HEHN, h6hn, JOHANN FERDINAND: German Roman Catholic; b. at Burghausen (57 m. e. of Munich) Jan. 4, 1873. He was educated at the universities of Wiirzburg (D.D., 1899) and Berlin (Ph.D., 1902), and in 1903 became privat docent at Wurzburg, where in the same year he was appointed associate professor of Old Testament exegesis and Biblical Oriental languages, becoming full professor in 1907. He has written: Die Einsetzung des heiligen Abendmahles als Beweis fur die Gottheit Christi (Wiirzburg, 1899) and Siinde urul Erlosung each biblischer and babylonischer Anschattung (Leipsic, 1903).
HEIDANUS, hai'ds nus, ABRAHAM:Reformed theologian; b. at Frankenthal (15 m. n. by w. of Speyer) in the Palatinate Aug. 10, 1597; d. at Leyden Oct. 15, 1678. In 1608 his father, a clergyman, was called to Amsterdam, where Abraham studied in the school of Mattheeus Sladus. Later he was sent to Leyden to be trained as preacher of the Walloon Church. After a two years' journey in Germany, Switzerland, France, and England, he became preacher of the Netherlandish Reformed congregation in Naarden in 1623. In 1627 he was called to Leyden, and in 1648 he became professor at the University of Leyden. At that time the study of Aristotle ruled in the Dutch universities and was closely bound up with the orthodoxy of Dort. Heidanus, however, and Johannes Cocceius (q.v.) showed a predilection for the teachings of Descartes. Both had to encounter vehement opposition from the camp of the orthodox, headed by Vo6tius. The doctrine of Cocceius spread, in spite of the efforts of the curators of the University of Leyden to suppress it. At their instigation Friedrich Spanheim and Antonius Hulsius compiled the theses of the new doctrine which gave the most offense, and Jan. 7,1675, it was forbidden to treat " in any manner, directly or indirectly " at the university twenty three propositions. Heidanus.
seeing herein an attack on the liberty of teaching, opposed it in his Consideration over eenige saecken onlanghs voorgevallen in de Universiteiyt binnen Leyden (Leyden, 1676). The work caused such a sensation that within ten days a second edition was necessary, and a third appeared in the same year. Heidanus maintained that his teachings did not contradict the confessional writings, but only presented their truths in a different light. However, on May 4, 1676, he was deposed from his office. The course of the curators was disapproved by many in the Netherlands as well as in foreign countries.
Heidanus represented the view that theology and philosophy should remain each in its own sphere. According to him, there is no such intimate connection between the theology of Cocceius and the philosophy of Descartes that a follower of the former must necessarily agree with the Cartesians. He himself as a theologian was in sympathy with Cocceius, as a philosopher a disciple of Descartes, but his Cartesianism hardly influenced his theology. His writings include:, Proeve en wederlegginghe des Remorestrantschen Calechismi (Leyden, 1641); De causa Dei, dat is de sake Godts yerdedight tegen den mensche (1645); Disputationes de Sabbsto et die dominics (Amsterdam, 1658); Consideration over de heyliging van den Sabbat ends den. dagh des Heeren tot vrede der Kerchen (Leyden, 1659).
(S. D. VAN VEEN.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The funeral oration by C. Wittich was pub
lished Leyden, 1679. Consult P. Bayle, Dictionary, Historical and Critical, iii. 360 364, London, 1736 (quite full, quotes sources); J. A. Cramer, Abraham Heidanus en zi§n Cartesianimme, Utrecht, 1889.
HEIDEGGER, hai'deg"er, JOHANN HEINRICH
Swiss Protestant, author of the ~ Helvetic Formula. consensus (see HELVETIC CCN6ENsU6); b. at Barentschweil (15 m. s.e. of Zurich) July 1, 1633; d. at Zurich Jan. 18, 1698. He studied at Zurich, Marburg (1654), and Heidelberg; in the last named place he became a close friend of Ludwig Fabricius, taught Hebrew and philosophy, and lectured on Latin classics. In 1659 he accepted the theological chair for Loci communes and church history at Steinfurt, where he remained until 1665. Then he traveled to Holland, where he became acquainted with Cocceius. The disturbances of war made an end of the Steinfurt academy, and Heidegger returned to Zurich, where he was appointed professor of Christian ethics. In 1667 he succeeded Hottinger as professor of theology, and he remained faithful to his native city in spite of calls to Leyden (to succeed Cocceius) and to Groningen.
