IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0 If KS I

I.I

1.25

2.5

1^1

110

22
2.0

11=

U IIIIII.6

///.

Photographic

Sdences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80

(716) 873-<S03

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHIVI/ICIVIH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes technique* et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagie

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaurie et/ou peliiculAe

I I Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

I I Coloured maps/

Cartes gAographiques en couleur

Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

Planches et/ou illustrations en coufeur

Bound with other material/
Relit avec d'autre^ documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serrte peut causer de I'ombre ol de la
distortion le long de la marge intArieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte.
mais, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6tA filmAes.

L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il .ui a At* possible de se procurer. Les d6tails
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la mithode normals de filmage
sont indiquAs ci-dessous.

The I
to th

D
D
D

Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

Pages damaged/
Pages endommagtes

Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restauries et/ou pelliculAes

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages dicolortes, tachettes ou piquAes

Pages detached/
Pages ddtachtes

Showthrough/
Transparence

Thei
poss
of th
film!

Origi
begii
the ii
sion,
othe
first
sion,
or ilii

□ Quality of print varies/
Quaiiti inAgole de I'lmpression

n Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplAmentaire

□ Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Thai
shall
TINL
whic

Map;
diffei
entiri
begli
right
requi
meth

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont M filmies A nouveau de fa^on A
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires supplAmentaires:

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous.

10X

14X

18X

22X

26X

30X

1
1

12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X

l«tails
It du
nodifier
ir une
ilmaga

Tha copy filmad hara has baan raproducad thanks
to tha genarosity of:

Mills Memorial Library
McMatter University

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated Impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure ara filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

L'exemplaira filmA fut raproduit grAca A la
gintrositA da:

Mills Memorial Library
McMaster University

Las images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avac la
plus grand soin, compta tenu de la condition at
de la nettetd de I'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat da
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couvarture en
papier est imprimde sont film6s en commen^ant
par la premier plat at en terminant soit par la
dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par la second
plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont film6s en commen^ant par la
premidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbole — ^» signifie "A SUIVRE", le
symbols V signifie "FIN".

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre
filmis d des taux de reduction diff6rents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd A partir
de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droita,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'Images n^cessaire. Las diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mdthode.

errata
tl to

e pelure,
;on i

32X

. s

I. J3 I

C 'M I

OUTLINES

OF THE

HISTORY OF DOGMxi

hi
n

'f-

I V

{■■!

/', .

"fi

r .

Hi'

OUTLLXES

OF THE

HISTORY OF DOGAIA

IJY

Dr. ADOLF HARXACK

Profrssor of Church History in the University of Hrrlin
THAN SLATED 15 Y

EDWIN KNOX MITCHELL, M.A.

Professor of Grcrco-noman mul Eastrrn Church History in
Hartford Theoloyical Hcminary

r£W YORK

FUNK & WAGNALLS CO.AH^ANY

LONDON AND TORONTO

Printed in the United States

CopvnionT, 1893, by toe
FUNK & WAGNALL8 COMPANY

[Reyistered at Stationers' Hall, London, Eny.]

('*

'■ ♦ I 'a

1 ■

f '

■1

hi
f

I
i 4

I ' R E F A ( ; E .

.i1

«.

i.iv'

rpHK English tr/mslation oi mv ''(Inindrisj

(Icr J)()gint'ng('schic'ht(*'' lias hwn made,
in accordanco with my expressed wish, by my
former puinl and esteemed friend, iMi-. Edwin
Knox ^litchell. Tt is my pleasant duty to ex-
press to him here my heartiest thanks.

English and American theological literature
possess excellent works, hut they are not rich
in products within thcj realm of the History of
Do^^ma. I may therefore perhaps hope that
my "Grundriss" will supply a want. J shall
he most happy, if I can with tliis hook do my
English and American friends and fellow-work-
ers some service — a small return for the rich
benefit which I have reaped from their labors.
In reality, however, tlu^-o no longer exists any
distinction between German and Englisli theo-
logical science. The exchange is now so brisk
that scientific theologians of all evangelical
lands form already one Concilium.

Adolf IIarxack.

WlLaiERSDOKF NEAR BERLIN,

March 17th, 1893.

■11

CONTENTS.

Prolegomena to the Disci pi inp

I. Idea and Aim of the History of Do^'ma
II. Narrative of the History of Dogma ' '

F'resuppositions of the History of Dogma . . .

HI. Introductory

IV. Tho Gospel of Jesus Christ according to His Own
Testimony .....
V. The General Proclamation concerning Jesus
Chri.st in the First (Jeneration of His Adherents
VI. The Current ExiM)sition of the Old Testiiraent and
the Jewish Future Hope, in their Bearing on the
Earliest Formulation of the Christian Message
VII The Religious Conceptions and the Religious
Ilnlosophy of the Hellenistic Jews in their Bear-
^nrj^'^r^''' Transformation of the Gospel Mes.sago .
vni. The Religious Disposition of the Greeks and Ro-
mans in the First Two Centuries and tlie Contem-
porary Grseco- Roman Philosophy <^f Religion

PAOR
1
1

8
10
10

I.T
1»

.•i3

PART I.

THE RISE OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOGMA.

Book I.

THE PREPARATION.
Chapter I. —Historical Survey

Chapter II. Ground Common to Christians and Attitude
laken toward Judaism

Chapter HL -The Common Faith and the Beginnings of
Self-Recognition in that Gentile Christianity
which was to Develoi. into Catholicism .

vni

CONTKNTS.

PAflF

(Imptrr IV.— Attempt of ilic (inohticn t«» CoiistiiKt an
Apo^ilolit- hiM'trinc of l-'jiitli atitl to i'rutliicr u
Cliristiaii 'rhi'()l«t)<y ; nr. tlic Acnti* St'ciilai'i/.atidn
<»f ( 'lirisiiaiiity .......

< 'haplcr V. .ManioMs AUcinpt to St ,\si(lc the Old Tr.s-
taiiK'iit as the I'muKlatioii uf tin* ( Jo.^pfl, to I'liiify
Tradition, juid to Ilrl'orni (.'liri.stianity on the
Hasis of the rauliue (rosprl

("luiptcr \'I.— Suppk'UifUt : TliuChriHtiunity of tlio Jcwi.sh
t'hriHtiuuH

r,M

Book II.

THE LAYINO Ol" TllK FOUNDATION.

CliaptiT I.— Historical Survey 81

Section I. Kstdhlisliiiiiiit (if Owistiduiti/ an a Church and
its (Ji'diliutl Sivitldrizdtion,

ChaptiT II. -The Setting Forth t>f the Apostolic Rules
(Norms) for Ecclesiastical Christianity. The
Catholic Church 81

A. The Recasting of the liaptismul (Jonfeabiou into

tho Apostolic Rule of Faith b5

B. Tho Recoguitiou of a Selection of Well-kuowu

Scriptures as Virtually Belougiug to the Old
Testament; i. e. , as a Compilation of Apostolic
Scriptiu-es 88

C. Tho Transformation of the Episcopal Office in tho

Churcli into tho Apostolic Office. History of the
Transformation of the Idea of th<» Church . 95

Chapter III. — Continuation: Tho Old Christianity and

the New Church 100

Section II. Establishment of Christianity as Doctrine and
its Grudaal Secularization.

Chapter IV. — Ecclesiastical Christianity and Philosophy.

Tho Apologists 117

Chapter V. — Beginnings of an Ecclesiastico-Theological
Exposition and Revision of the Rule of Faith in
OpiK)sition to Gnosticism on the Presupposition of
the New Testament and the Christian Philosophy
of tho Apologists : Ireuajus, Tertullian, Hippoly-
tus, Cyprian, Novatian 130

CONTENTS.

;)M

TO
74

rAfii:
('liiH»t«'r VI.— TraiiHlMniiJitioM nf KcclcsiaHticjil Trmlitinii
into u I'liilosopliy of Ucli^iuii, or tlii' Oii^iii of
SchMitilic Iv'cU'siastical 'I luolu^'y ami DoKHiaticH :

Cli'iiu'nt andOriK'H 1411

Chapter V'll. — Decisive lirsult «»f Tlirnldj^ical S|w>('uIation
\\ itiiiit the Rcaitii of llic itulcof Faith, or tiit> Ddin-
ing of tiu' IvT'lrHiufstical I)<M'triual Norm through
tlio Auci'pUmce of tiir Logos Christol«t^'y , , 100

PART II.

THE DKVELOPMENT OF ECCJLESIASTICAL DOGMA.

Book I.

IIISTOUY OF THE DKVKLol'MKNT (JF DOO.MA AS IXKTUINK OF TIIK
OOU-.MAN ll'ON TllK li.VSlS OF N.VTL'KAL TIIEOLOOY.

Chai)t«'r I. — Historical Survey 11);{

Chapter II. — The Fuiulainental Con(<'|)ti(»n of Salvation

ami a General Skuteh of (lie Doctrine of Faith , WG
Chapter III.— Tho Sources of Knowhsl^^c and tlu? Authori-
ties, or Scripture, Tradition, and the Cliurch . 212

A. The I*resu2>2^nitioH8 of the iJortriiie of Sah'ution, or Aa^

Hi'ul Theoloyij.

Chapter IV. — The Presuppositions and Conceptions of

God, the Creator, as tho Dispen.ser of Salvation . 22")
Cliapter V. — The Presupjiositions and Conceptions of Man

as the Recipient of Salvation .... 229
R. Tlie Dot'triu'i of Rrih'wjttiou throinjh the Person of the

Qod-M'in in itx IIistorie<(l Dereloj»iie)it.
Chapter VI.— Tlie Doctrine of the Necessity and Reality of
Redemption through the Incarnation of the Son

of God

Chapter VII.— The Doctrine of the Ilomousion of the Son

of God with Go.1 TTimself

I. Until Council of Nic;ea . . . • •

II. Until I^eath of ('(inst;intius

III. Until Comicils of Constantinoi)le. IWI, 383 .

Supplement: The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit
and of the Trinity .266

235

242
242
253
259

CONTENTS.

PAOB

(Chapter VIII.— Tho Doctrine of the Perfect Equality
aH to Nature of the Incarnate »Son of God and

Humanity 274

Oliapter IX. — Continuation : Tlie Doctrine of the Personal
Union of the Divine and Iluniau Niitures in the

Incarnate Son of God 280

I. The Nestorian Controversy ..... 280
II. The Eutychian Controversy 287

III. The Monopliysite Controversies and the oth
Council 294

IV. The Monergistic and Monothelitic Controversies,
the Gth Council and John of Damascus . . 300

C. Tlie Temporal Enjoyment of Redemption.

Chapter X. — The Mysteries, and Matters Akin to Them

Chapter XI. — Conclusion : Sketch of the Historic Begin-
nings of the Orthodox System . . . .

305
318

Book IT

■H

EXPANSION AND RECASTING OF THE DOGMA INTO A DOCTRINE

CONCERNING SIN, GRACE AND THE MEANS OF GRACE

UPON THE BASIS OF THE CHURCH.

Chapter
Chapter

Chapter

I.
II.

III.
IV.

Chapter

326

I. — Historical Survey ......

II. — Occidental Christianity and Occidental The-
ologians before Augustine .....

III. — The World-Historical Position of Augustine
as Reformer of Christian Piety ....

IV. — The World- Historical Position of Augus-
tine as Teacher of the Church ....

Augustine's Doctrine of tlie First and Last Things 345
The Donatist Contest. The Work "DeCivitate
Dei." The Doctrine of the Church and of the
Means of Grace ......

The Pelagian Contest. Doctrine of Grace and

of Sin

Augustine's Exposition of the Symbol. The
New Doctrine of Religion ....
V. — History of Dogma in the Occident till the
Beginning of tlio Middle Ages (430-G04)

329

335

342

354

363

376

382

CONTENTS.

PAOE

300

305
318

I. Contest between Semi-PelaKiauisiuaiul Au^ustini-

anisni .........

II. Gregory tlie (Jreat (oOO-GOi)

Chapter VI. — History of Do^nia iu the Tinu' of tin* Carlo-

vingiuu Ki'iuiissancf ......

I. A. The Adoption Controversy ....

I. B. The I'retlentination Controversy

II. Controversy about thi; Filiocjue and about Images 3!»7

III. The Development, in Practice and in Theory, of

tlieMass (Dogma of the Eucharist) and of Penanci;

Chapter VII. — History of Dogma in the Time of Clugny,

Ansehn and Bernard to the End of the 12th

Century

I. The Revival of Piety

II. On the History of Ecclesiastical Ljiw
Hi. The Revival t>f Science ......

IV. Work upon the Dogma ......

A. The Berengar Controversy

B. Anselm's Doctrine of Satisfaction and tin; Doc-
trines of the Atonement of the Theologians of th(>
12th Century

Chapter VIII. — History of Dogma in the Time of the INIen
dicant Orders till the Beginning ul th(i 10th

Century

I. On the History of Piety

II. On the History of Ecclesiastical Law. The Doc-
trine of the Church ......

III. On the History of Ecclesiastical Science

IV. The Remiuting of Dogmatics into Scholastics

A. The "Working Over of the Traditional Articuli
Fidei

B. The Scholastic Doctrine of the Saciaments .

C. The Revising of Augustinianism in the Direction

of the Doctrine of Meritorious Works . . . 488

383

887

393

31)1
3!>r)

399

406
407
412
414
422
423

427

433
434

442
452
40 L

462
468

Book HI.

THE THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF THE IIISTOKV OF DOOMA.

Chapter I.— Historical rUu-vcy .",01

Chapter II. — The Issuiiig of the Dogma in Roman Ca

tholicism 510

xii

CONTENTS

I. <^'odification of tliP \f«,i-

tion to I'ro J.a' i *^Sn?"'J;-s i., Opp,.,.

II- Post-Tridenfino D,.vJta„nlt '^ '^"'«>»> ■ ■
the Vatican Couiioi ' "'"' " P'-^^Paration for
,"';"'« Vatican Council ' ' ' • ■ .

CImptcr III. -Tl,o Issuing of thon„' ■ • ■

nanisn, „„„ Soc-in^i:!!", "'""" '» ^""-THnita.

I. I ,»tor,caUnt,,,„uctio„ . ' ' ' • .

Cl-apterV^r? ''-'"- ■.•;•• ' "'''

„I. Int..,;,U.rtL'^""-«'""-I'"*,-ain Protostanti.ni 5«

II, i"''''"'s Cliristiaaity ' ' " ■ • . 541

m- Luther's Strictures on the Domi ' r ' ' ' «■'

Luther's ChrtliZ> ^'^'"■""' -". and within '

rAOK

510

518
527

529
52D
535

PAriK

in Opposi-

-GH) . .510

aration for

. 518
. 527

ti-Trinita-

. 529
. 529
. 535
estantism 541
. 541
. 545
Ecclesi-

. 551
d within

. 557

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

PROLEGOMENA TO THE DISCIPLINE.

I. — Idea and Aim of the History of Docjma.

1. Religion is a practical aiYair with mankind, KfiiRion.
since it has to do with our highest happiness and

with those faculties which pertain to a holy life.
But in every religion these faculties are closely con-
nected with some definite faith or with some defi-
nite cult, which are referred back to Divine Reve-
lation. Christianity is that religion in which the
impulse and power to a blessed and holy life is bound
up with faith in God as the Father of Jesus Christ.
So far as this God is believed to be the omni intent
Lord of heaven and earth, the Christian religion
includes a particular knoirledge of God, of the world
and of the purpose of created things; so far, how-
ever, as this religion teaches that God can bo truly
known only in Jesus Christ, it is inseparable from
historical knowledge.

2. The inclination to formulate the content of "'^^^^^Ith "^
religion in Articles of Faith is as natural to Chris-
tianity as the effort to veriffj these articles with
reference to science and to history. On the other

OUTLINES Oi^ THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

rrnldcin
Insoluble.

Attompts
at Solu-
tion.

hand the un^^crsal and supornatural character of tho
Cliristian religion imposes upon its adherents tho
duty of finding a statement of it which will not bo
impaired by our wavering knowledge of nature and
history; and, indeed, which will be able to maintain
itself before every possible theory of nature or of
history. The problem which thus arises permits,
indeed, of no absolute solution, since all knowledge
is relative ; and yet religion essays to bring her ab-
solute truth into the sphere of relative knowledge
and to reduce it to statement there. But history
teaches, and every thinking Christian testifies, that
the problem does not come to its solution ; even on
that account the j^rcxjressivc efforts which have
been made to solve it are of value.

3. The most thorough-going attempt at solution
hitherto is that which the Catlujlic Church made,
and which the churches of the Reformation (with
more or less restrictions) have continued to make,
viz. : Accepting a collection of Christian and Pre-
Christian writings and oral traditions as of Divine
origin, to deduce from them a system of doctrine,
arranged in scientific form for apologetic purposes,
which should have as its content the knowledge of
God and of tho world and of the means of salvation ;
then to proclaim this complex system {of dogma)
as the compendium of Christianity, to demand of
every mature member of the Church a faithfid ac-
ceptance of it, and at the same time to maintain tlmt
the same is a necessary preparation for the blessed-

PROLEGOMENA.

i
I

ness promised by the religion. With this augmen-
tation the Christian brotherhood, whose character
as " Catholic Church " is essentially indicated under
this conception of Christianity, took a definite and,
as was sui)posed, incontestable attitude toward the
science of nature and of history, expressed its relig-
ious faith in God and Christ, and yet gave (inas-
much as it retpiired of all its members an acceptance
of these articles of faith) to the thinking part of the
community a system which is capable of a wider and
indeed boundless development. Thus arose dog-
in afic CJi ristia n itij.

4. The aim of the hisfonj of docjtiia is, (1) To ex-
plain the origin of this dogmatic Christianity, and,
(v>) To describe its development.

5. The historij of the rise of dogmatic Christian-
ity would seem to close when a well- formulated sys-
tem of belief had been established by scientific
means, and had been made the ^' articulus const itn-
tiviis ccclesirv,^^ and as such had been imposed upon
the entire Church. This took place in the transition
from the lUl to the 411i century when the Logos-
Christology was established. The development of
dogma is in ahstnicto without limit, but in cou-
creto it has come to an end. For, (a) the Greek
Church maintains that its system of dogma has been
complete since the end of the " Im.'ige Controversy " ;
(b) the Roman, Catholic Church leaves the ix^ssi])il-
it}' of the formulating of new dogmas open, Ijut in
the Tridentine Council and still more in the Vatican

Aim of
History of

Rise of
Do(;iiia.

Dovelop-
niont of

Oroek
Church.

