Vou. VIII. No. 7%.
NEW HAVEN, CONN., THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1898.
PRICE Ten Cents.
PROFESSOR =BUDDE'S LECTURES,
Review of the Course by Professor
F. K. Sanders,
A notable series of six lectures has
just been completed at Yale. The lec-
turer, Professor Karl Budde, D.D., of
the University of Strassburg, is in this
country under the auspices of the
American Committee for Lectures on
the History of Religions, composed of
representatives from our leading uni-
versities.
Professor Budde has for years been
an eminent representative of the best
Biblical scholarship of Germany. He
is not only a diligent student, but a
keen and clever investigator, and a
broad-minded and _ positive thinker.
Perhaps no one to-day would be re-
garded as better fitted to discuss to the
profit of a University audience the
theme presented by him.
His purpose was to trace. the origin
and historical development of the relig-
ious ideas of the people of Israel, from
the earliest times to the age of the
exile (586-538 B. C.).
His standpoint was that of a student
of comparative religion, hence he used
the Old Testament simply as a source
of reliable information. He regarded
the religious data contained in the
Hexateuch and the historical books as
frequently obscured by the particular
use made of them by the authors of
those books, and consequently based
his use of these data on an exact and
thorough criticism, which discriminated
between statements found in their orig-
inal form in the Old Testament, inter-
pretations made early and those made
very long after the actual occurrences
and sometimes under a misapprehen-
sion of them.
might differ from Professor Budde in
regard to these matters, none could
fal to be impressed by his candid,
earnest and instructive presentation.
The last three lectures, being based
upon the prophetic books,—first-hand
sources—did not call for such prepar-
atory criticism of the material used.
The opening lecture discussed the
“Origin of the Religion of Yahweh.”
The speaker emphasized the broad gulf
between the Jehovah of whom a Chris- |
tian of to-day thinks and the deity
whom an early Israelite worshipped, a
difference easily kept in mind by the
use of the really more accurate name,
Yahweh, for the latter. Archaeological
discoveries and the many-sided testi-
mony of the Israelites themselves prove
that this people were set free from
Egyptian bondage in approximately the
fourteenth century Their rela-
tions with Egypt left them free to adopt
a national God. Exodus 6:3 places
their recognition of Yahweh in the time
of Moses, while-Exodus 3 asserts that
he revealed himself to Moses when
that leader was living among the Ke-
nites of Midian. Following these and
other clues the inference is natural that
Yahweh was originally the name of the
warrior or storm god of the Kenites,
through whose power Moses felt him-
self enabled to deliver Israel from
-bondage. The deliverance took place
and Israel readily covenanted to adopt
Yahweh as their god. At this time they
were at best monolatrous, freely recog-
nizing the existence and the power of
other gods (Judges 11:23, 24). How
they came to take the far-advanced step
of attributing to Yahweh an absolute
world sovereignty which recognized
no other gods and purely ethical at-
tributes can only be made clear by a
However any auditor
study of their historical development.
The theme of the second lecture was
“Yahweh and his Rivals.” When the
Israelites conquered a foothold in
Canaan they found a land of small com-
munities, each with its Baal or ‘“Master”’
deity, who was supposed to control the
soil.
the Israelites should for a time worship
these local deities, alongside of their
PROFESSOR KARL BUDDE,
covenant god, Yahweh, since we find
good evidence in the Old Testament
that they recognized also household
gods, tribal gods, etc. The one fruit-
ful result of this acquaintance of the
Israelites with the sensuous and happy
Canaanitish cults was that they caught
the idea of the possibility of familiar
association with their Yahweh, a real
step in advance of the austerity and awe
heretofore associated with him.
The third lecture traced the agency
of three national factors in making
Yahweh the only recognized god of
Israel, that of priests from the tribe of
Levi, of the newly organized order of
prophets and of the kings, Saul, David
and Solomon. Through them Israel
gradually acquired a political supremacy
in Palestine. As the nation unified and
became strong, the worship of Yahweh
acquired preéminence. To a certain ex-
tent, however, it retained and included
as recognized features of its own cult
elements borrowed from the older
Canaanitish religion. It particularly
took over the ancient sacred places
of the Canaanites.
The fourth lecture on “Foreign
Powers and the Written Prophecy of
the Northern Kingdom” discussed the
struggle of Yahwism against Phoeni-
cian Baalism introduced and supported
by Jezebel and against the crushing
power of Assyria. A new type of
prophecy appears with Amos and
Hosea, for whom it is not enough that
Yahweh alone should be worshipped by
all israel. The failure of the expected
deliverance to appear after the dynasty
of Jehu had extirpated Baal-worship
proved to these deeper-seeing prophets
that a moral reformation as well was
required before Yahweh’s favor could
be expected. Assyria appears to Amos |
as a power directed by Yahweh to the
punishment of sinful peoples—not Israel
alone, but the neighboring nations as
well. Hosea goes further and develops
the idea that Yahweh punishes Israel
with a purpose of loving restoration.
The fifth lecture traced the growth
of religious thought in the Southern
Kingdom during the 130 years between
the fall of Samaria and its own destruc-
tion. The first third of this period is
covered by the career of Isaiah, whose
preaching was based on the principles
of Amos. Internal reform, not diplo-
macy and foreign alliances, was the
divinely indicated policy. Isaiah was
rebuffed by Ahaz and for years with-
-inculcation of
It was natural and inevitable that
‘bringing forward and
drew from public life. Nevertheless
his failure led to the adoption of a real
prophetic principles
among a school of highly influential
followers. His subsequent triumph,
when Hezekiah, accepting his advice,
defied Sennacherib and witnessed at the
supreme crisis the overthrow of the
mighty foe, was in at least one respect—
the development of the conviction of the
inviolability of Zion—an injury to re-
ligous progress. Under Manasseh a
second period of 50 years of strong
Assyrian influence set in, vainly op-
posed by the prophetic party, until with
the reform of Josiah they succeeded in
securing the
adoption of their conception of the
Mosaic ideal as set forth in Deuteron-
omy. This reform abolished the old-
time local sanctuaries and concentrated
all worship under official surveillance
at Jerusalem.
