401 religious encyclopedia nationalism

RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. See LIBERTY, RELIG­IOUS.
RELIGIOUS PEDAGOGY, HARTFORD SCHOOL OF: An institution organized and equipped solely for the purpose of accomplishing in religious educa­tion what the high grade normal school or college does in secular education. Founded by the Rev. David Allen Reed at Springfield, Mass., it was in­corporated Jan. 28, 1885, under the name " School for Christian Workers." Its course of study was enlarged in 1892, and again in 1897, when it was given the name " Bible Normal College." In Mar., 1902, it was moved to Hartford, Conn., that it might carry on its work in affiliation with Hartford Theo­logical Seminary. At the same time the require­ments for admission and graduation were still fur­ther strengthened in anticipation of a more strictly professional type of work. On Apr. 14, 1903, 'the school was reincorporated under the laws of Con­necticut and received its present name, together with authority to confer the bachelor's, master's, and doctor's degree in religious pedagogy.

Religious Pedagogy

Remonstrants

The school is interdenominational and is open to both men and women. The increasing demand from churches and other religious organizations for thor­oughly trained teachers is conclusive evidence that a new profession is rapidly developing within the church. To pioneer this new profession, and to se­cure and thoroughly equip men and women who are qualified by nature and preliminary training to fill it, is the central design of the school.

The work involves three central ideas: The Bible; the child; and the teacher. It is grouped into three departments of study, namely: studies relating to the Bible; studies relating to man; and studies re­lating to teaching. These studies are designed to afford an accurate, teaching knowledge of the Bible and cognate subjects; an understanding of the in­dividual and social nature of man, with special ref­erence to the child; and the training of the teacher in the essentials of scientific pedagogy. They are intended to give students a professional equipment for positions as Sunday school superintendents; normal, field, city, district, and primary superin­tendents; city, home, and  foreign missionaries; pastors' assistants, and superintendents and teach­ers in reformatory and charitable institutions.

The school is under the direction of a board of eighteen trustees. In number of students it has had a sure and steady growth. The number enrolled in all courses, both regular and special, in 1904 was 54; in 1910, 130. The faculty is constituted as fol­lows: President William Douglas Mackenzie, D.D., of Hartford Theological Seminary, president of the institution and professor of Christian doctrine; Rev. Charles Stoddard Lane, A.M., vice president and professor of church history; Rev. Edward H. Knight, D.D., dean of the faculty and professor of New Testament language and literature; George E. Dawson, Ph.D., professor of psychology; Edward P. St. John, Pd.M., professor of pedagogy; Rev. Ed­ward E. Nourse, D.D., professor of Old Testament language and literature; Miss Orissa M. Baxter, professor of home economics.

The school has no endowment, and meets its an­nual expenses (in 1910, $13,000) chiefly by gifts from individuals, churches, and Sunday schools.

EDWARD HOOKER KNIGHT.
RELIGIOUS TRACT SOCIETY. See TRAcr So­CIETIES, IIL, 1.
RELLY, JAMES: Universalist; b. at Jeffreston (70 m. w.n.w. of Cardiff), Pembrokeshire, Wales, about 1722; d. at London Apr. 25, 1778. He at­tended the Pembroke grammar school, came under the influence of George Whitefield, probably in the latter's first tour of Wales in 1741, and became one of his preachers. His first station was at Rhydd­langwraig near Narbeth, Pembrokeshire; and in 1747 he made a report of a missionary tour to Bris­tol, Bath, Gloucestershire, and Birmingham. He broke, however, with Whitefield on doctrinal grounds and is known to have been in controversy with John Wesley in 1756. About the same time he adopted Universalism and occupied meeting­houses in various parts of London until his death. One of his converts in 1770 was John Murray (q.v.), the founder of Universalist churches in America.

THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG

480

His chief publications were: The Tryal of Spirits (London, 1756); Union; or a Treatise of the Con­sanguinity between Christ and His Church (1759); The Sadducee Detected (1754); and Epistles, or the Great Salvation Contemplated (1776).

BcHi.IOaxerar : W. Wilson. Hid. and Antiquities o! Dis­senting Churches in London, i. 358 359, iii. 184. 385, 4 vole., London, 1808 14; L. Tyerman. Life and Times of John Wesley, i. 538 b37. ii. 240, 400, London, 1870 71; R. Eddy, in American Church History Series, x. 348, 392, 473. New York, 1894; DNB, alviii. 7 8.