Heidegger lived in harmony with his colleagues until the appearance of Johann Miiller in 1672, just
at the time when the Formula conThe sensus was in preparation. Heidegger
Helvetic agreed with the orthodox theologians Consensus. of Basel, Theodor Zwinger, Lucas Gernler, and others, that Turretin in Geneva ought to be assisted in his opposition to the new hypothesis of Amyraut and the other theologians of Saumur (see AMYRAUT, MOIBE), but thought that the measures adopted against the Saumur theology should be moderate. There were two parties in
Switzerland, one of which, headed by Johann Midler, adhered to the orthodox teachings of Maresius, while men like Heidegger leaned toward the doctrines of Cocceius. The party headed by Willer was interested in eradicating not only the heresies of 'Saumur, but also the Cocceian theology and Cartesian philosophy. \Heidegger with his adherents gained the victory. The special formula for the defense against the innovations of Saumur was drawn up by him, and was approved by all theologians, although the opposition was allowed to make extensive changes. In 1675 the formula was ratified by the council and citizens of Zurich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen. On the insistence of Muller the formula was modified in certain articles before it was sent to the other cantons. Since the formula was directed specifically against Saumur, the Maresians planned new measures against the Dutch tendencies. Heidegger, J. H. Schweizer, and others could hardly print anything without the interference of Willer, who instigated the council against them. Biilod, Fiissli, and Gessner incited the people by denouncing the adherents of Heidegger as Arians and Arminians.
From 1664 to 1680 Heidegger developed an extensive polemical activity against the Roman
Catholic Church. During the persecuControversy tion of the Protestants in France in with 1682, and their unsatisfactory condi
Roman tion in England under Charles II., he
Catholics. employed his pen in their defense by
writing his Historia papatus (Amsterdam, 1684), but the situation did not change. In 1685 a Roman Catholic line assumed the. rule in the Palatinate, in England the new king, James II., openly avowed Romanism, and Louis XIV. revoked the Edict of Nantes. A multitude of fugitives poured into Switzerland, and Heidegger had an opportunity to prove his hospitality. His polemical attitude against his Roman neighbors was renewed when Sfondrati, abbot of St. Gall, tried to extend his rule over Reformed territory by ordering private baptism by midwives, without excepting the Evangelical families. Heidegger wrote by order of the magistrate on the necessity of baptism and against its profanation by midwives. His relations with the Lutheran Church were always of a conciliatory nature. Instigated by the suppression of the Reformed Church in France, he urged a union of all Evangelicals, which found a response in Spener, but the canons of the Synod of Dort made an agreement impossible in Spener's opinion.
Heidegger's literary activity was extensive and chiefly polemical against the Roman Catholics, Baronius, the superstitious pilgrimages to Einsiedeln, etc. To defend the rights of the Reformed in the German empire he wrote Demonstratio de Augustanee contessionis cum fide reformats consensu (1664), and, aiming to unite all Evangelicals, he wrote Manducatio in viam concordita Proteslantium ecclesiasticw (1686). His doctrinal writings exerted much influence, especially his Corpus theologize Christiance (ed. J. H. Schweizer, 2 vols., Zurich, 1700) and Ethicee ChrisGants elements (ed. J. GSIricke, Frankfort, 1711); of the former work he made two shorter compilations, Medulla theologies
Heidelberg CatechismTHE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG 204
Christiansa (1696) for advanced students, and Medulla mednllse theologise Christiance (1697).
BIBLIOORAPBY: His autobiography, Histmia vita J. H. Heideggeri, appeared Zurich, 1698. Consult: L. Meister,
Beruhmte Z(ircher, 2 vols., Basel, 1782.
The Work of Several Col Adverse Criticism (§ 4).
laborators (§ 1). Acceptance of the Cate•
Ursinus, Olevianus, Fred chism (§ 5).
erick III. (§ 2). Doctrinal Character (§ 6).
Editions (§ 3). Arrangement (§ 7).
The Reformation did not enter the Palatinate until 1546, and it was only under Frederick III. that it was actually carried through
r. The (see FREDERICK III. THE PIOUS). Of
Work of fended by the anathematizing tend
Several encies of Lutheran zealots, this sover
Collabo eign inclined toward the Reformed
rators. doctrines. In this spirit he com
missioned Caspar Olevianus, professor
and preacher in Heidelberg, to draw up a new
church order, and conceived the idea of the com
pilation of a catechism. Owing to the loss of the
Palatine archives, the history of the origin of this
catechism lacks important documentary evidences.
