 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 343 
 
 Arminian ideas. The old creeds, however, remained 
 intact and firm. Scientists and historical critics 
 were quietly pursuing their investigations into 
 nature and the sources of history, but their dis- 
 coveries created no general alarm. Not tiU the 
 middle of the century was the inevitable and essen- 
 tial antagonism between scientific and historical 
 studies and the dogmas of traditional theology fully 
 realized. Then followed a mortal conflict between 
 the radical and vital principle of all science and 
 historical criticism, — summed up in the Darwin- 
 ian law of uninterrupted natural evolution, — and 
 the traditional a 'priori principle of a supernatural 
 intervention by special creation and miracle as the 
 true historical explanation of the course of nature 
 and of human events. This conflict, if we look at 
 the nineteenth century from its theological side, 
 marks more deeply and characteristically than any 
 other its history as a whole. Consciously or un- 
 consciously, all theological discussions and move- 
 ments of any importance have taken their cue from 
 the attitude of theologians toward the Darwinian 
 doctrine of nature. For a generation after the 
 publication of " The Origin of Species " the whole 
 theological air was filled with the dust that was 
 raised by dogmatic or timid theologians. But a 
 strange lull has recently fallen upon the field of 
 debate, for reasons that are too plain to remain 
 doubtful. The truth is that it has become clear to 
 the mass of intelligent men and women that if 
 there is any radical antagonism between the ascer- 
 
344 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 tained facts of science and historical criticism and 
 the traditional dogmas of the old orthodoxy, it 
 must mean that these dogmas are invalid and false. 
 In fact, the new science and the new history have 
 come to stay. The educated world has already ac- 
 cepted their fundamental premises and conclusions, 
 however doubtful it may be as to certain subordi- 
 nate questions. Thus the ground has been made 
 historically clear for the new problem of theology 
 in the century to come. There can be no doubt 
 as to what its fundamental character must be. 
 The century is to be marked by the complete har- 
 monizing and unifying of scientific, historical, and 
 religious truth. That this process will involve the 
 utter downfall of the old theology in its traditional 
 creed forms goes without saying. It must disap- 
 pear with the old false science and history on which 
 it was built, — as, for example, those exploded 
 theories of creation as wrought in six days, of our 
 earth as the centre of the universe, of a material 
 heaven beyond the circumference of the starry 
 vault, of a material heU deep in the centre of the 
 earth, of the aerial region above and around us as 
 filled with supernatural beings both good and bad, 
 of men as subject in both body and soul to the 
 " prince of the power of the air," through bewitch- 
 ment or actual demoniacal possession, of this world 
 as given over by God because of Adam's sin and 
 fall to Satan, and thus made the scene of conflict 
 between two spiritual kingdoms only to be termi- 
 nated by the miraculous coming of the Son of God 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 345 
 
 for the everlasting destruction of evil and triumph 
 of good. This whole mass of traditional supersti- 
 tion, which belongs essentially to one and the same 
 class of uncritical beliefs, is rapidly dissolving like 
 snow under the sun of summer and is giving place 
 to a new order of religious ideas proceeding from a 
 new scientific and critical principle of eternal and 
 unchangeable law. Such is the problem in one 
 aspect of it. Of course there are still many who 
 would protest loudly against such a historical re- 
 sume and forecast. Organized Christianity, which 
 hugs so tenaciously its historical traditions, will 
 not give them up without a final struggle ; but I 
 believe that I am safe, as a historical observer, in 
 the assertion that the decisive battle between 
 science and religion is at an end, and that, so far 
 as there was any real ground of conflict growing 
 out of dogmas that were supposed to be essential 
 to religious faith, science and its ally historical 
 criticism have come off victors. The final cowp de 
 grace was given by historical criticism. The de- 
 fenders of a miraculous Christianity have rested 
 their arguments on the assumption that the Bible 
 was a direct divine revelation, and that conse- 
 quently its narratives were authentic history. His- 
 torical criticism has destroyed the very basis of this 
 position by showing that its primary assumptions 
 are untenable. 
 
 If one would realize how complete a change has 
 been wrought in a single generation, as the result 
 of critical research, let him look into a work of 
 
346 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Dr. McCosh entitled " The Supernatural in Kelar 
 tion to the Natural," published in 1862. Appar- 
 ently Dr. McCosh was not aware that Darwin's 
 epoch-making book had already appeared three 
 years before. At least he does not allude to it in 
 his own volume, though he was quite a scientific 
 student and accepted much of the science of his 
 day, especially the new astronomy and geology. 
 Certainly had he realized what was the radically 
 new position taken by Darwin as to the character 
 of the origin and mode of development of nature 
 in all its forms, he would have met it with an 
 earnest demurrer, for he held strongly in his book 
 to special acts of divine creation, and to the con- 
 tinuance of the miraculous element in history. 
 The naive way in which Dr. McCosh makes use 
 of certain portions of the Bible, assuming without 
 question their entire historicity, is truly astonish- 
 ing. For example, he alludes to the account in 
 the book of Daniel of " the three children of Israel 
 who were thrown into the fiery furnace in Baby- 
 lon " without a hint that it may not be accepted 
 fact. So concerning Balaam's ass, he asserts that 
 " We know enough to convince us that the ass could 
 not speak except by a supernatural agency work- 
 ing in it," never once suggesting a doubt whether 
 the ass did actually speak in human language. 
 On the same principle he declares that the prophe- 
 cies of the Old Testament were predictions of defi- 
 nite future historical events, " foretold hundreds 
 or thousands of years beforehand," and hence 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 347 
 
 must be regarded as proofs of miraculous power 
 and agency. He accepts the entire historicity of 
 the narrative given in "The Acts" concerning 
 what happened on the day of Pentecost, assuming 
 with the completest assurance that " uneducated 
 fishermen at once, without having been taught, 
 addressed a multitude of persons gathered from a 
 variety of countries each in his own language." 
 How utterly the foundations of Dr. McCosh's 
 whole argument have been undermined by Biblical 
 criticism I need not say. What critical scholar 
 to-day accepts the fuU historicity of any of these 
 Scripture accounts? When Dr. McCosh laid 
 down his primary philosophical thesis " that it is 
 not possible for the inductive philosophers to be 
 able to establish the doctrine of the uniformity of 
 nature as a law which can admit of no excep- 
 tions,^^ he surely little realized that a book was al- 
 ready in existence which would prove just such a 
 uniformity of nature in the case of species, — the 
 very case which Dr. McCosh had relied upon as 
 the citadel of his own position. There are some 
 to-day, apparently, who are leaning on the same 
 broken reed. They are ready to accept the law of 
 evolution to a certain point, but refuse to allow 
 that there are no exceptions to it. Dr. Lyman 
 Abbott, for example, admits the law to be invio- 
 lable and universal with a single exception, to wit, 
 the miraculous birth of Christ. But if one event 
 can lie outside of the law, what becomes of the law 
 itself? A law of nature can no more allow a 
 
348 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 single breach than a chain, the strength of which 
 is gone if a single link be broken. The Darwinian 
 law of natural evolution is true, unchangeably, 
 and universally, or it is utterly false, and to be 
 cast aside as unscientific. 
 
 In dealing thus with Dr. McCosh's book, I feel 
 as if I were stirring the flickering embers of a 
 dead issue. I have done so because I know of no 
 better way to show how far behind us already have 
 those theological questions drifted which some 
 would assume to be still alive and mooted among 
 us. In fact, when they are raised now and then, 
 there is no attempt to answer them ; the time and 
 need of such discussion has gone irretrievably by. 
 The law of natural evolution so signally proved 
 and illustrated by Darwin in its application to all 
 species of organic life, including man, is equally 
 applicable in every other field of nature. Take 
 the case of miracles. There are those who are 
 ready to give up all miracles outside of the Bible, 
 or even of the New Testament, but insist on the 
 retention of the latter as if Christianity itself de- 
 pended on their historical reality. But if the 
 principle of the uniformity of nature has ever been 
 broken once, by a single miraculous act through 
 which natural law was violated or suspended, then 
 the essential character of law has been invaded 
 and a principle of natural disorder and contin- 
 gency has been introduced, which makes the uni- 
 verse the sport of chance, and its essential charac- 
 ter as a cosmos is gone. It is just as difficult for 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 349 
 
 the scientific or historical critic to accept a single 
 miracle, in its theological meaning of a violation 
 or suspension of law, as to accept a thousand. 
 
