¹ For German evaluations of Peabody see Baumgarten in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1930), IV, 1054Google Scholar, and Christliche Welt, Dec. 1, 1898, pp. 1131–1134. On Peabody's place in the Social Gospel movement see his Reminiscences of Present-Day Saints (Boston and New York, 1927), pp. 117 f.Google Scholar

² Quotations are from Peabody's Harvard in the Sixties: A Boy's Eye View (Cambridge, 1935), p. 19Google Scholar, and A Little Boy in Little Boston (Cambridge, 1935)Google Scholar, passim.

³ See Harvard in the Sixties, p. 31, and Reminiscences, p. 65.

⁴ Williams, G. H., ed., The Harvard Divinity School (Boston, 1954), p. 88Google Scholar. For a thorough discussion of the academic moral philosophers see Smith, Wilson, Professors & Public Ethics (Ithaca, 1956)Google Scholar, in particular ch. IX.

⁵ This discussion of theological instruction at the Divinity School draws heavily on Sydney E. Ahlstrom, “The Middle Period (1840–1880),” in Williams, ed., op. cit. On Everett see n. 16, infra.

⁶ See Peabody, , “The Germ of the Graduate School,” Harvard Graduates Magazine, XXVII (Dec, 1918), 176–181Google Scholar. The Harvard University Archives also preserve Peabody's notes taken in the philosophical course.

⁷ For Peabody's appreciation of Emerson's mysticism see his “Ralph Waldo Emerson and the Doctrine of Divine Immanence,” in Pioneers of Religious Liberty in America (Boston, 1903), pp. 307–339Google Scholar.

⁸ Peirce's terms probabilism and fallibilism are meant to substitute a concept of scientific laws as based on contingency and statistical probability for the older view of scientific laws as mechanically determined. Tychism was thinking that admitted chance. Both probabilism and tychism imply “that people cannot attain absolute certainty concerning questions of fact.” See Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, eds. Hartshorne, and Weiss, (Cambridge, 1931), I, 59Google Scholar, and cf. Wiener's, Philip P. discussion of Peirce in Evolution and the Founders of Pragmatism (Cambridge, 1949)Google Scholar, ch. 4 and p. 200.

⁹ Reminiscences, p. 68.

¹⁰ Quotations from Reminiscences, pp. 69–71.

¹¹ For a detailed account of the motivations of the Prussian authorities in appointing Tholuck at Halle and of the determined resistance of the local theological faculty against Tholuck's acceptance see Witte, Leopold, Das Leben D. Friedrich August Gotttreu Tholuck's (Bielefeld and Leipzig, 1884), I, 411–452Google Scholar.

¹² In Die Glaubwürdigkeit der Evangelischen Geschichte, 2nd ed. (Hamburg, 1838), pp. 9 and viii.Google Scholar

¹³ From Reminiscences, pp. 89, 80, 69, and 81. Cf. also article on Tholuck in Die Religion, 2nd ed., V, 1149 f., and Pfleiderer's evaluation of Tholuck in Die Entwicklung der Protestantischen Theologie (Freiburg i. B., 1891), pp. 188–193Google Scholar.

¹⁴ On Pfleiderer see Die Religion, 2nd ed., IV, 1156 f., and Peabody, “History of the Psychology of Religion,”; Unitarian Review, XIV (Aug. and Sept., 1880), 97–109, and 193–211.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See Report of the Committee to Visit the Divinity School in 1879 (Cambridge, 1879), 12 pp.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Everett, who became dean in 1878, was a student of German philosophy, particularly of Fichte and Hegel, and an admirer of transcendentalism.

¹⁷ Reminiscences, p. 121.

¹⁸ See Ahlstrom, op. cit., pp. 138 ff., passim. Levering Reynolds, Jr., ibid., p. 167, n. 6, tells us that of the six Divinity School professors in the eighties and nineties, five had studied in Germany and were disciples of the historical school and of philosophical idealism.

¹⁹ Persons, Stow, Free Religion: An American Faith (New Haven, 1947), p. 75Google Scholar, characterized the Free Religious Association as “a sort of mutual protective society for these dissenters who would not submit to the yoke of Christ, as prescribed by the National Unitarian Conference.” Peabody rejected their Religion of Humanity because “the legitimate object is eliminated while the sentiment of worship is retained….” In “The Methods of the Psychology of Religion,” Unitarian Review XIX (April, 1883), 323Google Scholar.

²⁰ “The Method of the Psychology of Religion,” Unitarian Review, XIX (March, 1883), 254.Google Scholar

²¹ “The New Theology,” ibid., XI (April, 1879), 369.

²² Cf. his review of “Janet's Theory of Morals,” Science, March 21, 1884, pp. 360–362.

²³ In “The Thirst for the Living God,” King's Chapel, Sermons on Great Themes, Special Series No. 1 (Boston, 1886), 17 pp. Also as AUA Tract, Fourth Series, No. 126 (Boston, n.d.).