REMEftS1YYDER, rem'en anai"der, JUNIUS BENJAMIN: Lutheran; b. at Staunton, Va., Feb. 24, 1843. He was graduated from Pennsylvania College, Gettysburg, Pa. (B.A., 1861), and the Gettysburg Theological Seminary (1865). He served in the 131st Pennsylvania Volunteers in 18623, and after his ordination in 1865 held pastorates at St. John's, Lewistown, Pa. (18657), St. Luke's, Philadelphia (1867 74), Church of the Ascension, Savannah, Ga. (1874 80), and St. James', New York City, of which he has been the head since 1881. In theology he is conservative and is op­posed to rationalism, favoring progressive and con­structive, not destructive, criticism; he advocates educational rather than emotional methods in re­ligion and in worship holds to the historic liturgies. He has written Heavenward: or, The Race for the Crown of Life (Philadelphia, 1874, new ed., 1908); Doom Eternal: The Bible and Church Doctrine of Everlasting Punishment (1880); The Work and Per­sonality of Luther (New York, 1882); Lutheran Literature: Its Distinctive Traits and Excellencies (1883); The Six Days of Creation: Lectures on the Mosaic Account of the Creation., Fall, aced Deluge (1886); The Real Presence (1890); The Lutheran Manual (1892); The Atonement and Modern Thought (Philadelphia, 1905); and Mysticism: Psychology, History., and Relation to Scripture, Church, and Christian Life (1909).
REMIGIUS, re mij'i us, OF AUXERRE: Me­dieval scholar; b. in Burgundy before 850; d. about 908. He entered the Benedictine order at the mon­astery of St. Germanus at Auxerre, where he studied under the famous Heiricus; was called, about 882, by Archbishop Fulco to Reims to reorganize with Hucbald the two schools located there; and after the archbishop's death (900) taught at Paris the liberal arts and probably theology, counting as one of his scholars Odo of Cluny. Besides his commen­tary on the work of Marcianua Capella (on book IX., MPL, exxxi. 931 sqq.) on the seven liberal arts, and his glosses on the works of Donatus and Prisciauus (the fruit of his teaching of grammar, dialectic, and music, and widely used in the Middle Ages), were his commentaries on Genesis (MPL, cxxxi. 51 sqq.), Psalms (pp. 133 eqq.), Canticles (cxvii. 295 sqq.), Minor Prophets (pp. 9 sqq.), Epis­tles of Paul (pp. 361 sqq.), Revelation (pp. 937 sqq.), Matthew, and Mark; homilies on texts from Matthew (twelve in MPL, cxxxi. 86.5 sqq.); and De celebrations misers et ejua signifcatione (ib., ci. 1246 sqq., under the name of Alcuin), a treatise on the mass, following the view of Paschasius Rad 

bertus (q.v.). (R. SCHMID.)

481 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Be lisions Peter

8emonstraat.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hint. litUraire de la France, vi. 99 sqq.;

A. Ebert, Allgemeine Geschichte der Litteratur tea Mittel­

altera, iii. 234, Leipsic, 1887; Ceillier, Auteura aacrie,

xii. 753 780; NA, 1901, p. 583.

REMIGIUS OF LYONS: Archbishop of that

city; d. there Oct. 28, 875. Nothing is known of him

prior to his elevation to the episcopate on Mar. 31,

852. He played a prominent part in French eccle­

siastical history. He was Archicapellanus (q.v.)

from 855 to 863, which was a position of great in­

fluence. He figures among the leading members of

several synods, indeed presided over the Synod of

Valence in 855. He participated in the predestina­

tion controversy which had been precipitated on the

church by the unhappy monk Gottschalk (q.v.),

whom, like some other leaders, he defended. This

brought him up against the still more powerful

Hinemar, who, in the Synod of Chiersy held in 853,

got the endorsement of his four chapters on predes­

tination. But these the synod of Valence refused

to ratify and, on the contrary, passed six canons

(Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, iv. 193 sqq.) against

Hinemar's position, and they were reaffirmed by

the Synod of Langres in 859, which was proof of

Remigius' influence. In the national Synod of

Savoni6res which immediately followed Remigius

presented these canons to Charles the Bald.

Remigius was an able and faithful prelate. When

he came into his rule he found that certain sources

of revenue which he thought properly belonged to

his diocese had been taken from it. He set about

regaining this lost revenue and brilliantly succeeded.