 Here, then, comes to view the very starting-point 
 of any satisfactory and lasting solution of the new 
 problem of theology. No haH-way measures — no 
 compromises between two antagonistic positions — 
 can stand. There can be no real harmonizing of 
 science and theology except on the basis of a 
 complete and unwavering acceptance of scientific 
 principles and laws in all their widest applica- 
 tions. To attempt to revive the old discredited 
 controversies of the nineteenth century is a histor- 
 ical anachronism. Evolution, as I have said, is 
 all true or it is all false. The old distinction 
 which has so long been a fundamental assumption 
 of theology between the supernatural, with its ap- 
 pendix of miracle, and the natural, from which all 
 miracle is eliminated, is whoUy obsolete so far as 
 science is concerned, and theology can never come 
 into real harmony with scientific methods and 
 results until it has equally abolished this dualistic 
 assumption. Let it be noted that science has to 
 do only with nature and its laws. What may lie 
 behind nature, whence its laws are derived, are 
 questions not of science directly but of philosophy. 
 Monism in science, therefore, does not necessarily 
 involve monism in philosophy. If a conflict is to 
 arise again between monism and dualism, it can- 
 not be fought within the domain of nature and 
 natural law, but in the metaphysical or transcen- 
 
350 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 dental realm. In short, a man may be a dualist 
 in his philosophy and yet accept wholly the mon- 
 ism of science. When Ernst Haeckel, in " The 
 Riddle of the Universe," declares that the monism 
 of science must be extended to all philosophical 
 problems, he passes from scientific ground, where 
 he is strong and invulnerable, to philosophic 
 ground, where he at once becomes weak, and shows 
 only too painfully " the heel of Achilles." But 
 the new problem of theology in the aspect under 
 which we are now considering it is directly con- 
 nected with nature and its laws. Whatever fur- 
 ther problems may arise in the field of philosophic 
 thought, the problem that faces the theologian of 
 to-day first of all is concerned with the true rela- 
 tion of religion and science ; and here the situation 
 has become clear, as it seems to me, to every can- 
 did observer. The new theology must first of all 
 be a scientific theology through and through. 
 When this position has once been squarely taken, 
 it will be found that scientific and critical scholars 
 who have been treated with distrust and unfair- 
 ness, and even sometimes with scant courtesy, as 
 if in league with destroyers of the faith, are really 
 its most valuable friends and helpers. When na- 
 ture and history are once seen to be "parts of 
 God's ways," and full not only of divine ministries 
 to men, but also of the truest and tenderest reve- 
 lations of the divine character, what new sources 
 of theological truth will they become ! Then the 
 Bible will become a new book, — a very well or 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 361 
 
 natural spring of the water of life. Above all, the 
 teachings of Jesus of Nazareth will glow with a 
 new spiritual light and beauty, drawn as they were 
 so completely, not at second hand from human lit- 
 erature and learning, but directly from God's own 
 great book of nature itself. 
 
 Let us now turn to the other aspect of the pro- 
 blem. Assuming that science and religion have 
 been brought into harmonious union, and the 
 highest forms of human intelligence thus made 
 accordant with those religious instincts and princi- 
 ples which are inextinguishably rooted in every 
 member of the human race, we are ready to ask 
 what must be the presiding principle of a theology 
 which shall be able to harmonize the hitherto 
 divergent religions of the world and unite all their 
 devotees in one kingdom of truth and life ? One 
 great barrier to this result will have been removed 
 at once by the assumption just made. The full 
 harmonization of religion and science must involve 
 the entire downfall of the old traditional credal 
 theology, on which the great missionary move- 
 ments of Christendom have hitherto largely rested. 
 With the spread of the new scientific and histor- 
 ical light the same result must follow in the non- 
 Christian world, involving a like downfall of those 
 religious and theological cults that have lived on 
 with little relaxation of their hold on the Ethnic 
 peoples from prehistoric tunes to the present day, 
 and have resisted hitherto all the efforts of Chris- 
 tian missions. We have seen how vain it is to 
 
352 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 attempt to overthrow the speculative dogmas of the 
 Ethnic religions from the standpoint of Christian 
 theology. The weapons of the Ethnic religious 
 thinkers are as keen and effective as those of their 
 opponents. The history of religion is fuU of these 
 metaphysical battles ; and the theological ramparts 
 behind which these battles were fought — the 
 most amazing metaphysical structures ever reared 
 by man — are to-day the wonder and admiration 
 of aU students of ancient philosophy. But they 
 belong to a mode of warfare that has passed 
 away. To carry on the missionary movement on 
 these old superannuated lines is no longer pos- 
 sible. The new missionary gospel must be one 
 that has been transformed by the new light of our 
 age. What the Ethnic peoples need, first of all, 
 is the spread among them of the f uUest and latest 
 results of modern scholarship. God's newest reve- 
 lations in nature and history, intelligently under- 
 stood and accepted, will cause those ancient sys- 
 tems of religious speculation which are strong 
 against any form of Christian dogma, to topple 
 into a mass of ruins. Error and superstition 
 thrive so long as men are bound in the chains of 
 ignorance and custom, but they cannot endure the 
 light of truth. Education and enlightenment is 
 then the first work of the Christian missionary. But 
 this is only the stepping-stone to his real mission 
 as a religious teacher. When science has done its 
 part, then historical criticism must add its quota, 
 if he would be completely e(juipped for the procla- 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 353 
 
 mation of that religious truth which alone has 
 power to convert and sanctify mankind. Such 
 truth is to be found in Christ's original and un- 
 adulterated gospel. How this gospel was slowly- 
 distorted into another gospel until its original 
 lineaments were mostly lost for long ages, and 
 how it has been rediscovered for us in these last 
 times, has been already set forth at length. 
 Enough here to summarize and say that histor- 
 ical criticism has restored to Christian faith and 
 love the true historical Jesus of Nazareth. Layer 
 after layer of unhistorical tradition and legend, 
 with its superstitious accretions of miracle and 
 fable, have been removed, until at last the veri- 
 table picture of the man of Galilee in all the ten- 
 derness, and sweetness, and moral greatness of his 
 hmnan life has come forth to view, once more to 
 draw to himself all tempted, hungering, and thirst- 
 ing human hearts. Such a picture, with all its gos- 
 pel simplicity, uttering with silent and yet eloquent 
 lips that parable of the prodigal son, which gath- 
 ered up into itself the very pith and marrow of 
 Christ's moral teaching, has more power and vir- 
 tue in it to move the world than all the theologies 
 from Nice to Westminster. Such a simple gospel, 
 without dogma or credo^ without any mixture of 
 speculative metaphysics, — a gospel from God 
 through man to his human brother, — such a gos- 
 pel of divine-human brotherly love the heart of 
 man everywhere will open to as the morning 
 
354 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 flowers to the rising sun, and it will open to no 
 other,^ 
 
 ^ It has been a common assumption of the advocates of Chris- 
 tian missions that the Ethnic religious systems have little hold 
 upon their adherents. A close study of the history of these sys- 
 tems makes clear the superficial and unhistorical character of this 
 assumption, and recent events are proving how baseless and false 
 it is. This is especially the case with the g^eat Asiatic religions, 
 such as Confucianism, Hindooism, Buddhism, and Mohammed- 
 anism. As I write, items entirely independent of each other 
 appearing in leading newspapers are straws that indicate much 
 more truthfully than missionary reports what is the real char- 
 acter of the situation. First, the Congregationalist has the follow- 
 ing in its editorial columns: ^^ Hinduism Reviving. Hindus of 
 the educated classes in Bengal are more actively engaged in sup- 
 port of their religion than ever before, and most of these have 
 been educated in Christian schools, or in those established under 
 the auspices of the British government. Societies are being 
 formed for the defense of Hinduism, for studying its literature, 
 and for practical religious and charitable work. Hindus in vari- 
 ous ways are attempting to reform Hinduism. Some denounce 
 idolatry, others polytheism, declaring that these superstitions are 
 not essential to their faith." The Christian Register also edi- 
 torially remarks : " The vast recuperative powers of the Oriental 
 world — whether Buddhist, Mohammedan, or Confucian — have 
 been shown through innumerable past ages, and are likely to 
 be exhibited within our times upon a grand scale." The 
 Boston Transcript, in an issue of the same week, gives some 
 account of the results of the experiences of an English woman 
 who was led by " her interest in the Hindoo religion and people 
 to go to India to. study Hindooism on its own ground." She spent 
 nine years, " living entirely among the natives." On the point 
 with which I am now concerned Miss Muller ' ' thinks it improb- 
 able that Christianity can get any general hold on the Hindoos 
 for a very long time to come, if ever." These items are in line 
 with other recent testimony of men who have lived many years 
 in India and have looked at the matter with unprejudiced minds. 
 
 What is thus made evident by the testimony of recent obser- 
 vation is amply sustained by the history of the Ethnic religions, 
 which shows that the essential dogmas of those religfions have 
 been slowly built up on primary religious ideas that form the 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 355 
 
 At this point I cannot help noting how simple 
 at last "the new problem of theology in the 
 
 very warp and woof of the Ethnic religions consciousness, and 
 cannot be dislodged by another set of ideas without an upheaval 
 such as is not likely to happen at present. Such changes are of 
 all the slowest in their movement. There is something deeper 
 and more radical in human nature and society than mere dogma 
 or dogmatic systems of religious belief. These are but the out- 
 growth of sentiments and ideas that have their roots in the pri- 
 mary moral instincts and tendencies of human nature. While it 
 is true that the human race is generically one, it is equally true 
 that different varieties of mankind have developed great diver- 
 gencies of religious sentiment and thought, such as ideas of the 
 family, of woman, of government, of society, of racial kinship ; 
 and the more closely these subjects are studied, the more clearly 
 will it be seen that religious dogmatic systems are secondary to 
 these primary ideas, and are built up to support them. Here, in 
 part at least, is the explanation of the remarkable and appar- 
 ently deep-seated difference between the Asiatic Oriental mind 
 and character and that of the Occidental or European. This 
 difference lies below the dogmatic differences between the 
 Ethnic and Christian religions, and it is the chief bar to the suc- 
 cess of Christian missions. It may be said that Christianity is 
 itself of Asiatic origin. This is true, but its speedy amalgama- 
 tion with Greek ideas completely changed its whole character, 
 as has been shown. A Semitic Asiatic religion became a Hellen- 
 ized European religion, and it has remained such to this day. 
 The Semitic Judaism out of which it sprang has always refused 
 to accept it. This is the historical reason why Christianity in its 
 early progress never penetrated far beyond the outskirts of the 
 Roman Empire. The subsequent conversion of the western bar- 
 barians was more due to the influence of Roman civilization and 
 culture, in connection with race affinity, than to the dogmas of 
 the Christian religion. Thus it may be seen that the problem 
 of the Christianization of the world is a far more complex and 
 intricate one than is ordinarily supposed. It is my profound 
 conviction, as a historical student, that the Christian nations 
 providentially hold the keys of the world's religious as well as 
 political future ; but everything depends, as I have endeavored 
 to show, on the way in which Christianity employs its forces. 
 