Roman
Otiirch.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

Evangel-
ical
Churches.

has it in fact on political grounds rounded out its
dogma as a legal system which above all demands
obedience and only secondarily conscious faith ; the
Roman Catholic Church has consecjuently abandoned
the original motive of dogmatic Christianity and
has placed a wholly new motive in its stead, retain-
ing the mere semblance of the old ; (c) The Evan-
gelical churches have, on the one hand, accepted a
greater part of the formulated doctrines of dogmatic
Christianity and seek to ground them, like the Cath-
olic Church, in the Holy Scriptures. But, on the
other hand, they took a different view of the author-
ity of the Holy Scriptures, they put aside tradition
as a source in matters of belief, they (questioned the
significance of the empirical Church as regards the
dogma, and above all they tried to put forwartl a
formulation of the Christian religion, which goes
directly back to the "true understanding of the
Word of God." Thus in principle the ancient dog-
matic conception of Christianity was set aside, while
however in certain matters no fixed attitude was
taken toward the same and reactions began at once
and still continue. Therefore is it announced that
protestan? *^^^ history of Protcstaut doctrine will bo excluded
Exduded. from the history of dogma, and within the foniier
will be indicated only the position of the Reformers
and of the churches of the Reformation, out of which
the later complicated development grew. Hence the
history of dogma can be treated as relatively a com-
pleted discipline.

PROLEGOMENA.

uot KxjMt-

sitioii of

CliiiHtiau

K»'v«*lu-

tloa.

C. The claim of tho Cliuivh that the dogmas are
simply the exposition of the Christian revelation,
because dedueed from the Holy Scriptures, is not
confirmed by historical investigation. On the con-
trary, it becomes clear that dogmatic Christianity
(the dogmas) in its conception and in its construc-
tion was ilie work of the Hellenic sjririf Kpnn the
Gospel soil. The intellectual medium by which in
early times men sought to make the Gospel compre-
hensible and to establish it securely, became insep-
arably blended with the content of tlio same. Thus
arose the dogma, in whose formation, to be sure,
other factors (the words of Sacred Scripture, re juire-
ments of the cult, and of the organization, political
and social environment, the impulse to push things
to their logical consequences, blind custom, etc.)
played a part, yet so that the desire and effort to
formulate the main principles of the Christian re-
demption, and to explain and develop them, secured
the upper hand, at least in the earlier times.

7. Just as the formulating of the dogma proved to Jyy*t,?jfJ[
be an illusion, so far as the same was to be the pure
exposition of the Gospel, so also does historical inves-
tigation destroy the other illusion ci the Church,
viz. : that the dogma, always having been the same
therein, have simply been explained, and that eccle-
siastical theology has never had any other aim than
to explain the unchanging dogma and to refute the
heretical teaching pressing in from without. The
formulating of the dogma indicates rather that the-

»'d the
Dogma.

Aiijnistinc
l.iillu'r.

I !

11 ( >

OUTLTNKS OK TIIK HISTORY OF DOCJMA.

olngy corirttrucU'd llic dogma, Imt that the Church
must over conceal the lahor of the thi\)logiaiiH,
wliicli thus i)hiceH them in an unfortunate jtliglit.
In each favoraUe case the result of their lahor has
been declared to be a reproduction and they them-
selves luive been robl)ed of their best service; as a
rule in the progress of histt)ry they fell under the
condemnation of the dogmatic scheme, whose foun-
dation they themselves had laid, and so entire ge?UT-
rations of theologians, as well as the chief leadtis
thereof, have, in the further development of dogma,
been afterwards marked and declared to be heretics
or held in suspicion. Dogma has ever in the prog-
ress of history devoured its own progenitors.

8. Although dogmatic Christianity has never, in
the process of its develoi)ment, lost its original style
and character as a work of the spirit of perishing
anti(puty upon Gospel soil (stfjle of the Greek
apoloijists and of Origiu), yet it experienced first
through Augustine and later through Luther a
deeper and more thorough transformation. Both of
these men, the latter more than the former, cham-
pioned a new and more evangelical conception of
Christianity, guided chiefly by Paulinism; Augus-
tine however hardly attempted a revision of the tra-
ditional dogma, rather did he co-ordinate the old and
the new; Luther, indeed, attempted it, but did not
carry it through. The Christian quality of the
dogma gained through the influence of each, and the
old traditional system of dogma was relaxed some-

niOLECiOMENA.

what — this was so much llio cjisc in Protostantisin
that one dix'S well, as ivinarkod ahovo, no l(>ngi»r to
consider the syniholical teaching of the Protestant
churches as wholly a recasting of the old dogma.

!>. An understanding of the dogmatico-historic ivri(xis in

" ^ ° History nf

process cannot be se( ired by isolating the special L)^k"»"
doctrines and considering them sei)arately (8|)ecial
History of Dogma) after that the epochs have been
previously characterized (General History of I)(^gma) .
It is much better to consider the " general " and the
" special " in each period and to treat the periods sep-
arately, and as much as possible to prove the special
doctrines to be the outcome of the fundamental idejus
and motives. It is not possible, however, to mako
more than four principal divisions, viz. : I. The Ori-
gin of Dogma. II. a. The Development of Dogma
in accordance with the principles of its original con-
ception (Oriental Development from Arianism to the
Image-Controversy). II. b. The O lental Devel-
opment of Dogma under the influence of Augustine's
Christianity and the Roman papal politics. II. c.
The Three-fold Issuing of Dogma (in the churches
of the Reformation — in Tridentine Catholicism — and
in the criticism of the rationalistic age, i.e., of So-
cinianism) .

10. The history of dogma, in that it sets forth the value of
process of the origin and development of the dogma,
offers the very best means and methods of freeing
the Church from dogmatic Christianity, and of hast-
ening tiie inevitable process of emancipation, which

Ol'TLINKH OF TIIK HISTORY OF DOGMA.

began with AuguHtim;. But tlio hi.stoiy of dogma
teHtifies also to tho unity and continuity of tho
Christian faith in tho progress of its history, in so
far as it proves that certain fundamental ideas of tlio
Gospel have never been lost and ha.ve defied all
attacks.

II.— History of the History of Dogma.

MoHhelm,

etc.

li!

Baronlus,

ftL-.

Luther,
etc.

Erasmus,
etc.

Benedic-
tine, etc.

Gottfried
Arnold.

The narrative of the History of Dogma begins first
in the 18th century with Mosheim, Walch, Ernesti,
Lessing, and Semler, since Catholicism in general is
not fitted for a critical handling of the subject, al-
though learned works have been written by individ-
ual Catholic theologians (Baronius Bellarmin, Peta-
vius, Thomassin, Kulm, Schwane, Bach, etc.), and
since the Protestant churches remained until the
18th century under the ban of confessionalism, al-
though important contributions were made in the
time of the Reformation (Luther, Okolampad, Mel-
anchthon, Flacius, Hyperius, Chemnitz) to the criti-
cal treatment of the History of Dogma, based in part
upon the labors of the critically disposed humanists
(L. Valla; Erasmus, etc.). But without the learned
material, which, on the one hand, the Benedictine
and other Orders had gathered together, and, on the
other, the Protestant Casaubonus, Vossius, Pearson,
Dallaus, Spanheim, Grabe, Basnage, etc., and with-
out the grand impulse which pietism gave (Gott-
fried Arnold), the work of the 18th century would

PROLEGOMENA.

have been iuconsi«loral)lo. Kaiiunalism robbed tlio
history of dogma of its ecclesitiHtical interest and
gave it over to a critical troatnKMit in which its
darkness was liglitod np in part by the hunp of
connnon nnderstanding and in part by the torch
of general historical contcnii)lation (first History of
Dogma by Langc, ITi^O, previous works by Sond(»r,
H()ssler, Loffler, etc., then the History of Dogma
by Miinscher, Handb. 4 Bdd. 1T!>7 f., an excellent
Lehrbnch, 1. Aufl. IS 11, 'A. Antl. 1S:5^, :M (inter
2 Bdd. 1S()2 f, StJiudlin ISOO and l^'l'l, Augusti
1805 and 1S:)0, Gieseler, edited l)y Redepenning 2
Bdd. 1855). The valuable handbooks of Baumgar-
ton-Crusius 18:52, i.e. 1840 and 1840, and of Meier
1840, i.e. 1854, mark the transition to a class of
works in which an inner understanding of the pro-
cess of the History of Dogma has been won, for
which Lessing had already striven, and for which
Herder, Schleiermacher and the Romanticists on the
one side, and Hegel and Schelling on the other, had
prepared the way. Epoch-making were the writings
of F. Chr. Baur (Lehrb. 1847, i.e. 1807, Vorles.
3. Thl. 1805 f.), in which the dogmati co-historic
process, conceived to be sure in a one-sided way,
was, so to speak, lived over again (cf . also Strauss,
Glaubenslehre 2 Bdd. 1840 f. Marheineke 1840).
From the Schleiermacher point of view, is Neander
(2. Thl. 1857) and Hagenbach (1840, i.e. 1807).
Dorner (History of the Doctrine of the Person of
Christ, 1839 i.e. 1845-53) attempted to unite Hegel

Lango.

MllLwlior.

Iiauiiii;nr-
t<'ii-Cru-

KillS.

Herder,

Schleier-

inucher,

Heijel,

Scbelling.

Baur.

Neander.

Domer.

If!

NiUHch.

OUTLINKM OF THE FII8TORY OF DOOMA.

and S('lil<'i(MiuHclHT. From tli<» Liithcraii Confc'H-
Hioiial standpoint Klicfotli (Kinl. in d. D. (I. l.s;;:>),
TlioinasiuH ("i Hdd. isTt f. and lss7 edited by Bon-
wetsch 1 l^d.), Hdiniid (isrj'.l i.v. 1SH7 od. l)y llauck)
and, with reservations, Kahnis (The Faith of the
Clinreh, 1S(;4). A marked [idvanco is indieated in
the History of Dogma by Niizsch (I Bd. ISTo). For
a correct understanding esiK»cially of the origin of
dogma the hibors of Rothe, Ritschl, Ronan, Over-
beek, v. Engeliiardt, Weizaiicker and Reville are
valuabk\

Oospcl is
.It'siis
Cliiist.

PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE HISTORY

OF DOGMA.

III.— Introductory.

1. The gosp{»l appeared in the "fulness of time."
And t]>e Gospel is Jesus Christ. In these sentences
the announcement is made that the Gospel is the
climax of an universal development and yet that it
has its power in a personal Life. Jesus Christ " de-
stroyed not," but "fulfilled." Ho witnessed a new
life before God and in God, but within the confines
of Judaism, and upon the soil of the Old Testament
whose hidden treasures he uncovered. It can be
shown, that everything that is " lofty and spiritual "
in the Psalms and Prophets, and everything that had
been gained through the development of Grecian
ethics, is reaffirmed in the plain and simple Gospel ;
but it obtained its power there, because it became

PKOliKCJoMKNA.

lifi' ami (Iced in a I'rr.son, wljosr j^rcatiioss coiisiHts
also in this, that ho did not remould Ids oartldv en-
vironnicnl, nor encounter any suhsetjuent rehutV, —
in other words, that he did not iHconie entangled in
his times.

'^. Two L'enerat ions lati'r there I'xisted, to be sure, •'•"'/"'I'T-

" ' ' ati'il Cull-

no united and liomoj^eneous Clinrc/i, hut there ^■'"'^^''^"""''•
wore Hcattorud througliout the wide Roman empire
ronf(>derated congregations of Christian l)elieverH
(churehes) who, for the most l)art, were (Jentile-
horn and condennied the Jewish nation and religion
as apostate; thoy apju'opriated tlu; Old Testament as
theirs by right and considered themselves a "new
nation", and yet as the " ancient creation of (iod",
while in all departments of life and thought certain
sacred forms were graduallj' l)eing i)ut forward.
The existence of these confedt^rated Cientile Christian
comnuuiities is the preliminary condition to the rise
of dogmatic Christianity.

The organization of these churches began, indeed, Frtvin*,' of

_ (IllSIM'l

in the apostolic times and their peculiar constitution ''""j'^i;''""
is negatively indicated by the freeing of the (losi)el
from the Jewish church. While in Islamism the
Arabic nation remained for centuries the main trunk
of the new religion, it is an astonishing fact in the
history of the Gospel, that it soon left its native soil
and went forth into the wide world and realized its
universal character, not through the transformation
of the Jewish religion, but by developing into a
world-religion upon Grceco-RoDian soil. The Oos-

Cliunli.

■l I

Gospel

Worlcl-Ri-

ligiuu.

Classical

Epoch of

Gospel

History.

Paul's Mis-
sion.

No Chasm

Between

EarliLT

Epoch and

Succeeding

Periotl.

OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

pel became a workl-reliqion in thnf^ having a
messiuje for all mankind^ it preached it to Greek
and barbarian^ and accordingly attached itself
to the spiritual and political life of the world-
wide Roman enqyire.

3. Since the Gospel in its original form was Jew-
ish and was preached only to the Jews, there lay in
this transition, which was brought about, in part
gradually and without disturbance, and in part
through a severe crisis, conseciuences of the most
stringent kind. From the standpoint of the history
of the Church and of dogma, the brief history of the
Gospel within the bounds of Palestinian Judaism is
accordingly a paloontclogical epoch. And yet this
remains the classical epochs not only on account of
the Founder and of the original testimony, but quite
as much because a Jewish Christian (Paul) recog-
nized the Gospel as the power of God, which was
able to save both Jew and Greek, and because he
designedly severed the Gospel from the Jewish na-
tional religion and proclaimed the Christ as the end
of the Law. Then other Jewish Christians, personal
disciples of Jesus, indeed, followed him in all this
(see also the 4th Gospel and the Epistle to the
Hebrews) .

Yet there is in reality no chasm between the older
brief epoch and the succeeding period, so far as the
Gospel is in itself universalistic, and this character
very soon became manifest. But the means by
which Paul and his sympathizers set forth the uni-

PROLErJOMENA.

iving a

3 Greek

d itself

world-

as Jew-
3 lay in
in part
in part
le most
history
7 of the
iiism is
'et this
Dunt of
t quite
recog-

1 was
use he
sh na-
le end
rsonal
11 this

o the

older
IS the
acter

B uni-

Oentilo

Chiiroh (iid

not C'oni-

versal character of the Gospel (j roving that the Old
Testament religion had been fulfilled and done away
with) was little understood, and, vice versa^ the
manner and means by which the Gentile Christians
came to an acceptance of the Gospel, can only in
part be attributed to the preaching of Paul So far
as we now possess in the New Testament substan-
tial writings in which the Gospel is so thoroughly
thought out that it is prized as the supplanter oi the
Old Testament religion, and writings which at the
same time are not deeply touched with the Greek
spirit, does this literature differ radically from all
that follows.

4. The growing Gentile Church, notwithstanding
Paul's significant relation toward it, did not com- prehend
prehend, nor really experience the crisis, out of problem,
which the Pauline conception of the Gospel arose.
In the Jewish propaganda, within which the Old
Testament had long since become liberalized and
spiritualized, the Gentile Church, entering and grad-
ually subjecting the same to itself, seldom felt the
problem of the reconciliation of the Old Testament
with the Gospel, since by means of the allegorical
method the propaganda had freed themselves from
the letter of the law, but had not entirely- overcome
its spirit; indeed they had simply cast off their
national character. Moved by the hostile power of
the Jews and later also of the Gentiles and by the
consciousness of inherent strength to organize a
" people " for itself, the Church as a matter of course

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

' •-

fi.'ntilf

Chiirclirrt

Kt'taii;i(l

Many

Pilt'stiiiian

Cliaractcr-

istics.

TTistiiry of

l)<);,'ma has

to ilti witli

(iciitilc

Chtirc'li

Only.

took on the form of the thought and life of the world
in which it lived, casting aside everything polythe-
istic, immoral and vulgar. Thus arose the new or-
ganizations, which with all their newness bore testi-
mony to their kinship with the original Palestinian
churches, in so far as, (1) the Old Testament was
likewise recognized as a primitive revelation, and
in so far as, (2) the strong spiritual monotheism, {'.))
the outlines of the proclamation concerning Jesus
Christ, (4) the consciousness of a direct and living
fellowship with God through the gift of the Spirit,
(5) the expectation of the approaching iJid of the
world, and the earnest conviction of the personal
responsibility and accountability of each individual
soul were all likewise maintained. To these is to
be added finally, that the earliest Jewish-Christian
proclamation, yes, the Gospel itself, bears the stamp
of the spiritual epochs, out of which it arose, — of the
Hellenic age, in which the nations exchanged their
wares and religions were transformed, and the idea
of the worth and accountability of every soul became
widespread; so that the Hellenism which soon
pressed so mightily into the Church was not abso-
lutely strange and new.

5. The history of dogma has to do with the Gen-
tile Church only — the history of theology begins, it
is true, with Paul — , but in order to understand his-
torically the basis of the formation of doctrine in the
Gentile Church, it must take into consideration, as
already stated, the following as antecedent condi-

I'KOLEGOMENA.

tions: (1) TJw Gospel of Jcsiis Christ, (2) The rr.'snpi><>-
general and sinuilfaneons jyt'odamation of Jesns
Christ in the first generation of believers, {'■]) The
eurrent understanding and exposition of tJie Old
Testament and the Jewish anticipations of the fu-
ture andtheir speculations, (4) The religious con-
ceptions and the religious philosophy of the Hel-
lenistic Jews, (5) The religious attitfide of the
Greeks and, Bomans during the first two centu-
ries, and the current Grceco-Eonian philosophy
of religion.

Gen-
Ins, it
ll his-
In the
|n, as

mdi-

of KinK-

(loin of

God.

IV.— The Gospel of Jesus Christ according
TO His Own Testimony.

The Gospel is the good news of the reign of the JI'^^I^'^^J^.^
Ahnighty and Holy God, the Father and Judge of
the world and of each individual soul. In this rtn'gn,
which makes men citizens of the heavenly kingdom
and gives them to realize their citizenship in the ap-
proaching eon, the life of every man who gives him-
self to God is secure, even if he should immediately
lose the world and his earthly life; while those
who seek to win the world and to keep their life fall
into the hands of the Judge, who condemns them to
hell. This reign of God, in that it rises ahove all
ceremonies and statutes, places men under a la?r,
which is old and yet new, viz. : Whole-hearted lore
to God and to one's neighbor. In this love, wher-
ever it controls the thoughts in their deepest springs,
that better Justice is exemplified which corresponds

T ovf to

(ioi! and

Man.

OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

to the perfection of God. The way to secure this
righteousness is by a change of hearty i.e. by self-
denial and humility before God and a heart-felt
trust in him. In such humility and trust in God
the soul realizes its own unworthiness. The Gospel,
however, calls even sinners, who are so disposed,
unto the kingdom of God, in that it assures them
satisfaction with his justice, i.e., guarantees them
the forgiveness of the sins which have hitherto
separated them from God. In the three-fold form,
however, in which the Gospel is set forth, (God's
^'vrv^fSv' sovereignty, higher justice [law of love] and for-
L.m%^For- givcuess of siu) it is inseparably connected with
Sin. Jesus Christ. For in the proclamation of the Gos-
pel, Jesus Christ everywhere called men unto him-
self. In him is the Gospel icorcl and deed; it is
his meat and drink and, therefore, is it become his
personal life, and into this life he would draw all
men. He is the Son, who knows the Father. Men
should see in him how kind the Lord is; in him
they may experience the power and sovereignty of
God over the world and be comforted in this trust ;
him, the meek and gentle-hearted One, should they
follow ; and inasmuch as he, the holy and pure One,
calls sinners unto himself, they should be fully as-
sured that God through him forgives sin.

This close connection of his Gospel with his per-
son, Jesus by no means made prominent in words,
but left his disciples to experience it. He called
himself the Son of Man and led them on to the jon-

TfOspcl

Word and

Divd in

Jesus.

lA.

euro this

. by self-

leart-felt

in God

) Gospel,

lisposed,

•es them

es them

hitherto

d form,

, (God's

md for-

3d with

he Gos-

to him-

Ij it is

>me his

raw all

Men

:n him

nty of

trust ;

i they

3 One,

ly as-

per-
ords,
called

jon-

PROLEGOMKNA.

fession that he was their Master and Messiah. Jfsua Mes-
siah.

Thereby he gave to his lasting significance for them
and for his people a comprehensible expression, and
at the close of his life, in an hour of great solemnity,
he said to them that his death also like his life was
an imperishable service which he rendered to the
"many" for the forgiveness of sins. By this ho
raised himself above the plane of all others, although
they may already be his brethren ; he claimed for
himself an unique significance as the Redeemer and Rwipj^mer,
as the Judge ; for he interpreted his death, like all
his suffering, as a triumph, as the transition to his
cjlorij, and he proved his power by actually awaken-
ing in his disciples the conviction that he still lives
and is Lord over the dead and the living. The re-
ligion of the Gospel rests upon this faith in Jesus
Christ, i.e. looking upon him, that historical Per-
son, the believer is convinced that God rules heaven
and earth, and that God, the Judge, is also Father
and Redeemer. The religion of the Gospel is the re-
ligion which frees men from all legality, which, how-
ever, at the same time lays upon them the highest
moral obligations — the simplest and the severest —
and lays bare the contradiction in which every man
finds himself as regards them. But it brings re-
demption out of such necessities, in that it leads
men to the gracious God, leaves them in his hands,
and draws their life into union with the inexhaustible
and blessed life of Jesus Christ, who has overcome
the world and called sinners to himself.

Gospel
Frees from
all Legal-
ity.

i !i

I ■ I

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

Josus IJis-
«'n Lord.

Way,

Truth,

Life.

Kinp.

Contont of

Disciples'

IJeliof.

New
Chiiivh,
Tnu' Is-
rael.

V. — The General Proclamation concerning
Jesus Christ in the First Generation of
His Adherents.

1. Men had learned to know Jesns Christ Jind hud
found him to bo the Messiah. In the first two gen-
erations following him everything was said about
him which men were in any way able to say. Inas-
much as they knew him to be the Risen One, they
exalted him as the Lord of the world and of history,
sitting at the right hand of God, as the Way, the
Truth and the Life, as the Prince of Life and the
living Power of a new existence, as the Contiueror
of death and the King of a coming new kingdom.
Although strong individual feeling, special experi-
ence, Scriptural learning and a fantastic tendency
gave from the beginning a form to the confession of
him, yet common characteristics of the proclamation
can be definitely pointed out.

3. The content of the disciples' belief and the gen-
eral proclamation of it on the ground of the certainty
of the resurrection of Jesus, can be set forth as fol-
lows : Jesus is the Messiah promised by the prophets
— ho will come again and establish a visible king-
dom, — they who believe on him and surrender them-
selves entirely to this belief, may fool assured of the
grace of God and of a share in liis future glory. A
new community of Christian believers thus organized
itself within the Jewish nation. And this now com-
munity believed itself to be (he true Israel of the

* .

PROLEfJOMEXA.

JERNING
nON OF

[«ik1 Ijad
WO gen-
ii about
Inas-
le, they
history,
''ay, the
unci the
ntjiieror
ngdom.
experi-
ndoncy
sion of
mation

le gen-

'tainty

las fol-

[ophets

king-

them-

of the

mized

com-

)f the

AssiiriiiiLMi
of I)!^!!-
plrsliii).

Messianic times and lived, accordingly, in all their
thoughts and feelings in the future. Thus could all
the Jewish apocalyptic expectations retain their pow-
er for the time of the second coming of Christ. For
the fulfilment of these hopes the new community pos-
sessed a guarantee in the sacrificial death of Christ,
as also in the manifold manifestations of the Spirit,
which were visible upon the members upon their
entrance into the brother-hood (from the beginning
this introduction seems to have been accompanied bv rosscssion

^ • dl' Spirit,

bajitism) and in their gathering together. The pos-
session of the Spirit was an assurance to each indi-
vidual that he was not only a " disciple " but also a
"called saint," and, as such, a. priest and king of
God. Faith in the God of Israel became faith in
God the Father ; added to this was faith in Jesus,
the Christ and Son of God, and the witness of the
gift of the Holy Spirit, i.e. of the Spirit of God and
Christ. In ihe strength of this faith men lived in
the fear of the Judge and in trust in God, who had
already begun the redemption of his own people.
The proclamation concerning Jesus, the Christ,
rested first of all entirely upon the Old Testament,
yet it had its starting-point in the exaltation of
Jesus through his resurrection from the dead. To
prove that the entire Old Testament pointed toward
him, and that his person, his work, his fate were the
actual and verbal fulfilment of the Old Testament
in-ophecies, was the chief interest of believers, in so
far as they did not give themselves entirely to ex-

PrcatOiinjj

Based Kii-

tirclv on

Old Tfstii-

IlU'Ill.

«!

.?i'!

>lk'

Specula-
tion Began
in Apostol-
ic Ages.

OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

poctations of tho future. This roferenco did not
serve at once to make clear the meaning and worth
of tho ]\Iossianic work — this it did not seem to need
— but rather to establish the Messiah-ship of Jesus.
However, the Old Testament, as it was then under-
stood, gave occasion, through tho fixing of the per-
son and dignity of Christ, for widening the scope
of the thought of Israel's perfected theocracy. And,
in addition, faith in the exaltation of Jesus to the
right hand of God caused men to think of the begin-
ning of his existence in harmony therewith. Then
the fact of the successful Gentile conversion threw a
new light upon the scope of his work, i.e. upon its
significance for all mankind. And finally the per-
sonal claims of Jesus led men to reflect on his pecu-
liar relation to God, the Father. On these four
points speculation began already in the apostolic age
and it went on to formulate new statements concern-
ing the person and dignity of Christ. In proclaim-
ing Jesus to be the Christ men ceased thereby to
proclaim tho Gospel, because the -rr^petv rtdwTa Una
iveTeiXazn 6 Ir^nuu'? was to be included as a matter of
course and so did not especially engage the thoughts.
That this must bo for the future a questionable
digression is plain enough; for since everything
depends upon the appropriation of the Person of
Jesus, it is not possible for a personal life to be
appropriated through opinions about the Person,
but only through the record of the concrete Per-
sonality.

\i.

I'HOLK(;()MKNA.

'Ta una

.5. U|)on tho basis of tho pUiiii vvordH of JesuH and A>simiiir..
* * lit I' (iif-'i ve-

in tho consciousness of tho possession of the Spirit men u'i'^M*" ui-

were already assured ot i\ 2)n'si'Ht possesHioii oi iha ii..ii
forgiveness of sin, of righteousness before God,, of
tho full knowledge of the Divine Will and of the call
into the future kingdom. In tho acquiring of those
blessings, surely not a few realized tho consequences
of the first coming of the Messiah, i.e. his work, and
they referred especially the forgiveness of sin to
the death of Christ, and eternal life to his resurrec
tion. But no theories touching tho relation of the
blessings of the Gospel to the history of Christ were
propounded; Paul was the first to develop a theology
upon the basis of the death and resurrection of Christ
and to bring it into relations with the Old Testa-
ment religion.

4. This theologj' was constructed in opposition to ^'HJjV'^oT
the legalistic righteousness of the pharisees, i.e.., to i!,'Sii.sVic
tho official religion of the Old Testament. While its
form was thereby somewhat conditioned, its power
rested in the certainty of tho new life of tho Spirit,
which the Risen One offered, who through his death
overcame the world of the flesh and of sin. With
the thought that righteousness comes through faith
in God who raised Jesus from the dead and fulfilled
the Law by the legal way of the crucifixion of the
Christ upon the cross, Paul wrenched tho Gospel
from its native soil and gave it at the same time
through his Christological speculation and his carry-
ing out of the contrast of flesh and spirit, a charac-

UfSS.

! 1

|! 1'

Ol'TMNKS OK TIIK IIISTOKY OK F)()(1MA.

Heathen

Not

Ol)lifjwl to

Bwom«

JtiWS.

Transfor-
mation of
Christian-
ity Oi-

curred

Apait

from

Paul.

toristic Htamp whicli was romproliciisiblo to the
(i rocks, although thoy were illy prepared to accept
his special manner of reconciling it with the Law.
Through Paul, who was the first theologian, the
(juestion of the Law (in theory and practice) and
the principles of missionary activity accordingly he-
came the absorbing themes in the Christian coninni-
nities. While he in-oclaimed freed()m from the Law
and baptized the heathen, forbidding them to become
Jews, others now for the first time consciously made
the righteousness of Christian believers dependent
upon the punctilious observance of the Law and re-
jected Paul as an apostle and as a Christian. Yet
the chief disciples of Jesus were convinced, perha.i)s
not a little influenced by the success of Paul, and
concede \ to the heathen the right to become Chris-
tians without first becoming Jews. This well at-
tested fact is the strongest evidence that Christ had
awakened among his personal disciples a faith in
himself, which was dearer to them than all the tra-
ditions of the fathers. Yet there were among those
who accepted the Pauline mission various opinions
as to the attitude which one should take toward
heathen Christians in ordinary life and intercourse.
These opinions held out for a long time.

As surely as Paul had fought his fight for the
whole of Christendom, so sure also is it that the
transformation of the original form of Christianity
into its universal form took place outside of his
activity (proof* the Church at Rome). The Juda-

1 \

MA.

I'llOI.EGOMKNA.

> to tlie
to accept
he Law.
pan, the
ice) and
ingly 1)0-
conimu-
the Law
) become
ly made
pendent
and re-
n. Yet
perhaps
nl, and
) Chris-
veil at-
ist had
lith in
he tra-
? those
)inions
oward
'oiirse.

)r the
at the
ianity
►f his
Juda-

ism ot' the diaspora was lon<^ since surrounded h}- a
retiiuie of half-hred Grecian brethren, for whom the
particular and national forms of the Old Testament
religion were hardly existent (see VIL). And, far-
ther, this Judaism itself had begun to transform for
the Jews the old religion into a universal and spirit-
ual religion without casting aside its forms, which
were rather considered significant symbols (myster-
ies). The Gospel, being received into these circles,
completed sim|)ly and almost suddenly the process of
s])iritualizing the old religion, and it stripped oflf the
old forms as shells, replacing them at once in part by
new forms {e.g., circumcision is circumcision of the
heart, likewise also baptism; the Sabbath is the
glorious kingdom of Christ, etc.). The outward
withdrawal from the synagogue is also here a clear
proof of the power and self -consciousness oi the new
religion. The same developed itself rapidly in con-
secpience of the hatred of the Jews, who adhered to
the old faith. Paul exerted an influence, and the
destruction of Jerusalem cleared up entirely the ob-
scurities which still remained.

VL— The Current Exposition of the Old Tes-
tament AND THE Jewish Future Hope, in
their Bearing on the Earliest Formula-
tion of the Christian Message.

1. Although the method of the pedant, the casuis- ^Kx^^Kl'sii'*
tic handling of the Law and the extortion of the »)y churJh.

1, 1

, I

i i;

Jewish

Apociilyp-

tic Litt'ia-

ture Rtv

tuiued.

OUTLINES OF TIIK IIISTOHY OF IJOOMA.

dtH'[)(»s( moaning of tho itropliccics, liad Im'cii in priii-
ciplo (lono away with by Johus Clirist, the old
school-oxogesis still remained active in the Cliria-
tian rhurchos, and especially the nnhistorical local-
method in the exposition of the Old Testament, as
well as the allegoristic and the Ilaggada ; for a sacred
text — and as such the Old Testanu^nt was considered
— ever invites men in the exposition of it to disre-
gard its historical conditions and interpret it accord-
ing to the needs of the time. Especially wherever
the proofs of the fulfilment^ prophecy, i.e., of the
Messiah-ship of Jesus was concerned, the received
point of view exercised its influence, as well upon
the exposition of the Old Testament as upon the
conception of the person, fate and deeds of Jesus.
It gave, under the strong impression of the history
of Jesus, to many Old Testament passages n foreign
sense and enriched, on the other hard, the life of
Jesus with new facts, throwing the emphasis upon
details, which were often unreal and seldom of prime
importance.

2. The Jewish apocalyptic literature, as it flour-
ished after the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, was not
forbidden within the circles of the first believers oi
the Gospel, but rather was it retained and read as
an explanation of the prophecies of Jesus and, as it
were, cultivated. Although the content of the same
appeared modified and the uncertainty regarding the
person of the Messiah who was to appear in judg-
ment w^as done away with, the earthly sensuous

J *'-

PHOLKfJOMKNA.

5i5

hoiH's wore by no moans wholly roproHsod. Confused
pioturos filled tho fjincy, throatonod to obsouro the
plain and earnest description of the judj^nient which
every individual soul is sure of, and drove many
friends of the Gospel into a restless turmoil and intt)
a detestation of the state. Consecpiently the repro-
duction of the eschatological discourses of Jesus be-
came indefinite; even things wholly foreign were
mingled therewith, and the true aim of the Christian
life and hope began to waver.

3. Through the apocalyptic literature, tho artificial ^'J!j/|'"''^,f**
exegesis and the Haggada, a mass of mythological i!il.u!,"il|.'.
and poetical ideas crowded into the Christian com-
munities and were legitimized. Tho most imjMjr-
tant for tho succeeding times were tho speculations in
regard to the Messiah, which were drawn in part
from the Old Testament and the apocalypses and in
part were constructed in accordance with methods
whoso right no one questioned and whoso adoption
seemed to give security to the faith. Long since in
the Jewish religion men had given to everything
that is and that happens an existence within the
knowledge of God, but they had in reality confined
this representation to that only which is really im-
portant. The advancing religious thought had above Pn-Exist-

ence As-
all included individuals also, that is, the most promi- jiJ,yy|lJ,"

nent, within this speculation which should glorify

God, and so a pro-existence was ascribed also to the

Messiah, but of such a nature that by virtue of it

he abides ivith Ood during his earthly manifesta-

ilil

«^ !

|l >

! I

Hoot . f

Speciiiii

ti.ju.

<>l TLINKS OK THE HISTORY OP' 1)0(JMA.

tioH. In <)i)pu.siti()n to tliis, llio Hellenics ideas of
pre-existeiice rooted themselves in the distinguishing
of God and matter; spirit and flesh. According to
the same the Spirit is pre-existent and visible na-
ture is only a shell which it assumes. Here was
the soil for ideas about the incarnation, the assump-
tion of a second nature, etc. In the time of Christ
these Hellenic ideas influenced the Jewish and thus
both were so spread abroad that even the most prom-
inent Christian teachers adopted them. The relig-
ious convictions (see V. 2), that, (1) the establish-
ment of the kingdom of God upon the earth and the
sending of Jesus as the perfect Mediator was from
eternity the highest purpose in God's plan of salva-
tion, that, (2) the glorified Christ has entered into
his own proper position of God-like dominion, that,
(3) in Jesus God has revealed himself, and that he
therefore excels all Old Testament mediators, yes,
tlie angel-powers themselves — these convictions were
so fixed (not without the influence of Hellenic
thought) that Jesus pre-existed, i.e. tluit in him a
heavenly Being of like rank with God, older than
the world, yes even its creating Principle, has ap-
peared and assumed our flesh. The religious root of
chis speculation lay in sentences such as I. Pet. 1,
20 ; its forms of statement were varied even accord-
ing to the intelligence of the teacher and his famil-
iarity with the apocalyptic theology or with the
Hellenic philosophy of religion, in which intermedi-
ate beings (above all the Logos) played a great role.

. ii !

PK(>LK(;()MKNA.

Rise nnil

Sni'ciid

In. istiiift.

Only the Fourth Evangolist — he hardly hulungs to
the 1st century — saw with perfect clearness that the
pre-earthly Christ must be established as '''^''V iu> iv
"■I'XJI '('^^"^ '"^ '''^'''^) ill order not t(j endanger the content
and significance of the revelation of God in Christ.
In addition there prevailed in wide circles such con-
ceptions also as recognized in a spiritual communi-
cation at his baptism the eciuipment of the man
Jesus (see the genealogies, the beginning of the
Gospel of Mark) for his office, or found upon tlie
basis of Isa. vii. in his miraculous birth (from a
virgin) the germ of his uni(iue being. (The rise
and spread of this representation is wholly indistinct
to us ; Paul seems not to hjive known it ; in the be-
ginning of the l^d century it is almort universal.)
On the other hand, it is of great significance tlmt
every teacher who recognized the new in Christian
ity as religion ascribed pre-existonco to Christ.

Supplement . — A reference to the witness of proph-
ecy, to the current exposition of the Old Testament,
to apocalyptic writings and valid methods of specu-
lation was not sufficient to clear up every new point
which cropped out in the statement of the Christian
message. The earliest brother-hoods were enthusias-
tic, had prophets in the midst of them, etc. Under
such conditions facts were produced outright contin-
ually in the history (c.^., as particularly weighty, J'acts ito-
the ascension of Christ and his descent into heF.).
It is farther not poesiblo to point out the motive to
such productions, which first onlj" by the creation of

Knrlii'sf

IkhmIs En-
thusiast if.

