the announcement of the ruin to be caused by the powers of the world (Vol. i. p. 156); and we have throughout endeavoured to prove, that the Messiah was first of all set before the eyes of contemporaries, for their consolation and the furtherance of their faith in the midst of their distresses, and as a warning in their temptations.

The weak point in the early orthodox view was to be found in this very department of historical interpretation; and the lesson, which the Church has to learn from rationalism, is just to provide a remedy for this particular weakness. But we must still bear in mind, that another and far more serious danger threatens from the same side; and this danger the author has been most careful to avoid. It is of importance, it is true, to deprive rationalism of its relative justification; but it is also important to take care not to be caught in its snares, and to see to it that, in the effort to trace the "organic development" of Messianic prophecy, we do not lose sight of its essential characteristics, that we do not bind the prophetic word to the events of history, but content ourselves with pointing out, as far as possible, a historical point of contact, in doing which we must restrain ourselves within very modest bounds. It would hardly be possible, for example, to find anything in the historical circumstances, which would explain the reason why Micah fixed upon Bethlehem as the birthplace of Christ. And the fact of Isaiah being the first to depict the highpriestly office of the Messiah, can only be traced to the comprehensive character, which was given by God to the predictions of this prince among the prophets. The necessity for proceeding cautiously is the more apparent, from the fact that we may perceive how disastrous the influence of rationalism has been in other departments of the orthodox theology, especially in connection with the doctrine of Christ.

Hofmann himself has yielded to this temptation, so far as the Old Testament Christology is concerned. His method of treating the prophecies relating to Christ is distinguished from that of the rationalists solely by its orthodox dress, which is by no means an improvement.

It has always been admitted by orthodox theologians, that even history possesses a prophetic importance. By the side of the prophecies, strictly so called, they have recognised acted

"1

prophecies, or types. It is undeniale that "history is also prophecy. The past enfolds the present in the germ, and in particular points, which are discernible by the eye of the mind, the greater may be seen in the less, the inward in the outward, and the present or the future in the past.' But it is perfectly obvious, that verbal prophecy is the pre-requisite and condition of the acted prophecy, and that the type is "a subordinate kind of divine testimony, which merely serves to complete the word of the Spirit, from which at the same time light is thrown in return." Without the light which it receives from prophecy, the type by itself cannot possibly be understood; and hence, for the whole of the long ages preceding the fulfilment, it would be entirely useless. Its reality must therefore be questionable, if the necessary condition of its efficiency could not be proved to exist. If the evident proof is not to be found in prophecy, that there is a God, who rules above the world, and moves all events towards their ultimate destiny according to a preconcerted plan; then in the place of the type or the acted prophecy, we have nothing but a vague impulse, which cannot rest, till that which exists already in the design has been fully worked out in history. Hence if prophecy, in the strict sense of the word, be overthrown, the acted prophecy, which is undoubtedly worthy of its name, must fall with it, and it is nothing but an illusion, to attempt to elevate types at the expense of prophecy.

This is the plan proposed by Hofmann. A truly prophetic character he attributes to history alone. In his opinion the prophets do not reveal the secrets, which the Lord has communicated to them, his servants, as they are said to do in Amos iii. 7; on the contrary they are nothing but interpreters of history, and they proclaim nothing more, than is put within the reach of an acute and far-seeing mind by the circumstances of any age. They do not stand above history to mark out its cause with the eagle glance of a seer absorbed in God; in reality, they are nothing but what the rationalists thought them (see, for example, Gesenius on Is. xxxix.), far-seeing politicians, who could discern in the present the germs of future times. Prophecy is not a light

1 B. Jakobi in Sack's Apologetik, p. 356.

2 Sack, p. 253.

shining in a dark place (2 Pet. i. 19), but is simply raised a few inches about the ordinary standpoint, the distinction between the two being nothing more, than that between genius and the common understanding. As the actual state of things is greatly misunderstood, we must prove our assertion by a series of ex

tracts.