356 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 twentieth century " has become. In this volume 
 we have walked around and closely scanned grand 
 scholastic metaphysical systems, the Hindoo, the 
 Plotinian, the Christian, rising toward the sky 
 like the vast mediaeval cathedrals ; but even now 
 they are growing dim in the distance behind us, 
 as we turn the corner of a new century, while be- 
 fore us rises the unobtrusive figure of a man, the 
 meek and lowly Jesus, who " had not where to 
 lay his head." Humbling, indeed, is such a shrink- 
 age of human philosophy to human pride. Not 
 so strange would it be if again, as in the begin- 
 nings of Christianity, Christ in his lowliness 
 should be " despised and rejected " even by the 
 religious leaders of Christendom, unwilling to 
 leave those mediaeval structures on which they 
 have labored so long for the humble abode of 
 Nazareth. Fortunate the Christian missionary 
 who shall have so caught the spirit of his master 
 that he will be ready to lay aside all the pride of 
 human philosophy, as Paul did, and preach " Jesus 
 Christ and him crucified," that is, Christ's own 
 gospel of love and sacrifice. 
 
 The new problem of theology once fairly 
 grasped, the construction will be easy. I had al- 
 most said that it wiU construct itself. Founded 
 
 No earnest student of the great Oriental religions can, in my 
 judgment, be made to believe that they will ever be overthi-own 
 by philosophical or theological dogmas of any kind. But, as I 
 have said, there is a more excellent way, and it is the only way, 
 — the way of a nobler civilization, a truer science, a diviner gos- 
 pel of love and charity. 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 357 
 
 on the inductive method, its development will be 
 natural and spontaneous. As science and histor- 
 ical criticism move on to new fields of discovery 
 and knowledge, theology wiU follow, appropriat- 
 ing all the new truth for the satisfaction of its 
 intellectual and spiritual needs. As " knowledge 
 grows from more to more," religion and the re- 
 ligious nature will rise to higher and fuller con- 
 ceptions of truth. 
 
 It is not difficult also to forecast what the essen- 
 tial feature of the new theology will be. Man and 
 nature together will constitute its fundamental 
 material, and as man is nature's crown, he wiU 
 naturally be the foremost subject of rehgious in- 
 terest. Besides, man's own moral consciousness is 
 the focus-point through which all the moral light 
 of the universe in every form of revelation must 
 pass. The seat of moral authority for every man 
 is in his own moral nature. It becomes, therefore, 
 the highest moral duty of every man to study him- 
 seK, and in the light of that psychological survey 
 to test and gauge his moral responsibility. All 
 the spiritual knowledge of which man is capable 
 must reach him through his own moral faculties, 
 so that its real character will be truly discoverable 
 only as it takes on the forms of the moral con- 
 sciousness. God can be known only as his image 
 is shadowed in man's own moral nature. Whether 
 God and man are of one common image and like- 
 ness or not, man cannot help conceiving of God in 
 that way. If God is not a moral and personal 
 
368 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 being, he is to man " an unknown God." Hence 
 theology is destined to be essentially an anthropo- 
 logy ; and psychology or the study of man's higher 
 nature will form with natural science the twin 
 " master lights " of theological truth, — historical 
 criticism assisting them by its methods of elimi- 
 nating possible error and by shedding the further 
 light of universal human experience upon man's 
 individual path. 
 
 Another historical forecast may also be taken. 
 Not only wiU the development of the new theology 
 be easy, it will also be rapid. Historical move- 
 ments as a rule are slow ; but crises often involve 
 immense changes that are accomplished with a 
 marvelous celerity. Such, I believe, will be the 
 case in the religious and theological advances of 
 the new century. Even now one can feel the 
 rushing of the tide beneath his feet. Cause and 
 effect go together. One has only to study the 
 causes of the present religious and theological 
 unrest, and see how deep and radical they are, to 
 lose all sense of surprise at the great changes that 
 are coming over human thought and especially 
 over all the old forms of religious belief. This 
 movement is still in its very birth throes. The 
 new currents are only just beginning to set toward 
 their swift forward march. Science is still " mew- 
 ing its mighty youth," and historical criticism is 
 but a child in swaddling clothes. What vast ac- 
 cessions to the realm of knowledge may we not 
 expect when these striplings attain to their full 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 359 
 
 majority ! The infant is already born, so the 
 historical observer may not fear to say, who will 
 see with his own eyes an era of scientific and his- 
 torical progress that shall make our present 
 achievements seem hke the play of children; 
 and with it a new philosophy of nature, of man, 
 and of God, — in brief, a new world, a new re- 
 ligion, and a new theology practically complete. 
 
 But some one metaphysically inclined, and not 
 quite ready to accept such a simple solution as the 
 inductive historical method offers, may skeptically 
 raise the question : what about monism versus 
 dualism f To which my reply would be : For 
 such a riddle I have no answer. Ask, if you 
 will, the sphinxes that line the approach to the 
 ruined temple of Egyptian Karnak, whose speech- 
 less lips and far-off looking eyes are silent wit- 
 nesses to the eternal mystery of life and time. 
 For myseK, I have little faith in metaphysical 
 speculation as containing any satisfactory solution 
 of religious problems or even as able to throw any 
 practical light upon them. Not till Kant had 
 passed from the barren wastes of speculative ra- 
 tionalistic criticism to the green pastures of man's 
 moral intuitions did his religious consciousness 
 find rest. " The true fight that enlighteneth 
 every man that cometh into the world " was 
 kindled by God in every man's moral nature. 
 By itseK the speculative or ratiocinating faculty, 
 whether analytical or synthetical, is but a dry 
 Sahara waste. It has no fountain of spiritual life. 
 
360 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 Man's moral consciousness is the natural head- 
 spring of all religion and of aU religious truth. 
 That consciousness can be interrogated and studied 
 only by the inductive or experimental method. 
 Therefore scientific and historical induction affords 
 the only basis of a true theology. It has been made 
 a point of criticism against "The Evolution of 
 Trinitarism " that it declares the moral conscious- 
 ness to be in its very nature theistic, — it being 
 assimied by these critics that such a declaration is 
 a priori or deductive rather than inductive. Such 
 an assumption I decline to accept, and assert, on 
 the contrary, that aU the religious light we have 
 from our moral consciousness is purely the result of 
 experience, and that such experience can be studied 
 only by experimental induction ; and further, that 
 the widest possible survey of the moral history of 
 mankind proves conclusively that man's moral in- 
 stincts and intuitions are theistic, and not pan- 
 theistic. If my position be valid, the charge of 
 logical inconsistency falls to the ground. 
 
 Let me here say that the difference between 
 these two modes of procedure in the discovery of 
 religious truth is vital. The true fons et origo of 
 the a priori or abstract method, with all its meta- 
 physical assumptions, is the speculative faculty, — 
 a method of religious quest and adventure as un- 
 safe as Bellerophon's horse Pegasus, who threw his 
 rider to the earth when he wished to be carried to 
 heaven. This faculty has its function in critical 
 philosophy, but it should be a servant, and never 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 361 
 
 become a master. If one would realize what 
 mastership involves, he has only to read the his- 
 tory of Christian theology. On the other hand, 
 the true and original home of religion and of re- 
 ligious truth is man's religious nature. Strange 
 that so easy a lesson should be so hard to remem- 
 ber. No doubt the world will have its a priori' s 
 and speculative idealisms to the end of time. 
 There are always some to whom a veritable ab- 
 straction or Platonic " idea " is " daily food." 
 Unfortunately for such the twentieth century is 
 otherwise inclined. The Zeitgeist has worked 
 too hard to get rid of the metaphysical cobwebs 
 of past millenniums and to set its house in order 
 for the new facts of science and history, to listen 
 credulously or patiently to any metaphysical siren 
 song. The new theology, whatever else it may 
 be, will be a matter offact^ a moral, an anthro- 
 pologic theology, and will be solidly built on the 
 foundation stones of the truths revealed through 
 man's moral consciousness. Here will be the field 
 of investigation, — a field of religious inquiry 
 virgin and rich indeed, hitherto almost covered 
 up by the old theological dogmas of "original 
 sin" and "total depravity." How could Jona- 
 than Edwards understand the religious nature of a 
 child, when he piously believed that from birth 
 it was "a little viper" steeped in the "poison" 
 of sin ! Were I asked what religious book I re- 
 gard as the most epochal of the last century in 
 New England or even in America I should answer 
 
362 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 at once : BushneU's " Christian Nui-ture." This 
 book, first published in 1860, — the year following, 
 be it noted, the publication of Darwin's " Origin of 
 Species," — has exerted a quiet but truly remark- 
 able influence. If ever a man "builded better 
 than he knew," it was Bushnell. Scarcely realiz- 
 ing what he was doing, BushneU practically laid 
 the first stone in the foundations of the new 
 theology. That stone was the new position taken 
 that the Christian religion is a matter of natural 
 growth and nurture in man, beginning with the 
 earliest years of childhood. The whole book is a 
 fervid plea for the careful Christian education and 
 training of children from the beginnings of moral 
 existence. When it was published, the times were 
 ripe for the seed sown. The Edwardsian Calvin- 
 istic doctrine of child-nature as poisoned and de- 
 praved by the Adamic sin was losing its hold on 
 the age, partly through the prevalence of Hopkin- 
 sianism which denied natural corruption, though 
 putting something just as bad in its place, but 
 more through the scientific and critical light that 
 was slowly permeating the minds of men. To 
 this day I know of no theological work so fuU of 
 the new religious leaven and spirit that are work- 
 ing in our time as BushneU's '' Christian Nurture ; " 
 and its main teaching concerning the child-nature 
 will, I believe, be the most fruitful feature of 
 those psychological investigations which more than 
 aU other influences combined will give a new shap- 
 ing to theological thought. The new theology 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 363 
 
 will not only be anthropological : it will be a 
 child-anthropology^ and Milton's lines — 
 
 " The childhood shows the man 
 As morning shows the day " — 
 
 will be the first article of its credo. 
 
