Abstract
The posthumous appearance of John Locke’s paraphrases and notes on the epistles of Paul, on which he had worked during the last years of his life spent at Oates in the house of Lady Damaris Cudworth Masham and her husband, did not go unnoticed in scholarly circles. In 1705 Jacques Bernard, a French pastor who had taken refuge in Holland and who served there as editor of the Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, had already written a very detailed review of the Paraphrase and Notes to the letter to the Galatians published earlier that same year, praising Locke’s insight and noting the quality of his interpretations. When the complete version of Locke’s Pauline works came out 2 years later, Jean Le Clerc wrote a meticulous review in which, despite criticising Locke and even taking a number of jabs at him, he did not hesitate to affirm that “… there are not many interpreters who have done better when it comes to Paul’s line of reasoning and the goal at which he aimed.” Finally, in 1708, an anonymous review appeared in English which faithfully summarised the Essay on Paul, but carefully avoided any kind of evaluation. These first responses broadly approved of Locke’s biblical interpretation and legitimised his religious profile as a philosopher in representing his thought as either fundamentally compatible with Reformed theology or else as opposed to orthodoxy and yet actively engaged in the battle against scepticism. They were soon to be counterbalanced by others which were more critical of Locke while nevertheless testifying to the important place occupied by his biblical works at the time, such as the reviews of the Anglican controversist, Robert Jenkin or the German Lutheran, Friedrich Gotthelf Gotter. These reactions to Locke were rapidly followed by a polemic within the Quaker camp during which both sides appealed specifically to the Paraphrase and Notes, and by translations of the Paraphrase and Notes into French, Dutch, and German, as well as a number of exegetical works that were openly inspired by Locke’s work on the Pauline epistles. As a late appendix to the undeniable eighteenth-century interest in Locke’s hermeneutics, the year 1832 saw the publication of the American edition of the Paraphrase and Notes and, more significantly, the anonymous review in the American Monthly Review that bordered on eulogy. A “standard book” that ought to be found on everyone’s shelf, Locke’s Paraphrase and Notes “constitute the best commentary for popular use with which we are conversant; and without it no library can be considered perfect in its theological department.” Marked by “the same philosophical acuteness and accuracy the same ardent love of truth for the truth’s sake, the same manly freedom which marked his researches in intellectual science,” it is the work of a true liberal who would not be aligned with any party or sect.
This is a considerably augmented, reworked and updated version of an article published under the title “John Locke lecteur de Saint Paul ou l’histoire d’une rencontre presque oubliée: un siècle d’études,” Annali di storia dell’esegesi, 17/1 (2000): 265–73. Its purpose is not merely to provide an overview of the history of scholarship. In retracing the most important stages of a historiography that has from the very beginning comprised a considerable number of works published in languages other than English—especially French and Italian—of which English language scholarship generally seems to be unaware, we hope to promote a wider circulation of knowledge. This article is limited to the reception of Locke’s works on Paul until 2008, and does not delve into the much greater body of literature on Lockean religion.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Galatians, I and II Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians. To which is prefix’d An Essay for the Understanding of St. Paul’s Epistles, by consulting St. Paul himself (London: A. & J. Churchill, 1707). Each Paraphrase and Notes, as well as the essay on Paul, had previously been published individually between 1705 and 1707 by the same publisher.
- 2.
The references to the eighteenth-century reception of Locke’s work that follow are not meant to be exhaustive but only to underline the significance of this work at that time. For a detailed and nearly complete account of the reactions to this work, see John Locke, A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St Paul, to the Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians, ed. Arthur W. Wainwright, 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), 1: 59–73.
- 3.
