an elegiac poet of Greece, of a very excitable character, flourished in the 59th Olympiad, or about 544 years before the Christian era. According to Plato, who is followed by Suidas, he was a citizen of Megara, in Sicily; but Harpocratio contends that he was a native of Megara in Greece; and Corsini has satisfactorily shown that the latter statement is very probable. (Corsini, Fasti Attici, tom. iii. p. 109.) Theognis commonly uses the Ionic dialect, and not the Doric of the Sicilians; and his verses afford several other indications of an Achaean origin. He speaks of himself as a person of superior birth. From his fellow-citizens, he experienced harsh treatment; and having been driven into exile with his wife Argyris, he found a place of refuge at Thebes. As he survived the Median war, B.C. 490, he must have reached a very advanced age. (Clinton's Fasti Hellenici, vol. ii. p. 9.) But how or where he terminated his career, we find no information. His remaining work consists of a series of Tyranai, or moral sentences, written in elegiac verse, and containing many pointed and striking sentiments, though some of them are not strictly moral. The name of the author's friend Cyrus is very frequently introduced. Of this work there are many separate editions. It is likewise to be found in Brunck's Gnomica Poeta Graeci (1784), and in the first volume of Gaisford's Poetae Minores Graeci (1814-20). In the edition of Bekker (Lipsiae, 1815, 8vo.), one hundred and fifty-one verses are printed for the first time, and the total number is thus raised to 1389. A more recent edition, with a critical commentary and notes, was published by F. Th. Welecker, Francof. 1826, 8vo. Schneidewin (1838) and Bergk (1843) have both edited the works of Theognis, and Müller, Ulrici, and Bode have illustrated him. Theology. The word *Theology*, in its more restricted sense, signifies a discourse concerning God (λόγος περὶ τῶν θεῶν) (1); but it is commonly employed to designate that science which treats not only of the divine existence and attributes, but also of the relations which subsist between God and his intelligent creatures, the duties which consequently devolve upon the latter, and the arrangements which God has entered into for their government and benefit. More particularly it is used to designate the scientific development of the doctrines upon these points embraced by Christianity (2).

1. The word *theologia* and its cognates were first used to denote the efforts of those poets and philosophers who wrote of the origin of things and of the genealogy and exploits of the gods. (See Diog. Laert., Bk. i. §119, 122; Clement of Alexandria, Strom., Bk. v. p. 670, 676; Cicero, De Nat. Deor., iii. 21.) They were afterwards adopted by the earliest writers of the Christian Church, who styled the author of the Apocalypse, by way of eminence, Ἀποκάλυψις, the Divine; and the doctrine of Jesus, by way of eminence, Ἀποκάλυψις, i.e., the doctrine that the λόγος is Θεός. From this special sense the title "theologian" came to be reserved as a title of honour for those who defended well the doctrine of our Lord's Divinity or that of the Trinity; thus it is applied to Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus. Augustine uses the term "theologia" in its etymological sense when he says (De Civ. Dei, 8.1), "Theologia est aut Sermo Dei, aut de divinitate sermo et ratio." The first by whom the term was used in its modern acceptation was the famous Abelard, who early in the twelfth century, composed a treatise entitled *Theologia Christiana*.

