written!  And one is not even compensated by truthful representation of human nature or character.  On the contrary, his book is totally destitute of nature and truth.  The so-called acting personages whom he brings forward are not men with living flesh and blood, but miserable wooden puppets, moved according to his fancy and made to produce all sorts of contortions and grimaces.  But what kind of an age is this, which not only makes such a book possible, but even finds it endurable and delightful!”

V.—­On the Bible

Sunday, March 11, 1832.  This evening for an hour Goethe talked on various excellent topics.  I had purchased an English Bible, but found to my great regret that it did not include the Apocrypha, because these were not considered genuine and divinely inspired.  I missed the truly noble Tobias, the wisdom of Solomon and Jesus Sirach, all writings of such deeply spiritual value, that few others equal them.  I expressed to Goethe my regret at the narrow exclusiveness thus manifested.  He entirely agreed with me.

“Still,” said he, “there are two points of view from which Biblical subjects may be regarded.  There is that of primitive religion, of pure nature and reason, which is of divine origin.  This will ever remain the same, and will endure as long as divinely endowed beings exist.  It is, however, only for the elect, and is far too high and noble to become universal.

“Then there is the point of view of the Church, which is of a more human nature.  This is fallible and fickle, but, though perpetually changing, it will last as long as there are weak human beings.  The light of cloudless divine revelation is far too pure and radiant for poor, weak man.  But the Church interposes as mediator, to soften and moderate, and all are helped.  Its influence is immense, through the notion that as successor of Christ it can relieve the burden of human sin.  To secure this power, and to consolidate ecclesiasticism is the special aim of the Christian priesthood.

“Therefore it does not so much ask whether this or that book in the Bible effects a great enlightenment of the mind, it much more looks to the Mosaic and prophetic and Gospel records for allusions to the fall of man, and the advent to earth and death of Christ, as the atonement for sin.  Thus you see that for such purposes the noble Tobias, the wisdom of Solomon, and the sayings of Sirach have little weight.

“Still, the question as to authenticity in details of the Bible is truly singular.  What is genuine but the really excellent, which harmonises with the purest reason and nature, and even now ministers to our highest development?  What is spurious but the absurd, hollow, and stupid, which brings no worthy fruit?  If the authenticity of a Biblical writing depends on the question whether something true throughout has been handed down to us, we might on some points doubt the genuineness of the Gospels, of which Mark and Luke were not written from immediate presence and experience, but long afterwards from oral tradition.  And the last, by the disciple John, was written in his old age.