REGULA FIDEI ("RULE OF FAITH"): A
term used so frequently in early Christian literature from the last quarter of the second century that an understanding of it is necessary to a correct idea of the religious conceptions of that period. Different forms with more or less the same meaning occur. Ho kanon tes aletheias (" canon of truth "), regula veritatis (rule of truth), probably the oldest form, was used apparently by Dionysius of Corinth (c. 160), then by Irensus, Clement of Alexandria, Hippoly tus, Tertullian, and Novatian; ho kanon tes pisteos, regula fidei, by Poly crates of Ephesus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and by the later Latin writers. The equivalent use of these two expressions is important for the determination of the original significance attached to them. The truth itself is the standard by which teaching and practise are to be judged (cf. Irenaus, Har., II., xxviii. 1; ANF, i. 399). It is presupposed that this truth takes for the Christian community a definite, tangible form, such as the law was for the Jews (Rom. ii. 20), in a body of doctrine not merely held and taught by the Church, but clearly formulated. Besides the expressions already discussed, another is worth mentioning, found only in Greek writers and the versions from them — ho ekklesiastikos kanon or ho kanon tes ekklesias (Clement of Alexandria and Origen).
The ante-Nicene church never considered as the Rule of Faith the Bible or any part of it. Certain expressions of recent writers show that it is not unnecessary to point out that the word kanon, with or without qualifying additions, is never used until after Eusebius to designate the Bible, and that even after the word had begun to be applied to the collection of Scriptural books, the sense mentioned
Reg-ula Fidei Reid
THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
above is never given to it by the Greeks. This is explained by the fact that the early Church used this word for something else— the baptismal formula. It is quite evident that in the oldest and most explicit witnesses for the use of the word, Irenaus and Tertullian, this was known primarily as the rule of faith. When the former (I., ix. 4) says " he who retains unchangeable in his heart the rule of the truth which he received by means of baptism, ' ' the expression " rule of truth " can not mean any sum total of truths as to which instruction has been conveyed before or after baptism, but only a formula which the neophyte has made his own by a profession of faith made at the time of baptism. This was " the faith," which the convert received from the teaching Church and was to keep as the standard for his subsequent life and for the testing of all doctrines presented to him. With Tertullian the regula fidei is identical with the sacramentum fidei, the rule of faith with that which he so often designates as the oath of allegiance of the soldiers of Christ {Ad martyras, iii.). The prevalent view in both these authors is the same as that expressed by Augustine when he says to the catechumens at the traditio symboli, " receive, sons, the rule of faith which is called ' the symbol ' " (Serrn., ccxiii.; Serin, i., ad catechumenos de symbolo). That similar expressions are occasionally used of the Nicene creed shows at least that the Rule of Faith was a formulated confession, and thus that in the ante-Nicene period it could not refer to anything but the baptismal creed, the only one then existing. In a word, the early Fathers considered Christ himself as the giver of the Rule, though they admitted freely that its actual words were an expansion of the nucleus recorded in the Gospels, regarding it as only a development of the baptismal formula ; and, on the other hand, the whole body of teaching current in the undisputed Catholic Church was to them but an expansion of the creed, and thus the term " Rule of Faith " could be, as it is occasionally found, applied to this whole body. (T. Zahn.)
REGULARS: A term used ecclesiastically to denote those of either sex observing a common rule of life and bound by monastic vows. It expresses membership in an order, as opposed to secular, which involves living in the world.
REHOBOAM, ri"h5-bo'am: Son and successor of Solomon, first king of Judah after the division, his own imprudence being in large measure the cause of that division. His dates according to the old chronology were 975-957; according to Kittel 9.17-920. Sources are I Kings xi. 43-xii. 24, xiv. 21-31; II Chron. ix. 31-xii. The Book of Kings relates that after the death of Solomon, the Israelites went to Shechem to make Reboboam king. Xaturally, this does not signify election, since Israel was not strictly an elective monarchy ; nevertheless, the people seem to have retained the right to impose conditions under which it would recognize succession. At Shechem, the leaders of the northern tribes demanded a lessening of the burdens imposed upon the people. Rehoboam, at first inclined to consent, was induced to listen to the advice of his younger counselors, and harshly re-
fused; whereupon he was rejected and his rival Jeroboam was chosen in his stead. Although the ostensible reason was the heavy burden laid upon Israel because of Solomon's great outlay for buildings and for luxury of all kinds, the real reason must rather be sought in the inborn opposition between the north and the south. The two sections had acted independently until David (q.v.) by his victories, succeeded in uniting all the tribes though the Ephraimitic jealousy was ever ready to develop into open revolt. Religious considerations were also operative. The building of the Temple was a severe blow for the various sanctuaries scattered through the land, and the priests of the high places must have supported the revolt. Josephus {Ant., VIII. , viii. 3) makes the rebels exclaim: " We leave to Rehoboam the Temple his father built."
Rehoboam's reign was uneventful, and he opposed but a feeble resistance to the revolt of the north. The only event of importance was the campaign of Shishak of Egypt, which occurred in Rehoboam's fifth year and revealed the weakness of divided Irsael. The notice in II Chron. xi. 6 sqq., that Rehoboam built fifteen fortified cities, indicates that the attack was not unexpected. Nevertheless, in spite of its strong position, Jerusalem appears to have offered no serious defense, and the treasures collected by Solomon became the booty of the Egyptians. The cities mentioned in Shishak's inscription at Karnak indicate that his campaign extended beyond Judah, and it seems that Jeroboam was not spared, since the Megiddo of the inscription must be the well-known city of the northern kingdom. Possibly this may signify that Jeroboam, although the instigator of Shishak's invasion, had placed himself under the protectorate of Egypt, and that his cities were regarded by Shishak as his own. W. Spiegelberg regards the Egyptian account as untrustworthy and thinks the accounts of the Old Testament alone reliable {Aegyptologische Randglossen zum A. T., Strasburg, 1904).
(R. Kittel.)
Bibliography: Besides the works on the history of Israel named under Ahab and Israel, History of, consult: F. Vigouroux, La Bible el les decouvertes modernes, iii. 407-427, Paris, 1896; idem, Dictionnaire, fasc. xxxiv. 1102-05; Maspero, in Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute of Great Britain, xxvii. 63; DB, iv. 222- 223; EB, iv. 4027; JE, x. 362-363; and the commentaries on the sources.
REICHEL, rai'shel, OSWALD JOSEPH: Church of England; b. at Ockbrook (33 m. s. of Sheffield) Feb. 2, 1840. He received his education at Queen's College, Oxford, where he was Taylorian scholar, Ellerton theological essayist, and Johnson and Denyer theological scholar; was made deacon and priest, 1865; served that year as curate of North Hincksey, Berkshire; was vice-principal of Cuddesdon College, Oxford, 1865-70; and vicar of Sparsholt with Kingston-Lisle, 1869-86. He translated E. Zeller's Socrates and the Socratic Schools (London, 1868), and his Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics (1870) ; edited and continued the family tree from documents begun and continued by ancestors in 1620, 1690, 1787, and 1820 (1878); and has written The Duty of the Church in Respect of Christian Missions (1866); Tlw See of Rome in the Middle Ages