It has been customary to give Olevianus and Zachsr
*. rias Ursinus the credit of having compiled the book
on the initiative of the elector in 1562. But it has been proved that the catechism and the Refoinnation in the Palatinate were not the work of one or. two men, but the result of common efforts. This is evident from Ursinus's preface to the apology of the Heidelberg Catechism; from a letter of Olevianus to_Calvin; from the testimony of Quirinus Reuter, a pupil of Ursinus, in the preface to the works of his teacher; and from the introductions to the first three editions of the catechism, written by the elector himself, in which he states that it originated " with the counsel and assistance of our whole theologlcal,_faculty, also all superintendents and the principal church councilors." The theological faculty of Heidelberg consisted in 1562 of three men, Boquinus (Pierre Bouquin, q.v.), a Frenchman, who was one of the first advocates of Calvinism in Heidelberg; Emmanuel Tremellius, an Italian, who followed Calvin and Butzer; ad...Ursinus, a pupil of Melanchthon. The foremost among the superintendents was Olevianus, an admirer of Calvin and friend of Bullinger. Among the church councilors may be mentioned Michael Diller, court preacher, and Thomas Erastus, a physician who represented the German Swiss 'tendency. Besides these men and others, the elector himself shared in the work
j of the. catechism.
The older, tradition, however, is correct in so far as the principal share of the work is due to Ursinus and Olevianus. Ursinus had already
2. Ursmus, prepared two catechisms, the (larger)
Olevianus, Summa theologise and the Cateehesis
Frederick minor, which formed the basis of the
III. new work. The larger catechism he
had compiled in 1561 for his academic
lectures; it contains his own ,dogmatip 4tip.yk but
reveals at the same time the authorities from which
he learned, Melanchthon without his synergism,
Leo Jud, B, and Calvin, also the influence
of some Netherlandish catechisms such as the Klsym _Catechismus of Martin Micron (1552), Korte onders9ekinghe des.gheloofs (1553), and Catechisn:,s ofte Kinderlehre tho niitte der Joget in 0stfriesslandt (1554), edited by the preachers of Emden. The smaller catechism of Ursinus approaches. teidel berg Catechism the more closely; it was probably compiled after discussions with the elector and churchmen of the Palatinate. As the__eleor had pledged himself to the Augustana by,the Frankfort Recess and his action at the Naumburg Convention (qq.v.), he was anxious to preserve peace with the Lutherans as far as possible by dropping some of the Zurich and Calvinistic peculiarities of doctrine, especially as regarded the lord'&. Supper. It was probably Olevianus who was chiefly rop9mhle for the change of the text of the Catechesis minor into the German wording of the Heidelberg, Catechism and for its final redaction. A comparison of the final text of the catechism with the new church order drawn up by him and with his devotional writings reveals a harmony in language, style, and theological bent which can hardly be accidental. The mediating. influence of the elector may be recognized in the changes concerning the doctrine of the Lord's Supper and in the suppression of the discussion concerning,election.
in Kirchen and Schulen der Churfiiratlichen P/altz
gel_rieben~wirdt. A few weeks later a second edition
was published, which, beside many minor changes,
contained an entirely new question_,Oxxx.) con
cerning the difference between the Lord's Supper
and the papal mass: In the third edition, which
immediately followed, the condemnatory_,wqrds in
regard,to the adoration of the host were added.
The real author of this eightieth .question was
Oleld4nus,. The church order published Nov. 15,
1563, contains the four _h_edition of the geidel_berg
Catechism, which is to be regarded as the textus
receptus. It is essentially identical with the third
edition, texts oLS cripture for different classes and a
.short summary of the catechism having been added.