“Quoi que Mr. Locke ne fût pas Théologien de profession, il n’avait pas laissé d’étudier la religion avec soin, et de l’étudier dans ses sources, je veus dire dans l’Ecriture. On n’a garde de vouloir adopter partout ses idées, mais on ne sauroit disconvenir, qu’il n’aît parfaitement rencontré en plusieurs endroits. Il avoit de la pénétration, il savoit méditer, et il méditoit profondément, c’est un préjugez favorable pour tous ses Ouvrages” Jacques Bernard, Nouvelles de la République des Lettres (1705, April), art. VIII: 448–49. The initial positive reception nevertheless seems to have been toned down throughout the course of publication of the rest of Locke’s biblical works. Thus with the release of the paraphrase and notes to 1 Cor., the commentary notes are said to be “rather strange” (bien singulières) and the paraphrase “often forced” (souvent forcée) (Ibid. (1706, January), art. VII: 101), while in May of the same year Bernard does no more than simply note the publication of the paraphrase and notes to 2 Cor. (Ibid. (1706, May), art. VI: 590).
- 4.
“… il n’y a pas beaucoup d’interprètes, qui aient mieux réussi que lui à l’égard de la suite du raisonnement, et du but que St. Paul se propose” (Bibliothèque choisie XIII (1707), art. II: 67); the review (37–178) walks through the individual pieces that had been collected in the 1707 edition, beginning with the Essay for the understanding of St. Paul’s Epistles by consulting St. Paul himself. In giving very detailed summaries, interrupted with large passages translated into French and accompanied with numerous critical remarks, Le Clerc contributed in a significant way to the introduction of this work to an audience that for the most part had not necessarily mastered the English language. The positive reception noted above is all the more significant given that the tone of the article does not tend to the panegyric, as Le Clerc often criticises Locke, for example for having a limited knowledge of the biblical languages, forcing the coherence of Paul’s discourse, or not always taking account of the preceding tradition.
- 5.
The History of the Works of the Learned. Or, An Impartial Account of Books Lately Printed in all Parts of Europe . With a Particular Relation of the State of Learning in each Country X (1708): 556–60.
- 6.
“Il a évité avec soin toutes les explications Théologiques, et autant que j’ai pû l’apercevoir, il n’y a rien dans tout cèt Ouvrage, qui soit directement contraire à la doctrine des Réformez, si ce n’est, peut-être, que par les Œuvres ausquelles St. Paul refuse la vertu de justifier, il entend les œuvres de la Loi, l’oeconomie légale prise précisément en elle-même” (Bernard , Nouvelles de la République des Lettres (1705, April): 452).
- 7.
This is the portrait that emerges from Le Clerc’s long review, in which he gives numerous citations from Locke where he comes out polemically against orthodoxy, although he balances them by emphasising Locke’s defence of the Christian religion: “On ne sauroit encore trop le louër, de ce que s’étant si fort appliqué à la Philosophie, il n’avait nullement négligé l’étude de la Religion, et de ce qu’il a fait tout ce qu’il a pû, pour en convaincre les Incredules, en leur en représentant la simplicité et l’excellence. Ceux qui liront ce qu’il a fait sur St. Paul, pour ne pas parler de son Christianisme raisonnable, verront facilement qu’il parle par tout, en homme tout à fait persuadé de la verité de la Religion Chrétienne et comprendront que ce n’est que, par une malice grossiere, et parce qu’il n’approuvoit pas les idées de certains Partis, que quelques-uns de se ses ennemis l’ont voulu accuser d’Irréligion” (Bibliothèque choisie XIII (1707): 178). Some 20 years later the anonymous author of an anti-deist and anti-Sceptical work offers a similarly apologetic reading of Locke’s religious works, in this case based only on the Reasonableness: see The Infidel Convicted: or, a Brief defence of the Christian revelation. In which the Excellency of the Christian Morality is fully shewn, and the Consistency of Revelation with Human Reason proved. Corroborated by Unanswerable Arguments from Mr. Locke, on whose Writings many Persons causlesly profess to build their Sceptical Notions (London: J. Roberts, 1731), 33–49. A very pious and appreciative reading of Locke’s work is given by the anonymous editor of the 2nd edition of the Œuvres diverses de Monsieur Locke. Nouvelle Edition considérablement augmentée, 2 vols.: “On y trouve [sc. dans l’Essay for the understanding of St Paul] des vues sublimes et des avis proportionez à la portée des lecteurs les plus simples, des réflexions pieuses; et cet esprit de charité et de douceur, en quoi Mr. Locke a toujours fait consister l’essence du Christianisme” (Amsterdam: J.-F. Bernard, 1732, “Avertissement,” 1: viii–ix).