THE FINAL LECTURE.
The sixth and final lecture described
conditions during the generation which
witnessed the fall of Jerusalem, the
tragic career of Jeremiah and the be-
ginnings of legalism fostered by Eze-
kiel. To the pessimism of Jeremiah the
later Judaism owed the independence
of its religious life from the accident of
national prosperity or adversity. Jere-
miah found a faith in God superior to
these and foreshadowing the personal
religion of later times. Ezekiel, him-
self a priest, consoled Israel in exile by
his picture of a new Jerusalem, whose
ideal was isolation of the holy people.
From his outlines grew up the priestly
legislation which kept the Jews a pecu-
liar people through centuries of disper-
sion. Ezekiel’s visions of an ideal future
became at the same time the foundation
of later apocalyptic hopes. The third
and greatest of the figures of this period
is the nameless prophet of the exile
known as Deutero-Isaiah, whose writ-
ings, beginning with the message of
comfort Isa. xl., set forth the lofty ideal
of Israel as Yahweh’s servant, who
suffers that he may fulfil his mission of
preaching Yahweh to the nations. On
these three pillars grew up after the
exile the structure of Judaism, which
contained in itself the germs of Chris-
tianity, the world-religion.
This survery of the steps by which
Israel attained its unique consciousness
of God, far from being an attack on the
integrity or sacredness of the Scriptures,
leads us to co-ordinate the methods of
God in revealing himself to mankind
from the dawn of human history to the
present day, and enables us to solve the
majority of the puzzling problems of
the Old Testament. Professor Budde’s
solutions may not be final, but they are
at least exceedingly helpful to every
student of religion.
- Frank K. SANDERS.
Brief Sketch of Prof. Budde.
Professor Karl Budde was born in
the Rhine Provinces in 1850. At an
early age he entered the University of
Bonn and studied under Kamphausen.
His studies were interrupted by the
Franco-German War, and after serv-
ing in the army he returned to the Uni-
versity of Bonn and became an Instruc-
tor in Literature and History. Pro-
fessor Budde’s Biblical History of
Primeval Times is of great importance,
and it was owing to this work that he
was called to take the professorship of
Hebrew at the University of Strass-
burg. His principal writings are Com-
mentaries on Job, Lamentations and
Judges, and A Critical Analysis of
Judges and Song of Solomon. He was
the translator and editor of the Hebrew
text of the Books of Samuel in Paul
Haupt’s series entitled “Sacred Books
of the Old Testament.”
IS IT T00 LATE?
Mr. Camp on the Chances of Making
a Team Now.
Now that coaches are here and more
expected it is only fair to the team to
let the graduates know how _handi-
capped Mr. Chamberlin and the faithful
men who have worked under him have
been through the month of October.
This is not to depress the spirits of the
many good Yale men who hope to be
on hand to see the matches of the 12th
and 19th, but to state facts as frankly
as they should be stated and understood
by Yale men. No Yale team has ever
before been so neglected by the coaches
as that of 1898, and no Yale captain be-
fore has ever plead to so many deaf
ears. Up to the first of November and
especially during the last two weeks of
October, the vital weeks in a football
team’s development, no amount of tele-
grams, letters and personal entreaty
could secure anything more than a de-
sultory day now and then for some sin-
gle coach.
With players in plenty but without
a staff of coaches, Captain Chamberlin
has staggered along the best he could.
The team have struggled nobly to keep
up to the work they know must be done
in order to reach a proper point of
development before Nov. 12th. It is
safe to say that it is not the desire of
any captain or any eleven to rely upon
a whirlwind finish’ for final victory.
Such things are too risky, and when any
organization begins to depend upon
such miracles the miracles cease to
come. A_ beneficent Providence that
rewards endeavor is the Providence to
which justice must point. And when a
team has done all in its power, when
the coaches, as last year, have watched
and prayed with it day after day, know-
ing its insufficiencies, but doing their
best to make them less, then there is
reason for trusting in Providence for
the rest. But when Providence has
helped out and every body says, “If as
a green team the Eleven won, there need
be no coaching to make certain of vic-
tory as veterans,” then Providence turns
away.
A COMPARISON WITH OTHER COLLEGES.
Princeton has a triumvirate of three
men at the. head of her coaching this
year: Mr. Lea, that wonderful tackle;
Mr. Moffat, a thorough student of
back field work and kicking, and
Mr. Brown, a_ remarkably clever
end. Harvard has at the call of Mr.
Forbes a dozen coaches, eleven of
whom have been on the field at one
time. Cornell has Mr. Warner and Mr.
Fennell in daily charge, and Pennsyl-
vania has in Mr. Woodruff a man
whose knowledge is complete and who
is regularly engaged by the manage-
ment to instil that knowledge into the
teams of the University of Pennsylvania.
At New Haven Mr. Butterworth has
come up the most frequently of any of
the coaches, but his visits have hardly
averaged twice a week. Mr. Sanford
‘has given several days to the rush line,
and Mr. Bull gave part of his Sum-
mer to the kickers. Mr. Rodgers and
Mr. Murphy have spared a few days.
Mr. Stillman and Mr. Corbin have been
present each a single, day, and one or
two others have taken a very short turn
at it. But there have been days when
no one was present, and no time when
for the continued period of a single
week systematic handling by one or
