positively it was influenced by the attractive power of the Church of Rome; an attraction which in the case of Cardinal Newman and others proved all-powerful.
Yet more striking is the difference in the quality of English and German theological thinking. German theology seems busied rather in the world of ideas, English theology in the world of facts. By this possibly misleading statement I mean that English theology is more direct and outspoken. I can concieve that to a German, English theology should seem somewhat rude and amateurish. In German theology the traditional forms of religious thought are subjected to a strain by which they become more and more attenuated. This may be illustrated by a remark which Pfleiderer makes in regard to Hoffman. "Hoffman's wish," he says, "to represent his teaching as essentially in accordance with the dogma of the Confessions can only be called a piece of strange self-deception. But his want of honesty towards himself and others, this concealment of the heresy of which he was really guilty, is so general a weakness among theologians, that we must not press it too much in relation to individuals." English liberal thought to a great extent troubles itself little about the technical forms of theological expression.
In the English Church the creeds often cover thinking which is extremely heretical; but this heretical thought is apt to disregard the creeds as though they were intended as articles of peace rather than of belief instead of expanding and attenuating them by philosophico-theological thought. The profounder thought of Germany may well inspire, as it has so often done, English and American theology; while perhaps the very bluntness and rudeness of English and American theology might influence for good the more subtle and philosophically trained German mind.
In conclusion, we most heartily commend this work to our readers as one that gives a better presentation of the later German theology than can be found elsewhere. Pfleiderer is one of the most genial and sympathetic of historians. He keeps himself and his personal biases largely in the background. When he makes a comment or criticism it shows common sense and religious interest rather the marks of any particular school or party.
It is to be regretted that the extremely important work of W. Robertson Smith on the Religion of the Semites and that of Edwin Hatch on the Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church, were published too late to be included in this work.