- 8.
“It is visible in all Mr. Lock’s Writings, that he had a Scheme or system into which he would draw others; that he rejected every Doctrine thet is contrary to it, and offered violence to Scripture, and every thing else that opposes it” Robert Jenkin, Remarks on some Books Lately Publish’d, viz. Mr. Basnage’s History of the Jews, Whiston’s Eight Sermons, Lock’s Paraphrase and Notes on St. Paul’s Epistles, Le Clerc’s Bibliotheque Choisie (London: Printed by W. B. for Richard Sare, 1709), 122.
- 9.
See Dissertatio inauguralis de obscuritate epistolis Paulli falso tributa potissimum Jo. Lockio opposita (Ienae: Litteris P. Fickelscherrii, 1732).
- 10.
We also note the criticism of Locke made by the philologist Anthony Blackwall (1672–1730) who attacked the notion of a Pauline Greek as suggested by the philosopher in his Essay for the understanding of St. Paul’s Epistles, highlighting the inconsistency between the intellectual independence Locke had exhibited and the submission he had evinced to the tradition at a philological level: “But though Mr. Locke, as a philosopher, pretends to be a Free-thinker, and scorns the slavery of following any guide, or being addicted to any sect or party; yet it will presently appear, that as critic he implicitly embrac’d the vulgarly receiv’d notion, and walk’d in the old beaten path” (The sacred classics defended and illustrated: or, an essay humbly offer’d towards proving the purity, propriety, and true eloquence of the writers of the New Testament. In two parts (London: C. Rivington and W. Cantrell, 1727), 123 (1st ed. London, 1725).
- 11.
Locke’s works on Paul, and particularly the commentary on 1 Cor. 11:3, were to fuel a battle between the two Quaker polemicists Benjamin Coole and Josiah Martin. Little is known of the first, except that he lived in Bristol and was a correspondent of both Daniel Defoe and Isaac Norris. Martin (1683–1747), on the other hand, is fairly well known, especially through a pamphlet of 1741 directed against certain remarks about the Quakers in the last of Voltaire’s Lettres philosophiques. In 1715 Coole published Some Brief Observations on the Paraphrase and Notes of the Judicious John Lock: relating to the Women’s Exercising their Spiritual Gifts in the Church (London: P. Gwillim, 1715), in which he came out against women preachers. This pamphlet was responded to by Martin who also appealed to Locke, but in order to defend the practice of allowing women to mount the pulpit; see his Letter to the Author of Some Brief observations on the Paraphrase and Notes of the Judicious John Locke, relating to the Women’s Exercising their Spiritual Gifts in the Church (London, 1716), now in The reception of Locke’s Politics, ed. Mark Goldie, vol. V, The Church, Dissent and Religious Toleration, 1689–1773 (London: Pickering and Chatto, 1999), 129–42. Coole answered with his Reflections on a letter to the Author of Some Brief Observations (London: P. Gwillim, 1717) which Martin countered with A Vindication of Women’s Preaching as well from Holy Scripture and Antient Writings as from the Paraphrase and Notes of the judicious John Locke, on I Cor. xi. Wherein the brief Observations of B.C. on the said Paraphrase and Notes, and the Arguments in his Book, intitled Reflections, &c. are fully Consider’d (London: J. Sowle, 1717). Almost a century later, William Reeves took up the cause of women preachers by publishing a defence of Martin entitled The Gospel Ministry of Women under the Christian Dispensation defended from scripture, and from the writings of John Locke, Josiah Martin , London, W. Phillips, 1801. As Goldie correctly notes (The reception of Locke’s Politics, 5: 130), this controversy which appears to have not yet been the subject of any study, illustrates Locke’s reputation as an exegete in the eighteenth century, albeit largely underestimated in the later reception of his corpus. Wainwright, on the other hand, does refer to this controversy (see Locke, A Paraphrase and Notes, 1: 68–69).
- 12.