I i

! 'i!i

I ,ii

4 \

b< Ii',

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the New Testament Canon reached a hy no means
complete end, i.e., now became enriched by compre-
hensible mythologumena.

VIL— The Religious Conceptions and the Re-
ligious Philosophy of the Hellenistic
Jews in Their Bearing on the Transfor-
mation OF THE Gospel Message.

Religion of 1. From the remnants of Jewish- Alexandrian lit-

Diaspora,

aud"^ooJ- erature (reference is also made to the Sibylline
naoogy. Qp^cles as Well as to Joseph as) and from the great
propaganda of Judaism in the Grseco- Roman world,
it may be inferred that there was a Judaism in the
diaspora to whoso consciousness the cultus and the
ceremonial law disappeared entirely behind the mono-
theistic worship of God without images, behind the
moral instruction and the faith in a future reward
beyond. Circumcision itself was no longer abso-
lutely required of those converted to Judaism; one
was also satisfied w'th the cleansing bath. The
Jewish religion seemed here transformed into a com-
mon human morality and into a monotheistic cos-
mology. Accordingly tne thought of the theocracy
ae well as the Messianic hope grew dim. The latter
did not entirely fail, however, but the prophecies
were valued chieily for the proof of the antiquity of the
Jewish monotheism, and the thought of the future
spent itself in the expectation of the destruction of the
Roman empire, of the burning of the world and —

PROLEGOMENA.

Propara-

tion for

Christian-

Greeks.

what is Weightiest — the general judgment. That
which is specifically Jewish preserved itself under a
high regard for the Old Testament, which was con-
sidered as the fountain of all wisdom (also for the
Greek philosophy and the elements of truth in the
non- Jewish religions). Many intelligent men also
observed punctiliously the Law for the sake of its
symlolical significance. Such Jews, together with
their converts from the Greeks, formed a new Juda-
ism upon the foundation of the old. And these j^re-
pared the soil for the Christianizing of the Greeks,
as well as for the establishment within the empire
of a great Gentile Church free from the Law; under
the influence of Greek culture it developed into a
kind of universal society with a monotheistic back-
ground. As religion it laid aside the national forms,
put itself forward as the most perfect form of that
" natural " religion, which the Stoa had discovered.
But in that way it became more iiioralifitic and lost
a part of the religious enorgy, which the prophets
and psalmists possessed. The inner union of Juda-
ism and the Hellenistic philosophy of religion indi-
cates a great advance in the history of religion and
culture, l)ut the same did not lead to strong religious
creations. Its productions passed over into " Chris-
tianity."

2. The Jewish- Alexandrian philosophy of religion
had its most noted defender in Philo,— the perfect ^JiJophy^df
Greek and the sincere Jew, who turned the religious ^phila"'
philosopliy of his time in the direction of Neo-

Jpwish-
Alexan-

I !

til

t I

Asc'Ptic
Virtue.

Inrttiencp
of AU'xnii-
(Iriim Plii-
losojihy of

|{<'li).^ioii

U|)OI»

Christ iiin-

ity.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Platonism and prepared the way for a Christian
tlieology, which was able to rival the philosophy.
Pliiio was a Platonist and a Stoic, but at the same
tinio a revelation-philosopher; he placed the final
end in that wliich is above reason and therefore the
highest power in the Divine communication. On
the either hand, he saw in the human spirit some-
thing Divine and bridged over the contrast between
God and creature-5j>/y/^, between nature and history,
by means of the personal- impersonal Logos, out of
which he explained religion and the world whose
material, it is true, remained to him wholly perish-
able and evil. His ethical tendencies had, therefore,
in principle a strong ascetic character, however much
he might guard the earthly virtues as relative. Vir-
tue is freedom from the sensuous and it is made per-
fect through the touch of Divinity. This touch sur-
passes all knowledge; the latter, however, is to bo
highly prized as the tvay. Meditation upon the
world is by Pliilo dependent upon the need of hap-
piness and freedom, w^hich is higher than all reason.
One may say that Philo is therefore the first who,
as a philosopher, gave to this need a clear expression,
because he was not only a Greek, but also a Jew
imbued with the Old Testament within whose view,
it is true, the synthesis of the Messiah and of the
Logos did not lay.

'A. The practical fundamental conceptions of the
Alexandrian philosophy of religion must, in different
degrees, have found an entrance very early into

PROLEGOMENA.

the Jewish-Christian circles of the diaspora, and
through the same also into the Gontile-Christian ; or
rather the soil was already prepared wherever these
thoughts became widespread. After the beginning
of the 2d century the philosophy of Philo also be-
came influential through Christian teachers, espe-
cially his Logos-doctrine, as the expression of the
unity of religion, nature and history; and ahoi'e all
his fundamental liermeneutic principles. The sys-
tems of Valentine and Origen presuppose the system
of Philo. His fine dualism and allegorical art (*'the
Biblical alchemy ") became acceptable also to the
learned men of the Church; to find the spiritual
meaning of the sacred text, in part alongside the
letter and in part outside, was the watchword of
scientific Christian theology, which in general was
possible only upon such a basis, since it strove, with-
out recognizing a relative standard, to unify the
monstrous and discordant material of the Old Testa-
ment and the Gospel, and to reconcile both with the
religion and scientific culture of the Greeks. Here
Philo was a master, for he first in the largest sense
])oured the new wine into the old wine-skins — a i)ro-
codure in its ultimate intention justified, since his-
tory is a unit; but in its pedantic and scholastic
execution the same was a source of illusions, of un-
reality and finally of stultification.

Vnlt'ntinus
nn<l ( )ript*n

Presup-
pose I'hilo.

i:t

Grneco-Rri-

rnan World

Grew Mon^

Rt^li pious
in ad and

1 '■

3d t^entu-

I i i

I ■

•"M

111

ni\

ries.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

VIII. — The Religious Disposition of the
Greeks and Romans in the First Two
Centuries and the Contemporary Gr^co-
RoMAN Philosophy of Religion.

1. In the age of Cicero and Augustus the people's
religion and the religious sense in general was almost
entirely wanting in cultured circles, but after the
end of the 1st century of our era a revival of the relig-
ious sense is noticeable in the Grgeco-Roman world,
which affected all grades of society and seemed after
the middle of the 2d century to grow stronger from
decennium to decennium. Parallel with it went the
not fruitless attempt to restore the old national cults,
religious usages, oracles, et cetera. Meanwhile the
new religious needs of the time did not reach a vig-
orous or untroubled expression through this effort,
which was made in part from above and in part by
artificial means. The same sought, far more in ac-
cordance with the wholly changed conditions of the
times, to find new forms of gratification (intermin-
gling and intercourse of nations —downfall of the old
republican constitutions, institutions and classes —
monarchy and absolutism — social crises and pauper-
ism — influence of philosophy, religion, morality and
law — cosmopolitanism and human rights — influx of
Oriental cults — knowledge of the world and sa-
tiety). Under the influence of philosophy a dispo-
sition toward monotheism was developed out of the
downfall of the political cults and the syncretism.

I'R(^LEG()MENA.

Religion and individual inorfdify became more
closely united: Spirit acdizid ion of the cidts^ en-
nobling of man^ idea of ethical personality^ of con-
science and of puritij. Repentance and pardon
became of importance, also inner union with the
Divinity, longing for revelation {asceticism and
nn/sterions rites c(s a means of appropriating the
Divine), yearning after a painless, eternal life be-
yond the grave (apotheosis); the earthly life as a
phantom life {--yx/xireca and (hdirzacci) , Just as in the
2d century the moral swing was the stronger, so in
the 3d century the religious increased more and more
— thirst for life. Polytheism was not thereby over-
come, but only shoved aside upon a lower plane,
where it was as active as ever. The numen supre-
mum revealed its fulness in a thousand forms (demi-
gods), going upward (apotheosis, emperor cult,
"dominus ac dens noster^') and downward (mani-
festations in nature and in hi"story) . The soul itself
is a super-earthly being ; the ideal of the perfect man
and of the Leader (Redeemer) was developed and
sought after. The new remained in part concealed
by the old cultus forms, which the state and piety
protected or restored; there was a feeling-around
after forms of expression, and yet the wise, the
skeptic, the pious and the patriot capitulated to the
cultish traditions.

2. The formation of social organizations, on the
one hand, and the founding of the monarchical
world-wide Roman empire, on the other, had tlie

KfliKion

ninl AInr.vl-

itv Moro

L'uited.

Social Or-
ganiza-
tions, Hn
rnaa Eui-
I)ift', t'os-
iiio;)i)litati-
isui.

1 >!l

1 1

i .(

< ,i

stoicism,
riatouism.

Nfo-Plat-
ouism.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

greatest significance as regards the deveh^pment of
something new. Everywhere there sprang up that
cosmopolitan feeling, which points beyond itself,
there toward the practice of charity, here toward
the uniting of mankind under one head and the wip-
ing out of national lines. The Church appropriated,
piece for piece^ the great apparatus of the earthly
Roman empire; in its constitution, perhaps, it also
saw the portrayal of the Divine economy.

3. Perhaps the most decisive factor in the change
of the religious-ethical attitude was the philosophy,
which in almost all its schools had more and more
brought ethics forward and deepened the same.
Upon the soil of Stoicism, Posidonius, Seneca, Epic-
tetus and Marcus Aurelius, and upon the soil of
Platonism, men like Plutarch had achieved an ethi-
cal-outlook, which in its principles (knowledge, res-
ignation, trust in God) was obscure, yet in some
particulars scarcely admits of improvement. Com-
mon to them all is the great value put upon the soul.
A religious bent, the desire for Divine assistance,
for redemption and for a life beyond, comes out dis-
tinctly in some of them ; most clearly in the Neo-
Platonists and those who anticipated them in the 2d
centurj'- (preparation by Philo). Characteristics of
this mode of thought are the dualistic contrasting of
the Divine and the earthlj^ the abstract idea of God,
the assertion of the unknowableness of God, skepti-
cism in regard to sense-experience and distrust of
the powers of reason ; at the same time great readi-

PROLE(}OMENA.

Fantawii'

I,«';riti-

inizcd.

ness to investigate and to utilize the results of the
previous scientific labors; and farther, the demand
for freedom from the sensuous through asceticism,
the want of an authority, belief in a higher revela-
tion and the fusing of religion, science and mythol-
ogy. Already men began to legitimize the relig-
ious fantasie within the realm of philosophy, by
reaching back and seizing the myths as the vehicle
of the deepest wisdom (romanticism). The tlieo-
sophical philosophy which had thus equipped itself
was from the standpoint of natural science and clear
thinking in many ways a retrogression (yet not in
all partic':lcirs, e.g. the Neo-Platonic psj^chology is
far] bocter than the Stoic) ; but it was an expression
for the deeper religious needs and the better self-
knowledge. The inner life with its desires was now
altogether the starting-point for all thought concern-
ing the world. Thoughts of the divine, gracious
Providence, of the kinship of all men, of the common
fraternal love, of the ready and willing forgiveness
of wrong, of the indulgenc patience, of the insight
into tlicir own weaknesses were no less the product
of the practical philosophy of the Greeks for wide
circles, than the conviction of the inherent sinful-
ness, of the need of redemption and of the value of a
human soul which finds its rest only in God. But Revpiation

and Relif?

men possessed no sure revelation, no comprehensive 'bunion'
and satisfactory religious eommunion, no vigorous
and religious genius and no conception of hislonj,
which could take the place of the no longer valuable

,'M

munion
Wan tin;

•^ -

I i'

t 1 1

' I ;

I :

i !

f ■

OUTLINES OF THE HISTOKY OF DOGMA.

political history; men poHsessed no ccrtilnde anil
thoy (lid not get beyond the wavering between the
fear of God and the deification of nature. Yet with
this philosophy, the highest the age had to offer,
the Gospel allied itself, avd the stages of the
Ecclesiastical History of Dogma dnring the first
fwe centuries correspond to the stages of the
Hellenistic Philosophy of Religion ivithin the
same period.

introduc- As an introduction to the study of the history of

tory Works

to History dogma the following works are to be especially com-
mended: Schiirer, Geschichto des jiidischen Volks
im Zeitaltor Jesu Christi, 2. Bd. 1885 (English
translation published by T. & T. Clark). Weber,
System der altsynagogalen palastinensischen The-
ologie, 1880. Kuenen, Volksreligion und Weltre-
ligion, 1883. Wellhausen, Abriss der Geschichte
Israel's und Juda's (Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, 1.
Heft, 1884). Weiss, Lehrbuch der bibl. Theolo-
gie, 4. Aufl., 1884. Baldensperger, Das Selbstbe-
wustsein Jesu im Licht der messianischen Hoff-
nungen seiner Zeit, 1888. Leben Jesu von Keim,
Weiss and others and the Einleitungen in das N.
T. von Reuss, Hilgenfeld, Mangold, Holtzmann und
Weiss. Weizsiicker, Apostolisches Zeitalter, 188G.
Renan, Hist, des Orig. du Christianisme, T. II.-
IV. Pfleidorer, Das Urchristendum, 1887, Dics-
tel, Geschichte des A. T. i. der christi. Kirche,

PROLEGOMENA.

18r,!l, Siegfried, Philo v. Alex. 1875. Bigg, The
ChriHtian PlatoniHts of Alexandria, ISSO. Die
UiiterHUchungen von Freudentlial (' Hellenistisclie
Studion ') and Bernays. BoisKier, La R«''ligion
Romaino d'Augiiste aux Antonins, 2 vols,, 187 4.
Reville, La Religion a Rome sous len Sevr'res,
188G (German by Kriiger 1888). Friedliinder, Dar-
stellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Roms in der Zeit
von August bis zu Ausgang der Antonine, 3. Bdd.
5. Aufl. Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, 3.
Bdd. 1878. Leopold Schmidt, Die Ethik der alten
Griechen, 2 Bdd. 1882. Heinze, Die Lebre vom
Logos, 1872. Hirzel, Untersucbungen zu Cicero's
philos. Schriften, C Tble. 1877. Die Lebrbiicber
der Geschicbte der Pbilosopbie von Zeller, Ueber-
weg, Striimpell and otbers,

fif

M ! II

ii ' ' I '

part I.

THE RISE OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOCMA.

BOOK I.
THE PREPARATION.

CHAP . KU I.

HISTORICAL SURVEY.

THE first century of the existence of Gentile-
Christian communities is characterized, (I) l)y
the rapid retirement of Jewish Christianity, ('^) by
religious enthusiasm and the strength of the future
hope, (;]) by a severe moralit}' deduced from the
Masters' teaching, (4) by the manifold form and
freedom of expression of belief, on the basis of plain
fornuilas and ever increasing tradition, (5) by the
lack of a definite authority, in the transition to a
recognized outward authority among the churches,
(0) by the lack of a political connection among the
various communities, and by an organization which
was firm and yet permitted individual liberty, (7)
by the development of a peculiar literary activity,
claiming assent to its newly produced facts, (8) by

the reproduction of detached phrases and individual

Oontile-

ChriHtiuii

(Viinnuuii-

tics.

^^l i\\

* m

:ii'

;;.,

i ' ■
; 1

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

inferences from tlie apostolical teacliiiig, without
a clear understanding of the same, (0) by the crop-
ping out of those tendencies which served in every
way to hasten the process already begun of fusing
the Gospel with the spiritual and religious interests
of the time, — with Hellenism, — as well as by numer-
ous attempts to wrench the Gospel free from its
native setting and to introduce elements foreign to
it. And finally, above all, it belonged to the (Hel-
lenic) representation to consider knowledge, not as
a (charismatic) supplement to faith, but as of like
essence with it.

CHAPTER II.

GROUND COMMON TO CHRISTIANS AND ATTITUDE
TAKEN TOWARD JUDAJ^M.

Beliefs That the great majority of Christians had com-

Courion

to cHHs- ^QT^Qii beliefs is indicated by this fact, among others,
that gnosticism was gradually expelled from the
churches. Assurance of the knowledge of the true
God, consciousness of responsibility to him, faith in
Christ, hope in eternal life, exaltation above the pres-
ent world, — these were fundamental thoughts. If
we enter into details the following points may be
noted :

Gospel. 1. The Gospel, being founded upon a revelation,
is the- reliable message of the true God, the faithful
acceptance of which guarantees salvation ;

■t

u —

l*i

THE PREPARATION.

TDE

Icom-
lers,
the
true
ih in
ires-
If
be

ion,
itiil

2. Tlie real content of this n»-^3snage is spiritual
moncUieism, the announcemonc of tlie resurrection
and oternal life, as well as the proclamation of moral
purity and abstinence on the ground of repentance
toward God and of attested cleansing through bap-
tism in remembrance of the reward of good and
evil;

3. This message comes to us through Jesus Christ,
who " in these last days " is the commissioned Sa-
viour and stands in a peculiar relationship with God.
He is the l^edeemer (nutrrj/i) because he has brought
full knowledge of God and the gift of eternal life
{yxutri^ and ^ojrj, and especially y-'wrn^ ry;^ C<«?7s% the ex-
pression for the summa of the Gospel). He is also
the highest Prototype of every ethic?il virtue, the
Law-Giver £.id the Law of the perfect life, and
accordingly the Conqueror of demons and the Judge
of the world ;

4. Virtue is abstinence (a renunciation of the good
things of this world, in which the Christian is a
stranger, and whose destruction is awaited) and
brotherly love;

5. The message of the Christ is entrusted to
chosen men, to apostles, and more especially to one
apostle; their preaching is the preaching of the
Christ. Moreover, the Spirit of God reproduces his
gifts and graces in the "saints," and thus equips
special "prophets and teachers," who receive com
nuuiications for the edification of others ;

). Christian worship is tiie offering of spiritual

Content of
Message.

C'onios
throu^^h
Christ.

Virtue is
Abstinence
and Love.

Message
Entrusted
to Apos-
tles.

Worship.

' I '■

Basis of

lirother-

huod.

Christian-
ity and
Judaism.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

sacrifice without regard to statutory rites and cere-
monies; the holy offices and anointings, which are
connected with the Christian cult, have their virtue
in this, that spiritual blessings are therewith im-
parted ;

7. The barriers of sex, age, position and nation-
ality vanish entirely for Christians, as Christians;
the Christian brotherhood rests upon the Divine
election and is organized through the gifts of the
Spirit; in regard to the ground of election there
were divers views ;

8. Since Christianity is the only true religion and
is not a national religion, but belongs to all mankind
and pertains to our inmost life, it follows tuat it can
have no special alliance with the Jewish people, or
with their peculiar cult. The Jewish people of to-
day, at least, stand in no favored relationship with
the God whom Jesus has revealed; whether they
formerly did is doubtful; this, however, is certain,
that God has cast them off, and that the whole
Divine revelation, so far as there was any revela-
tion prior to Christ (the majority believed in one and
looked upon the Old Testament as Holy Scripture)
had as its end the calling of a " new nation " and
the spreading of the revelation of God through his
Son.