 Realizing thus how simple and rapid the theo-' 
 logical movement of the twentieth century is likely 
 to be, I am ready to believe that the necessary 
 preliminary work of destructive criticism may soon 
 give way to a new theological construction. It is 
 true that theological changes are usually of creep- 
 ing pace, especially when thought has become 
 stiffened into creeds. Who does not realize it 
 that has studied the history of theological beliefs ? 
 How often does the Scripture adage come to 
 mind, with ever growing impressiveness, " One 
 day with the Lord is as a thousand years " ! The 
 movement of the dogmatic evolutions of the great 
 world religions has been like the geological forma- 
 tion of the crust of the earth. The Ethnic trini- 
 ties antedate all history, and one may follow them 
 until they are lost in the prehistoric origins of the 
 race. Through what long ages may the growth 
 of Christian theology be traced ! As a rule how 
 unyielding and tenacious of its hold on Christian 
 faith has every dogma been ! Yet, on the other 
 hand, it has been proved equally true that "a 
 thousand years with the Lord are as one day." 
 Long deferred was the great Protestant Eeforma- 
 tion that broke for half of Europe the papal yoke ; 
 but when the crisis at last came, a single genera- 
 
364 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 tion sufficed to accomplish the most remarkable 
 ecclesiastical revolt in history. The signs of an 
 equally remarkable theological revolution fiU the 
 religious sky to-day and give no uncertain note of 
 warning that " The time is short,^^ 
 
 I cannot finish this book without touching once 
 more the note which was struck in the last chapter 
 of my previous volume. If the historical evolution 
 of nineteen centuries gave grounds for optimistic 
 hopefulness, how much more occasion for a like 
 sentiment at the conclusion of a survey of man's re- 
 ligious history from the beginning of time ! How 
 infinitely great the contrast between the moral 
 ignorance and blindness of mankind at the outset 
 of their moral life and our clear and intelligent 
 grasp of religious truth to-day ! What makes this 
 contrast the more signal is the fact that in our own 
 generation not only has the true history of nature 
 and man been made known, but also the scientific 
 and historical laws in accordance with which it is 
 guided and will continue to be guided in the 
 future. Here the basis is laid as it was never laid 
 before for confidence and faith. To a degree at 
 least we now know where we are in God's universe 
 and whither we are tending. " God hath spoken 
 to us at the end of these days," by the things that 
 are made, in a manner that cannot be mistaken, 
 and shown that " he is not far from any one of 
 us." Nature, as its laws have proved, is good, not 
 evil, and the God of nature must be good also. 
 Divine revelation, to earlier faith so mysterious, 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 365 
 
 transcendent, and sporadic, has become natural and 
 immanent and harmonious with the faculties of 
 our moral nature. We wait no longer to hear 
 God speak outside of us in some miraculous way, 
 but listen contiaually to " the still small voice " 
 that whispers within our own souls. With the 
 new light of our scientific day the old materialism, 
 with all its degrading and cruel superstitions, has 
 faded into shadows that have gone with the night. 
 Religion with us is no longer of the letter or of 
 the form, but of the spirit. Dogma is but the 
 cast-off badge of a slavery that has given place to 
 " the freedom wherewith Christ hath made us 
 free." Even those fads of religious fancy and 
 custom that human nature delights in at certain 
 stages and in certain moods are dropping off as 
 " childish things." The educated world has at 
 last entered into the inheritance of its full man- 
 hood. As it looks backward it sees the difficult 
 and uncertain path by which it has slowly gained 
 its present point of vision, and turning to the 
 future rejoices in that eternal sweep of unchang- 
 ing divine law which gives such sweet assurance 
 that all things shall continue " as they were from 
 the beginning," only revealing themselves more 
 and more clearly in all their rhythmic order and 
 grace, — 
 
 " Forever singing as they shine, 
 The hand that made us is divine." 
 
 Coming back from such an outlook to the little 
 round of our mortal lives, with their vicissitudes of 
 
366 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 sorrow and joy, loss and gain, good and evil, how 
 can we forget the truth thus learned, that the whole 
 universe in which we live, with all its laws and 
 forces and historical evolutions, declares in one ma- 
 jestic and harmonious accord that " God is good "? 
 It was with a vision not quite cleared from the 
 clouds of old tradition, but with eager gaze into the 
 growing revelations which nature and history had 
 already disclosed, that Tennyson summed up in his 
 " In Memoriam " the half doubting, half believing 
 attitude of the century just ended : — 
 
 " Oh yet we trust that somehow good 
 Will be the final goal of ill, 
 To pangs of nature, sins of will, 
 Defects of doubt, and taints of blood ; 
 
 " That nothing walks with aimless feet ; 
 That not one life shall be destroyed, 
 Or cast as rubbish to the void. 
 When God hath made the pile complete. 
 
 " Behold, we know not anything ; 
 
 I can but trust that good shall fall 
 At last — far oflE — at last, to all. 
 And every winter change to spring. 
 
 "So runs my dream : but what am I ? 
 An infant crying in the night : 
 An infant crying for the light : 
 And with no language but a cry." 
 
 Such a strain, with all its longing after faith, 
 and with its frank confession of agnosticism and 
 doubt, reminds one of the melancholy notes of 
 Virgil's ^neid. Tennyson's " trust " after all is 
 but a " dream," and his expression of it but an 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 367 
 
 " infant's cry." It is " night " still around him. 
 " The light," for which he prays has not yet risen.^ 
 I can but think that the future Tennyson or 
 Virgil of our twentieth century will strike a more 
 hopeful key and sing a nobler song. Browning 
 was only a younger contemporary of Tennyson, 
 but he had caught something of the spirit of the 
 coming age when he wrote that simple yet weird 
 poem, " The Boy and the Angel," from which I 
 quote : — 
 
 " Morning, evening, noon and night, 
 * Praise God ! ' sang Theocrite. 
 
 " Hard he labored, long and well ; 
 O'er his work the boy's curls f elL 
 
 " But ever, at each period, 
 He stopped and sang, ' Praise God ! ' 
 
 " Then back again his curls he threw, 
 And cheerful turned to work anew. 
 
 " He did God's will ; to him, all one 
 If on the earth or in the sun. 
 
 ^ It may be said that the " In Memoriam " does not fairly 
 represent Tennyson's maturer religious views. Allowing this, it 
 remains true that this poem, with all its agnostic and hesitating 
 religious temper, accurately represents the ruling literary spirit of 
 the nineteenth century ; and it may be added that the " In Me- 
 moriam " influenced religiously the age more than all Tennyson's 
 other writings. Nor does it stand alone among these writings in 
 its religious character. The same note of doubt, uncertainty, and 
 unrest is even more strongly struck in " The Two Voices." No 
 doubt, as Teimyson drew nearer to the end of the century, the 
 spirit of unquestioning faith grew on him, and there are clear 
 touches of it in some of his last poems. But if the " In Memo- 
 riam " was the supreme poetical creation of the Victorian age, no 
 less was it the supreme expression of its religious moods. 
 
368 THE ETHNIC TRINITIES 
 
 " God said, * A praise is in mine ear ; 
 There is no doubt in it, no fear ! ' " 
 
 Who does not note the difference in the religious 
 temper of these two poets ? The " In Memoriam " 
 is pensive with a minor strain of baffled moral 
 effort and anxious uncertainty that vibrates all 
 through the poem like a chilling east wind. But 
 Browning has somehow seen a new light — the 
 light of a new scientific and historical day. 
 
 " God said, ' A praise is in mine ear ; 
 There is no doubt in it, no fear ! ' " 
 
 will be the deep undertone and refrain of man's 
 coming religion, — not so much a new religion as 
 a revival of Christ's own religion, simple, spiritual, 
 filled with a sense of God's presence and reflecting 
 his gracious spirit of love. This new age of ours 
 is the heir of two centuries. The eighteenth cen- 
 tury was marked by an intense skeptical reaction 
 from a theology of gloom and fear. The nine- 
 teenth century was an age of conflict between tra- 
 ditional dogmas that were embalmed in creeds and 
 the moral awakening caused by the new revelations 
 of science and history. The twentieth century will 
 be an era of faith built on solid grounds, and of 
 religious freedom and peace. 
 
 Into that new era our survey cannot further 
 carry us. The scroU of God's providence unrolls 
 only as time moves on. But this we knoW, that 
 faith, freedom, and peace are always the harbingers 
 of the highest blessings to man, and of the fullest 
 revelations of God. Political peace, with its ac- 
 
THE NEW PROBLEM OF THEOLOGY 369 
 
 companiment of freedom, has ever been the world's 
 ideal. Men have fought, bled, and died for it. 
 "Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" is 
 still written on the escutcheon of the State of 
 Massachusetts, and fitly symbolizes the Puritan 
 spirit. But political peace is only a crude pre- 
 figurement of moral and spiritual peace and har- 
 mony. Towards this the noblest souls of the race 
 have always striven. "Peace I leave with you" 
 was Christ's last message to his sorrowing com- 
 panions. It is in such an atmosphere that man 
 receives the clearest and purest inspirations. Only 
 after the storm on the Gralilean lake had subsided, 
 and the tumult in the hearts of Christ's disciples 
 had been stilled, did they gain a new apprehension 
 of his marvelous nature and exclaim : " What 
 manner of man is this ? " Not in times of " Sturm 
 und Drang " are the highest heavens opened. 
 Wordsworth had caught the true secret of the 
 " open vision " in the strangely mystical lines : — 
 
 " Hence in a season of calm weather 
 Though inland far we be, 
 Our souls have sight of that immortal sea 
 Which brought us hither, 
 Can in a moment travel thither, 
 And see the children sport upon the shore, 
 And hear the mighty waters rolling evermore." 
 