Essai sur la nécessité d’expliquer les Epitres de St Paul, par St. Paul même, in Œuvres diverses de Monsieur Locke, 2: 92–145; a critical edition of this French translation appeared in 1999, ed. Maria-Cristina Pitassi (Oxford: The Voltaire Foundation, 1999).
- 13.
De Brief van Paulus aan de Romeinen. Met een doorgaande uitbreiding en rede-gevende Aantekeningen. Uit het oogmerk en de styl van den Heiligen Apostel zelve opgeheldert. Na den derden Druk uit het Engelsch vertaalt (Amsterdam: K. de Wit, 1739). A second Dutch edition came from the presses of T. Tjalling in Hoorn in 1764; I thank Professor Henk Jan de Jonge of Leiden for providing me with this information. On the other hand, I have never been able to find any trace of the 1768 Amsterdam edition which is in fact the only one cited in the Locke bibliographies.
- 14.
Johann Locke’s, paraphrastische Erklärung und Anmärkungen über St. Pauli Briefe an die Galater Korinther Römer und Epheser. Zwei Bände aus dem Englischen übersetzt und mit Anmärkungen zur Erläuterung Beurtheilung und Widerlegung versehen von D. Johann Georg Hofmann, der Theologie ausserordentl. der orientalischen Sprachen ordentl. lehrer zu Giessen (Frankfurt a.M.: Andräischen Buchhandlung, 1769).
- 15.
On this point, see in this same volume Arthur W. Wainwright, “Locke’s influence on the exegesis of Peirce, Hallett, and Benson.”
- 16.
A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians, First and second Corinthians, Romans, Ephesians. To which is prefix’d an Essay for the Understanding of St. Paul’s Epistles by consulting St. Paul himself [reprinted from the latest English Edition] (Cambridge: Brown, Shattuck and Co., 1832).
- 17.
American monthly review 2/4 (1832): 265–73.
- 18.
Ibid., 265.
- 19.
Ibid., 271.
- 20.
Ibid.
- 21.
It is nevertheless significant that, for example, in the bibliographical guide published by Roland Hall and Roger Woolhouse in 1983, where the table of contents includes numerous entries devoted to religious themes (“God,” “Heresy,” “Immortality,” “Justification,” “Original Sin,” “Religion,” “Religious belief,” “Resurrection” to give only a few examples), the authors omitted theology from the list of fields addressed by studies on Locke: “The amazing variety of fields into which Locke studies have penetrated include bibliography, economics, education, history, linguistics, literary studies, medicine, philology, psychology, and sociology, besides philosophy and political theory.” Roland Hall, Roger S. Woolhouse, 80 Years of Locke Scholarship: A Bibliographical Guide (Edinburgh, Edinburgh UP, 1983), 1.
- 22.
John Locke, The Reasonableness of Christianity as delivered in the Scriptures (London: A. and J. Churchill, 1695).
- 23.
(London: T. Basset, 1690).
- 24.
John Locke, Saggio su l’intendimento delle Epistole di S. Paolo, ed. Francesco A. Ferrari (Lanciano: R. Carabba, 1919).
- 25.
In speaking of Locke’s Essay on Paul, Ferrari notes that this work “ben presto cadde, a differenza di tutti gli altri scritti, nell’oblio dei filosofi, e nella rigogliosa fioritura degli studi biblici del secolo XIX non uno si è volto indietro a rammentare l’espositore grande e modesto di un ‘suo metodo’, che dopo un secolo sarebbe stato il metodo della scienza e dei critici tutti” (Francesco A. Ferrari, “Nota introduttiva,” to Locke, Saggio sull’intendimento, 9–10).
- 26.
Cf. Luigi Salvatorelli, “Da Locke a Reitzenstein. L’indagine storica delle origini cristiane,” Rivista storica italiana 45 (1928): 338–69; ibid. 46 (1929): 5–66; English translation in Harvard Theological Review 22 (1929): 263–369.
- 27.
According to Salvatorelli, the dogmatic assumption of the English deists, the assimilation of revelation to reason, the religious law and the natural moral law, in itself represented an obstacle to understanding the true nature of Jesus’ message. The impossibility of adapting the biblical text as a whole to their theses forced them to exercise a Scriptural criticism that opened the way to modern research, despite the fundamentally anti-historical goal that drove them.