On the margin, the 129 questions together with the
Bible texts have been divided into ten lessons to be
read before the main service; the questions alone
have been divided into fifty two Sundays for the
purpose of the catechetical. afteruoon,_sermons. It
is only in later editions that the questions are
uumd and the verses stated in Biblical quo
Immediately after its appearance the Heidelberg Catechism encountered violent attacks. Maximilian
II. remonstrated, against it_ .(Apr. 25,
4.. Adverse im3) as an infringement of the Peace Criticism. of Augsburg. On May 4 followed a
joint address from theCount Palatine, Wolfgang of Zweibriicken, Duke. Christopher of W iirttemberg, and Margrave Charles II. of Baden, accompanied with a sharp criticism inscribed Yerzeichnis der Manger,, probably composed by
205 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Heidelberg Cateohiam Brenz. Many theologians protested against the new catechism. In 064 Flacius published Widerlegung
eines Heinen deutsehen calvinisohen Catechismi, and
Hesshus published his Trpwe Wamung. There
appeared also a new and enlarged edition of the
Vemeichnis der Mangel, which criticized especially
the marginal $ible texts. In defense of the cate
chism, Ursinup published, in 1564, in Heidelberg,
three treatises: Grandtlicher bericht vom heiligen
wortt au ff etlicher Theologen Censur uber die am rand
dess Heydelberger Catechisms auss Wager Schri f f t
angezogene Zeugnusse. Concerning the further
events from the Colloquy of Maulbronn to the Diet
of Augsburg, see FREDERICK III. THE PIOUS.
Having gone through this ordeal, the suceesf of the book began. An assembly of emigrants from the Netherlands in Wesel in 1568
g. Accept recommended it by the side of the
ance of the catechism of Calvin. The Synod at
Catechism. Emden. in 1571. adopted it for the
German speaking Netherlandish con
gregations in East Frisia and on the Lower Rhine.
It entered also the ranks of the Reformed in J(ilich,
Cleves, and Berg. Other German regions and indi
vidual congregations (in Nassau Siegen, Wittgen
stein, Solms and Wied, Bremen, Lippe, Anhalt, Hesse
Cassel, Brandenburg, Prusda, etc.) followed in the
course of time. The Reformed churches of Hun ,
gar , _TraAMlvania, and Poland adopted it; and in
1619 the..Synod_ of . Dolt officially declared it one
of the general symbolical books of the Reformed
Church. From Holland, and afterward also from
Germany, ft was brought to Amedca, where it has
always been the honored symbol of the Dutch and
German Reformed churches.' The first reunited
General Aasemfaly of. the Presbyterian Church, at
Philadelphia in .1870, , authorized its use. It has
been traUdated3nta a.Elunpean languages, also
into Hebrew,,Arabic,.Malalt,_Singalese, and others,
and numerous paraphrases, summaries, and exposi
tions have appeared.
From the dogmatic point of view, the history of the origin of the Heidelberg Catechism frustrates every attempt to identify it with the 6. Doctrinal doctrine of any individual theologian Character. of the Reformation time. Its specifically Reformed character shows itself, apart, from the doctrine of the sacraments, by its continual goingback from all perishable authorities to the Bible; by its ethical rather than metaphysical mode of 'viewing Christ _as being gnointed by the Holy_Ghost for the execution of his work; by its peculiar manner of closely connecting the moral life of the Christian with faith as its subjective proof; finally, by its conception of the intimate social connection in the congregation and by its designation of the church or congregation as the real source of discipline. In an anonymous pasquil of 1566 the Heidelberg Catechism is said to have been compiled " by Bullinger and his associates," Quantitatively it contains more of Calvin's catechism than of Bullinger's. Bullinger's influence, however, may be recognized, perhaps, if it be con
sidered in its total impression; for it is true that the
catechism does not shale the philosophical and
intellectual traits of Calvin, b11t~takes_ta._root_in
the Christian experience, of salvation which it repre
sents practically and devotionally. The doctrine of
elestiQu _?s..rete...9z'e._Cautiously than
by„h11JAger. The doctrinQ_Qf..tha_Lord's Supper is
distinguished less by clearness than by an effort to.
bridge over existing .differences. In bringing the
Lord's Supper into relation to the suffering of the
Lord, the influence of Zurich may be recognized;
the emphasis of a myAtical,.union_.of the believers.
with the heavenly body. of Christ_.re_veals ,Calv_in's
influence; and in order to reconcile the distrusting
Lutheran adversaries, the confessional and oblig
atory character of the celebration was given up.
Considered as a catechetical text book, the Heidelberg Catechism is distinguished from Luther's smaller catechism by its systematic
7. Arrange arrangement. The ,.five .traditional
meat. articles of faith have been retained,
but have been inserted into an organic
min accordance with subjective, psychological
reasons, under the head of three main conceptions.