INDEX 
 
 Abbott, Ltman, criticism of " Evolu- 
 tion of Trinitarianism," 213; ob- 
 jects to my view of Paul's media- 
 tional theology, 213; declares that 
 I make Paul an Arian, 213; real 
 point of objection to my interpreta- 
 tion, 215 ; his dislike of the media- 
 tion doctrine, 216; thinks I mis- 
 imderstand Paul, 216; my view of 
 evolution of Trinitarianism " fatally 
 defective," 218; " fatal ^defect " of 
 Dr. Abbott's whole criticism, 218 ; 
 admits the laws of natiire to be in- 
 violable with a single exception, 347. 
 
 *• American Journal of Theology," 
 article, 183. 
 
 Amiel, H. F., quoted, 199. 
 
 Apostles' Creed, title legendary, 232 ; 
 not earlier in original form than 
 third century, 233 ; reached its pre- 
 sent shape in eighth century as a 
 Latin creed of Western Church, 235. 
 
 Aristotle, passage from De Calo, 16 ; 
 not a trinitarian, 18 ; threefold law 
 of the syllogism, 18 ; Nicomachean 
 Ethics, 309 ; corrected ethical vacil- 
 lation of Plato, 310. 
 
 Athenagoras held Holy Spirit to be an 
 effluence (not personal) from Gk)d, 
 241. 
 
 Athene, mediator between gods and 
 men, 108 ; central figure of Odyssey, 
 108; analysis of action of Odys- 
 sey, 108 ; various incarnations, 109 ; 
 intercessor for men, 108; mediat- 
 ing character, 110 ; " in fashion 
 as a man," 112; motherly char- 
 acter, 113; compared with Mary, 
 mother of Jesus, 114; "called vir- 
 gin," 114. 
 
 Augustine, use of tripartite character 
 of soul in work on Trinity, 18; 
 Contra Mendacium, 312. 
 
 Babylonian epic of creation, 221. 
 
 Bacon, B. W., article in " Biblical 
 World," 218 ; on the Fourth Gospel, 
 quoted, 263. 
 
 Baptism, originally "into Christ," 
 230 ; evolution of trinitarian for- 
 mula, 231, 232. 
 
 Barnabas, epistle of, 228. 
 
 Bertrand, A., La Religion des Gau- 
 lois, 102, note. 
 
 Bhagavatgita {Divine Song), 54, 123. 
 
 Brahm, absolute form of personal 
 Brahma, 43. 
 
 Browning, R., " The Boy and the An- 
 gel," quoted, 367 ; compared with 
 Tennyson, 368. 
 
 Buddha (Gautama), 39 ; character of 
 teaching, 40; collection of reputed 
 sayings, 40; comparison with 
 Christ's sayings, 41 ; lives of B. 
 mostly legendary ; likeness to gos- 
 pel accounts of Christ, 42 ; tempta- 
 tion by the Evil One, 42; relation 
 of Buddhist and Christian tradi- 
 tions, 42 ; B. in later Hindoo tradi- 
 tion an incarnation of Vishnu. 
 
 Buddhism, 39 ; not a dogmatic revolt 
 from earlier Hindoo ideas, 57 ; its 
 dogma of an incarnation of Gk>d the 
 only historical counterpart to that 
 of Christianity, 58 ; tolerant charac- 
 ter, 275. 
 
 Bushnell, H., "Christian Nurture," 
 most epochal book of last century in 
 America, 362; doctrine of child 
 nurture fruitful in psychological 
 investigations, 362. 
 
 Capttolinb temple, 118. 
 
 Carey, Professor, " Synoptic Gos- 
 pels," quoted, 223. 
 
 Christian angelology and demonology, 
 276; radically similar to Ethnic 
 
372 
 
 INDEX 
 
 ideas, 276; essentially polytheistic 
 in Middle Ages, 278. 
 
 "Christian Register," quoted, 354, 
 note. 
 
 Christian religion, no more "histori- 
 cal " than Ethnic religions, 194, 
 197 ; comes under the strict law of 
 historical evolution, 198 ; traditional 
 view of, as the one divine gospel, 
 199 ; entrance into Greek world be- 
 gins a new chapter of history, 210 ; 
 its philosophy radically changed, 
 211 ; Paul and early Fathers influ- 
 enced by Greek thought, 211 ; close 
 historical connection between Chris- 
 tian and Ethnic religions, 212; in- 
 tolerant as compared with Ethnic 
 religions, 275. 
 
 Christian theology essentially a Chris- 
 tology, 220. 
 
 Christianity, as a world-religion, 281; 
 religion and the religious instinct 
 in men essentially one, 282; God, 
 one, 282 ; world-religion finally one, 
 283; not an external vmity, 283; 
 creeds and dogmas barriers to unity, 
 283 ; comparative ineffectualness of 
 Christian missions, 285; necessity 
 of revival of Christ's original gospel, 
 286 ; its ruling force, 286 ; crisis in 
 history of, 291 ; how made ready 
 for its work, 293 ; causes of unreadi- 
 ness, 293 ; gradual shifting of reli- 
 gious leadership, 297 ; exposed to 
 dangers within and without, 298; 
 as organized, exposed to two perils, 
 298 ; churches wedded to forms of 
 religious truth out of joint with our 
 times, 301 ; campaign of education 
 imperatively needed, 302; proper 
 teaching of the young, 302; false 
 reliance on perpetuity of organized 
 chiurch, 303 ; no institution can live 
 simply on its past, 305; peculiar 
 character of religious insincerity, 
 306 ; sincerity of Christ, 306 ; ethics 
 of Plato and Aristotle, 307 ; influ- 
 ence on church, 309 ; " officiosum 
 mendacium,^^ 309; Old Testament 
 ethical teaching, 310 ; effect on eth- 
 ics of the theory of " double sense " 
 in Scripture, 311 ; lawful use of dis- 
 simulation against heretics, 311 ; 
 Augustine's " contra mendacium,^^ 
 
 312; ethics of "offlciosum menda- 
 cium^^ continued after Protestant 
 revolt, 314 ; inherited virus of in- 
 sincerity in the church to-day, 315 ; 
 Aristotle on dissimulation, 319; 
 sin of suppressio veri, 320 ; modem 
 Biblical exegesis, 320 ; " I go not up 
 to this feast," 321 ; change of ovk 
 to ovwoi, 321 ; Jerome, quoted, 321 ; 
 charges of Porphyry, 322 ; Jerome's 
 defense, 322 ; Lardner, N., quoted, 
 324; Alford's exegesis, 325; ex- 
 planation of Alford's extraordinary 
 interpretation, 327 ; fatal flaw, 328 ; 
 effect of new light on Johannine 
 problem, 329; Tholuck's exegesis, 
 330 ; Bishop Ellicott rejects pre- 
 vious interpretations, 331 ; his own, 
 an amazing " wresting of Scrip- 
 ture," 333; results of theory of 
 " officiosum niendacium,''^ 334 ; re- 
 action through new spirit of the 
 age, 335 ; Christianity like an old 
 palimpsest, 336; the apocalypse, 
 its interpretation, 338. 
 
 Clement, epistle of, 227. 
 
 Comforter (Paraclete), not mentioned 
 by Justin Martyr, 240; Irenseus 
 first to mention it, and quote from 
 Fourth Gospel, 241; of Greek ori- 
 gin, traceable to Philo, 262 ; doctrine 
 of, not taught in the synoptics, 263. 
 
 " Congregationalist," quoted, 354, 
 note. 
 
 Constantine, devoted to worship of 
 sun-god, 25. 
 
 Cross, sign of the, 94 ; origin, pre- 
 historic, 94 ; f oimd in all parts of 
 the world, 96 ; not original with 
 Christianity, 96 ; pre-Christian, dif- 
 ferent in significance from Chris- 
 tian, 97, 99 ; early form, 97 ; Latin 
 form, later, 97 ; made by Constan- 
 tine the great symbol of Christianity, 
 99 ; gradual blending of pre-Chris- 
 tian and Christian conceptions, 100; 
 illustrated from early Christian art, 
 100 ; history of : La Religion des 
 Gaulois, Bertrand, 102, note. 
 
 Crucifix, origin as late as seventh 
 century, 97. 
 
 Dabk Ages, religion of, one of cre- 
 dulity, fear, and cruelty, 279. 
 
INDEX 
 
 373 
 
 Darmesteter, J., Avestan scholar, 
 
 quoted, 67. 
 Darwin, Charles, " Origin of Species " 
 
 (Oct. 1, 1859), 292. 
 Defoe, 20. 
 
 Emmons, N., quoted, 25."*. 
 
 Ethnic religions, traditional view of, 
 as essentially evil and false, result 
 of historical ignorance, 182 ; Paul's 
 indictment against, equally appli- 
 cable to a degenerate Christianity, 
 182 ; upward progress of, 183. 
 
 Evolution, physical versus historical, 
 4 ; illustrated in the history of reli- 
 gions, 5; Christianity no exception, 
 6 ; law of, historical, universal, and 
 without break, 191. 
 
 "Evolution of Trinitarianism " criti- 
 cised, 216-218, 360, 
 
 Faibbaibn, a. M., 19. 
 
 Family, the, root of trinitarian idea, 
 22. 
 
 Father, origin of term as applied to 
 God, 23. 
 
