Affiliated to this school, though less closely than the men already named, was Ernst Gottlieb Eengel, pro- fessor of historical theology at Tubingen. This scholar passed beyond the ordinary favorable attitude of the school of Storr in his fondness for Socinian views, and was also a Kantianizing, rationalizing supranatnral- ist. So firmly was he intrenched in such views that he steadily refused to be influenced- by any new ten- dency which the changing philosopliy of a new a^ra might bring to bear upon theological inquiry. He scarcely indicated that he knew of the existence of Schleiermacher, and prevented the appointment of Bockshammer — who had written an unusually able work on the freedom of the will — to the iaculty as the successor of the elder Flatt, because of Bocks- hammer's departure from the old plan to which Ben- gel was committed. Other adherents of this school, as Stcudel, Christian Friedrich Sehmid, etc., remained more faithful to the Storrian ideas in some respects, but were, on the other hand, gradually led away from the traditional position of the Tubingen school through the inrtuence of the theology of Schleiermacher. New men, new tendencies, new methods, have taken the place of the old, not only with respect to tlie external fact, but even as regards the results of what was at one time a noteworthy factor in the devslopment of theological science. The Tiibingen school has produced, upon the wliole, effects much less important to such development than its prominence would seem to warrant.
See Herzog, Real- Enci/klop. s. v., and the various names mentioned in this article in Herzog and this Cy- clopo'dhi. See also IiAtioxamsjf.
TUBINGEN SCHOOL, Tmc New. A very differ- ent rt?ravvas inaugurated in the University of Tubingen on the appointment of F. C. Baur (q. v.) as professor of theology in 1826. He began to attack the objective positions of Christianity through the Pauline epistles, selecting some of these only as authentic, and pointing out alleged discrepancies between them and other parts of the New-Test, history. His theory, which is summed up in his work on the apostle Paul, is, in brief, that, tak- ing the epistles to the (ialatians, the Romans, and the Corinthians especially as guides, we find therein "ex- posed the fact that there were two parties in the early
TUCH
Cluirch, the Pauline and the Petrine. These strug- gled for supremacy, and the conflict was a long one. Peter was a thorough Jew, and his side predominated even after the death of the principal combatants. Ju- daism was the cradle of Christianity; and the latter was only an earnest, restless, reformatory branch of the former. But it was not an offshoot as yet, for Christi- anity was essentially Jewish all througli its first histor- ic period. The canonical writings of the New Test., which constitute tiie chief literature of the first two centuries, are the literary monument of Christianity while it was yet undeveloped and undetached from Ju- daism. These writings are the mediatinrj theolor/y of those distant days. The Petrine party was very strong until the middle of the 2d century, when it was obliged to yield to, or rather harmonize with, the Pauline. IMany' causes contributed to bring the two factions to- gether. There was an absence of growth quite incom- patible with their respective strength. Alone, they were almost unable to brave the storm of persecution. Finally, for the sake of security and propagation, they laid down their weapons and united under one banner. From this union came the subsequent growth of Chris- tianity. The canonical works so much revered by the Church had been written in the interest of one or the other of these i)arties. Since the enmity has been de- stroyed, their literary productions must be considered in the light of history. The Church is therefore much mistaken in attaching importance to the Scriptures, for they were written for a timeserving end, and are quite unworthy of the interest which we attach to them."
It is obvious how destructive to the essential faith of Christians were these positions, and yet it is wonder- ful that they were broached with so much assurance, although based upon so trivial a comparison of circum- stances. Nevertheless, a ntmierous circle of disciples clustered around Baur, and they enjoyed his leadership until his death, in 1860. But the writings of both the master and his school were (piickly answered by the best theologians of Germany, such as Thiersch, Dorner, Leckler, Lange, Schaff, Bleek, Hase, Biuisen, and I isch- endorf. Yet the effects of the insinuations, suspicions, and criticisms of Baur were for a long time a serious hindrance to the truth. The authors of the move- ment were disciples of the Hegelian philosophy. Their aim was to explain the origin of Christianity by natu- ral causes alone. In this endeavor they but reproduced in a new and ingenious form the exploded infidelity of a former age. And the primitive doctrine of supranat- uralism was again defended by an appeal, as of old and ever, to facts of the inspired records and the instinctive convictions of humanity. Yet some of its champions in this contest were themselves unconsciously infected more or less bj' the insinuating infiuences of the new scepticism, and were led to make concessions which later and sounder theologians have seen to be unneces- sary and luitenable.
Meanwhile, the attack upon the fundamental doc- uments of Christianity was resumed in a still more vir- ulent form by D. F. Strauss (q. v.), on his appointment to the theological facidty of Tubingen in 1832, and cul- minated in his famous Leben Jest/, which boldly im- pugns the historical truth of the Gospel itself. For the discussion of the controversy resulting, see INIvTiii- €AL Theory. A strong reaction has long since set in against these negative views, even in Tubingen itself, so that what has recently been known as " the Tubin- gen theology" is likelv soon to be a thing of the past. See Hurst, Hist, of Rationalism, p. 280 sq.; Cook, Mon- day Lectures, ser. i; Fisher, Snpernat. Origin of Chris- tianity, p. XXXV. See Neology.