THE PREPARATION.

CHAPTER III.

THE COMMON FAITH AND THE BEGINNINGS OF SELF-
RECOGNITION IN THAT GENTILE CHRISTIANITY
WHICH WAS TO DEVELOP INTO CATHOLICISM.

Sources: The writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers,
inferences drawn from the Works of the Apologists of the 2d
century ; Ritschl, Entstehuug der alt-kath. Kirche, 2. Ed.
1857 ; Engelhardt, Das Christenthum Justins, 1878 ; Pflei-
derer, Das Urchristenthum, 1887.

1. The Christian Communities and the Church.
— Both tho outlines and the character of the founda-
tions of Christianity were fixed by those disciples of
thr faith, who were members of well-ordered Chris-
tian communities, and who accepted the Old Testa-
ment as an original Divine revelation and prized
the Gospel tradition as a free message for all, which
should be kept faithfully pure. Each little brother-
hood should, through the strength of its faith, the
certainty of its hope and the holy ordering of its life,
as well as through love and peace, be an image of
the holy Church of God, which is in heaveji and
whose members are scattered over the earth; it
should, also, in the purity of its daily life and in the
genuineness of its brotherly kindness be an ensample
to those who are "without," i.e. to the alien world.
In the recently discovered " Teaching of the Apos-
tles " we come upon the sphere of interest in those
communities who had not yet been influenced by
philosophical speculation. They awaited the return

FixiiiK of
Outlines

and Char-
iictcr of

t'hristiau-
ity.

ill I

1 ti;r

111

l.il

III

\ Mi

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

of the Christ, and urged a holy life ("Two Ways,"
dependence of its ethical rules upon the Jewish-Alex-
andrian gnomic and the Sermon on the Mount) and,
without outward union and a common polity, they
recognized themselves as belonging to the new and
yet original creation of God, to the Church, which
is the true Eve, the Bride of the heavenly Christ
(Tertull. Apolog. 30 : corpus siimus de conscientia
religionis et disciplinae imitate et spei foedere ;

II. Clem. 14 : r:iii(v)\irsrrjg t^^' Trvsu/iaruj^S", t^? ;:/)(> 7j?u<>u
xai rreXrj'^r^g kxTt<riii'^ri<i . . , ixxXrjffia Zuxra frcu/id i.(TTi X/)t-
(TtoTj ' }Jy£t yap tj ypa^rj • iTZotrj/rs:^ o fisv? tu'^ avO{)io7:<iv upaev
xai i^^rj).u • ru apffzv l<rT\v 6 Xpiaro^^ zv ft^y^Xu ij IxxXr^nui^.

2. T]ip. Foundations of the Faith, i.e. of the
the Faith. cQnfcssions respecting the One God and Jesus and
also the Holy Spirit, were laid by the " Christian-
oi^^Jesta- ized" Old Testament Scriptures, together with the
apocalypses and the ever increasing traditions cour
cerning the Christ (his ethical and eschatological dis-
courses, on the one side, and the proclamation of
the history of Jesus on the other). Prophecy was
proven by theology. Already at an early date short
Articles of articles of faith had been formulated (^ TrapddiKng, o

7:apad<n'h](; Xnyng^ 6 xa>u)v rrjg Tzapadoirsox?^ zd XTJpoy/ia, ij
didaxTJ^ ij Trc'fl-TJ?, 6 xaywv t^? r.laxs.ii}<i^ etc). The cliurch

at Rome had formulated before a. p. 150 the foUow-
P^jJ^i^® ing creed, which was the basis for all future creeds :

7:i(Treuuj eiV Oedv Tzaripa TzavruxpaTopa • xai er? Xptarov
WfjfrooVj uluv auTou tuv fxovayev^, tov xuptuv rjfxwv, tov yevvT]-

Founda-
tions of

THE PREPARATION.

IloyTio(> IhkaToo (Txaupio^thTa xa\ raifivra^ zrjj Tfiirrj r^iiipa
dvaffzdvTa ix vsx/uyy, nva^d-iza £;V t<<u9 tioixv^tiu^j xaf^rj /jlcvov iv
ds^tdt TO'') T.aT(u')<i^ uUtv k'/t^erac x/nvai ^(bvza^ xai vexfxn')'} • xai
erV TTvshjia aytny^ dyiay ixx?.rj(Tiav^ acfsniv u/iafKiwv, aapxu'i

fhd(TTa(Tcv. Everything that had been prophesied con- risp of

Court of

ceniing the Christ in the Old Testament, and that Appeal.
had been testified concerning him in the primitive
Gospel, was referred back to the concurrent teach-
ing and testimony of the twelve apostles {<^^<^<^x'^
xopiou (hd rwv i{i dr.onruXurJ) . The rise of this court ot
appeal, which was the beginning of the idea of
Catholic tradition, is historically obscure and rests
upon an « priori. Of like authority,^ though not
identified with it, is Paul with his Epistles, which
were, moreover, diligently read.
3. The Principal Elements of Christianity were Main Eie-

iii'Mits in

faith in God, the o^^-^Jrvjc and in his Son, on the chiistiau-
ground of the fulfilment of prophecy and of the apos-
tolic attested teaching of the Lord, the discipline in
accordance with the standard laid down by the Mas-
ter, baptism culminating in a common sacrificial
prayer, the communion meal, and the certain hope
of the near coming of Christ's glorious kingdom.
The confessions of faith were very manifold ; there
was not as yet any definite doctrine of faith ; imagi-
nation, speculation and the exclusively spiritual
interpretation of the Old Testament had the widest
range; for man must not quench the Spirit. In the
exercise of prayer the congregations expressed that

^'U

i I

I .1

li,i

•i'

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DO(iMA.

Concrp-

tions of

Salvation.

Chiliasni.

which they possessed in God and in Christ ; and the
duty of sacrificing this world for the hoped-for future
appeared as the practical side of faith itself. The
varying conceptions of salvation grouped themselves
about two centres, which were only loosely con-
nected ; the one was fixed chiefly by the disposition
and the imagination, the other by the intellect. On
the one side, accordingly, salvation was believed to
consist in the approaching glorious kingdom of
Clirist, which should bring joy upon the earth to the
righteous (this realistic Jewish conception was de-
rived directly from the apocalypses: Chiliasm, and
hence the interest in the resurrection of the physical
body). On the other side, salvation was held to con-
^of ood*^^ sist in a definite and full knowledge of God (and the
world), as against the errors of heathenism; and this
knowledge disclosed to faith (-rVrrr^) and hope the
gift of life and all imaginable blessings (less em-
phasis was accoidingly placed on the resurrection of
the physical body). Of these blessings the brother-
hood was already in possession of the forgiveness of
sin and of righteousness, in so far as theirs was a
brotherhood of saints. But these two blessings ap-
peared to be endangered as to their worth by empha-
sizing the moral point of view, in accordance with
which eternal life is looked upon, for the most part,
as the wages and the reward of a perfect moral life
lived in one's own strength. It is true that the
thought was still present, that sinlessness rests upon
a new moral creation (the new birth) which is real-

•\Ioral
View.

-i

THE PRETARATION.

•47

ap-
|pha-

dth
)art,

life

the

[•eal-

ized in baptism ; but it was ever in danger of being

crowded out by the other thouglit, that there are no

blessings in salvation save revealed knowledge and

the eternal life, but rather only a catalogue jf duties,

in which the Gospel is set fv^rth as the Xeiv Lear (as

cetic holiness and love) . The " Christianizing " of tlio ooappi as

New Law.

Old Testament served to promote this Greek concep-
tion. The idea, it is true, was alreadj' present that
the Gospel, in so far as it is law (•'"'/'"^), includes the

gift of salvation {•-■'''.'""^ <'yz>) X'-^yir) dWiyAr^^; — ><)//.os' ''7s'

iXtuHtpia^ — Christ himself is the Law) ; but this rep-
resentation vv'.is always doubtful and was gradually
abandoned. The setting forth of tlic Gospel under
the conceptions: ^vw'rrs' (God and world), Ir^ayyElia
(eternal life), '-'Oiw^ (moral duty), appeared as plain as
it was exhaustive, and in every relation the -((rzi-i was
held to be confirmed, since it exhibits itself in knowl-
edge as well as in hope and in obedience; but in
reality it is only ru<7rt<5 rr;? xXrj<Tzu)^^ a preparation, be-
cause the blessings of salvation (the i^afnXeia Toh fhob
as well as the d(p^'^ap(Tia) are conferred in the future.

In this hope of the future, salvation is set forth
as realizing itself in a brotherhood, while in the
moral-gnostic view it is considered as an individ-
ual possession, and reward and punislunent are
represented as co-ordinated with it, which results in
emptying the conception of God of its content. The
moral view of sin, forgiveness and righteousness in
Clement, Barnabas and Polycarp is overlaid by Pau-
line phrases and formulas ; but the uncertainty with

Transition
to Moral-
ism.

.1* : :i

i.:j

iri

1 1

• i
I

'ii;:

i
111

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Iiitluonce
of Old

which these are quoted indicates that they were not
really understood. In Hermas and II. Clement the
ground of the forgiveness of sin is the spontaneous
energizing ncrdxna. The wide-spread idea that griev-
ous sins could not be forgiven those who had been
baptized, but that light sins might be condoned,
indicates tlie complete transition to a barren, theo-
retical moralisni, which was, however, still overlaid
by an apocalyptic enthusiasm.
4. The Old Ttstainent as the Source of the Knoivl-
Testament, g^/^g ^^ Fciith Contributed, (1) to the development of
the monotheistic cosmology, (•?) to the setting forth of
the proofs of prophecy and of the anticjuity of Chris-
tianity ("older than the world"), {'<)) to the establish-
fng of all tlio ecclesiastical ideas, rights and cere-
monies, which were considered necessary, (4) to the
deepening of the life of faith (Psalms and prophetical
fragments), (e'l) to the refuting of Judaism as a
nation, i.e. to the proving that this people had been
cast off by God, and that they had either never bad
any covenant with him (Barn:: has), or had had a
co'^enant of wrath, or had forfeited their covenant :
that they had never understood the Old Testameut and
were therefore now deprived of it, if, indeed, they
had ever been in possession of it (ths attitude of the
Church as a whole toward the Jewisli people and
their history appears to have been originally as in.-
definite as the attitude of the gnostics toward the
Old Testament;). Attempts to correct the Old Testa-
ment and to give it j Christian sense were not want-

i!i

THE PREPARATION.

Ood la
CiTiitor,

ing; in the formation of tho Now Testament there
were rudimentary efforts toward this end.

5. Faith Kuowledge was above all a knowledge
of God as the only supernatural, spiritual and al- \'J|.jyy,,',"','.'
mighty Being: God is the Creator and Ruler of
the world and is therefore the Lord. But inas-
much as ho created the world as a beautiful, well-
ordered whole (monotheistic theory of nature) for
tho sake of man, he is at the same time the God
of goodness and of redemption {''-:'\^ (>o)Trj/>)^ and
only through the knowledge of the identity of the
Creator and Redeemer God does faith in God as
the Father reach its perfection. Redemption, how-
ever, was necessary, because mankind and the world
in the very beginning fell under the dominion of
demons. A general and acceptable theory in re-
gaxd to the origin of this dominion did by no means
exist; but the conviction was fixed and universal,
that the present condition and course of the world is
not of God, but of the devil. Still, faith in the al-
mighty Creator, and hope in the restoration of tho
c{U'th did not allow theoretical dualism to make any
lieadw\ay and practical dualism dominated. Tho
world is good and belongs to God, but the present
course of it is of the devil. Thus men's thoughts os-
cillated between the conception of the world as a
beautiful and orderly whole, and the impression of
the present evil course of things, of the baseness
of the sensuous and of the dominion of demons in
the world.

Dominion

of D»"MUDS.

rraotical
Duaii.sm.

■L

|| '||M'

OUTLINES OF TIIK IIISTOIfY OF DO(iMA.

!l!

' -I
I' \

18,: I
il

.Tori IK Is
I. (Ill I ami

Kaviciir
Uko (ioil,

Titles

01 von to

Josus.

Son of
God.

G. Faith in Jesus (lirisi as the Redcrmer was
closely identified with faith in (lod as the Kodeenier.
Jesus is x>)f>ti><s and Tonrj/i like Ood, and the same
words were often used without indicatinj^ whether
the reference was to him or to God; for in the Ke-
voaler and Mediator of salvation (Jesus), the Author
(God) is represented (the ])uriiose of salvation and
the revelation of it coincide); prayer, however, was
made to God through Christ. This title given to Jesus
(" Christ ") became indeed a mere name, since there
was no real knowledge of the meaning of " Messiah."
Therefore the Gentile Christians were obliged
through other moans to find expressions for the dig-
nity of Jesus ; but they possessed in the full eschato-
logical traditions valuable reminiscences of the orig-
inal apprehension of the Person of Josus. In the
confession that God has chosen and specially pre-
pared Jesus, that ho is the "Angel" and "Servant"
of God, and that ho shall judge mankind, and simi-
lar expressions, other utterances were made concern-
ing Jesus, which sprang from the fundamental idea
that he was the "Christ" calliMl of God and en-
trusted with an office. In addition there was a
traditional, though not common, reference to him as
"The Teacher."

The title " Son of God " (not " Son of Man ") was
traditional, and was maintained without any waver-
ing. Out of this grew directly the conception that
Jesus belongs to the sphere of God and that one
must think of him " ^s- -£/>[ if-ob " (II. Clem. 1). In

THE I'KKI'AKATION.

this plirnsiiif? of it the indirect thcoloqia Chvisfi, in
7r(jar(l /o icliich fhcre tras no ivarcrinfj, found ox-
proswion in classical forms. It is necessary t(» think
of Jesus as one thinks of God, (1) because he is the
God-exalted Lord and Judge, {'I) because he brought
true knowledge and life and has delivered mankind
from the dominion of demons, from error and sin, or
will deliver them. Therefore he is n<o-rj/>, x''y'J"s', >^s'k
y^/jicov, dei Jilius ac dciis, ih>nii)in8 ac dens, but not 'l
ff:<>,\ He is "our Hoi)e," ''our Faith," the High-
Priest of our prayers, and "our Life."

Starting from this basis there were divers theoi'ies ThoorioH -^f
in regard to the Person of Jesus, which however all J*?sus-
bore a certain analogy to the niiive and the philo-
sophical Greek " theologies", but there wore no uni-
versally accepted " doctrines''. We may distinguish
here two princi})al types: Jesus was looked ujjon as
the man whom God had chosen and in whom the
Spirit of God (the Godhead itself) dwelt; he was,
in accordance with his own testimony, adopted by
God and clothed wn"th authority {Adoption Chris-
totof/f/) ; or Jesus was looked upon as a heaveidy
spiritual Being (the highest heavenly spiritual
Being next to God), who became incarnate and
after the completion of his work upon the earth
returned to the heavens {Pnevmatic Christolof/y ; Twociuis
the transition here to the Logos Christologij was
easy). These two different C^hristologies (the D(m-
fied mari and the Divine Being appearing in the
f(jrm of a man) were however brought closely to-

tologies.

fr'A

■I

,!'!

;

1 1

OUTLINES OF THE IIISTOKY OF DOUMA.

gothor HO Hoon as tli(> i!ni)lanto(l Spirit of Ood in
the niiin Jesus was lookod upon as tho pro-oxistont
Son of (iod (Hernias), and so soon as tho titlo "Son
of 0)d," as ai)pli(3d to that spiritual Being, was
derived from his (miraculous) incarnation — both,
however, were maintained. Notwithstanding these
transition forms the two Christologies may he clearly
distinguished : In the one case the election (emphasis
npon the miraculous occurrence at the baptism) and
the exaltation to God are characteristic ; in the other,

Niiivt. Do- a naive docetism ; for as yet there was no two-
nature theory (Jesus' divinity was looked upon as
a gift, or else his human form as a temporary taber-
nacle). Tho declaration: Jesus was a mere man
{ir'nXu's avOfno-i)^) was undoubtedly from the beginning
and always highly objectionable; likewise was the
denial of the " l'-' ^'//'X£'" ; but the theories which iden-

Niiivft Mo- titled tho Person of Jesus with the Godhead (naive

dill ism. ^

modalism) were not cast aside with the same assur-
ance. A formal theonj of the identity of God and
Jesus does not seem to have been wide-spread in the
Church at large. The acceptance of the existence at
least of one heavenly, eternal, spiritual Being close
to God was demanded outright by the Old Testa-
ment Scriptures, as men understood them, so that all
were constrained to recognize this^ whether or not
they had any basis for reconciling their Christology
with that heavenly Being.
Pneumatic Tho pnoumatic Christology was always found
ogy. wherever men gave themselves to the study of the

THE rUKPAHATloK.

was

found
^f the

Old TcHtamont and whorovor faitli in C'hrist hr tho
c'oniplcto revelation of God was tlic forcmoHt tliou{^ht,
i.e. it is found in <tll the important and iMlucated
Christian writers (not in Hernias, but in Clenu»nt,
Harnahas, Ignatius, vie. ). Because this (Mn-istol-
ogy seemed to he directly demtinded by the Old Tes-
tament as then exjMjunded, l)ecau8o it alone united
and reconciled creation and re<lemption, because it
furnished the proof that the world and religion have
the same Divine Source, because the most est('<'med
primitive Scriptures champiimed it, and, hnally, be-
cause it gave room for the introduction of the Logos-
speculation, it was the Cliristology of the future.
The adoption Christology, however, proved itself
insufficient over against the consideration of the re-
lation of religion to tho cosmos, to humanity and
its history, as well as over against the Old Testa-
ment. And the advocates of the pneumatic C*hris-
tology did not set it forth as a doubtful theologu-
menon; their expositions of it (Clement, Ignatius,
Barnabas, Justin), on the contrary, indicate that
they could not conceive of a Christianitj^ without
faith m the divine spiritual Being, Christ. On the
other hand, in the liturgical fragments and prayers
that have come down to us, we find little reference
to the pre-existence ; it sufficed that Jesus is now
the xufitd^ to whom prayer may be addressed.

The representations of the work of Christ (Christ
as teacher: Giving of knowledge, proclaiming of
the new law; Christ as Saviour: Giving of life, con

A(Ioi)ti()n
Cliristul-

Christ as
Teacher
uuil Sav-
iour.