After the two introductory questions there follow:
(1) the miser. of man as it may be recognized from
the cond the law in 11btt.di. (questions
iii. xi.); (2)..th rede'a Af u . man, the Gospell
to be accepted in faith developed according to_the
three articles_of the, Apostles' Creed, which is fol
lowed by the doctrine of justificatign, the sacra
ments, and the power of the ,keys (questions
xii. lxxxv.); (3) thankfulness, i.e., thg_new,life ac
cording to its basis in conversion, its norm in the
decalogue, and its most beautifulexpression in prayer
(questions lxxXVi. °.xxix.). The catechism is not
entirely adapted to a Qlqapacity; but its noble
language, captivating by its clearness as well as by
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The official German editions were published in 1583, 1585, 1595, 1684, 1724; the American in 1863. Only one copy of the first edition is known now in the university library at Utrecht. The most valuable work is the Tercentenary Monument. In Commemoration of the Three Hundredth Anniversary of the H"lberg Catechism, Published by the Germ. Ref. Ch. of the U. 8. A. in Eno. and Germ. The German ad. by Dr. Schaff, with an historical Introduction, Chambereburg, 1863 (contains a number of essays by authorities on the history and theology of the symbol). With the foregoing may be conveniently compared Schaff, Creeds, i. 529 554 (history, specimens, and estimates), iii. 307 ?55 (text, Germ. and Eng.); idem, Christian Church, vi. 555 557, 681, vii. 669, 811. The best work in Eng. on the catechism is by J. W. Kevin, History and Genius of the Heidelberg Catechism, Chambereburg, 1847 (of. his introduction in the Tercentenary Monument ut sup, pp. 11 127). Valuable also for the early history is J. I. 'Doedes, De Heidelbxrgache Catechiamus in dyne eerste Levenajaren 1688 67, Utrecht, 1867; also TBH for 1863 and 867. Other works which may be consulted are: H. S. *n Alpen, Geachichte and Literatur flea Heidelb4per Katechismua, Frankfort, 17961797; J. C. W. Augusti, Versuch einer hietorisach kritischen Einleitung in die beiden HauphKatechiemen der evange. liaehen %ircla, pp. 96 eqq., Elberfeld, 1824; K. Sudhoff, C. Olevianue and Z. Ursinua, ib. 1857; G. W. Bethune, Expository Lectures on the Heidelberg Catechism, New York, 1864; H. Calaminue, Die Geschichte des HeideY berger %atechiamua in Deutschland, Elberfeld, 1885; M. A. Goossen, De Heidalbarpache CatecAiamus en het boekye
8e drin8 THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG 208
van de breking des broods in het yaar 1603=Bk beebeden en
verdedigt, Leyden, 1892; J. 1: Good, History of the ~eformed Church in the United States, 1726 1898, passim, Reading, 1899; Der Heidelberger Katechiamue and vier verwandte Katechiamen, mit . . . Einleitung, ed. A. Lim& Leipeic,1907.
HEIL, WILLIAM FRANKLIN:Bishop of the United Evangelical Church; b. at Berlinsville, Pa., May 1, 1857. He was educated in Pennsylvania schools, and fitted himself for the ministry while teaching 1874 80. He served as pastor 1880 90 and 1895 1903, was presiding elder 1890 95, and has been bishop since 1902.
HEIMBUCHER, haim'bi3 Her, VAX: German Roman Catholic; b. at Miesbach (16 m. s.s.w. of Munich) June 10, 1859. He was educated at the Lyceum of Freising and the University of Munich, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1883. After holding various clerical positions until 1889, he became privatrdocent at the University of Munich, and two years later (1891) was appointed to his present position of professor of dogmatics, encyclopedics, and patristics at the Lyceum of Bamberg. He has written: Die Wirkungen der heiligen Kommunion (Regensburg, 1884); Die Bibliothek des Priesters (1885); Kurze Gesehichte Freisihgs and seiner Bisch6fe (Freising, 1885); Die heilige Oelung (Regensburg, 1888); Die heilige Firmung (Augsburg, 1889 ); Die Papstwahlen enter den Karolingern (1889); Die Orden and Kongregationen der katholischen Kirche (2 vols., Paderborn, 1896 97; 2d ed. 3 vols., 1907 08); and Die praktisch socials Thatigkeit des Priesters (1902).
HEINECCIUS, hai nee'tsi us, JOHANN MICHAEL:German theologian; b. at Eisenberg (35 m. s. of Halle) 1674; d. at Halle Sept. 11, 1722. He studied at Jena, Giessen, and Helmstedt, and traveled in Germany and the Netherlands. In 1699 he was ordained deacon at Goaslar, became pastor at Halle in 1708, and assistant superintendent of Halle and neighborhood. About 1709 he qualified for the doctorate in theology at Helmstedt and was appointed councilor of the royal Prussian consistory and superintendent for the duchy of Magdeburg, and rector of St. Mary's Church at Halle.
