PerhapsnothingshowsmoreclearlythetenacityoftheoldsystemofinterpretationthanthesermonsofSavonarola。Duringthelastdecadeofthefifteenthcentury，justatthecloseofthemedievalperiod，hewasengagedinalife-and-deathstruggleatFlorence。Nomaneverpreachedmorepowerfullythegospelofrighteousness；noneeverlaidmorestressonconduct；evenLutherwasnotmorezealousforreformormorecarelessoftradition；andyetwefindthegreatFlorentineapostleandmartyrabsolutelytiedfasttotheoldsystemofallegoricalinterpretation。Theautographnotesofhissermons，stillpreservedinhiscellatSanMarco，showthisabundantly。Thuswefindhimattachingtothecreationofgrassesandplantsonthethirddayanallegoricalconnectionwiththe“multitudeoftheelect“andwiththe“sounddoctrinesoftheChurch。”andtothecreationoflandanimalsonthesixthdayasimilarrelationto“theJewishpeople“andto“Christiansgivenuptothingsearthly。”[468]
　　[468]ForAgobard，seetheLiberadversusFredigisum，cap。xii；
　　alsoReuter’sRelig。AufklarungimMittelalter，vol。i，p。24；
　　alsoPoole，IllustrationsoftheHistoryofMedievalThought，London，1884，pp。38etseq。ForErigena，seehisDeDivisioneNaturae，lib。iv，cap。v；alsoi，cap。lxvi-lxxi；andforgeneralaccount，seeUeberweg，HistoryofPhilosophy，NewYork，1871，vol。i，pp。358etseq。；andforthetreatmentofhisworkbytheChurch，seetheeditionoftheIndexunderLeoXIII，1881。ForAbelard，seetheSicetNon，Prologue，Migne，vol。iii，pp。371-
　　377。ForHugoofSt。Victor，seeErudit。Didask。，lib。vii，vi，4，inMigne，clxxvi。ForSavonarola’sinterpretations，seevariousreferencestohispreachinginVillari’slifeofSavonarola，Englishtranslation，London，1890，andespeciallytheexceedinglyinterestingtableintheappendixtovol。i，chap。
　　vii。
　　Therevivaloflearninginthefifteenthcenturyseemedlikelytounderminethisolderstructure。
　　ThenitwasthatLorenzoVallabroughttobearonbiblicalresearch，forthefirsttime，thespiritofmoderncriticism。
　　Bytrulyscientificmethodsheprovedthefamous“LetterofChristtoAbgarus“aforgery；the“DonationofConstantine。”oneofthegreatfoundationsoftheecclesiasticalpowerintemporalthings，afraud；andthe“Apostles’Creed“acreationwhichpost-datedtheapostlesbyseveralcenturies。OfevenmorepermanentinfluencewashisworkupontheNewTestament，inwhichheinitiatedthemodernmethodofcomparingmanuscriptstofindwhatthesacredtextreallyis。Atanearlierorlaterperiodhewoulddoubtlesshavepaidforhistemeritywithhislife；
　　fortunately，justatthattimetherulingpontiffandhisContemporariescaredmuchforliteratureandlittlefororthodoxy，andfromtheirpalaceshecouldbiddefiancetotheInquisition。
　　WhileVallathusinitiatedbiblicalcriticismsouthoftheAlps，amuchgreatermanbeganamorefruitfulworkinnorthernEurope。
　　Erasmus，withhiseditionoftheNewTestament，standsatthesourceofthatgreatstreamofmodernresearchandthoughtwhichisdoingsomuchtoundermineanddissolveawaythevastfabricofpatristicandscholasticinterpretation。
　　Yethiseffortstopurifythescripturaltextseemedatfirsttoencounterinsurmountabledifficulties，andoneofthesemaystimulatereflection。Hehadfound，whatsomeothershadfoundbeforehim，thatthefamousverseinthefifthchapteroftheFirstEpistleGeneralofSt。John，regardingthe“threewitnesses。”wasaninterpolation。Carefulresearchthroughallthereallyimportantearlymanuscriptsshowedthatitappearedinnoneofthem。EvenaftertheBiblehadbeencorrected，intheeleventhandtwelfthcenturies，byLanfranc，ArchbishopofCanterbury，andbyNicholas，cardinalandlibrarianoftheRomanChurch，“inaccordancewiththeorthodoxfaith。”thepassagewasstillwantinginthemoreauthoritativeLatinmanuscripts。
　　Therewasnottheslightesttenablegroundforbelievingintheauthenticityofthetext；onthecontrary，ithasbeendemonstratedthat，afterauniversalsilenceoftheorthodoxfathersoftheChurch，oftheancientversionsoftheScriptures，andofallreallyimportantmanuscripts，theversefirstappearedinaConfessionofFaithdrawnupbyanobscurezealottowardtheendofthefifthcentury。Inaverymildexercise，then，ofcriticaljudgment，ErasmusomittedthistextfromthefirsttwoeditionsofhisGreekTestamentasevidentlyspurious。Astormaroseatonce。InEngland，Lee，afterwardArchbishopofYork；