For these and other services his grateful people

canonized him. Various writings have been attrib­

uted to him, but he does not seem to have been a

writer and the attributions are probably false.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bouquet, Receuil, viii. 388 aqq.; Ceillier,

Auteura sacra, xii. 614 sqq.; ASB, Oct., xii. 878 sqq.;

Hid. littbraire de la France, v. 449 aqq.

REMIGIUS OF REIMS: Bishop of that city;

b. at Laon (87 m. n.e. of Paris) about 437; d. at

Reims, probably Jan. 13, 532 or 533. In his twenty­

second year he became bishop; and his fame rests

upon the record, according to Gregory of Tours, of

his converting the Frankish king Clovis to Chris­

tianity (baptized, Christmas, 496). With this is con­

nected the legend of the ampulla (see AMPULLE).

It had its origin with Hinemar of Reims (q.v.).

When Remigius crowned Charles the Bald at Metz

(869) the sacred oil was produced and alleged to

have been used by Remigius at the consecration of

Clovis. This was to validate the right of the king

of the West Franks over Lotharingia by establish­

ing a connection, if traditional, with the Merovin­

gians. The vial reappeared at the coronation of

Philip II. in 1179 and was broken by a revolution­

ist in 1793. That Remigius exerted influence over

Clovis and his sons may be surmised but can not be

substantiated in detail, owing to the legendary

character of the records. The letter in which Pope

Hormisdas appears to have appointed him vicar of

the kingdom of Clovis is proved to be spurious; it

is presumed to have been an attempt of Hincmar to

base his pretensions for the elevation of Reims to

the primacy, following the alleged precedent of

Remigius. Four letters of Remigius are all that are

IX. 31

preserved of his writings (ed. Gundlach, in MGH,

Epist., iii. 112 116). (A. HAUcs.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: For review of the literature on Remigius: H. Jodart, Bibliopraphie tea ouvrapae concernant la vie et k culte de S. Remi, Reims, 1891. For earlyy sources consult: The Vita, formerly ascribed to Venantius Fortu­natus, in ASB, Oct., f. 128 131, with commentary, pp. 59 128; MPL, lxxxviii. 527 532; and ed. B. Hrusch, in MGR, Auct. ant., iv. 2 (1885), 64 $7, with commentary, pp. xxii. xciv (the Vita gives little information). Other materials of little value are in ASB, Oct., i. 187 178; MPL, exxv. 1187 98; and Analecta Bollandiana, iv (1885), 337 343. Further sources ale: Gregory of Tours, Hietoria Francorum, ii. 27, 31, viii. 21, ix. 14, x. 19; idem, In ploria confesaorum, hix.; and Sidonius Apollinarin, Epiat., ix. 7. Consult further: F. Dahn, Urgeechichte der permaniachen and romaniachen Vtilker, iii. 49 61, Ber­lin, 1885; J. Dorigny, Vie de S Remi, Chilons, 1714; P. Armand, Hist. de St. Remi, Paris, 1848; H. RBekert, %ulturpeachichte, vol. i., chaps. xii. xiv., Leipsie, 1853; P. Heber, Die vorkarolinpiachen christlichen Glaubens­helden am Rhein, Frankfort, 1858; C. von Noorden, Hink­mar, pp. 393 aqq., Berlin, 18&3; H. Schrbrs, Hinkmar, pp. 448 454, 508612, Freiburg, 1884; E. d'Avenay, Saint Remi de Reims, Reims, 1898; L. Carlier, Vie de Saint Remi, Paris, 1896; A. Handeeeeur, Saint Remi, Mque de Reims, Paris, 1898; Hilt. litt6raire de la France, iii. 88 eqq., 155 eqq., Friedrich, %D, vol. ii., § 5; Hauck, ED, i. 119 120; DCB, iv. 541 542. '

REMORSTRANTS.
I. History to 1818. The Remonstrance (§ 1). Doctrines (§ 2). Counter remonstrance (§ 3).

11. From 1818 to 1832. III. From 1832 to 1795. IV. The Period of Independent Existence. Remonstrants is a name given to the adherents of Jacobus Arminius (q.v.) after his death, from the " Remonstrance " which they drew up in 1610 as an exposition and justification of their views (see below). Their history may be divided into four periods, the first extending to the Synod of Dort, 1618; the second comprising the years of persecu­tion until 1632; the third the time of toleration during the existence of the Republic of the United Netherlands until 1795; the fourth the period of their existence as an independent church com­munity.