 Feminine element in Trinity, absence 
 of, in Christian dogma, 253 ; Mary, a 
 true human mother, 253 ; substitu- 
 tion of Holy Spirit for Mary, 254 ; 
 in " Gospel of the Hebrews " the 
 Holy Spirit is called Christ's mo- 
 ther, 255 ; why the feminine ele- 
 ment failed to prevail, 255 ; loss felt 
 in Christian consciousness, 256. 
 
 Fergusson, J., " History of Architec- 
 ture," plan of triple Etruscan tem- 
 ple, 118. 
 
 Fourth Gospel, first gives theory of 
 Comforter and procession from the 
 Father, 281 ; Athanasius rested de- 
 fense of homoousian trinity prima- 
 rily on, 262 ; historicity of, 262 ; 
 whether the words imputed to 
 Christ concerning Comforter were 
 spoken by him, 262. (For writer's 
 judgment on authenticity of, see 
 Appendix A on "The Johannine 
 Problem," m " Evolution of Trini- 
 terianism," 264.) 
 
 G-ATHAs, oldest Avestan writing, 68 ; 
 picture of Zoroaster, 68 ; evolution 
 of supernatural and miraculous ele- 
 
 ments, 68 ; remarkable resemblances 
 to events in life of Christ, 68. 
 
 Generation, eternal, developed by Plo- 
 tinus, emphasized by Origeu and 
 Athanasius, 252. 
 
 Generation idea, behind divine triads, 
 22 ; fundamental to all Ethnic trini- 
 ties, and to Christian dogma, 251. 
 
 Gibbon, E., quoted, 90. 
 
 Gnosticism, Zoroastrian in origin, 77, 
 88. 
 
 God,' the earliest conception of, 33; 
 can exist only in trinity, so held by 
 Plotinus and present day theolo- 
 gians, 249. 
 
 Greek religion, originally polytheistic, 
 92 ; earlier philosophy of, 124; new 
 epoch of Socrates, Plato, and Aris- 
 totle, 124. 
 
 Haecsel, Eenst, " The Kiddle of the 
 Universe," 350. 
 
 "Hebrews, Gospel of," early gos- 
 pel, mostly lost, 255 ; quoted, 255. 
 
 Heartley, C. A., Harmonia Syrtibo- 
 lica, 235. 
 
 Holy Spirit, evolution of, as third Per- 
 son of Trinity, 222 ; in Old Testa- 
 ment always adjunctive or adjecti- 
 val, setting forth the divine activity, 
 222; Christ's doctrme of, 223 ; Paul, 
 Jewish monotheist, 224; used the 
 term as synonymous with God, 224; 
 illustrated tendency towards per- 
 sonality, 225; doxologies, to God 
 only, 226 ; view of i)ost- Apostolic 
 Fathers, 226; tendencies towards 
 evolution of H. S. , as third person, 
 along three lines of movement, 235 ; 
 Justin Martyr, wavering "view of," 
 239 ; question whether H. S. is a 
 member of Trinity or creature not 
 settled until Nicene age, 240 ; Ori- 
 gen and Arius held that H. S. had a 
 beginning in time, 240; procession 
 of, in Christian trinity, 253 ; doc- 
 trine of H. S. as third person, a sort 
 of historical necessity, 254; "pro- 
 cession " does not appear in creeds 
 until fourth century, 261 ; why pro- 
 cession of third person instead of 
 generation, 261 ; found in Fourth 
 Gospel, 361 ; real meaning of proces- 
 sion, 265. 
 
374 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Homer, use of, prohibited by Plato in 
 
 scheme of education, 92. 
 Huss, John, violation of safe conduct 
 
 by Council of Constance, 313. 
 
 loNATiAN Epistles, seven longer, 
 largely interpolated, 236; seven 
 shorter, fewer interpolations, 236; 
 not to be accepted as genuine, 236 ; 
 results of comparison of two ver- 
 sions, 236, 237 ; " Comforter " and 
 "Word" found in longer, but not 
 in shorter, 238 ; conclusive testi- 
 mony to fluxive character of early 
 trinitarianism, 238. 
 
 niad, its trinity, 103 ; subordination- 
 ism, 105 ; mediational character of 
 Athene, 105. 
 
 lUingworth, J. K., quoted, 195 ; treats 
 Christian dogmas as historical facts, 
 196. 
 
 Incarnation, two classes of theory of, 
 51 ; distinction between incarnation 
 and mediation theories, 52 ; stages 
 of evolution of dogma, 71. 
 
 Inge, W. R., holds that Plotinus was 
 not a pantheist, 183 ; apparent mis- 
 understanding of phrase "sameness 
 and otherness," 184 ; view savors of 
 8abellianism, 185 ; extracts from 
 the Enneads that prove Plotinus a 
 pantheist, 185 ; misunderstanding 
 of term exacrTos, 186 ; says " Ploti- 
 nus is no Buddhist," 188. 
 
 Irenseus, first to give a creed on trin- 
 itarian basis, 241 ; introduces third 
 stage of evolution of trinity, 242 ; 
 marked by use of Fourth Gospel, 
 and doctrine of Comforter, 242. 
 
 " Isis and Osiris," attributed to Plu- 
 tarch, genuiueuesa somewhat doubt- 
 ful, 137. 
 
 Jesds Cheist, had no mediation doc- 
 trine, 60 ; a truly historical person- 
 age, 192 ; legends of miraculous 
 birth common to all religious epochs 
 and characters, 193 ; such legends 
 misgrowths of a credulous and un- 
 critical age, 194 ; J. C, not the 
 author of new dogmas, 201 ; or of a 
 new philosophy, 202 ; or of a new 
 system of ethics, 203 ; new " moral 
 consciousness " of character of God 
 
 and of man's relation to Him, 205 ; 
 love, the substance of religion, 205; 
 gospel originally given in Hebrew- 
 Aramaic, 206; divinizing of J. C, 
 the liistorical starting point of Chris- 
 tian trinity, 270 ; and the theological 
 centre of Christianity, 271 ; fallacy 
 of apology concerning C. as histori- 
 cal person, 272 ; most honored when 
 truth told of him, 279. 
 Jupiter Capitolinus, 118. 
 
 Kant, E., quoted, 319. 
 
 Krishna, incarnation of Vishnu, 47 ; 
 pre-Christian, 50; differences be- 
 tween it and the Christian dog^ma, 
 
 Lectistebnium, 118. 
 
 Lightfoot, Bishop, on Ignatian Epis- 
 tles, 236. 
 
 Aoyos (logos), unfortunate error of 
 Latin version of N. T., perpetuated 
 in English versions, 128; meaning 
 of, in proem of Fourth Gospel, 129 ; 
 introduced by Heracleitus into phi- 
 losophical language, 129 ; Plato's use 
 of, 129 ; how logos doctrine is traced 
 to Plato, 130 ; Philo's substitution 
 of Aoyo? for ^vxv as mediation prin- 
 ciple, 131 ; logos of Fourth Gospel, 
 132. 
 
 Lonsdale and Lee, translators of 
 ^neid, quoted, 121. 
 
 Maha-Bharata, 43. 
 
 Marduk, "first-bom," "only begot- 
 ten," "son of Ea," 25. 
 
 Mary, Virgin, doctrine and cultus of, 
 not peculiar to Christianity, 71 ; mo- 
 ther of Jesus, 114 ; raised in Catho- 
 lic theology to divine rank, as 
 mediator, 114 ; represents the 
 feminine element in mediation, 114; 
 "Queen of Heaven," 116; process 
 of evolution of dogma of, 252 ; pop- 
 ularity of cult of, in the Middle 
 Ages, 257 ; Catholic effort to place 
 M. in the Trinity, 258; at Christ's 
 side in paintings, 258 ; cult of M. 
 growing among Protestants, 259; 
 how defensible, 260 ; only possible 
 direct witness of virginity, 263. 
 
 McCosh, J., " The Supernatural in re- 
 
INDEX 
 
 375 
 
 lation to the Natural," 346 ; repre- 
 sents the traditional pre-Darwlnian 
 view of nature and miracle, 346 ; 
 accepts full historicity of Scrip- 
 ture miracles, 347 ; holds that the 
 laws of nature may admit of excep- 
 tions, 347; with Dr. L. Abbott, 
 who admits a single exception, 
 viz., the miraculous birth of Christ, 
 348. 
 
 Mediation idea, how it led to a trinity, 
 28 ; tended to union with generation 
 idea, 28; difference between Mith- 
 raic and Christian, 85. 
 
 Mediator, origin of idea of, 26 ; in the 
 Ethnic trinities, 27 ; in Plato, 27 ; 
 in Vedic hymn to Agni, 27 ; Sosiosh 
 as Zoroastrian, 79 ; /xeaiTTjs (media- 
 tor) introduced by Philo into Greek 
 philosophy, 131 ; made the keynote 
 of Paul's Christology, 132 ; also of 
 Epistle to Hebrews, 132. 
 
 Michelet, French historian, in Bible 
 de V Humanity expresses preference 
 for dualism, 89. 
 
 Mill, James, view of dualism as theory 
 of universe, 89. 
 
 Mills, L. H., quoted, 65. 
 
 Mithra, sim-god in Yedas, 81 ; in 
 Avesta, creature of Ormuzd, 81 ; in 
 later Zoroastrianism, the great me- 
 diator, 81 ; Mithraic triad, 82 ; spread 
 of Mithraic cult in Roman world, 
 82 ; takes place of Ormuzd as head 
 of Zoroastrian trinity, 84; temples 
 of, closed by Theodosius, 89 ; Mith- 
 raic cult, overthrown by Christian 
 emperors, 89, 90 ; to be condemned, 
 91. 
 
 Mohammedanism, had a mediation 
 element, 60 ; half-brother to Chris- 
 tianity, 275. 
 
 Monotheism, as the primitive revela- 
 tion,? ; of Genesis as reformed ver- 
 sion of older polytheism, 78. 
 