"Every triumphal procession," says Hofmann (Weissagung und Erfüllung i. p. 15), “which passed through the streets of Rome was a prophecy of Augustus Cæsar; for what he displayed through the whole of his career, was here displayed by the triumphant general on his day of honour,-namely the God in the man, Jupiter in the Roman citizen. In the fact that Rome paid such honours to its victorious commanders, it pointed to the future, when it would rule the world through the great emperor, to whom divine honours would be paid. And after the apostle John has related how it was that, when Jesus was crucified, not a bone of him was broken, he adds, thus was fulfilled the saying, concerning the paschal lamb, a bone of it shall not be broken.' Thus in the paschal lamb he sees a type of Jesus, and in that which happened to Jesus he sees the fulfilment of a prophecy of, or allusion to, the future, which was associated with the paschal meal. The meaning of the triumph was not fully realised in the constantly recurring triumphal processions; and so also the meaning of the passover was not fully realised in the yearly paschal meals; but the essential meaning of both was to be fully developed at some future period, when the prophecy contained in them would also be fully confirmed." Thus, instead of prophecy, we have nothing more than the vague generality of an allusion to the future. Rome and Zion are placed on the same level. As the life which pervaded Rome was at length clothed in flesh and blood in Augustus Cæsar, so was that which animated Israel, in Jesus Christ. Everything is left to the ordinary processes of nature, which, after a long series of subordinate productions, at length brings forth the most perfect, according to an innate law of necessity.

Again, at p. 52, "Every new epoch in history is a prophecy. And therefore, by handing these down to us in their proper succession, and their true shape, the Scriptures place us in a position to write prophetic history." Prophecy is no longer

It is an unconscious

knowing something about the future. paving of the way for the future. It consists in the preludes "of the present God, who lives in the world, but especially in man” (p. 16),—and who knows no more about what he is doing, than man whom he employs as his instrument.

At p. 54, again, Hofmann says, "The distinguishing characteristics of a nation I can discern in the topstone and culminating point of its history; and as Augustus Cæsar enables us to understand the history of Rome, so does Jesus Christ the history of Israel."

. At p. 55, "At the very outset we should expect that the word of salvation would keep pace with the facts of salvation. The hope of a coming Messiah will be founded upon, and arise out of, the events of natural life." If history is ruled by a blind impulse, the "word of salvation" will naturally be also unable to break through the magic circle of unconsciousness.

At p. 56, "There is never more than one passage of prophetic history, which manifests itself in one deed or one word, one prayer or one prediction." "The age and its utterances have

the same vocation."

Starting with the view that prophecy is merely a product of history, Hofmann has attempted, as it were systematically, to extinguish its light in all those ages in which he cannot discern any distinct Messianic predictions.

Of the Protevangelium nothing is left, that deserves the name; and in its place we have simply trifling (we cannot choose any other word). "All that we read here, is that the enmity between the woman and the serpent was to be transmitted to the posterity of both" (p. 75).

On Noah's prophecy in Gen. ix. 25-27 he observes, "this curse and blessing do not profess to be a prediction, but they are both fulfilled, because they are dictated by a just conception of the nature of the event which has just occurred" (p. 91).

Even the announcement made to Abraham is robbed of its deeper meaning, according to the example set by rationalistic commentators. "In thee and in thy descendants will the whole world discern, what it regards as its own blessing, and in thee will it find such prosperity as it will desire for itself" (p. 98).

Gen. xlix. 10 is said to refer, not to Christ, but to Judah only,

and to mean that Judah will at length come to the enjoyment of peace, and be obeyed by whole nations, p. 118, "That all this would be really a good, and that it is just the blessing which we should necessarily expect for Judah in this series, needs no proof whatever." The naturalistic disposition, which measures everything by a human standard, is well saved by such exposition as this.

With reference to Ps. cx., in the face of the clearest declarations on the part of the Lord in Matt. xxii., he says (p. 176), "We have met with nothing in this Paalm that carries us beyond the limits of David's reign. Circumstances, with which we have already become acquainted in other ways, are all that are here expressed."

"The 45th Psalm brings Solomon in his regal glory before our minds," (p. 118). In ver. 17, where the Psalmist says to the king "whom (thy children) thou mayest make princes in all the earth," according to Hofmann, "the poet means nothing more, than that the king will have sons enough to be able to appoint them as superior officers over all the land, wherever he may require them," (p. 188).

"In Ps. lxxii. Solomon prays for a reign of righteousness and peace."

The origin of the Messianic idea is described as follows (p. 200): "Under the reigns of David and Solomon the Israelitish nation had become acquainted with the blessings of common life, and simply desired that they should continue. But in order to continue, it was necessary that they should be differently constituted; and the pious especially perceived that, without a thorough conversion on the part of the whole community to the law of Jehovah, it would enjoy no true and lasting peace, to say nothing of the extension of peace over the whole world. The hope, that this would eventually be the case, continued to be entertained in connection with the family of David, upon whom in fact the promise rested. A descendant of this hero of God (Is. ix. 5 !) will ultimately secure the complete enjoyment of the prosperity which has been destroyed, having first removed, not merely all the disturbing elements, but also all that brought them into existence."

We are unable to detect any essential difference between such