'.; I

<*< ii'

i. I'

I r

Sj . I.

fu lin-

Exap
atfi
portanoe
(jiven to
Facts.

OUTLINES OF THE HISiORY OF DOCiMA,

qiiering of demons, forgiving of past sins in the time
of error) were connected by some (following cv- ^nt
tradition, using the Pauline Epistles) with his death
and resurrection, by others they were affirmed with-
out direct reference to these facts. Independent re-
flections upon +he close union of the saving work of
Clirist with the facts set forth in his preaching are
nowhere found; and yet the representation of the
free endurance of suffering, of the cross, and of the
blood of Christ, was accepted in many communities
PS a holy mysterium, in which the deepest wisdom
and power of the Gospel is concealed (Ignatius),
although the death on tae cross and the forgiveness
of sin were by no means everywhere (as in Clement,
Polycarp and Barnabas) Inseparably joined together
(Hermas knows nothing whatever about such a
union). The peculiarity and the individuality of the
work of the historical Christ were moreover menaced
I y the idea that Christ had been the revealer of God
in the Old Testament.

All the facts pertaining to the history of Jesus,
tlie real and the imagined, received an exaggerated
significance when reiterated in the work of instruc-
tion and when attacked bv heretics. To the mirac-
n.lous birth, death, resurrection, exaltation and return,
v/as added definitely now the ascension on the 40th
day and, less definitely, the descent into hell, while
the history of the baptism was more and more ig-
nored. The reality of these occurrences was strongly
emphasized ; but they had not yet become " dogmas" ;

»' ..

THE i REPARATION.

IIC-

ac-
lirn,
0th
lile

ig-

for thty were neither insepariibly connectetl with th«
idea of salvation, nor were they definitely outlined,
nor was ilm fcuitasie restricted in its artistic exuber-
ance.

7. That the Worship of God should be a pure, worship,
spiritual exercise, without ceremonies, was taken for
granted. Every divine service was looked upon as
a spiritual offering (of thanks) accompanied with
fasting and deeds of compassionate love. The
Lord's Supper (eucharist) was held to be an offering ^uuv^t.
in the strictest sense of the word, and e^'orything
which was associated with it {e.(j. assistance of
tlie poor) became imbued with the idea of sacrifice.
Thenceforward the institutional idea found a wide
range, notwithstanding the essential spirituality of
w^orshii). Starting with the idea of the symbolical^
" mysteries " which were so necessary to the Greeks
were soon established. Baptism in the name of the Baptism.
Father, Son and Spirit w^as esteemed as the mystery
through which the sins of blindness are wholly set
aside, and which only thenceforward, however,
irni)0ses obligations (mortal sins, committed after
baptism, were considered unpardonable, and yet
})ardoning power was reserved for G(jd who here
and there exercises it upon the earth through in-
spired men. The idea and practice of a "sec-
ond repentance" were born through the stress of
necessity, became however wide-spread, and were
then established by the prophetical book of Hernias).
Baptism was called 'riffxiyii and (fioTiaiw^ (no infant

MWMMJWPMpI

III '1 !

I ' '"\

,1 ■■■!

H 9 fi i!

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

I);il)tism); tlio uniting of baptism with the gift of
th(j Holy Spirit became somewhat uncertain. The
LorcVs Supper was viewed as (pd[)imxuv dfhvmnia^i^ as
a mysterious communication of gnosis and of life
(see the eucharistic prayer in the Didache; tiie for-
giveness of sins is not there mentioned) ; it was at
once a communion meal and a sacrificial meal.
Realism Realism and symbolism were here mingled together,
boiisiii. j^^^^ jjj^ were the ideas of grace and of sacrificial
offering. Hellenic conceptions early crowded in here
(see Ignatius, Justin, Apol. I., the close).

Church organization^ as such, exercised no in-
fluence upon the form of the statement of belief until
about the year 150. And yet the high esteem in
which the apostles, prophets and teachers were held
laid the foundation for future developments; besides,
Ignatius had already declared that the attitude
toward the bishop determined the attitude toward
God and toward Christ, and other teachers insisted
that one must follow the "ancients", the disciples
of the apostles, in all things.

Clinrch Or-
guuizutiuu.

Catholic
Systt'in of

Doctrine
iu Embryo.

This survey indicates that tae decisive premises
for the evolution of the Catholic system of doctrine
were already in existence before the middle of the 2d
century and before the heated contest with gnosti-
cism.

The records which have come down to us from
the 1st century of the Gentile Church are of a very

THE PREPARATION.

111 SOS

trine
e 2d
osti-

It'rom
very

Didaohe.

Barnabas-
Epistle.

varied character from the point of view of the his-
tory of dogma. In the Didache we have a catechism
for the Christian life, dependent upon a Jewish-
Greek catechism, and bringing out in the prayers
and ecclesiastical discipline that which is specifically
Christian. The Bainabas-Epistle, probably of Al-
exandrian origin, teaches the correct (Christian)
interpretation of the Old Testament, casts aside
verbal interpretation and Judaism as of. the devil,
and follows Paul essentiall}'' as regards Christology.
The same Christology is represented in the Roman
1. Clement-Epistle, which also contains Pauline
reminiscences (in regard to atonement and justifi-
cation), but these are conceived from the moral
standpoint. It is classically represented in Hennas
Pastor and in the II. Clement-Epistle, where the
eschatological element is also very prominent. The
Clu'istology of the former is the adoption; the
author of the 11. Clem. Epist. has no consistent
Christolojy, but follows various motives. The the-
ology of Ignatius is the most advanced, in so far as
he, in the contest with the gnostics, made the facts
of salvation prominent and drew his ow^n gnosis
from the history of Christ rather than from the Old
Testament. He sought to make Jesus Christ, xfira
7:viT)fia and xaTd ffdpxa^ the centre of Christianity. The
Epistle of Polycarp is characteristic on account of its ^V'y^ll'^'J^P
dependence upon earlier Christian writings (Paul's
Epistles, I. Peter, I. John), and on account of its
conservative attitude toward the most valuable tra

I. Cltv
meut.

Hennas

I'astor,

n. fle-

iiieut.

)^1

w -i

!!l|

''ii

i:'

!i ■' !■

it I

j! ,; ;

•' ill'

'it!

-i;i

': ^;t

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Preedicatio ditions. Tho ZVT^(//r'rt//o /V//"/ maiks tlie transition

Petri.

from the primitive Christian literary activity to tho
apologetic writers (Christ as v'v^'^? and /'Y"^')-

CHAPTER IV.

THE ATTEMPT OF THE GNOSTICS TO CONSTRUCT AN
APOSTOLIC DOCTRINE OF FAITH AND TO PRO-
DUCE A CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY ; OR, THE ACUTE
SECULARIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY.

Sources : The writings of Justin and the early Catholic
Fathers, together with Ei)iphanius and Theodoret. Frag-
ments collected by Hilgenfeld, Ketzergesch, 1884. Descrip-
tions by Neandei-, Gnostisclie System, 1818, Baur, Gnosis,
1835, Lipsius, Gnosticismus, 1800, Moeller, Kosmologie in
der griech. Kirche, 1860; ride also Renan, Hist. des. Orig.
du Christianisme", T. V.-VII.

Gnosti-
cism.

Aims at a

World -He-

ligion.

1 . Gnosticis:j is a manifestation of the great syn-
cretic movement of the 2d and 3d centuries, which
was occasioned by the interchange of national relig-
ions, by the contact of Orient and Occident, and by
the influence of Greek philosophy upon religion in
general. It aimed at the winning of a irovld-relig-
io7i, in which men should be rated, not on the basis
of citizenship, but according to the standard of their
intellectual and moral aptitude. The Gospel was rec-
ognized as a world-religion only in so far as it could
be severed from the Old Testament religion and the
Old Testament, and be moulded by the religious
philosophy of the Greeks and grafted upon the
existing cultus-wisdom and practice of occult mys-

li:;

i>y

)asia

their

rec-

lonld

the
lions

the

THE PUKPARATION.

.Jt'w ish
ila.

C'liristian

(inosis.

teries. The moans Ity which this artificial iiiiioii
was to he hroiiglit about was the allegorical method '^^/^.^[ll^'ip'
as used long since by the Greek religious philoso
pliers. The possibility of the rise of a Christian
gnosticism ki}^ in this, that the Christian commu-
nities had everywhere fallen heir to the heritage of
the Jewish propaganda, where there vris alrtnidy an
exuberant tendenc}' to spiritualize the C)ld Testament
religion, and where the intellectual interesi, in relig-
ion had long been unbridled. Besides, the Gospel of
Christ, and especlall}" Christ himself, had made such
an overwhelming impression that men were pos-
sessed bj the strongest impulse to subordinate their
highest conceptions to him, whence, as so often, the
"victus victori legem daf'' attained its right. Fi-
nally the Christian preaching from the beginning
promised a gnosis of the wisdom of God, espe
cially that of Paul an antinomian gnosis, and the
churches in the empire conceived the Christian
wisdom as /.oyuii hiTinia^ in accordance with their
Greek conceptions; they combined the mysterious
with a marvellous openness, the spiritual with the
most significant rites, and sought in this waj-, jiy^tt.
through their organization and through their " phil-
osophical life", to realize that ideal for which tlie
Hellenic religious spirit was then striving, — namely,
a communion, or fellowship, which, upon the basis
of a Divine revelation, comes into the possession of
the highest knowledge and therefore realizes the
holiest life, and which communicates this knowledge,

rioua

Kites.

'•r

! '!
I

I I

I i I!

Acute

Staj^f of
Process.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

)t tl

tori(

iroiigh nitional discussion, but tlirougb m}''^-
efficacious consecrations and revealed doc-

Attempt to

Fuso
Cluistian-

ity aiul
Helleuism.

Christian-
ity Be-
comes Oc-
cult Tlieos-
ophy.

lOUS

trines,

2. We are now prepared to assert, that in gnos-
ticism the acute stage of a process was reached,
which began early in the Church and which under-
went a slow and distinct evolution under the Catho-
lic system. The gnostics were the theologians of
the 1st century; they were the first to transform
Christianity into a system of doctrines (dogmas);
they were the first to treat tradition and the primitive
Christian Scriptures systematically ; they undertook
to set forth Christianity as the absolute religion, and
they therefcjre placed it in opposition to the other re-
ligions, to that of the Old Testament as well (not alone
to Judaism) ; but the absolute religion, which they
coupled with Christ, was to them essentially identical
with the results of the philosophy of religion, for which
they had now found the basis in a revelation : They
were accordingly a class of Christians who essayed
through a sharp onset to conquer Christianity for
Hellenic culture, and Hellenic culture for Christian-
ity, and they thereby abandoned the Old Testament
in order to fitly close up the breach between the two
opposing forces. Christianity became an occult the-
osophy (revealed metaphysics and apparition philos-
ophy, permeated witl: the Platonic spirit and with
Pauline ideas, constructed out of the material of
an old cultus-wisdom which was acquired through
mysteries and the illumined understanding, defined

THE PREPARATION.

by a keen and, in part, true criticism of the Old
Testament religion and the scant faith of the Church.
Consequently one is obliged to verify in the promi-
nent gnostic schools the Semitic cosmological prin-
ciples, the Hellenic philosophical ideas and the
knowledge of the redemption of the world througli
Christ. And one must also take account of these
three factors: The speculative philosophical, the
cultish-mystical and the dualistic -ascetic. The con-
junction of these elements, the entire transformation
of every ethical problem into a cosmological prob-
lem and, finally, the view that human history is
but a continuation of natural history, especially that
redemption is but the last act in the drama which
had its origin in the Godhead itself and its develop-
ment in the world — all these are not peculiar to
gnosticism, but a stage in the general development
which was in manj- ways related to Philonism and
which anticipated Neo-Platonism and Catholicism.
Out of the crass mythology of an Oriental religion,
by the transformation of the concrete forms into
speculative and ethical ideas, such as " Abyss", " Si-
lence", "Logos", "Wisdom", "Life" (the Semitic
names were often retained), tliere was formed a my-
tliology of notions in which the juxtaposition and the
number of these ideas were determined by the pro-
pounding of a scheme. Thus was produced a philo-
sophical, dramatico-poetic representation similar to
the Platonic, but far more complicated and therefore
more fantastical, in which those mighty powers, the

Three
Factors.

Philosoph-
ic Draniat-
ico-Poetic
Sj'Sttiin.

(1 '

' t

*~h\

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

! .'

f I il

4-. !

flnspol

History

AllfKOfi-

cal.

Absti-
iicnoi! thi

spiritual and the good, appeared to have been brought
into an unholy alliance with the material and the
base, from which however finally the spiritual, as-
sisted by kindred pov^ors wl, 'ch are too exalted ever
U be abased, ',.i if(oi ;i]l it ad r^id free. Tnc good
and the heavenly w'lici. i !' /raded to the material
is the human spirit; and the . ; llime Power which
sets it free is the Christ. The Gospel history is not
the history of Christ, but a collection of allegorical
representations of the groat Divine world-history.
Christ has in truth no history; h;s appearance in
this world of confusion and delusion is his own act
and the enlightenment of the Spirit, as regards itself,
is the effect of this act. This illumination itself is
life, but it is dependent upon asceticism and upon a
surrender to the mysteries ordained b}^ Christ, in
which one conies into communion with a praesens
nunien, and which in a mysterious way gradually free
the spirit from the world of sense. This spiritualiz-
ing process should also be actively cultivated. Absti-
WiUcii-cry. uQuce is therefore the watch-cry. Christianity is
accordingly a speculative philosophy which redeems
the si)irit {y^Afrc; (r<oTr^f)ta<:)^ inasmuch as it enlight-
ens and consecrates it and directs it unto the true
way of life. The gnosis is free from the rational-
istic interest of the stoa. The powers which give
vigor and life to the spirit rule in the supersensible
world. The only guide to this world is a iidf^rjtrif;
(not exact philosophy) resting upon a revelation and
allied with iio<szaYa>yia. The fundamental principles

THE PrtEPARATION.

free
laliz-

bsti-

-y is
eems
ight-

glVG

sible

and
iples

aro accordingly liio following: M) The supersensi-
ble indefinite and eternal nature of the divine pri-
mordial Being, ("^) the eA'il (not real) matter opposed
to the d: v^ino iJeing, {']) the plenitude of the divine
powers (eons) which, viewed partly as powers, partly
as real ideas, partly as relatively independent beings,
represent in stages the development and revelation
of the Divinity, but which at the same time are
intended to make possible the transition from the
higher to the lower, (1) the cosmos as a mixture of
matter with sparks of the divine Being, and whici:
originated from the descent of the latter into the
former, i.e. from a reprehensible undertaking of a
subordinate spirit, merely through the Divine suf-
ferance, (5) the freeing of the spiritual elements from
their union with matter, or the separation of the
good from the sensuous world through the Christ-
Spirit, which is active in holy consecrations, knowl-
edge and asceticism — thus arises the complete gnos-
tic, the independent world-free spirit, who lives in
God and prepares himself for eternity. The rest of
mankind arc earth-born (liylikers). Yet leading
teachers (School of Valentinus) distinguish also be-
tween hylikers and psychikers ; the latter were the
doers of the lavr, who lived by law and faith, for
whom the common faith is good enough, that is,
necessary. The centre of gravity of the gnostic
S3',qtem did not r3st in its changing details, which
iwe so imperfectly known to us, but in its aim and
in its postulates.

Funda-
mental
Principled.

Ilylik.'fs
(umI Psy-
chikers.

i .

i I

r w

:\ I!

riinHos of

(InoHti-

ciHUi.

^^um

nasi lid-
inns. Val-
ontiniaus.

Tlx' First

'I'll'Mllo-

Kiaiis.

OUTLINES OK TIIK HISTORY OK IXXiMA.

;j. The phases of gnosticism were }is variegated as
possible (brotherhoods, ascetic orders, cultus of mys-
teries, secret schools, free devotional associations,
performances by Christian swindlers and betrayed
betrayers, attempts to establish new religions after
the pattern and under the influence of the Christian
religion). Accordingly the relation of gnosticism
to that which was common to all Christians and to
the individual Christian communities was exceed-
ingly varied. On the one hand, gnosticism pene-
trated to the very heart of those Christian churches
in which docetic and dualistic-ascetic influences
were largely at work and where there was a strong
tendency to vary the original form of the kerygma;
on the other hand, there were gnostic communities
that remained apart and indeed abhorred all alliances
with others. For the history of dogma the right
wing of gnosticism and the real stem, the great
gnostic school sects (Basilidians, Valentinians) come
especially under consideration. The latter wished
to establish a higher order of Christians above the
common psychikers, who were barely endured. The
contest was mainly with these and they were the
theologians from whom later generations learned
and were the first to write elementary works on
dogmatics, ethics, and scientific and exegetical trea-
tises; in short, they laid the foundations of Chris-
tian theological literature and began the elaboration
of Christian tradition. The expulsion of these gnos-
tics and of the right wing (Encratites, "Docetee,"

THE PREPARATION.

Tutian) could bo accomplished only slowly and it
was a result of tho consolidating of the Christiail
communities into the Catholic Church which was
culled forth by this gnostic movement.

Tho rise of gnosticism is fully explained from tho
general conditions under which Christian preaching
liuurishod on Roman soil and from its own attraction
as a sure announcement of knowledge, life and dis-
cipline, attributed directly to a Divine Person who
had appeared upon the earth. The Church fathers
hold distracted Judnism, together with tho demons,
responsible for its rise; later they attribute it to tho
Samaritan messiah, Simon, then to tho Greek i)hi-
losophors, and finally to those who show themselves
disobedient to ecclesiastical discipline. In all this
there was a. particula veri as may be easily shown;
the syncretism which led to this Christian gnos-
ticism undoubtedly had one of its principal centres
in Samai'itan-Syrian territory and the other in Alex-
andria ; but it must not be overlooked that the con-
ditions were everywhere present in the empire for a
spontaneous development. On that account it is im-
possible to write a history of tho development of
gnosticism, and it would be so, even if wo knew
more than wo do about the particular systems. We
can distinguish only between Jewish-Christian and
Gentile- Christian gnostics, and can group the latter
only according to their greater or less departure from
the common Christian faith as exemplified in their
varying attitude toward the Old Testament and tho

Encratitw,

l)«K't't(l',

Tatlati.

Exyilnna-
tiuiisof

of (JnoHtl-
cisiii.

Simon Ma-
guy.

Samaria
and Alex-
andria.