- 28.
“[Locke] pose il principio che san Paolo andava interpretato con san Paolo, secondo il suo uso linguistico specifico, e che invece di spezzettarne i testi ad uso dei ‘loci theologici’ occorreva leggerlo e interpretarlo nel suo insieme, secondo le sue vedute. Era trovato il fondamento dell’esegesi storico-critica.” Salvatorelli, “Da Locke a Reitzenstein,” 342.
- 29.
Gretchen Graf Pahl, “John Locke as Literary Critic and Biblical Interpreter,” in Essay Critical and Historical dedicated to Lily B. Campbell (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1950), 139–57.
- 30.
Ibid., 156.
- 31.
Ibid.
- 32.
J. T. Moore, “Locke’s Analysis of Language and the Assent to Scripture,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 37 (1976): 707–14.
- 33.
The other question is that of the divine origin of Scripture; the author mentions it but then deliberately leaves it aside since, while recognising that it is linked to that of comprehension, he considers it distinct.
- 34.
Peter A. Schouls, The Imposition of Method. A Study of Descartes and Locke (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980).
- 35.
“Which of the Essay’s methodological principles are present? What is the manner in which they function in the theological works? […] Because such a question is central I shall be concerned only incidentally with the epistemological autonomy which characterises the knower of Scripture.” Ibid., 7.
- 36.
Henning G. Reventlow, Bibelautorirät und Geist der Moderne: die Bedeutung des Bibelverständnisses far die geistesgeschichtliche und politische Entwicklung in England von der Reformation bis zur Aufklärung (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1980); see also the English trans. revised and enlarged by the author: The Authority of the Bible and the Rise of the Modern World (London: SCM Press, 1984).
- 37.
See more specifically ibid., 243–85.
- 38.
“Hardly anywhere else does it become clearer to what degree the history of philosophy needs the history of biblical exegesis as a presupposition for understanding.” Ibid., 283.
- 39.
Graziano Ripanti, “L’ermeneutica dell’Autore. Il metodo esegetico di John Locke,” Studi Urbinati B 2 Filosofia, Pedagogia, Psicologia 55/2 (1981–82): 45–59.
- 40.
Mario Sina, “Testi teologico-filosofici lockiani dal Ms. Locke c. 27 della Lovelace Collection,” Rivista di filosofia neoscolastica 64 (1972): 54–75 and 400–27.
- 41.
John Locke, Scritti filosofici e religiosi, ed. Mario Sina (Milan: Rusconi, 1979).
- 42.
John C. Higgins-Biddle, “John Locke’s Essay on Infallibility: Introduction, Text and Translation,” Journal of Church and State 19 (1977): 301–27.
- 43.
Locke, A Paraphrase and Notes.
- 44.
Wainwright appears to have been unaware of Sina’s works which he makes no reference to; this is all the more surprising given that Sina’s publications are duly cited in Hall, Woolhouse, 80 Years of Locke Scholarship, 104. It is one of the rare omissions in an edition that is for the most part of exceptional quality.
- 45.
Henk Jan de Jonge, “Strong, Coherent Reasonings.” John Locke’s interpretatie van Paulus’ brieven (Leiden: Brill, 1988).
- 46.
Maria-Cristina Pitassi, Le Philosophe et l’Écriture. John Locke exégète de Saint Paul (Geneva, Lausanne, Neuchâtel: Revue de théologie et de philosophie, 1990).
- 47.
Maria-Cristina Pitassi, “Anima naturaliter mortalis? L’interpretazione lockiana di Tessalonicesi 5,23,” Annali di storia dell’esegesi 9/1 (1991): 87–99; Pitassi, “Le Christ lockien à l’épreuve des textes: de la Reasonableness aux Paraphrase and Notes,” in Le Christ entre Orthodoxie et Lumières, actes du colloque (Genève, août 1993), ed. Maria-Cristina Pitassi (Geneva: Droz, 1994), 101–22; Pitassi, “Une résurrection pour quel corps et pour quelle humanité? La réponse lockienne entre philosophie, exégèse et théologie,” Rivista di storia della filosofia 53 (1998): 45–61.