 Moses, a " mediator," but not deified, 
 59. 
 
 Mythology, essentially a system of 
 symbolism, 102; product of imagi- 
 nation, 102 ; comparison of Greek 
 with other forms of, 103. 
 
 New Platonism, begins with Philo 
 and Plutarch, 136 ; teat words ; ideal- 
 
 ism, mediation, evolution, 136 ; 
 change from Platonism radical, 136. 
 
 Nimbus, or aureole, sign of saintliness 
 or divinity, 101 ; connection with 
 sign of cross, 101. 
 
 Numbers, sacredness of, 15 ; 8i)ecial 
 sacredness of seven and three, 16; 
 Pythagorean idea of the propitious 
 character of odd numbers, 16. 
 
 Numenius, midway between Plutarch 
 and Plotinus, 148; "three gods," 
 148 ; follower of Plato, 148 ; signifi- 
 cance of, 149 ; generation doctrine 
 applied to whole trinity, 150 ; the 
 world, a member of trinity, 150. 
 
 Odyssey, of later date than Hiad, 105; 
 Athene supplants Here, 105 ; Apollo 
 becomes member of trinity, 106 ; 
 mediating function joined to sec- 
 ond person, 106 ; Odyssey com- 
 pared with Iliad, 106 ; its theme, 
 107 ; chief characters, 107 ; Athene 
 the central x>ersonage, 108 ; O. un- 
 rivalled in Ethnic literature, 112; 
 second person of trinity a woman» 
 113 ; O. compared with ^neid, 122; 
 "Divine Song" of Ethnic Bible, 
 123. 
 
 Old Testament, ethical teaching of, 
 310. 
 
 Origen, theory of mediatorship be- 
 tween God and Satan, 86, 88; O. 
 laid foundation of completed dogma 
 of Holy Spirit as third person, 242 ; 
 regarded H. S. as a creature, 243 ; a 
 monotheistic trinitarian, 243. 
 
 Pantheon, pagan temple, dedicated to 
 " Mary and all the saints," 278. 
 
 Paul, Greek training of, 207 ; founder 
 of Graeco-Roman Christianity, 208 ; 
 instrument of transfer of Christian- 
 ity from Semitic to Aryan world, 
 209; mediation doctrine of, de- 
 fended against view of Dr. Lyman 
 Abbott, 213 ; not an Arian, 214 ; did 
 not make Christ identical with God, 
 214. 
 
 Paulsen, " System of Ethics," quoted, 
 319. 
 
 Penelope, painting of, at Pompeii, 107. 
 
 Persian religion, relation to Indian, 
 64. 
 
376 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Petrie, Flindera, quoted, 210. 
 
 Philo, agency in developing Logos 
 doctrine, 130 ; historical founder of 
 logos mediation theology, 131 ; in- 
 troduced the term /u.e<7tr»js (media- 
 tor), 131 ; not a trinitarian, 132 ; his 
 " mediator " not a strict person, 133. 
 
 Plato, called God, Father, 24 ; quoted, 
 62 ; idealistic dualist, 125 ; media- 
 tion doctrine, 126 ; three principles 
 of being, 126 ; how the phenomenal 
 world is produced, 126; basis of 
 trinitarian development, 127 ; germ 
 of Logos doctrine, 128 ; eliminated 
 fabulous materials from philosophy, 
 134 ; trinitarian germs, 166 ; ethical 
 views, 307 ; opposed use of Homer 
 in education, 307 ; " lie in words " 
 sometimes necessary, 308 ; influence 
 of, on Christian morals, 309. 
 
 Pliny, Elder, quoted, 16. 
 
 Plotinus, historical connection with 
 Numenius, 152 ; differences between 
 them, 152 ; influence of Plato and 
 Aristotle, 153 ; philosophical system 
 essentially original, 154 ; Plotinian 
 trinity alone the work of a single 
 religious genius, 154 ; built a meta- 
 physical trinity on Platonic founda- 
 tions, 155 ; trinity has no mytholo- 
 gical background, wholly transcen- 
 dental, no divine incarnation, 156 ; 
 originality of genius, 157 ; a man 
 of faith, 157 ; unique power as a 
 thinker, 157 ; aim practical and re- 
 ligious, 159; analysis of famous 
 chapter, V. 1, in the Enneads, 160; 
 souls mimortal, and descended 
 from metaphysical world, 160, 161 ; 
 assumes idealistic dualism, 161 ; 
 " Sameness and Otherness," Plato's 
 dualistic key, adopted, 164; full 
 evolution of a trinity, 168 ; peculiar 
 double character of third hypostasis, 
 172 ; eternal generation of trinity, 
 173; subordination of second and 
 third hypostases, 173 ; soul homoou- 
 sios with God, 174 ; opposes Gnos- 
 tics, 174 ; limits trinitarian evolu- 
 tion to three, 175 ; three hypostases 
 not personal beings, 176 ; " other- 
 ness " the bridge from transcendent 
 to material world, 177 ; moral power 
 of, 178. 
 
 Plutarch, quoted, 16 ; styles the gods 
 *' saviours," 74 ; a Platonist, 135 ; 
 ruling feature of his system, media- 
 tion, prepared way for Plotinus, 134; 
 monistic rather than dualistic, 136 ; 
 new philosophic key, evolution, 136 ; 
 a philosophical eclectic, 138 ; found 
 in the Egyptian Osiris myth, a phil- 
 osophic trinity, 138 ; seeks to bring 
 Plato's three principles of existence 
 into harmony with the Egyptian 
 triad, Osiris, Isis, and Horus, 142 ; 
 affinity not real, 143 ; opened the 
 path from theism to pantheism, 144 ; 
 two steps towards it, 145; led the 
 way to the trinity of Numeuius, 
 148. 
 
 Polycarp, Epistle of, 228. 
 
 Polytheism, traditional view of its 
 origin, 7 ; Paul most influential ex- 
 poimder, 8 ; historical view of ori- 
 gin, 8. 
 
 Porphyry, letter to Marcella, 180. 
 
 Pythagoras, held in great repute by 
 Greek Fathers, 248. 
 
 Rawlinson, G., on Egyptian trinities, 
 15. 
 
 Reconstruction, in theology, 341. 
 
 Renan, E., quoted, 90, 258. 
 
 Revelation, book of, Zoroastrian ele- 
 ments, 76. 
 
 R^ville, Albert, Histoire du dogme de 
 la divinitS de JSsus Christ, quoted, 
 258. 
 
 Rdville, Jean, La Religion sous les 
 Severes, quoted, 88. 
 
 Roman religion, appendix to Greek, 
 116 ; abstract character, 117 ; trin- 
 ity, 117 ; Capitoline trinity, of 
 Etruscan origin, 110 ; comparison 
 of R. trinity with Greek, 119. 
 
 Sanday, Professor, suggestion con- 
 cerning origin of Apostles' Creed, 
 232. 
 
 Satan, Ahriman of A vesta, 77 ; de- 
 velopment of doctrine of, in the 
 church, 86; Origen's doctrine of, 
 drawn indirectly from Zoroastrian- 
 ism, 86. 
 
 Sayce, Professor, quoted, 23. 
 
 Schaff, P., 21 ; quoted on Apostlea* 
 Creed, 234. 
 
INDEX 
 
 377 
 
 Seneca, quoted, 61 ; " Letters of Paul 
 and Seneca," spurious, 61. 
 
 Servius, commentator on Virgil, 
 quoted, 118. 
 
 Shedd, W. G. T., 19. 
 
 Smith, H. B., quoted, 10. 
 
 Soaiosh, Zoroastrian "saviour," 73; 
 mythical being, 74 ; supernatural 
 son of Zoroaster, 74; divine mes- 
 senger of Ormuzd to raise the dead 
 and judge the world, 75. 
 
 Strauss, D. F., quoted, 342. 
 
 Symbolism, fundamental in human 
 thought and language, 94. 
 
 Symbols, of cross, 94 ; of sun, 95 ; 
 their religious character, 96 ; found 
 in aU parts of world, 96; of cross 
 and wheel, 98 ; original significance, 
 98,99. 
 
 Swastica, Hindoo gammated cross, 
 
 Talmud, quoted, 224. 
 
 Tauribolium, rite of Mithraic wor- 
 ship, 83, 
 
 " Teaching of Twelve Apostles," 229 ; 
 illustrates inchoate character of 
 trinitarian idea, 231 ; no trace of 
 Pauline mediatorship, 231 ; Christ 
 the " servant of God," 231 ; doxol- 
 <^es monotheistic, 231 : baptismal 
 formula, first in trinitarian form, 
 231. 
 
 Tennyson, Alfred, quoted, 62, 366; 
 compared with Browning, 368. 
 
 *' Tetractys," Pythagorean term, 
 usual form of oath, 246. 
 
 Theologry, the new problem of, 340; 
 two sides or aspects, 341 ; contrast 
 with problem of nineteenth century, 
 342 ; " Origin of Species," 343 ; 
 mortal confiict betweeen law of im- 
 interrupted evolution and the tra- 
 ditional principle of supernatural 
 intervention by special creation 
 and miracle, 343 ; victory of science 
 and historical criticism, 344, 345 ; 
 the new problem, the complete 
 harmonizing of scientific, historical 
 and religious truth, 344; downfall 
 of old theology, 344 ; the new, must 
 be scientific, 350 ; other aspect of 
 problem, 351 ; effect of harmonizing 
 of science and religion on missionary 
 
 movement, 351 ; false assumption 
 that Ethnic religious systems are 
 effete, 354, note ; problem of Chris- 
 tianization of world more complex 
 than ordinarily supposed, 355, note ; 
 great Oriental religions cannot be 
 overthrown by theological dogmas, 
 356; construction of new theology 
 simple and easy, 355, 366 ; essential 
 feature, anthropological, 357 ; de- 
 velopment rapid, 358; monism 
 versus dualism, 359 ; new theology 
 not metaphysical but moral, 360, 
 361; effect of Bushnell's "Chris- 
 tian Nurture," 362 ; grounds for 
 optimistic hopefulness, 364 ; Tenny- 
 son as representative of reUgioua 
 temper of nineteenth century, 366 ; 
 Browning, of the twentieth, 367 ; 
 faith, freedom and peace, watch- 
 words of the future, 368. 
 