■Jcwish-
Christian
and (J«ii-
til(>-Chri!+-
tian Gnos-
tics.

«i

\ n

u '

i,u

I liill

i i:!:

<r i

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

DilToronce
hctwcon
(liidstic

Ciiristian-

ity fuul

Common

Faith.

(lomiiirgo, and thon sock out of this to form from an
unl)ias(Ml reading of the Christian writings an i(l<»a
of "gnostic." That the cntin? niany-sich'd movo-
Mcik-nism. mont, in wliicli Hellenism, with all its good and had
cjualitics, songhi to adaj)t the (lospel, should gradu-
ally hecomo a Christian, or, rather, an ecclesiastical
movement, lay in the nature of the case. But it is
not therefore possihle to group the systems in the
2d century chronologically according to a Christian
standard, since attempts like that of Carpocrates he-
long to the earlier and not to the lat(?r times.

4. Although tho difTerenceshetween gnostic Chris-
tianity and the common ecclesiastical faith, as well
as the later ecclesiastical theology, appear in part
fleeting, in so far as in the latter also tho question
of knowledge was especially emphasized and the
Gospel was heing transformed into a system of com-
plete knowledge in order to subdue the world, and in
so far as tho Trt'/rrr^ was made subordinate to the
Yv(I>tTt<s and Greek philosophy was more and more
employed, and in so far as eschatology was restricted,
docetic views allowed free play and a rigid ascetism
prized; yet it is true, (1) that at the time when
gnosticism was most flourishing all these were found
in the Church at large only in germinal, or frag-
mentary form, ('2) that the Church at large held fast
to the settled facts contained in the baptismal con-
fession and to the eschatological expectations, retain-
ing its belief also in tho Creator as tho Supreme
God, in the oneness of Jesus (Jlirist and in tho Old

T!IK I'HKPAIJATION.

Kion.

Tc'stainont, llms reject inj; <lualisni, (:!) that tho
Chiiivh iiuiintainecl tho unity aiul tho parity of Im-
niaii kind mikI thon'foro tho simplicity and univcM-sal
tendency of tho C'ln'istian salvation, and (I) that it
opposed every .'ittenipt to intnuhico new, Oriental
inyth()lo«^i(>s, guided in this hy tho early Christian
consciousness and a certain iud(»pen(lont judgment.
However, the Church in its contest with gnosticism
learned a great deal from it. Tho princii)al points iTincipai

I'liinls im-

which were under discussion may ho hri(>flv sum- 'I'-r i>iwus-
marized as follows (tho word "positive" appended to
a gnostic jn'oposition indicates that the doctrine had
a positive intiuenco in tlu> di velopment of tho
Church view and doctrine) : (1) Christianity, which
is tho only true and. absolute religion, contains a re-
vealed system of doctrine (pos.), (2) the Rcvealer is
Christ (pos.), but Christ alonc^ and Christ, only so
far as ho was made manifest (no O. T. Christ).
This manifestation is itself tho redemption, — tho
teaching is tho proclamation of this and of tl'c nec-
essary presuppositions (pos.), (3) the Christian teach-
ing is to bo dedue. 1 from the apostolic tradition
critically treated ; the same is found in tho apostolic
writings and in an esoteric doctrine transmitted
by the apostles (pos.); as an open doctrine it is con-
densed in the regula Jidei (pos.), as an esoteric doc-
trine it is transmitted by appointed teachers, (4) the
primitive revelation (aiK)stolic Scriptures), even be-
cause it is such, must be exixnuided by means of tho
allegory, in order to draw out its dee])er meaning

•1
I'

/ I

^i;; '

! 'I

, !'l

Disparit}'

<i<Ml and
Creator.

Distin-
piiishinp

God from
God of
O. T.

Eternity of
Matter.

V.'orld
Product of
Intcrined'-
ntt' or Evil

Jk'ing.

Evil Inht-r-

(>iit ill
Matter and
a IMiysieal

Eons.

riirist Re-

vealei- )f

Unktuwii

God.

Jesus,

Heavenly

Eon.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

(pos.), (5) as to tho separate portions of the ?'egula
as the gnostics understood them, the following are
to be especially noted :

(a) The disparity between the supreme God and
tho Creator of the world, and the consequent contrast
of redemption and creation, ?'.e., the separation of
the mediator of revelation and the mediator of crea-
tion,

(b) the distinguishing of the Supreme God from
tho Go'l of the Old Testament, and the consequent
rejection of the O. T. ; i.e. the declaration that the
O. T. does not contain a revelation of the Supreme
God, unless it be in certain parts,

yc) the doctrine of the absoluteness and eternity of
matter,

(d) the affirmation that the present world came
into existence through a fall into sin, i.e. through
an undertaking antagonistic to God, and that it is
therefore the product of an evil, or intermediate
being,

(e) the doctrine that evil is inherent in matter and
is a physical agency,

(^) the acceptance of eons, i.e. of real powers and
heavenly per.stmy, in whom the absoluteness of the
Divinity unfouls itself,

(g) the affirmation that Christ proclaimed a hith-
erto unknowTi Divinity,

(h) the doctrine that in Jesus Christ, the heavenly
Eon — the gnostics rightly saw redemption i - his
Person, but they reduced his Person to a mere self-

THE PREPAFtATION.

Gt)

and

rs and
)f the

hith-

ivenly
II . bis
re self-

Valf'ntiu-

iatis.

Satornil.

existent Being — Christ and the human manifestation
of him are to be clearly distinguished and to each
nature a " cUstincte atjere " was to be given (not
docetism, but the two-natu v- doctrine is character-
istic). Accordingly some, as Basilides, recogni/.ed BaKiiides.
no real union whatever between Christ luid the man
Jesus, whom they otherwise accepted as a real man.
Others, as a portion of the Valentinians — their Chris-
tology was exceedingly complicated and varied —
taught that the body of Jesus was a heavenly-psychi-
cal form, and that it only apparently came forth
from the womb of Mary. Others finally, like Sator-
nil, explained that the entire visible manifestation of
Christ was only a phantasma, and hence they ques-
tioned the reality of his birth,

(i) the transformation of the ixxXr^cria (that the .c-^.V^!' '^
heavenly Church wa» looked upon as an eon was a/atiki'Is.
nothing new) into the collegium of the pneuma-
tikers, who alone shall enjoy the highest blessedness,
while the hylikers shall suffer destruction and the
psychikers with tlif^ir ^''^Ar^ -((rn^ shall obtain only an
inferior blessedness,

(k) the rejection of the ^rhole of primitive Chris-
tian eschatology, especially the return of Christ and
the resurrection of the body ; with this was coupled
the affirmation that in the future one should expect
only the freeing of the spirit from the veiled life of
the senses, while the spirit itself is enlightened and
assured of God and already possesses inmiortality
itnd only awaits an entrance into tlie pleroma,

Ri'kH'tioii

of Vriiiii-

tivf Cliris-

tiaii Ksclia-

tology.

■• . -^ ...•:',:

:<«^%N^

'A.

i I

7f)

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA,

Dualistic
Ethics.

(1) the dualistic eiliics (rigid ascetisiii) vvhicii here
and there may have veered over into libertinism.

How strongly gnosticism anticipated Catholicism
becomes apparent especially from its Christology and
its doctrine of redemption, from its magic-cult and
its doctrine of the sacraments, and from its scientific
literature.

CHAPTER V.

MARCION'S ATTEMPT TO SET ASIDE THE OLD TES-
TAMENT AS THE FOUNDATION OF THE GOSPEL,
TO PURIFY TRADITION, AND TO REFORM CHRIS-
TIANITY ON THE BASIS OF THE PAULINE GOS-
PEL.

Marcion's Marcion should not be classed with gnostics like
Principles. Bfigjij Jes and Valcntinus ; for (1) he was guided by
no metaphysical, also by no apologetical, but only
by a purely soteriological interest, (2) he therefore
placed the whole emphasis upon the pure Gospel and
upon faith (not ujwn knowledge), (3) he did not em-
ploy philosophy — at least not as a main principle —
in his conception of Christianity, (4) he did not en-
deavor to found schools of philosophers, but to re-
form, in accordance with the true Pauline Gospel,
the churches whose Christianity he believed to be
legalistic (Judaistic) and who, as he thought, denied
^rhuich ^ ^^®® grace. When he failed in this, he formed a

church of his own. Wholly captivated by the nov-
elty, uniqueness and glory of the grace of God in

1 ■,'

THE PPKPARATION.

-k, 1

Christ, ho believed that tlie sharp antitheses of
Paul (Law and Gospel, works and faith, flesh and
spirit, sin and righteousness) must be made the
foundation of religious conceptions, and that these
antitheses must be apportioned between the right-
eous, angry God of the Old Testament, who is iden-
tical with the Creator of the world, and the God of
the Gospel, who was unknown before Christ, and
wh(j is nothing but Love and Mercy. This crass Crass Duai-
dualism — a Paulinism without dialectics. Old Testa-
ment, or the Jewish-Christian view of history — was
put forth by Marcion, not without his being influ-
enced by the Syrian gnosis (Cerdo). With the ethi-
cal contrast of the sublime and good on the one side,
and the petty, just and hard on the other, there was
joined the contrast between the eternal, spiritual and
the limited, sen+ient, in a way which threatened to
debase the problem again to a question of cosmology.
In detail, the following points are especially impor-
tant :

1. The Old Testament was expounded by Marcion Exposition

^ "^ of Old Tes-

acc irding to its verbal sense and with a rejection of talent.
all allegorical interpretations; he accepted it as a
revelation of the Creator of the world and of the God
of the Jews ; but even on this account he placed it
in sharp antithesis to the Gospel (see the " Antithe-
ses") the content of which he discovered solely in
the utterances of Jesus and in the Pauline Epistles, w^f,![f"^'u(j
aft H" that he had purified them from supposed Jew- Ep'^stii^s
ish interpolations. These interpolations were, ac- oospei.

'fi''

I'aul Aloii!
Under-
stood
Jesus.

Marc ion's
Thi'oloK.v,
Chriatol-

ogy-

Docetism.

Oim.lNES OF THE HISTORY OF r)0(iMA.

cording

to his idea, of long- staiuliiij;', since the

twcilve apostles did not understand Jesus and mis-
construed his Gospel, making it to correspond with
the Old Testament. Paul, who was called bj- Christ
to restore the true Gospel, was the only one who pc^r-
ceived that Jesus had proclaimed a hitherto unknown
God of grace in opposition to Jehovah. As his
preaching has also been obscured, he, Marcion, iias
been authorized to restore the pure Gospel. This
was the mission which Marcion's church attributed
to him, and it gave his " Antitheses " a sort of canon-
ical authority.

2. Marcion's conception of God and his Christol-
ogy resemble the gnostic in so far as he also empha-
sized most clearly the newness, uniqueness and abso-
luteness of Christianity in opposition to the Church
at large; he surpassed the gnostics, however, in so
far as he conceived mankind to be wholly the off-
spring of the Creator of the world and found in
man's nature nothing akin to the God of Love.
But love and grace are according tc/ Marcion the
entire substance of the Godhead ; redemption is the
most incomprehensible act of the Divine mi?cy, and
everything that the Christian possesses he owes to
Christ :!one, who is the manifest ition oi the good
God liimstb Through his suffering he purchased
from the C^fitr^r of ^he world hose who believe on
him, :viv{ v"»n rhem for himself. The rigid loce-
tism, hov;ew;r, which Marcicu taught, — the declara-
tion that thw sj'i'3 only of men will be saved, — Lhe

]
(

I
1
r
t
r
C
f:

i i !'

THE J'REI'AKATION.

Aaceti-
eisiu.

Marcion'8
Hil>li(-ul
C'auou.

renunciation of the return of Clirist and tiie increas-
ingly hard asceticism, even to the prohibition of mar-
riage (in spite of the thought that God's love should
control the "new " life), are proofs that Marcion was
to a certain extent defenceless agahist Hellenism ; on
the other hand, his eschatological ideas indicate that
he was seeking to return to the monarchy of the
good God.

;i. With the view of restoring the Church of the
pure Gospel and of gatheiing together the redeemed
who are hated by the God of this world, Marcion
caused certain evangelical writings of a particular
character to be collected (Luke's Gospel and 10
Pauline Epistles), laid down certain principles for
their interpretation and drew the communities into
a closer, though freer, organization. Inasmuch as
he rejected the Old Testament, together with all
" natural " religion, philosophy and secret tradition,
he was obliged to answer the question. What is
Christian? out of the historical records. Here, as
in many other respects, did he anticipate the Cath-
olic Church.

4. The profound conception that the laws which conception

of Nature,

rule in nature and history and the course of civil Hisr.iy,
righteousness are a reflection of the acts of Divine
mercy, and that humble faith and fervent love are
the very opposite of self-complacent virtue and self-
righteousness — this conception, which dominated the
Christianity of Marcion, and which restrained him
from every rationalistic attempt at a system, was not

lil

1 i

-^^^mmfi

Apelles.

1 i

.Sit i '

OUTLINES Or^" TF7E HISTORY OF I)0(iMA.

clearly inMintaiiiod hy liis chuiTh as time wont on.
In order to close up the breaches and to remove the
inconsibtencies of his conceptions, some of his pupils
advanced to a doctrine of three principles, others to
a vulj^ar dualism, without however surrendering en-
tirely the fundamental ideas of their master. Apelles,
lujwever, Marcion's greatest pupil, returned to the
confession of the one God, without in other respects
surrendering the master's conceptions ; and, indeed,
he further developed some valuable ideas, at which
Marcion had only hinted.

The Church fathers strenuously opposed Marcion
as the worst of heretics. In its contest with him the
early Catholic Church doctrine was developed in
special directions.

CHAPTER VI.

SUPPLEMENT: THE CHRISTIANITY OF THE JEWISH

(CHRISTIANS.

il'.i

■M

Primitive

Cbristiaii-

ity.

1. Primitive Christianity appeared simply as a
Christian Judaism, the establishment of a universal
religion upon the Old Testament basis; accordingly
it retained in so far as it was not hollenized — and
that was never fully accomplished — the Jewish im-
press of its origin ; above all it retained the Old Tes-
tament as a primitive revelation. Hence the dispo-
sition made of the Old Testament was wholly Chris-
tian, proceeding on the assumption that the Chris-
tians are the true Israel, that the Old Testament

.iiiii .1

TITK PREPAl^\TTO^^

as a
n'sal

|ngly
-and

im-
iTes-
jispo-
hris-
Ihris-

nent

Jewish

C'luistiaii-

ity.

rcffi's to ilio Cliriritiaii org.iiiizatioii and teachiiit;',
and this, wiiotlier a more or loss realistic or spiritual
interpretation of it was in vogue. The question as
to the principles of iiiterpri'tation was a pro])U'ni
within the Chnrch, so long- as no sn})eriority was
conceded to the Jewish nation as such, and until the
abrogation of the Jewish ceremonies and laws was
insisted upon. Therefore the fovui '' JcfCi'sh-CJiris-
tianit/j " is applicable exclusively to those Christians
who really retained, entirely or in the smallest part,
the national and political forms of Judaism and
insisted upon the observance of the Mosaic I iw
without moditication as essential to Christianity, at
least to the Christianity of the Jewish-born converts,
or who indeed rejected these forms, but acknowl-
edged the prere)gative of the Jewish people also in
Christianity (Papias in spite of his chiliasm; the papias, di
author of the Didache, in spite of his transference
of the Old Testament priestly rights to the Chris-
tian prophets; Hermas, in spite of the waning an-
cient Greek philosophy ; the adoption Christologists,
in spite of their rejection of the Logos, are not
Jewish Christians; Paul, hov»'cver, is because of
Romans XL). The strong draft made upon the (Jld
Testament in favor of the Catholic cultus-, doctrine-
and discipline 33'stem, is so little a sign of the ad-
vance of Jewish Christianity in the Church at large,
that it rather runs parallel to the advancing Hellen-
ism, and was called forth by it. The formula, "the
new law," in the Catholic Church is not Jewish,

Hernias,
Paul.

1 1*

\f, — — -BW-

- ^ Bl ii WHWI .

J» n«» l«»i a a

— ^fl4*f-V»»Ji(id,.V'H '» J»«h,.

I r

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF I)0(;MA

^ M

1 S ■!*

' li

:i'

. t
U

Jewish

Ohristiiui-

ity ()\f'r-

couie.

Niizan'Ut's

C^oiitimu'cl

fur Soiiu'

Time.

Points ill
Controver-
sy Among
Them.

hut anti-Jcvvisli, yot it left room for thf slipping in
of more and m<jre of the Old Testament command-
ments into the Church.

2. Jewish Christianity, once a mighty antagonist
of Paul, was, through his labors and the labors of
other teachers, .is well as through the native force
of the Gospel, overcome. In the fall of Jerusalem
this conquest was completed. Since then Jewish
Christianity has not been a factor in the history of
the Church, while Judaistn has remained such (in-
fluence of Judaism upon the churches of the farthest
Orient, in the 4th and 5th centuries). However,
Jewi;>'i Christiniis (Ebionites, Nazarenes) existed for
some time, and among them the distinctions re-
mained which were already formulated in the apos-
tolic age. Sept rated from the main Church origi-
nally, not on account of " doctrine ", but on account
of principles of social Church life, of morals and
missionary practice, there were among them the fol-
lowing points in controversy: (1) Whether the observ-
ance of the Law was a condition, or the determining
condition, of the reception of the Messianic salva-
tion, (2) whether the same was to be required also of
Gentile-born converts, in order to their recognition
as Christians, (3) whether and to what extent one
might hold fellowship with Gentile Christians who
do not observe the Law, (4) whether Paul was a
chosen servant of Christ, or a God-hated interloper,
(5) whether Jesus was a son of Joseph, or was mirac-
ulously begotten of the Holy Spirit. Thus there

i
t

(
I

^ '

Jll,

THE PRE;'AKATJ0N.

ifitiifw

(Jot-pel.

were shades of l)elief within Jewish Christianity
(not two clearly distinguished parties). There se(>m3
to have been little literary activity among these Jew-
ish Christians, who were expelled by the Jews, (see,
however, Synnnachus) ; their Gospel was the Hebnnv
Gospel which was related to the Synoptics (testimony
of Justin, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, Ei)i[)hanius).
Justin still recognized the liberal Jewish Chris-
tians who observed the Law for themselves alone,
and were friendly toward the Gentile Christians, as
Christian brethren. As yet no Christological creed,
no iTew Testament, divided them, and even in their
eschatological expectations. Gentile and Jewish
Christians could still come to an understanding.
But the more Jewish Christianity withdrew from the
world in general and the more firmly the Catholic fjimiuaiiy

Kx|u'llc(l

Church fixed its doctrine and discipline (add to this fiom cutii-
the formation of the New Testament canon) and
formulated its Logos-Christology, the more foreign
and heretical did Jewish Christianity appear; and
after Irenaeur, it was even placed in the same cate-
gory with gnosticism. Certain Orientil fathers,
however, pass a better judgment upon it.

