The independent press. (Abbeville C.H., S.C.) 1853-1860, 1858-01-29
Neander and Gieseler,

/
is beginning to engage amongst us some
thing of the attention it deserves. The con-
troversies of the day call for a large &C.
quaintance with it. The inner Christian
life needs the nourshment it is fitted to af-
ford. And no one can claim to be we'll
read thcologian, who has not followed up,
along its channels. the stream of Christian
teaching towards its source.
But in pursuing it, good guides are need
ed; and at present there are no two more
worthy of cordial cornmcudntion than the
great Germans whose names stand above
With the exception Of their teachings as tc
the first constitution Of the Church, and here
and there tinge of rationalism, we heartily
join with the Presbyterian Banner and Adj
vocate in what it says ofthcm below. EDS.
OF THE Rec.
The great MASTERY pieces Of Ecclesiastical
History, by which the literature of this age
is distinguished, are the works of Neander
and of Geiscler. For more than quarter
of century, these cnineu, men were engag-
ed in maturing the productions Which, in
after years, were to be associated in honora-
bic connection with their names. Gicseer
and Neandcr We're contemporaries, and to a
certain extent, they were competitors for
fame. In many points they resemLled eacl,
other, while in others their respective char
acteristics stand out in remarkable differ
ence, and even contrast. Germans by birth
and throughly Germans as to their educa.
ton, they were equally attached to the
study Of antiquity. Equally capable of ira
versing all the records of the past, in what
ever language the information was to be
found aud equally characterized by assd
uity in research, and honesty in recording
the results Of their iabors, without bias or
influence of party; still, their mental idio-
syncracics are stamped on all their perfor-
mances. The wiring of Neandcr ares emi-
nently subjective. while the history of Giese.
Ter is as decidedly objective. The same
materials put into the hands Of these two
men, assumed two entirely different forms
$hen. they had concluded their respective
labots. Neander digestcd his materials,
andby process of mental assimilation,
made them all bis own. He then gave
' them forth in a flowing narrative, in which
his bis own temperament appears on every
page 1n.his hands, history is living ex-
Hibftion of the past whereas the object of
iGieseler is to construct work which, by its
sg0rdimg, shall record the actions
hgd the doctrines Of the bodies and ndivid-
names are inscribed on his pages.
anahs ease Of Neander, the leading worthless
..a abs'4ditys all pass before us, but they
saReak the language. and wear the dress of
sGsander. Gieseler takes the actual words
s theologians, of cannons and councils, and
ssbE asfs@ simple phrases of his own, he
s5laqs them together, and thus he makes
,asmtheigs own tale. Thus he: gives. the
materials Of history, honestly Sand fully,
:then he'permits the reader to construct the
theory for himself. Neander gives the
theory and the facts, and he imbues them
both with life {; ard all is done, in both Ca
'ses, by, the hand of a master.
t-1I 1t we're no difficult task to show how
partizan or rdisingenuous writer might mis-
lead bis readers, whether he followed the
lead Of Gicseler or Neandcr. A dogmatic
sophist may easily construct plausible the.
fory, and, i'll the manner ofNeander, fill up
his work. by vivid pictures of Iite-like trans
actious. His error lies, in his premises, and
;in the forced application Of his facts, to sus:
tain kis assumption. So in the case Of G les
eler,it is notorious Stilatthe words of theo.
'logians, the language Of councils and Church
assemblies, may be quoted and united to.
ge,ber, while the lesson inculcated by the
parratiye may abe altogether untrue. Still
where the writer is honest. where. he is la
berious in collecting bis materials, faithful in
making his extracts, and aims merely at re-
,cordlpg theSactual oecurrepces'of the past.
st iis'obvious that the principle on which
3 iGieseler has constructed his great work, is
s,the ssssst,a though notthe most brilliant in
lite sssui's:
g go 8 refecting mind that'can think for
.itsstf siessiers supplies the materials, aud
they can be ussd without fsaras to their ac-
tcprrency iptbe cause Of ftruth and righteous
ness Itistbis features Of his great work
SshieH constitutes its chief excellence. His
Honesty, bisfernditiou; and his accuracy, are
s;squally remarkable and .eonspicls us, in
every page Of his writings Hence this
swoik which stands alone in ecclsssisstipal
efaHatise, so fat aa structureis oonearnsl,
|s6ss an eacelIe Ieacs which must always com.
ihen The critical; reaas ltsis alinost