 Theophilus, makes "wisdom" third 
 person in place of H. S., 241. 
 
 Three, the complete or perfect num- 
 ber, according to Aristotle, 16. 
 
 "Transcript," Boston, quoted, 354, 
 note. 
 
 Triad, a principle of nature according 
 to Aristotle, 17. 
 
 Triadal idea, 244 ; how it entered into 
 Christian theology, 248. 
 
 Triads, widely spread over the world, 
 7 ; relation to Pantheism, 11. 
 
 Trimurti, Hindoo, 43; history of its 
 evolution, 43-45. 
 
 Trinitarianism, its origin, 9 ; a half- 
 way house from polytheism to the 
 doctrine of the divine unity, 10; 
 Zoroastrian, why comparatively in- 
 complete, 78. 
 
 Trinities, Ethnic, comparatively late 
 in development, 12 ; historical ori- 
 gin unknown, 14 ; result of a long 
 evolution, 14; why trinity rather 
 than duad or quatemity, 14; ex- 
 planation of rise of, 22 ; stage to- 
 ward pantheism, 29 ; of diverse and 
 independent origin, 32 ; result from 
 common religious instincts and 
 needs of human nature, 32 ; subject 
 to various evolutionary changes, 35 ; 
 persistency of trinitarian idea, 36; 
 Ethnic and Christian, alike under 
 the common law of historical evo- 
 
378 
 
 INDEX 
 
 lutjon, 219, 243; comparison of 
 internal characteristics, 243; in- 
 ternal resemblances, 250 ; mediation 
 element, the closest bond, 266; 
 mediational terms characterize 
 Ethnic trinities as the Christian 
 dogma, 267 ; French critic quoted, 
 268 ; internal differences, 270 ; in- 
 flexibility of Christian dogma due 
 to external rather than internal 
 causes, 274 ; resemblances radical, 
 differences superficial, 279. 
 Trinity, Christian dogma of, supposed 
 to be part of original revelation in 
 Genesis, 12; "social trinity" criti- 
 cised, 19; Vedic, 37; Brahmanic, 
 43; Christian dogma derived from 
 Greek philosophy, 219 ; a historical 
 evolution, 222; illustrated in case 
 of third person, 222; the word 
 trinity (Greek, rpias, Latin, trini- 
 tas) does not appear till Theophilus 
 (A. D. 168-188), 239. 
 
 Ultssbs, hero of Odyssey, 106. 
 
 Vkdas, 37. 
 
 Virgil, quoted, 16 ; Capitoline trinity 
 in the JCneid, 120; fatalism, 121; 
 
 JSneid compared with Odyssey, 
 
 122. 
 Virgin births, in Ethnic religions, 71. 
 Vishnu, incarnation of, 47. 
 
 Watts, Isaac, character of hymns, 
 
 318. 
 Westcott, Bishop, quoted, 15. 
 Wordsworth, quoted, 369. 
 
 Zend-Avesta, dates of, 67 ; completed 
 before Christian era, 69 ; quoted, 
 91. 
 
 Zoroaster, whether a myth, or histori- 
 cal person, 51, 64 ; a practical re- 
 former, 65; monotheist, 65; life 
 largely legendary, 66; explanation 
 of resemblances between lives of 
 Z., Buddha, and Christ, 70; reli- 
 gious teachings of, 72 ; closely akin 
 to later Judaism, 73 ; historical con- 
 nection with J., 73. 
 
 Zoroastrianism, a reaction from poly- 
 theism, 64; its later dualism, an 
 evolution, 65 ; post-exilic Jewish 
 ideas derived from, 73 ; three stages 
 in development of, 73 ; historical 
 connection between Z. and Chris- 
 tian eschatology, 75. 
 
ElectrotyPed and printed by H. O. Houghton &* Co. 
 Cambridge, Mass.^ U.S. A. 
 
Press Notices of Dr. Paine's Previous Work : 
 
 A CRITICAL HISTORY OF 
 
 THE EVOLUTION OF 
 
 TRINITARIANISM 
 
 AND ITS OUTCOME IN THE NEW CHRISTOLOGY 
 
 Crown 8vOj gilt top, $2.00 
 
 There have been few works on theology published within 
 recent years more deserving of serious attention than this 
 volume of Professor Paine's. Its significance lies in the 
 fact that it is an expression of to-day's theological self- 
 consciousness. It voices, and voices well, the demands 
 made by those who accept the results of unprejudiced crit- 
 ical processes for a theology resting, not on assumptions, but 
 on facts derived by positive methods. 
 
 Professor Paine shows himself an exceedingly acute and 
 stimulating expositor of the development of doctrine. It 
 would be difficult to find elsewhere a more lucid presenta- 
 tion of Athauasian trinitarianism, or a more revolutionary 
 exposition of Augustinianism. — Biblical Worlds Chicago. 
 
 This is a book which every serious-minded minister should 
 read in order that he may understand the spirit of the his- 
 torical school of theological study. Here is an investigator 
 who deals with the fundamentals, and whose methods and 
 processes strike deep into the very foundations of the dog- 
 matic structure of Christianity. 
 
 The book is written in a most vigorous and pellucid style. 
 No more quickening, absorbing, and stimulating book could 
 be taken by a minister for occasional reading in his summer 
 holidays. — Standard, Chicago. 
 
 Our author outdoes the most extreme Ritschlians in his 
 view of the needlessness and harmfulness of metaphysics in 
 theology. Within the limits of a brief review it is only 
 possible to give a resume of a book which raises a multitude 
 of fundamental questions in history, criticism, and philoso- 
 phy. It is the work of an acute and reverent mind, and 
 deserves to be taken seriously. It is to be hoped that it will 
 not fail of adequate criticism. It is a frank and candid 
 book ; let it be frankly and candidly met and answered. — 
 Prof. George B. Stevens, Yale Divinity School, in The 
 London Christian World. 
 
 A noteworthy book, the product of many years of research, 
 reflection, and teaching. It is both critical and constructive, 
 and is a highly finished fruit of the naturalistic school. . . . 
 The author has many striking qualities of style ; he is al- 
 ways lucid and vigorous. — Hartford Seminary Record. 
 
Marks a stage far in advance of anything that has come 
 from the pen of a Congregationalist. In style the book is 
 stimulating from its lucidity, accuracy, and force. — The 
 Advance, Chicago. 
 
 This is a profound book, written by a master in one of 
 our theological schools, — the result of thirty years of con- 
 tinuous and critical study and meditation. — Zion's Herald, 
 Boston. 
 
 Professor Paine writes with the deeply sincere convictions 
 of an earnest seeker after truth, in the frankest and most 
 straightforward manner, and with the fullest recognition 
 of the prevalent differences of opinion. 
 
 As an unequivocal expression of the transitional forms of 
 belief of the modern scientific school of theology it will take 
 rank as a very noteworthy volume. — The Presbyterian, 
 Nashville, Tenn. 
 
 It is immensely significant as the work of a teacher in one 
 of our most conservative theological institutions. It is the 
 boldest book which we have had from any Orthodox enclos- 
 ure. — The Christian Register, Boston. 
 
 A radically good book. . . . Any one who has time for a 
 careful study of Christian doctrines will find this book hon- 
 est, thorough, and — shall we say it ? — free from that pro- 
 pensity to lie for the truth's sake which characterizes so 
 large a part of theological production. The key-note of the 
 book is Faith in God and not in dogma. — Unity, Chicago. 
 
 This volume supplies a discussion of the historical devel- 
 opment of the doctrine of the Trinity which for clarity and 
 suggestiveness has not been surpassed for many years in the 
 field of American theology. The strength of the book is in 
 its historical method. It is a comfort to read one who hates 
 a fog of words. — The Independent, New York. 
 
 He has courage to come out and tell from the housetops 
 what other scholars have been muttering among themselves 
 in a corner in all our leading seminaries. — Springfield Re- 
 publican. 
 
 Beyond all question the book is, as one of its hostile crit- 
 ics admits, one of the ablest and subtlest presentations of 
 the new school of thinkers. . . . The style is direct, terse, 
 and clear as rock-water. — Dr. Wm. Matthews, in the 
 Boston Transcript. 
 
 I am immensely interested in the book as res gesta, — as 
 a part of contemporary ecclesiastical history, and a very 
 honorable and important part. ... It seems to me that one 
 of the most remarkable things about your very remarkable 
 book is the way the world (including the Church) has taken 
 it. — Dr. Leonard W. Bacon, Norwich, Conn. 
 
 HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY 
 Boston and New York 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO 50 CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 
 
 J 
 
 1947 
 
 •30ec'52Rl 
 
 W 
 
 22^S69 2^- 
 
 ' "'^^1 195? /jj 
 
 fsrtr- 
 
 m. 
 
 IS 
 
 t.i^gtf'JD ^g 
 
 ^I^H 4-64 -4 pi ^ 
 
 lUeb'64SM 
 
 W 
 
 lA 
 
 ^-^4^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^W 
 
 o^p- 
 
 LD 21-100m-12, '43 (8796s) 
 
/ 
 
 To, line 
 
 101937 
 
 r3 
 
 ^'i 
 
Ill