2. The following are definitions of theology given by some of the most eminent expositors of the science:—GERHARD—"Theologia systematica et abstractive considerata est doctrina ex verbo Dei extructa, qua homines in fide vera et vita pia erudiriunt ad vitam aeternam."—Locc. Theol., ii. 13. QUENSTEDT—"Summit vox theologiae vel essentialiter, absolute, ut habitualliter promittit, quae in mente habetur et animo hominis inhaeret, sive quatenus est habitus animi; vel accidentaliter, relato, systematico, quatenus est doctrina vel disciplina quo docetur et discitur, non libris continetur."—Theol. Didae, Polen., i. 11. BUDDEUS—"Est haec theologica... scientia rerum divinarum homini peculatori ad salutem consequendam cogniti necessariarum, prout ea Scriptura sacra nobis constant, cum facultate eas item illius docendi, confirmandi, atque defendendi conjuncta."—Inst. Theol. Dogmat., p. 50. TURRETINE—"Theologia supernaturalis (systematica considerata) notat compaginem doctrinarum salutaris de Deo et rebus divinis ex Scriptura expressae, per modum disciplinae aliquae in sua praeposta certa methodo dispositae."—Inst. Theol. Elec., i. p. 5. REINHARD—"Theol. Theoretica est corpus rerum quae homini Christiano credenda sunt, apte subtilissime compositum."—Vorlesungen üb. d. Dogmatik, p. 30, 4th edit. BRETSCHNEIDER—"The design of theology is to unfold to us the doctrines of religion fundamentally and rigidly, to discuss them convincingly and probably, so that they have been certainly and justly defended; its properties must be truth, certainty, and sufficiencyness."—Handbuch der Dogmatik, i. p. 21, 2d ed. DE WETTE—"As exhibitors of the Christian faith, from the point of view of intelligent conviction, according to epochs and in systematic complements."—Lehrbuch der Christlichen Dogmatik, vol. ii. p. 15 ff., 3d ed. This last definition introduces an element, that of epochs, on which some of the German divines since Schleiermacher have been disposed to lay much stress. By Schleiermacher dogmatic theology was viewed as a branch of historical science. He defines it as "the science of the connection [i.e., in a connected form] of the doctrines held at any given time in any Christian society."—Kurze Darstellung d. Theol. Studiums, § 97; Der Christl. Glaube, i. § 19, p. 114. He is followed in this by a very valuable writer, Tweiten, who defines the object of theology as simply "the dogmatic of the church to which we belong," in his case "the evangelical Lutheran, we being members of the Lutheran Church."—Vorlesungen üb. Dogmatik, &c., i. p. 38, 4th ed. (See also Hagenbach, Encyclopaedie d. Theol. Wissenschaft, p. 238 ff.)

The Christian theology embraces both what has been called Natural Theology, and that which is peculiar to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. The distinction between these two is clear and well-founded (1). At the same time, it is not of that kind which renders it necessary that the two should be treated separately; for as Christianity is no less a republication of the religion of nature (see Hill's Divinity, b. ii. c. 3, 1), than an announcement of truths, of which the volume of nature bears no traces, the attempt to present the entire body of its theology in one continuous whole, necessarily involves the statement both of the doctrines of natural and those of biblical theology.

1. Concerning the extent of natural theology many opinions have been formed, while some have contended that there is nothing. Into these disputes we mean not at present to enter. We believe that one of them could have had no existence among sober and enlightened men had the contending parties been at due pains to define with accuracy the terms which they used. Whatever be the origin of religion, it is obvious that no man can receive a written book as the Word of God till he be convinced by some other means that God exists, and that he is a Being of power, wisdom, and goodness who watches over the conduct of his creature man. If the progenitor of the human race was instructed in the principles of religion by the Author of his being (a fact of which it is difficult to conceive how a consistent theist can entertain a doubt), he might communicate to his children, by natural means, much of that knowledge which he himself could not have discovered had he not been supernaturally enlightened. Between illustrating or proving a truth which is already spoken of, and making a discovery of what is wholly unknown, every one perceives that there is a vast difference. "Preclare ergo Aristotelis, si essent, inquit, qui sub terris semper habitavissent, bonis et illustribus dæmonibus, qui essent ornata signis atque picturis, instructaque rebus hominibus guidant abundant hi, qui beatum planetarium nec tamen existant magnam super terram accipientem autem fama et auditione, esse quoddam numen, et vim ducendi; sed sine aliquo tempore, factisque terre facilibus, et illis abditis sedibus evadere in hæc loca, quæ non incolimus, atque eære potissimum; cum repente terram, et maria, conlumque vidissent; nubila magistri, ventorumque vim cognoverint, adepsimque solem, ejusque tum magnitudinem, pulchritudinemque, tum illam efficiemtiam cognoverint, quod se ilium effecerit, tota cælo luce diffusa: cum autem terras nox opacasset, tum coluit totum cœterum astris distinctum et ornatum, luneoque luminum variatatem tum crescentis, tum senecentis, sororum omnium ortus et occasus, atque in omni alternitate ratus, immutabilisque cursus: hæc cum vidèrent, profecto et esse deos, et hæc tanta opera deorum esset arbitraruntur."—Cicero, De Nat. Deorum, lib. ii. § 37.