²⁴ “Liberal Christianity and the Spirit of Worship,” Unitarian Review, XVIII (Nov., 1882), 387 ff.Google Scholar

²⁵ The Harvard University Catalogue, 1883–84 (Cambridge, 1883), p. 87.Google Scholar

²⁶ Quoted by Reynolds, op. cit., p. 180.

²⁷ In Dombrowski, James, The Early Days of Christian Socialism in America (New York, 1936), p. 63Google Scholar.

²⁸ “Religion in the University,” Unitarian Review, XXX (July, 1888), 55Google Scholar. See also Peabody, “Six Years of Voluntary Chapel,” Harvard Monthly, XV (Oct., 1892), 1–9Google Scholar, and his “Voluntary Worship, 1886–1929,” in Morison, S. E., ed., The Development of Harvard University (Cambridge, 1930), pp. li–lviiiGoogle Scholar.

²⁹ For examples of Harvard preaching under the voluntary system see Harvard Vespers (Boston, 1888), and Peabody's sermons, Mornings in the College Chapel (Boston and New York, 1896), Afternoons in the College Chapel (1898), Mornings in the College Chapel, 2nd Series (1907), Sunday Evenings in the College Chapel (1911), and Sunday Evenings in College Chapels Since the War (1921), all of which but the last also appeared in German translations.

³⁰ “Industrial Co-operation in England,” Forum, VIII (Nov., 1889), 274–285Google Scholar.

³¹ “The German Labor-Colonies for Tramps,” ibid., XII (Feb., 1892), 751–761.

³² “A Case for Good City Government,” ibid., XIII (March, 1892), 53.

³³ “The Problem of Rich Men,” Christian Register, Jan. 5, 1893, pp. 4–5.

³⁴ “Colonization as a Remedy for City Poverty,” Forum, XVII (March, 1894), 59–61Google Scholar, passim. See also “Developing the Social Up-Draught,” Charities Review, VI (July and Aug., 1897), 413–419.

³⁵ See his “Universities and the Workingman,” The Prospect Union Review, Nov. 6, 1895, p. 3; “Aims and Work of the Prospect Union” ibid., March 21, 1894, p. 1. For an account of “The Work of the Prospect Union,” see R. E. Ely's article in Publications of the Church Social Union, no. 31, Nov. 15, 1896, 24 pp.

³⁶ “Charity and Character,”Proceedings, 23rd Annual Session of the National Conference of Charities and Correction (Boston, 1896)Google Scholar, n.p. See also “Christianity and the Social Question,” in The World's Parliament of Religions, ed. Barrows, J. H. (Chicago, 1893), II, 1024–1030Google Scholar.

³⁷ “The Message of Christ to Human Society,” in The Message of Christ to Manhood (Bosten and New York, 1899), pp. 59–61Google Scholar, passim.

³⁸ Quotations are from pp. 346 and 247.

³⁹ Peabody here reformulated an approach which had been used by Pfleiderer and Everett before him, and which was based on the voluntaristic idealism of Fichte.

⁴⁰ “The Character of Jesus Christ,” Hibbert Journal, I (July, 1903), 641–642Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Ibid., 645.

⁴² Jesus Christ and the Christian Character (New York and London, 1905), p. 97Google Scholar. — Seeing in serenity and composure the evidences of Christian discipleship Peabody rejected the twice-born conception of piety of his “distinguished and beloved colleague” William James. James, Peabody felt, could not and did not account in his Varieties of Religious Experience for the “healthy-minded” character of Jesus. Peabody expressed hope that James “may be led from this fascinating discussion of the pathology of religion to the interpretation of its normal, heroic, rational, dynamic types.” In “The Character of Jesus Christ,” op. cit. 651–652, n. 1. See also The Religion of an Educated Man (New York and London, 1903), pp. 10–11Google Scholar.

⁴³ Jesus Christ and the Christian Character, p. 79 and passim.

⁴⁴ The Religion of an Educated Man, pp. 15 and 60. See also Peabody's sermon on Nicodemus in Harvard Vespers. Peabody derived his religion of education from Lessing's deistic treatise on Die Erziehung des Menschengeschlechtes and from Bushnell's Nurture.

⁴⁵ Akademische Gegenseitigkeit (Giessen, 1905), 39 pp.Google Scholar The address was reprinted in translation as “Academic Reciprocity,” in Harvard Graduates Magazine, XIV (March, 1906), 365–377Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ See “Was verdanken wir Amerikaner der Theologie Deutschlands?”, typescript, filed at the Unitarian Historical Library, Boston.

⁴⁷ See W. L. F., in Christliche Welt, Feb. 22, 1906, pp. 186–187, and Helene von Dungern, “Zukunftsmusik,” ibid., June 1, 1906, p. 544.