　　inSpain，Stunica，oneoftheeditorsoftheComplutensianPolyglot；andinFrance，Bude，SyndicoftheSorbonne，togetherwithavastarmyofmonksinEnglandandontheContinent，attackedhimferociously。HewascondemnedbytheUniversityofParis，andvariouspropositionsofhisweredeclaredtobehereticalandimpious。Fortunately，theworstpersecutorscouldnotreachhim；otherwisetheymighthavetreatedhimastheytreatedhisdisciple，Berquin，whomin1529theyburnedatParis。
　　Thefateofthisspurioustextthrowslightintotheworkingsofhumannatureinitsrelationstosacredliterature。AlthoughLutheromitteditfromhistranslationoftheNewTestament，andkeptitoutofeverycopypublishedduringhislifetime，andalthoughatalaterperiodthemosteminentChristianscholarsshowedthatithadnorighttoaplaceintheBible，itwas，afterLuther’sdeath，replacedintheGermantranslation，andhasbeenincorporatedintoallimportanteditionsofit，saveone，sincethebeginningoftheseventeenthcentury。Soessentialwasitfoundinmaintainingthedominanttheologythat，despitethefactthatSirIsaacNewton，RichardPorson，thenineteenth-centuryrevisers，andallothereminentauthoritieshaverejectedit，theAnglicanChurchstillretainsitinitsLectionary，andtheScotchChurchcontinuestouseitintheWestminsterCatechism，asamainsupportofthedoctrineoftheTrinity。
　　NorwereothernewtruthspresentedbyErasmusbetterreceived。
　　Hisstatementthat“someoftheepistlesascribedtoSt。Paularecertainlynothis。”whichisto-dayuniversallyacknowledgedasatruism，alsoarousedastorm。Forgenerations，then，hisworkseemedvain。
　　OnthecominginoftheReformationthegreatstructureofbeliefintheliteralandhistoricalcorrectnessofeverystatementintheScriptures，intheprofoundallegoricalmeaningsofthesimplesttexts，andeveninthedivineoriginofthevowelpunctuation，toweredmoreloftilyandgrewmorerapidlythaneverbefore。TheReformers，havingcastofftheauthorityofthePopeandoftheuniversalChurch，fellbackallthemoreupontheinfallibilityofthesacredbooks。TheattitudeofLuthertowardthisgreatsubjectwascharacteristic。Asarule，headheredtenaciouslytotheliteralinterpretationoftheScriptures；hisargumentagainstCopernicusisafairexampleofhisreasoninginthisrespect；but，withthestronggoodsensewhichcharacterizedhim，hefromtimetotimebrokeawayfromthereceivedbelief。Thus，hetookthelibertyofunderstandingcertainpassagesintheOldTestamentinadifferentsensefromthatgiventhembytheNewTestament，anddeclaredSt。Paul’sallegoricaluseofthestoryofSarahandHagar“toounsoundtostandthetest。”HealsoemphaticallydeniedthattheEpistletotheHebrewswaswrittenbySt。Paul，andhedidthisintheexerciseofacriticaljudgmentuponinternalevidence。HisutteranceastotheEpistleofSt。Jamesbecamefamous。HeannouncedtotheChurch：“Idonotesteemthisanapostolic，epistle；IwillnothaveitinmyBibleamongthecanonicalbooks。”andhesummeduphisopinioninhiswell-knownallusiontoitas“anepistleofstraw。”
　　Emboldenedbyhim，thegentlespiritofMelanchthon，whileusuallytakingtheBibleveryliterally，attimesrevolted；butthiswasnotduetoanywantofloyaltytotheoldmethodofinterpretation：wheneverthewildestandmostabsurdsystemofexegesisseemednecessarytosupportanypartofthereformeddoctrine，LutherandMelanchthonunflinchinglydevelopedit。
　　BothofthemheldfirmlytotheolddictumofHugoofSt。Victor，which，aswehaveseen，wasvirtuallythatonemustfirstacceptthedoctrine，andthenfindscripturalwarrantforit。VerystrikingexamplesofthiswereaffordedintheinterpretationbyLutherandMelanchthonofcertainallegedmarvelsoftheirtime，andoneoutofseveralofthesemaybetakenastypicaloftheirmethods。
　　In1523LutherandMelanchthonjointlypublishedaworkunderthetitleDerPapstesel——interpretingthesignificanceofastrange，ass-likemonsterwhich，accordingtoapopularstory，hadbeenfoundfloatingintheTibersometimebefore。Thisbookwasillustratedbystartlingpictures，andbothtextandpicturesweredevotedtoprovingthatthismonsterwas“asignfromGod。”