It is therefore undeniable that there are some principles of theology which may be called natural; for though it is in the highest degree probable that the parents of mankind received all their theological knowledge by supernatural means, it is yet obvious that some parts of that knowledge must have been capable of a proof purely rational, otherwise not a single religious truth could have been conveyed through the succeeding generations of the human race, but by the immediate inspiration of each individual. We indeed admit many propositions as certainly true, upon the sole authority of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, and we receive these Scriptures with gratitude as the lively oracles of God; but it is self-evident that we could not do either the one or the other, were it not convinced by natural means that God exists, that He is a Being of goodness, justice, and mercy, and that He inspired with divine wisdom the penmen of these sacred volumes. Now, though it is possible that no man, or body of men, left to themselves from infancy in a desert world, would ever have made a theological discovery, yet whatever propositions relating to the being and attributes of the first cause and the duty of man can be demonstrated by human reason, independent of written revelation, may be called natural theology, and are of the utmost importance, as being to us the first principles of all religion. Natural theology, in this sense of the word, is the foundation of the Christian revelation; for without a previous knowledge of it, we could have no evidence that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are indeed the Word of God. (See Lord Brougham's Discourse on Natural Theology.) In his "Installation Address," recently delivered, the same great orator and philosopher says, "The great doctrines of natural theology demand the closest attention, and afford the most valuable support to the teachers of the revealed Word. Nothing can be more groundless than the jealousy Theology, sometimes felt, but often professed, of natural religion by the advocates of revealed. Bacon, who had his prejudices on the subject of final cases occasioned by the abuse of that doctrine, describes natural religion as "the key of revealed," which, as he says, opens our understanding to the genuine spirit of the Scriptures, unlocking one belief so that we may enter upon the serious contemplation of the Divine mind in the characters of which he so deeply engraven in the works of the creation (De Deo et Aug. lib. i.) Newton has said, "De Deo de quo utique ex phemonenis disserere ad philosophiam naturalem pertinent." (Principia, Schol. gen.) Locke declares that he who would take away reason to make way for revelation, puts out the light of both, as if we should persuade a man to put out his eyes the better to receive "the remote light of an invisible star by a telescope" (Hum. Undert., iv. 19, 4); and Tillotson, in his great sermon preached before the king and queen upon the occasion of the naval victory in 1672, affirms that "the principles of natural religion are the foundation of that which is revealed." (P. 51.)

The principles of this science are to be found only in the word and works of God; and he who would extract them pure and unsophisticated, must dig for them himself in that exhaustless mine. To fit a man for this important investigation, much previous knowledge is requisite. He must study the works of God scientifically before he can perceive the full force of that testimony which they bear to the power, the wisdom, and the goodness of their author. Hence the desirableness of a general acquaintance with the physical and mathematical sciences before a man enter on the proper study of theology, for he will thus best obtain just and enlarged conceptions of the God of the universe. He should also make himself acquainted with the principles of logic, the philosophy of the human mind, and the different sources of evidence. Above all, he should devote himself to the study of the original languages of Scripture, and to the principles of biblical criticism and interpretation. He who is incapable of consulting the original Scriptures, must rest his faith, not on the sure foundation of the Word of God, but on the credit of fallible translators; and if he be at any time called on to vindicate revelation against the scoffs of infidelity, he will have to struggle with many difficulties which are easily solved by him who is master of the original tongues.

Having satisfied himself of the Authenticity and Divine Authority of the Scriptures (see Scripture), the student will set himself honestly, diligently, and devoutly to examine into their sacred contents, that he may thereby learn for himself the system of truths which they contain.

Assuming that God and the things of God can be known only by means of a revelation from Him (1); that there must be, and is, a perfect harmony between the revelation supplied in Nature and that furnished in Scripture; and that all Scripture is at harmony with itself, and all its statements, justly interpreted, of equal authority—the systematic theologian has to use his endeavour to construct into a harmonious and systematical whole the truths which he finds revealed concerning God and Divine things. And as by the very ground on which he professes to stand he renounces the idea of having to excogitate or devise a scheme of religious truth, and assumes to himself the office simply of an explorer of truth revealed, it is only by a scientific logical process, either inductive or deductive, that he can possibly gain his end, and build up the superstructure of his science.