The reputation sustained by Heineccius was that of a great scholar, both in theology and in other branches of knowledge. His library consisted of 4,000 volumes a. very considerable number for those times. He was, moreover, a writer of ability, and most of his works are preserved in the university library at Halle. He seems to have been the first scientific student of seals, and a result of this pursuit was his De veteribua Germanorum aliarumque nationum sigillis eorumque use (Frankfort, 1709). In the same year he published a large volume on the history of Gosslar and its neighborhood. His best work in history is his E%gentliche and wahrha/tVe Abbildung der alten and neuen griechischen Kirche nach ihrer Historic, Glaubens Lehren and Kirchen Gebrduchen (3 vols., Leipsic, 1711). The full bibliography concerning the Greek Church found there is still useful. Heineccius received high commendation for his sermon preached at the bicentennial of the Reformation in 1717. Of espe
cial interest is his Priifung der sogenannten neuen Propheten and ihres ausserordentlichen Zustandes (Halls, 1715). Heineceius is credited also with the authorship of two hymns.
Heineecius was a man of wide learning, of a balanced and hospitable temperament, and an adherent of moderate Lutheran orthodoxy.
BmmooRAPHY: J. C. Wetzel, Hymnopceographia, iv. 221
222, Nuremberg, 1728; ADB, xi. 361.
HEINRICI, hair A'kf, KARL FRIEDRICH
GEORG: German Protestant; b. at Karkeln (44
m. n.e. of KGnigsberg) Mar. 14, 1844. He was
educated at the universities of Halle (Ph.D., 1866)
and Berlin (lie. theol., 1868 ), and was assistant
preacher at the cathedral in 1869 70 and inspector
of the foundation for canonical candidates at Berlin
in 1870 71. In 1871 he became privat docent at the
University of Berlin, but two years later went as
associate professor to Marburg, where he was pro
moted to the rank of full professor in the next year.
Since 1892 he has been professor of New Testament
exegesis at Leipaic. He has written: Die valenti
nianische Gnosis and die heiligeSchri ft (Berlin, 1871);
Erklarung der Korintherbriefe (2 vols., 1880 87);
Wesen and Aufgabe der evangelisch theologischen
Fakukdten (Marburg, 1885); D. A. Twesten, naeh
Tagebiiehern and Briefen (1889); Theologische En
eyklopddie (Freiburg, 1893); Beitrdge zur Geschichte
1902); 1St die Lebenslehre Jesu zeitgemass f (Leip
sie, 1904); and Der litterariscJie Charakter der
neuleatamentlichen Schri/ten (1908). He also edited
H. A. W. Meyer's Exegetisches Handbueh zu den
Korintherbriefen from the fifth to the eighth
edition (2 vols., G6ttingen, 1881 1900).
HEITMUELLER, hait'mill ler, WILHELM: German Protestant; b. at DGleberg (Hanover) Aug. 3, 1869. He was educated at the universities of Greifswald, Marburg, Leipsic, and GGttingen (18881892), and since 1892 has been privat docent for New Testament exegesis at GSttingen. He has been associate editor of the Theologische Rundschau since 1900, and has written: Im Namen Jesu, eine spraeh and religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung, speziell zur altchristliehen Taufe (G6ttingen, 1903) and Taufe and Abendmahl bei Paulus (1903).
HEJIRA: The term, meaning "departure," applied by Mohammedans to the migration of Mohammed and his supporters from Mecca to Medina in the year 622 A.D. This event was made the starting point in the Mohammedan reckoning of time. See MOHAMMED, MOHAMMEDANISM.
BELDING, MICHAEL (called Sidonius): German Catholic theologian; b. at Langenenslingen (35 m. s.w. of Ulm), Wiirttemberg, in 1506; d. at Vienna Sept. 30, 1561. He was of humble parentage, studied at Tiibingen from 1525 to 1528, and three years later became rector of the cathedral school at Mainz. Taking holy orders, he was made preacher at the cathedral in 1533, and the fame which he earned by his talent as a preacher led, in 1538, to his nomination as titular bishop of Sidon. In 1545 he was present at the opening of the Council of Trent as the