⁴⁸ See Die Religion, 2nd ed., IV, 1054, and 1st ed., IV, 1343.

⁴⁹ “An Academic Interlude,” Harvard Alumni Bulletin (April, 1935), 790.

⁵⁰ Burgess created the impression of conveying President Roosevelt's views when, in his inaugural lecture, he denounced the Monroe doctrine as obsolete and called for massive Teutonic immigration to Latin America. In a private letter Roosevelt termed Burgess's views “hopelessly wrongheaded,” and the New York Times called Burgess “a missionary of mischief.” See Morison, , et al. , The Letters of Theodore Roosevelt (Cambridge, 1952), V, 645Google Scholar, and Current Literature, XLI (Dec., 1906), 611–615Google Scholar. For other evidence of the tactlessness of later American exchange professors at Berlin see editorial in The Nation, March 30, 1911.

⁵¹ “An Academic Interlude,” p. 790.

⁵² James Ford covers the history of the Social Ethics Department in S. E. Morison, ed., op. cit., pp. 223–230. Peabody's reports on the Social Museum are contained in the Publications of the Department of Social Ethics in Harvard University, nos. 1 and 4 (Feb., 1908 and 1911). Another report had first appeared in the Internationale Wochenschrift (Berlin, Nov. 23, 1907).

⁵³ See The Approach to the Social Question (New York, 1909), p. 51Google Scholar, and “The Recall to Theology,” Yale Review, n.s., XII (Jan., 1923), 324Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ The Approach, pp. 184 ff. — One implication of the theology of service was its repudiation of the eschatological doctrine of Christianity. For Peabody this repudiation could be summed up in one sentence: “There is nothing apocalyptic in the parable of the Good Samaritan….” See his “New Testament Eschatology and New Testament Ethics,” Harvard Theological Review, II (Jan., 1909), 50–57Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ See “‘Going Slow’ in Social Reform,” The Cambridge Magazine, n.s., I (Feb. 1896), 23–25, and “The People,” in Organized Labor and Capital (Philadelphia, 1904), pp. 187–226Google ScholarPubMed.

⁵⁶ The Christian Life in the Modern World (New York, 1914), pp. 95 and 184 f.Google Scholar Statements such as these prompted Sydney Kaplan to characterize Peabody as a teacher of “a kind of Bible Defense of Wage-Slavery….” In “Taussig, James and Peabody: A ‘Harvard School’ in 1900?” American Quarterly, VII (Winter, 1955), 319Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Occasionally Peabody alluded to the particular German responsibility for the war, as when in the Eleventh Report of the Class of 1869 (Cambridge, 1919), p. 217Google Scholar, he stated that his attendance at the Centenary of the University of Berlin in 1910 had been “the last chance for a self-respecting American Professor to associate himself with German university life.” Generally, however, he stuck to his concept of the dignified, stable, but corrupt civilization of Europe versus the casual, disorderly but healthy democracy of the United States. See his “Americans Abroad,” North American Review, CCI (March, 1915), 366–371Google Scholar, and his “The Religious Education of an American Child,” Religious Education, X (April, 1915), 107–114Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ “The Conversion of Militarism,” Biblical World, XLIV (Nov., 1914), 306Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ “Neutrality as an Opportunity,” Nation, Dec. 17, 1914, p. 712.

⁶⁰ “The Peace-Makers,” Harvard Theological Review, XII (Jan. 1919), 51–66Google Scholar.

⁶¹ Cf. his How to Save the Soul of America, AUA Dept. of Social and Public Service, Soc. Serv. Bull. No. 39 (Boston, n.d.), 32 pp., and “The Theologian in a New World,” Methodist Quarterly Review, LXIX (Oct., 1920), 621–632Google Scholar.

⁶² “The Practicability of the Christian Life,” Harvard Theological Review, VI (April, 1913), 131 f.Google Scholar

⁶³ “A New World and Its Religious Leaders,” Religious Education, VII (Oct., 1912), p. 367 f.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Quotations are from The Apostle Paul and the Modern World (New York, 1923), pp. 134 f., 176, 276.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ The universalism of the Church of the Spirit led Peabody to protest “The Call of the Bishops” of the Lambeth conference, because of its trinitarianism and its emphasis on baptism. In Hibbert Journal, XIX (Jan., 1921), 224–229.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ The Church of the Spirit (New York, 1926), p. 100Google ScholarPubMed.

⁶⁷ During the 1920's Peabody became alarmed by yet another kind of religious aberration, viz. the resurgence of Biblical literalism by the fundamentalists. See his “Recall to Theology,” 326.

⁶⁸ See Fine, Sidney, Laissez Faire and the General Welfare State (Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1957), pp. 169–251Google Scholar, and Hooft, W. A. Visser't, The Background of the Social Gospel in America (Haarlem, 1928)Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ A bibliography of Peabody's writings compiled by the author is scheduled to appear in the Proceedings of the Unitarian Historical Society for 1961.