- 48.
Jean-Michel Vienne, “De la Bible à la science. L’interprétation du singulier chez Locke,” in L’interpretazione nei secoli XVI e XVII, atti del convegno (Milan, nov. 18–20, 1991, and Paris, dec. 6–8, 1991), ed. Guido Canziani, Yves Charles. Zarka, (Milan: Franco Angeli, 1993), 771–88.
- 49.
Jean-Michel Vienne, “Peur de l’Enthusiasm et règles exégétiques chez Locke,” La peur, actes du colloque (Lille, March 10–12, 1983), ed. Alain Morvan (Lille: Université de Lille III), 1985, 139–52.
- 50.
Jean-Michel Vienne, Expérience et raison. Les fondements de la morale selon Locke (Paris: Vrin, 1991).
- 51.
Vienne , “De la Bible à la science,” 786.
- 52.
Joel Weinsheimer, Eighteenth-century hermeneutics: philosophy of interpretation in England from Locke to Burke (New Haven and London: Yale UP, 1993). See especially 21–45.
- 53.
“What Locke writes on St. Paul’s epistles is not, in his view, an exposition or commentary. It is not Locke’s interpretation, but rather a Paraphrase of St. Paul himself, and thus in one sense not an interpretation at all.” Ibid., 36.
- 54.
The author admits that he is somewhat unsympathetic towards Locke, and that he emphasises the anti-hermeneutical aspects of his thought in a unilateral manner (see e.g., ibid., 26–27).
- 55.
As defender of a dialogical conception of truth, Weinsheimer is very critical of an individualist conception such as that of Locke, to which he attributes a double solipsism, epistemological and interpretive.
- 56.
See in particular Raffaele Russo, Ragione e ascolto. L’ermeneutica di John Locke (Naples: Guida, 2001); Russo, “Locke contre Edwards: un conflitto ermeneutico,” in Metafisica e filosofia della religione, ed. Albino Babolin (Città di Castello: Alfagrafica, 2004), 231–71.
- 57.
John Marshall, John Locke. Resistance, Religion and Responsibility (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1994); see also Marshall, John Locke, Toleration and Early Enlightenment Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006).
- 58.
Victor Nuovo, “Locke’s theology, 1694–1704,” in English Theology in the Age of Locke, ed. Michael A. Stewart (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000), 183–215; Nuovo, “Locke’s Christology as a key to understanding his philosophy,” in The Philosophy of John Locke. New perspectives, ed. Peter R. Anstey (London and New York: Routledge, 2003), 129–53; after 2008, date to which is limited this critical review, Nuovo published Christianity, Antiquity, and Enlightenment. Interpretations of Locke, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York: Springer, 2011, in part. 21–126; John Locke : the philosopher as Christian virtuoso, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
- 59.
Kim I. Parker, “John Locke and the Enlightenment Metanarrative: a Biblical Corrective to a reasoned World,” Scottish Journal of Theology 49/1 (1996): 57–73; Parker, The Biblical Politics of John Locke (Waterloo (On.): W. Laurier UP, 2004). I note also Justin Champion, “‘Directions for the Profitable Reading of the Holy Scripture:’ Biblical Criticism, Clerical learning and Lay Readers, c. 1650–1720,” in Scripture and Scholarship in Early Modern England , ed. Ariel Hessayon, Nicholas Keene (eds.) (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006), 206–30, which opens a new and highly interesting perspective by considering the relationship between the practice of reading the Bible and the developments of scholarly biblical hermeneutics.
- 60.
For this reason, notwithstanding the undeniable importance of these works for Locke historiography, I limit myself to referring to them in summary fashion.
- 61.
This paper was translated from the French by Albert Gootjes.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pitassi, MC. (2019). Locke’s Pauline Hermeneutics: A Critical Review. In: Simonutti, L. (eds) Locke and Biblical Hermeneutics. International Archives of the History of Ideas Archives internationales d'histoire des idées, vol 226. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19903-6_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19903-6_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-19901-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-19903-6
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)