I. History to 16x8: After the death of Arminius (see i. 296 sqq. of this work) those who shared his conviction drew together more closely. They re­pudiated the name Arminians, but upheld the prin­ciple that the free investigation of the i. The Re  Bible should not be hampered by sub­monstrance. scription to symbolical books. They addressed themselves to the States of Holland, urging the convocation of a synod for the reconsideration and examination of the Netherland confession and the Heidelberg Catechism. On the invitation of Oldenbarneveldt, the Dutch liberal statesman and a sympathizer with the Remon­strants, forty one preachers and the two leaders of the Leyden state college for the education of preach­ers met in The Hague on Jan. 14, 1610, to state in written form their views concerning all disputed dodtrines. The document in the form of a remon­strance was drawn up by Jan Uytenbogaert (q.v.) and after a few changes was endorsed and signed by all and in July presented to Oldenbameveldt. It treats of the value of formulated confessions of faith, of the effect of the grace of God in opposition to

Remonstrants

Ronan THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG 482

their Calvinistic opponents, and of the power of secular authorities in the affairs of the Church. The Remonstrants did not reject confession and cate­chism, but did not acknowledge them as permanent and unchangeable canons of faith. They ascribed authority only to the word of God in Holy Scrip­ture and were averse to all formalism. They also maintained that the secular authorities have the right to interfere in theological disputes to preserve peace and prevent schisms in the Church.

Their views concerning the operation of divine grace they expressed in the following five articles

a. Doctrines. C' The Five Articles of Arminian 

lsm ' ), the positive part of the

Remonstrance:

AnTICr.H I. That God, by an eternal, unchangeable purpose in Jesus Christ, his Son, before the foundation of the world, hath determined, out of the fallen, sinful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ's sake, and through Christ, those who, through the grace of the Holy Ghost, shall believe on this his Son Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obedience of faith, through this grace, even to the end; and, on the other hand, to leave the incorri­gible and unbelieving in sin and under wrath, and to con­demn them as alienate from Christ, according to the word of the Gospel in John iii. 36: " He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him," and according to other passages of Scripture also.

ART. II. That, agreeably thereto, Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world, died for all men and for every man, so that he has obtained for them all, by his death on the cross, redemption, and the forgiveness ef sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this forgiveness of sins, except the believer, according to the word of the Gospel of John iii. 16: " God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life "; and in the First Epistle of John ii. 2: " And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only. but also for the sins of the whole world."

AST. 111 That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as he, in the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do anything that is truly good (such as having faith eminently is); but that it is needful that he be born again of God in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, or will, and an his powers, in order that he may rightly understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good, according to the word of Christ, John xv. b: " Without me ye can do nothing."

Aar. 1:V. That this grace of God is the beginning, con­tinuance, and accomplishment of an good, even to this ex­tent, that the regenerate man himself, without that prevenient or assisting; awakening, following, and co operative grace, elm neither think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements that can be conceived must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. But, as respects the mode of the operation of this grace, it is not irresistible, inasmuch as it is written concerning many that they have resisted the Holy Ghost,  Acts vii., and elsewhere in many places.

ART. V. That those who an incorporated into Christ by a true faith, and have thereby become partakers of his life­giving spirit, have thereby full power to strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own flesh, and to win the victory, it being well understood that it is ever through the assisting grace of the Holy Ghost; and that Jesus Christ assists them through his Spirit in all temptations, extends to them his hand; and if only they are ready for the con­flict. and desire his help, and are not inactive, keeps them from falling, so that they, by no craft or power of Satan, can be misled, nor plucked out of Christ's hands, according to the word of Christ, John x. 28: " Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." But whether they are capa­ble. through negligence, of forsaking again the first be­ginnings of their life in Christ, of again returning to this present evil world, of turning away from the holy doctrine which was delivered them, of losing a good conscience, of

becoming devoid of grace, that must be more particularly determined out of the Holy Scriptures before we ourselves can teach it with the full persuasion of our minds.