1. Hilary.—A Deo discendum est quicquid de Deo Intelligen- dum. Quenstedt.—Causa Theologiae efficiens principium Deus.

His first step in this course must be the collection and verification of his facts. As these are the data from which all his conclusions are to be drawn, the basis on which his entire superstructure is to rest, it is evident that no scientific inquirer can proceed a single step with security until he has attended to this. Careful scrutiny, and the application of all the necessary tests of accuracy, together with copiousness of collection, so as to draw the induction from the largest possible area, are indispensable in every scientific inquiry; and he who neglects these, though he may sometimes make a felicitous guess at truth, can never securely construct a system. As applied to biblical investigation, this indispensable requirement means the copious collection of passages bearing upon the subject in hand, and the ascertaining, by the use of proper methods of interpretation, the exact meaning of each in the connection in which it stands. It is necessary to lay stress on the latter of these; for it is obvious, that unless a passage be taken in its true meaning, its value as a proof-passage is destroyed. In natural science great stress is laid on what Bacon calls "the rejection of instances," by which he means the exclusion of all facts which, when properly tested, are found not to contain the quality or feature that belongs to the class. Now what this "purging of instances" is to the inductions of physical science, an exact and discriminating exegesis is to the inductions of theology. Every passage that will not abide this test is admitted into the process at the risk of vitiating the whole.

Having, by a process of careful observation and scrutiny, collected and verified his materials, the systematic theologian has next to classify them according to their subjects; and having done this, he may proceed to compare and weigh those in each class, one with another, for the purpose of eliciting the great general truth which they in common express. In some cases he will find this done to his hand in the Bible; for, as part of that book consists of theological discussion, it is only what may be expected, that in some instances, if not in all, we shall find the general truth, to which a comparison of instances would lead us, enunciated as a principle already ascertained—a theological dogma already proved. In this case the theologian may content himself with simply transcribing the Scriptural dogma as a matter already settled; or he may proceed with it deductively, and show how it holds true in each of the instances on which it rests; or he may ignore for the moment the authoritative announcement, and build up analytically from these instances the dogma afresh for himself. Men will be determined which of these three methods to pursue very much (in all probability) by the peculiar habit of their own minds; but, for scientific purposes, the third seems by far the preferable method. It is this method which the inquirer must pursue in all cases where the oracle does not authoritatively pronounce the conclusion at which he seeks to arrive. In this case his only resource is to compare passage with passage, and to educe, as the general truth taught, that which harmonises them all. As in science, the vera causa of the phenomena observed and classified is that principle common to them all, and which accounts for all alike; so in theology, the true dogma is that which is found to combine into one harmonious whole all the passages bearing on the subject.

Now, it will be observed, that whether we take a dogma enunciated in sacred Scripture, and reason down to its revealed elements, or take these elements and reason up to the dogma, whether enunciated in sacred Scripture or not, we pursue a process purely logical in its character. In the former case we elicit truths synthetically, employing the ordinary syllogistic method, the fundamental principle of which is, that what appertains to a containing whole appertains also to each of the parts of which it is composed. In the latter case we proceed analytically, on the assumed principle, that what appertains to the constituent parts of a containing whole, appertains also to the constituted whole. These two principles lie at the basis of all reasoning. They prescribe the form into which all right reasoning is resolvable; and they divide between them the science of logic. When properly followed, therefore, they land us in a conclusion which is formally certain; and this being the case, we shall have for the material truth of that conclusion Theology, exactly the same amount of certainty that we have for the premises from which it is drawn.

The science thus educed is sometimes called dogmatic, sometimes speculative, and sometimes polemic theology. These terms have reference to different aspects under which it may be viewed. As the truths with which it deals are principles held and taught as certain, it is dogmatic; as these truths are viewed not so much in their practical bearings as in their relation to each other as thought by us, it is speculative; and as there is hardly a position in the system of divine truth which has not been assailed by some one, and needs consequently to be defended as well as expounded, it is polemic. Besides these, such designations as acromatic, having reference to its being taught orally in colleges; catechetic, from its being presented in the form of a catechism, &c., are to be found in older works but are now no longer in use. Of late years much attention has been paid, especially in Germany, to what has been called Biblical Theology, the object of which is to set forth the doctrines contained in Scripture in their purely biblical form, apart from all traditional or philosophical additions and systems. This may be either general for the whole Bible, or special for any one of its books or of the sacred writers, as Paul or John for instance.