　　indicatingthedoomofthepapacy。ThistreatisebythetwogreatfoundersofGermanProtestantismpointedoutthattheass’sheadsignifiedthePopehimself；“for。”saidthey，“aswellasanass’sheadissuitedtoahumanbody，sowellisthePopesuitedtobeheadovertheChurch。”ThisargumentwasclinchedbyareferencetoExodus。Therighthandofthemonster，saidtobelikeanelephant’sfoot，theymadetosignifythespiritualruleofthePope，since“withithetramplesuponalltheweak“：thistheyprovedfromthebookofDanielandtheSecondEpistletoTimothy。Themonster’slefthand，whichwaslikethehandofaman，theydeclaredtomeanthePope’ssecularrule，andtheyfoundpassagestosupportthisviewinDanielandSt。Luke。
　　Therightfoot，whichwaslikethefootofanox，theydeclaredtotypifytheservantsofthespiritualpower；andprovedthisbyacitationfromSt。Matthew。Theleftfoot，likeagriffin’sclaw，theymadetotypifytheservantsofthetemporalpowerofthePope，andthehighlydevelopedbreastsandvariousothermembers，cardinals，bishops，priests，andmonks，“whoselifeiseating，drinking，andunchastity“：toprovethistheycitedpassagesfromSecondTimothyandPhilippians。Theallegedfish-scalesonthearms，legs，andneckofthemonstertheymadetotypifysecularprincesandlords；“since。”astheysaid，“inSt。MatthewandJobtheseatypifiestheworld，andfishesmen。”
　　Theoldman’sheadatthebaseofthemonster’sspinetheyinterpretedtomean“theabolitionandendofthepapacy。”andprovedthisfromHebrewsandDaniel。Thedragonwhichopenshismouthintherearandvomitsfire，“referstotheterrible，virulentbullsandbookswhichthePopeandhisminionsarenowvomitingforthintotheworld。”ThetwogreatReformersthenwentontoinsistthat，sincethismonsterwasfoundatRome，itcouldrefertonopersonbutthePope；“for。”theysaid，“Godalwayssendshissignsintheplaceswheretheirmeaningapplies。”Finally，theyassuredtheworldthatthemonsteringeneralclearlysignifiedthatthepapacywasthennearitsend。TothisdevelopmentofinterpretationLutherandMelanchthonespeciallydevotedthemselves；thelatterbyrevisingthisexpositionoftheprodigy，andtheformerbymakingadditionstoanewedition。SuchwasthesuccessofthiskindofinterpretationthatLuther，hearingthatamonstrouscalfhadbeenfoundatFreiburg，publishedatreatiseuponit——showing，bycitationsfromthebooksofExodus，Kings，thePsalms，Isaiah，Daniel，andtheGospelofSt。John，thatthisnewmonsterwastheespecialworkofthedevil，butfullofmeaninginregardtothequestionsatissuebetweentheReformersandtheolderChurch。
　　TheothermainbranchoftheReformedChurchappearedforatimetoestablishabettersystem。Calvin’sstronglogicseemedatoneperiodlikelytotearhisadherentsawayfromtheoldermethod；buttheevolutionofscholasticismcontinued，andtheinfluenceoftheGermanreformersprevailed。Ateverytheologicalcentrecameanamazingdevelopmentofinterpretation。
　　EminentLutherandivinesintheseventeenthcentury，likeGerhard，Calovius，Coccerus，andmultitudesofothers，wrotescoresofquartostofurtherthissystem，andtheotherbranchoftheProtestantChurchemulatedtheirexample。ThepregnantdictumofSt。Augustine——“GreateristheauthorityofScripturethanallhumancapacity“——wassteadilyinsistedupon，and，towardthecloseoftheseventeenthcentury，Voetius，therenownedprofessoratUtrecht，declared，“NotawordiscontainedintheHolyScriptureswhichisnotinthestrictestsenseinspired，theverypunctuationnotexcepted“；andthisdeclarationwasechoedbackfrommultitudesofpulpits，theologicalchairs，synods，andcouncils。Unfortunately，itwasverydifficulttofindwhatthe“authorityofScripture“reallywas。TothegreaternumberofProtestantecclesiasticsitmeanttheauthorityofanymeaninginthetextwhichtheyhadthewittoinventandthepowertoenforce。
　　Toincreasethisvastconfusion，came，intheolderbranchoftheChurch，theideaofthedivineinspirationoftheLatintranslationoftheBibleascribedtoSt。Jerome——theVulgate。
　　ItwasinsistedbyleadingCatholicauthoritiesthatthiswasascompletelyaproductofdivineinspirationaswastheHebreworiginal。Strongmenarosetoinsisteventhat，wheretheHebrewandtheLatindiffered，theHebrewshouldbealteredtofitJerome’smistranslation，asthelatter，havingbeenmadeunderthenewdispensation，mustbebetterthanthatmadeundertheold。EvensogreatamanasCardinalBellarmineexertedhimselfinvainagainstthisnewtideofunreason。[469]
　　[469]ForValla，seevarioussourcesalreadynamed；andforanespeciallyinterestingaccount，Symond’sRenaissanceinItaly，theRevivalofLearning，pp。260-269；andfortheopinionofthebestcontemporaryjudge，seeErasmus，Opera，Leyden，1703，tom。