The Confessionalists presented to the States of Holland a Counter remonstrance in which the view of the Remonstrants was sharply condemned. The

States requested six deputies of both 3. Counter  panties to discuss the five articles be 

remon  fore them. There participated in this

atrance. Conference of The Hague (1610), Uy­

tenbogaert and Episcopius on the one

side and Festus Hommius and Ruardus Acronius,

two preachers, on the other; but the dissenting

parties agreed neither here nor at another conference

held two years later at Delft. As the dissensions

led to disturbances, the States in 1614 passed a

resolution of peace in which the discussion of dis­

puted points was forbidden in the pulpit. Owing

to the influence of Oldenbarneveldt and of the

States, the controversies assumed a political char­

acter. Zealous Calvinists separated from the con­

gregations of the Remonstrants and held special

church services. The majority in the States of Hol­

land persistently refused to convene a national synod

as advocated by the Counterremonstrants, but

matters changed as soon as Prince Maurice publicly

avowed the cause of the latter. A national synod

was convoked (May 30, 1618) by the States general

at Dort, where the five articles of the Remonstranta

were condemned (see DORT, SYNOD OF).

II. From z6:8 till x632: By the decrees of the Synod of Dort, the church services of the Remon­strants were prohibited. Episcopius, with the other Remonstrants summoned before the synod, was de­posed, as were more than 200 preachers. Those who were not willing to renounce all further activity as preachers, were banished. They united in 1619 at Antwerp, where the basis for a new church com­munity was laid, under the name Remonstrant Reformed Brotherhood. Uytenbogaert and Episco­pius, who had found a refuge in Rouen, and Grevino­hoven, formerly a preacher of Rotterdam, now in Holstein, assumed the leadership of the Brother­hood while three exiled preachers secretly returned to their country to care for the congregations left there; for in spite of the unfavorable decree, there was still left a considerable number who would not hear the doctrine of absolute grace preached, and there were not wanting deposed preachers who dared to serve them. In 1621 Episcopius drew up a Confessio sine deelaratio sentmtite pastorum qui Remonstrantea vocantur, which found a large circu­lation in its Dutch translation. Its value to day is only historical. Owing to the lack of preachers, there originated in Warmond a movement in favor of the lay sermon, the adherents of which settled later at Rynsburg and founded the Society of Col­legiants (see COLLEGIANT8). On the invitation of Sweden and Denmark some preachers went to Gliickatadt, Danzig, and other places, founding con­gregations, which, however, were only of short dura­tion, except that of Friedrichstadt, under the favor and protection of Duke Frederick of Holstein. The congregations in Holland which had separated from the Reformed church were harassed rind persecuted. The preachers were punished with lifelong imprison 

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA

483

ment at the castle of Loevestein. The conspiracy of the sons of Oldenbarneveldt against Prince Maurice (1623) gave new impulse to the persecu­tion. It was only after the latter's death (1625) that a better time dawned for the Remonstrants. Prince Frederick Henry was of a milder spirit, so that Episeopius and Uytenbogaert could return from exile. All captives, seven in number, fled in 1631 from the castle of Loevestein, without any serious attempt being made to rearrest them. Churches were built, and the congregations received their own preachers. Thus the Brotherhood was established as the Remonstrant Reformed Church Community.

III. From 1632 till 1795: The Remonstrants were tolerated, but not officially recognized until 1795. They were not allowed to build their churches on the street and had to support their preachers by voluntary gifts. In the beginning there were forty congregations, mostly in South Holland. In North Holland there were only four and as many in Utrecht; others were in Gelderland, Overyssel, and Friesland. The delegates of these congregations met every year alternately at Rotterdam and Am­sterdam. At one of the first meetings there was established a church order. Uytenbogaert wrote an Onderwysinge in de christelycke religie in strict ac­cordance with the confession. A theological semi­nary was founded at Amsterdam, with Episcopius at its head, who in 1634 delivered his first lectures; this institution educated many distinguished preach­ers. Gerard Brandt and his sons Caspar, Johannes, and Gerard the Younger belonged to the best preach­ers of the country in the seventeenth century. As the Remonstrants were not bound by any confes­sion, schism frequently showed itself among them, while tendencies toward Socinianism and Rational­ism were not wanting.

IV. The Period of Independent Existence: When Church and State were separated, after the revolu­tion of 1795, the Brotherhood of the Remonstrants was recognized as an independent church commu­nity, and they then made an attempt to unite all Protestants. In Sept., 1796, the convention of the Brotherhood sent a letter to the clergymen of all Protestant churches in which the plan was fully discussed; but the Reformed Church refused co­operation. The chief tenet of the Remonstrants was to confess and preach the Gospel of Christ in freedom and tolerance. Their communities suffered considerably during the French rule, but after the restitution of the earlier conditions their cause be­gan to flourish. Many country congregations died out in the last century; but new congregations orig­inated in cities like Arnheim, Groningen, and Dort, where the adherents of the modern tendency in the Netherland Reformed Church joined the Brother hood under the pressure of confessionalism. It numbers at present twenty seven congregations with about 12,500 members, all of the congregations being in a flourishing condition.

(H. C. ROGOEf.)

BrBLaooaAray: Besides the works by Simon Episcopius,

Philippus van Limborch, and Jan Uytenbogaert, and the

literature under the articles on them, consult: The life

of Coolhaes by H. C. Rogge, 2 vole., Amsterdam, 1856­

1858; of Coornhert by F. D. J. Moorrees, Nijmegen, 1887,

Remonstrants Renan

and by C. Lorentzen, Jena, 1886; G. Brandt, Hiatoris der Rejormatie, 4 parts, Amsterdam, 1871 1704, Eng. trawl., Hiat. of the Reformation . . . in . . . the Low Countries, 4 vobs., London, 1720 23; A. a Cattenburgh, Bi3liotheca scriptorum Remonstrantium, Amsterdam, 1728 J. E. I. Waleh, Relipionestreitipkeiten aueaer der lutheriechen Kirche, iii. 540 sqq.. 10 vols., Jena, 173339; J. Regen­borg, Historic der Remonstranten, 2 parts, Amsterdam, 1774 76; F. Calder, Memoirs of Simon Episcopius, Lon­don, 1838; A. des Amorie van der Hoeven, Hot tweeds Eeuwfest van hot Seminarium der Remonstranten, Leeu­warden, 1840; J. Tideman, De Remonatr. Broederschap, Haarlem, 1847; idem, De Renwnetratie en het Remon­stratisme, ib. 1851; idem, De catechaiwhe Literatuur der Remonstranten, Rotterdam, 1852; idem, Do Stichtinp der Remonatr. Broederaehap, 1819 8,¢, 2 vole., Amsterdam, 1871 72; A. Schweitzer, Die protestantischen Central­dogmen, 166 aqq., Zurich, 1856; G. Frank, Gesehichte der protestantischen Theolopie, i. 403 eqq., Leipsie, 1862; W. Cunningham, Historical Theology, ii. 371 513, Edinburgh, 1864; Gedenkwhrift van het 860 jarip Beataen der Remonetr. Broederachap, Rotterdam, 1869; P. H. Ditchfield, The Church in the Netherlands, London, 1893; H. Y. Groene­wegen, De Remonatrantie op haren driehonderdaten ge­denkag, IB10 I4, Januari 1910, Leyden, 1910; Schaff, Creeds, i. 516 sqq., iii. 550 sqq.; the literature under DoaT, SYNOD OF; and HOLLAND.

REMPHAft, rem'fan: The name of a deity men­tioned only in Acts vii. 43. The readings of the name in the manuscripts are numerous, including the forms Rompha, Romphan, Rempha, Rephart, Raiphan, and Raphan. The passage is a free quo­tation from .Amos v. 26, in which the New Testa­ment (A. V.) " Remphan " (R. V., " Rephan "; Westcott and Hort, Rompha) displaces the Old Tes­tament " Chiun " (Babylonian Kaawanu, " Sat­urn "), here following the Septuagint manuscripts BAQ, which read Raiphan or Rephan. No deity named Remphan or Rephan is known, nor is the form known to occur as a title or name for Saturn. On the ground that the change from the form Chiun to Remphan, etc., occurs in the Septuagint, which was made in Egypt, explanations have been at­tempted, but have proved unsatisfactory, which take into account supposed Egyptian names or com­binations, e.g., a Coptic form meaning " king of heaven " (it seems far to go to seek a Coptic form, and the Egyptian equivalent of this Coptic would bear no resemblance to " Remphan "), or an alleged title of Seb (=Saturn) meaning "youngest of the gods " (which is far fetched, unusual, and unlikely). The best and generally accepted explanation is that the Septuagint form, which Acts borrows, is a mis­take in the reading of the Hebrew for " Chiun," a mistake easily explicable when the form of the let­ters is taken into account. GEo. W. GlrafoxE.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The commentaries on Amos and Acts; Schrader, KAT, p 409, note 1, 410 note 6; idem, in

TSK, 1874, pp. 324 sqq.