;>. Judaism was in the 1st century a very compli-
cated affair on account of foreign influences (Hellen-
istic Judaism, Samaritans, "Sects"). Accordingly
there were already "gnostic" Jewish Christians,
(" false teachers " at Colosse, see also the Pastoral <-*i"-istians.
Epistles; on the other hand, Simon Magus, Menan-
der) who introduced into Christianity angelological

Church.

.Tiidaism

Very rom-

plicattvl.

(inostic
.I«>\visli

''niim ] iiKmt>it0. m '

■■ •"rtffr i jl ifc^w yl li w I B^ a.

|:i

'li

!' I ;i

[I I
I: i

:«

OCTLIXKS OK TUK HISTORY OK IXHiMA.

^'1

llJIIllllT,

Ccriutli

^iJirs.'Sf.-"' f^pocuUitii^ns (tlioso were also familiar to the phar-
isoos and tlui writors of apocah'pscs) and gavo ciir-
n^ncy to cosmological idoas and myths, throuj^h both
of which thoy snhlimatdd i\\o idea of God, bisoctt'd,
corrected or transformed the Law (rejection of the
blood offering) and gave an impulse to a peculiar
asceticism and cultus of mysteries. They continued
until far into the Byzantine age. Cerinth (c. 100)
retained certain ostablislied laws (circumcision) and
preached a grossly sensuous, realistic future king-
dom; but, on the other hand, ho distinguished the
supreme God from the Creator of the world, freely
criticised the Law and distinguished in the Redeemer
the man Jesus from the Christ whom he identified
with the Holy Spirit. Another branch of this Jew-
ish Christianity is to bo found in the Pseudo-

u iiunKs. Qlementine Writings. Therein, as appears from their
sources, the attempt is made by means of stoic ra-
tionalism, on the one side, and Oriental mj'thologic
cosmology on the other, to fortify apologeiicallu the
conception that the Gospel is the restoration of the
pure Mosaic doctrine. The contradictory represen-
tations of stoic naturalism and a positive revelation
through prophets are to be united through the idea
of the one Prophet, who from Adam down has ap-
peared in different forms. The Gospel was believed
to be the restoration of the primitive and universal
religion, which is simply Mosaism freed from all its
peculiar characteristics (circumcision, statutes re-
specting off(n'ings). Christ is the one true Prophet,

Pscudo-
('K'liifiitiiK

Oosjwl

llrl.l to be

l.'cstura-

t iiiii (if

I'riiiiJtivo

lit'liLrion.

'■II ''

THE PREPARATION.

a-
ic
he
he
en-
ion
lea
ip-
^ed
sal
its
\ve-
let,

who, as it socms, was identified witli the tirst Adam.
Tlie stoic idea of the ^y>r'>t was accepted, hut it was
justified througli a dualistically-coiiceived eon-spec-
ulation, in which the <>arly Semitic ])rinciples cropped
out (masculine-feminine; neutralization of the ethi-
cal contradictions in the supreme God). Platonic
elements are hardly discern ihle. But along with
the apologetical tendency, the polemical is strongly
marked. This is directed, under the form of a r(>futa-
tion of Simon Magus, against every phase of (lentile-
Christian gnosticism (jilso against Marciou), while
the primitive writings douhtless contained a polemic
against Paul. The polemic and the means made use
of prove that the Catholic Church was already in ex-
istence. Therefore the Pseudo-Clementine Writings
helongtothe od century. Accordingly it is ])rol)ahle tinoWrit
that the compilers had hefore them earlier, anti-Paul- <^'''"'<""y
ine writings. Moreover it is prohahle that the last
redactors were in no sense Jewish Chri,-* ians, that,
also, the ahove-mentioned characteristics are not
ascrihable to a group of writers, as such, but th;.t
they belong to them only accidoifalhf, thjit [)rimi-
tive Jewish Christian writings passed through vari-
ous hands and were innocently transmitted and re-
vised. This being so, the seeking for a " Pseudo-
Clementine System" is a fruitless undertaking; it
were better to accept the last narrator as a Catholic
Christian who made use of whatever interested him
and others, but who was by no means a disciple of
Irenjmis or Origen. Whether under such conditions

( 'Iciiifn-

.' ' ■ '

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-S)

.V4

■^f

1.0

I.I

1^ 1^

12.2

H: Ml III 2.0

!25

1.4

,^ 6" —

►

4V%

Photographic

Sciences

Corporation

^9)

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

,.^^

,<ir^4^

f/.

.<?

^
^

*.<?>

: ■' I'll

I \$^

:i|!

:i-i

f ■ Hi.

Ill 11

III

ElkusaiU's.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

it is possible to distinguish tlie gnostic, Jewish-
Cliristian, and anti-Paulino sources is questionable.
A third group which did not have in a true sense,
like the former, a literary existence is composed of
the Elkesaitos (in Syria, pushing toward Rome at
the beginning of the 3d century) . These were such
Jewish-Christians as wholly set aside the Old Testa-
ment through their " nature-speculations " ; who did,
however, retain the idea of prophecy, especially of
Jesus as a Prophet, but who followed a new prophet
that had perfected religion through penitential and
cultus ordinances (washings) on the basis of a new
scripture revelation. A series of elements belong-
ing to this no longer Christian Jewish-Christianity
(sources: Hippolytus, Eusebius, Epiphanius), — viz.
rigid monotheism, partial criticism of the Old Tes-
tament, rejection of blood offering, prohibition of
wine, frequent washings, connivance in respect to
marriage, r>erversion of the Messianic idea in the
interests of their prophet, discarding of atonement
idea and, as it seems, also of the idea of a king-
dom, high regard for the relatives of their prophet
— reappear again in Islamism, that was in a measure
influenced by this "Jewish-Christianity", which is
related to the Sabier. The main Church troubled
itself very little about this aberration.

i i

BOOK II.

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

i t

•4

i»

CHAPTER I.

HISTORICAL SURVEY.

Ritschl, Entstehung dor altkathl. Kirche,
Origines, T. V-VII.

1857. Renan,

THE second century of the existence of Gentile-
Christian Churches is characterized by the
victorious contest with the gnostics, Marcion and
the early Christian enthusiasm ; that is, by the de-
clining of the acute hellenizing tendency on the one
side, and by the suppression of the primitive Chris-
tian freedom of expression, discipline and, in part,
hope also on the other. An important part of prim-
itive Christianity was rescued by the conserving force
of tradition (faith in the Creator and Redeemer
God) ; but men speculated all the more freely about
the world and its wisdom, since they believed that
they possessed in the apostolic Scriptures, in the
apostolic creed, in the apostolic office, the definite
assurance of what is " Christian". The subjectivism
of Christian piety was curbed and the fanciful niyth-

Gentile
Christian-
ity in the
M Century.

'• i

I
1

t :
1

1
!

; ■ !

' i

{ >

H'l

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY O^' IXXiMA.

' 11

If. . B ,|

J ill

:| !l

i t

Gnostic
Kyst«Miis
Itt'futed,

Doublt!

Problem.
First: Ori-
Kiu of
Catholi-
cism as

a Church.

Second:

Oripinof

Scicntiflc

System of

Fttith.

I * I

creating,' tendonry was restrained, likewise also the
acceptjiiice of wlioUy foreign material as doctrinal
teaching; but the individual was made subject to a
sacred primitive record and to the priest, since he
Wi's put under the rigid episcopal restraint of the
one, holy, apostolic, Catholic Church, which men
identified with the kingdom of Christ as a prepara-
tion for blessedness. The gnostic systems were
linaliy refuted ; but men then made for themselves
out of the kerygma and with the help of Greek
philosophy a scientific system of faith, which was a
superlative medium for commending the Church to
the intellectual world, but which was nothing but a
mystery to the laity, obscuring their faith, or inter-
preting the Gospel in the language of the Greek phi-
losophy of religion.

2. The problem of the history of dogma for the
period from about 150-300 A.D., is a double one:
First, it has to describe the origin of Catholicism as
a Church, i.e. the rise and development of the apos-
tolic-Catholic standards (Rule of Faith, New Testa-
ment, Ecclesiastical Office ; standards regarding the
holiness of the Church), by which the scattered
churches were gradually fused into one empirical
Church, which, however, was held to be the apos-
tolic, true and Hohj Church. Second, it has to
describe the rise and development of the scientific
system of faith, as this grew up on the circumfer-
ence of the Church for apologetical j)urj)oses, not it
is true as a foreign growth, but rather in closest

THE T.AYTN(i OF THE FOrXDATTON.

the
lone :

as
ipos-
sta-

tho
lered
'ical

)OS-

\tific

ifer-

i.t it

)sest

connection with the aims of the earliest Gentile
Christianity (see Book I. Chap, li) ; to describe how
this, which was originally through revelation sim-
ply an assured monotheistic cosmology, Logos-doc-
trine and moral theology, became in the contest with
gnosticism amalgamated with the ideas of salvation
in the ancient mysteries, on the one side, with the
Church kerygma and tbe Old Testament ideas on
the other (Iremeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian), and was
thus transformed into a complicated system (philo-
sophical, kerygmatical, Biblical and primitive-Chris-
tian -eschatological elements) ; how, farther, under
the influence of the Alexandrians^ it was recast into
an Hellenic, syncretic system in the interest of
Catholic gnostics (type of Philo and Valentine), and
how, then, the great breach between scientific dog-
matics and the traditional faith was made manifest,
which already in the 3d century had received such a
thorough solution that the aims of scientific dog-
matics and a part of its teaching (above all its
Logos-doctrine) were adopted as the faith of the
Church; while other things were cast aside or con-
tested, the realistic propositions of the kerygma
were shielded from the spiritualizing tendency that
would transform them, and the right of distinguish-
ing between a system of faith for thinking minds
and a faith for unthinking minds (thus Origen) was
fundamentally denied. The four stages of the de-
velopment of dogma (Apologists, early Catholic
Fathers, Alexandrines, Methodius together with

Irontrtis,
Hippoly-
tus, Ter-
tullian,

Alcxnn-
•Iriuns.

Doctrine
Accepted.

•

■M

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

his followers) corrt'spoiiil to the progressive relig-
ious ciiid philosophical ileveloi)ment of paganism dur-
ing that time : Philosophical theory of morals, idea
of salvation (theology and practice of mysteries),
Neo-Platonism and reactionary syncretism.

I. ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY AS
CHURCH AND ITS GRADUAL SECULAR-
IZATION.

I :i

I (

lit

Rulo of
Kaiili, Nt'w
Tfsimiit'ut,

onicc-.

I I

CHAPTER II.

THE SETTING FORTH OF THE APOSTOLIC RULES
(norms) for ECCLESIASTICAL CHRISTIANITY.
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

The three apostolic norms (Rule of Faith, New
Testament, Office) — see Irenaeus, III.: 1 sq., Tertul-
lian, de praesc. *il. '-Yi. 30.*) — found their way into
the different provincial churches at different times,
but the three always went together. They had their
preparatory stages in the brief kerygmatic confes-

'' A' praescr. 21: "Constat omnem doctrinam quae cum ecclesiis apoa-
tolicis watricibiis vt oriyinolibus fidci conspiret I'eritnti lieputandatu,
id sine dubio tenenteni quod ecrlesiae ub apostoh's, apnstnli a Chrisfo,
Christus adeo acce])it." 3G: "Vidcatnusqui<l (^ecclcsia Koinana) didicerit,
quid docuerit, cum Africauis quoque ecclesiis lontesserarit. Untim deu m
domitmm uoi'it, creatorem universitatis, et Christum Jesiim ex virgiue
Mdviii Jiliuji dci oeutittis, et carnis resnrrectionem; legem et prophet<is
cum evanijelicis et apostolicis titteris miseet, inde potat Jidem, cam aqua
sinnnt, saticto spiritu vestit, encharistia jmscit, mavti/rium crhnitatni; et
ltd iidcer.tns lid.ir iii.-ttitutiouem nniiiineiii recipit." 'ii: " Knilnnit nnli-
iieiii <iiiscitiK)iuiii sucnnii. ltd per siir( (■.■isiouein dh itiitio decurniilciti, ut
primus ill<- episct>]>us (diipieni e.v djiostolis i-cl apostolicis riris. (/ni tamen
cum apustulisperseceravit, habuerit auctorem et antecesseorein."

TIIK LAYINC or THK K()l'\l).\TI(»N,

New

M'tul-

iiito
imes,
1 their
Infes-

apos-
bidani,

Uct'vit.

deiiiii

jhetdn
aqua

fi(»\ ft
<)(■(//-

■III, ttt
Itamen

8K>II.

sions, in the antliority of the x''</<{»)v and of the apos-
tolic tradition, as woll as in the epistlos read in the
churches, and finally in th(» deference shown to
apostles, prophets and teachers, i.e. to the "elders"
and leaders of the individual churches.

A. The Rcntsfiiu/ of the Ihijtfi.siiidl Ctm/cssion nnptismai

L'oiit't's-

mfo the Apostolic Rule of Ftutli (C'aspari, Quellen
z. Gescli. des Taufsynibols, \ Bdd.)- From the first
there was in the Cluu'ch a kerygnia (preaching) of
Christ (see Book I., Chap. :> sub 'I) and brief confes-
sional formulas (Father, Son and Spirit) ; and espe-
cially in the Roman church, at least since ± 140 a.d.,
a definite baptismal confession (probably als(» in Asia
Minor) . These confessions were " the faith " and
were considered the quintessence of the apostolic
preaching and were, therefore, referred back to
Christ and ultimately to God himself. But every-
thing indeed wliich seemed inalienable was looked
upon as an apostolic rule of faith, cfj. the Christian
interpretation of the Old Testament. However,
probably nothing was fixed, save that the Roman
sj'mbol and the ethical rules (''•"^«;^i? xu(hoo) stood at
least upon the same plane as the kerygma of Christ.
From the beginning, however, in the work of in-
struction, in exhortations and, above all, in the con-
tests with false teachings men enjoined: «-»»;. j'r<«/iev

xa) fl-e/ivov r^s' ~apafio(7tiu<i ijfiwv xaviha (I.Clem. 7; cf.

Polyc. epist. 2. 7 ; the Pastoral Epistles, Jude, Ig-
natian Letters, also Justin). As the danger from

Hnniivn
Symbol.

M 1

<i !

I .

sr,

(RTMNKH OK THK HISTOUY OF l)()(;MA.

i?t7**i.I'^ Lfuosticisin ln'caiiic jicuto, incii iwcessarilv caiiu' to
«•»"'''"•(. j.y.^jjy^, ^jj^^ neither tlie content and t'omi»ass of

" tlui received faith" (''the sound doctrine"), nor
its interpretation was secured to them. There was
need, it seemed, of a lixed <nihr<tr<l stanthird, in
order to he ahle to disprove <loctrines sucli as tliat
of the dirt'erence hetween the supreme God and the
Creator-God, or such as tliat of docetism, and to
bo able to maintain the true concejition as (tposiolic
doctrine — they needed a dcjinHclfi iiiicrj)rcfril (q)(>s-
tolic creed. Under these circumstances the partic-
churciu's ularly closely allied churches of Asia Minor and

of Asia -^ -^

'^Komi' Ac^ Rome, whose experience is known to us through
Jrena3us (he is hardly the first writer on the subject),
accepted the fixed Roman baptismal confession as
apostolic in such a way that they proclaimed the
current anti-gnostic interpretation of it as its self-
evident content, and the expounded confession as
"fides cathoUca^' ; i.e. they set it up as a standard
of truth in matters of faith and made its acceptance
the condition of membershi]) in the Church. This
procedure, by which the centre of gravity of Chris-
tianity was shifted, (the latter, however, was pre-
served from entire dissolution) rests upon two un-
proven assertions and an exchange. It is not proven
that any confession of this kind emanated from the
apostles and that the churches founded by the apos-
tles always preserved their teaching without modi-
fications; and the confession itself was exchanged
for an exposition of it. Finally, the conclusion that

co\tt nap

tisinal
Coiift'ssion
as Apos-
tolic.

^Ik

THK LAYINfJ OF THK F'orXDATroN,

from ihv virtual ap^rormtMit in doctrine of a j^roup of
churclu's (l)ishoi)s) there existed a fides ((ithohCit
waw uniustitied. 77/ /.s (tct)(»i csfahlislird tin' Vtiilt- enthoii.-

Arjfiiiiuiit

olic (tnjunie)it from tradition and Ims determined [|'j','!!|,,'il;".'
its Jnndauientiil suinifivane'' iintn the j>rese)it
time: The e([nivocal rij;ht, on tlie one side, to an-
nounce the creed as complete and idnin, and, on the
other side, to make it ho elastic that one can reject
every uncomfortable meaning, is to the j)resent day
characteristic of Catholicism. It is also characteris-
tic that men identify Christianity with a system of
faith which the laity cannot understand. The lat-
ter are therefore oppressed and referred back to the
authoritn.

TertuUian developed the method of Irenirus still T.'rtuiiian

* Makes iiii

farther. As the latter found the chief gnostic AjU-am-.M.n
teachings already refuted in the baptismal confes-
sion, while as yet only the common sense of the
Church protested against them; so the former,
embracing the confession all the more firmly as au-
thority for the faith, found in the reyula already the
creation of the universe from nothing, the mediator-
ship of the Logos in creation, the existence of the
same before all creatures, a definite theory in regard
to his incarnation, the preaching of a nova lex and
of a nova promissio^ and finally also the trinitarian
economy and the correct teaching in respect to the
natures of Christ {de praescv. 13; de vivg. 1; adv.
Prax.^ 2, etc.). His "recjula^' is an apostolic lex et
doctrina^ inviolable for every Christian.

I'na'us.

ii :

' t:

I .

OITF.INKS OF TIIK IIISTOKY OK IKXJMA.

Not Wid.'-

.Spnail till

During :i<l

t'fritury.

: ,:)

New T«'sta-
iin'iit Writ-
injcs Rec-
oj^uizt'd as
Apostolic.

( )nly ill ilu' course of (lie .".d mitiiry did tliis Cilli-
olicr standard Iktoihc \vido-s|troad in tlio (Uiiirch.
('lenient ol' Alexandria did not yet know it (for
liiin the /'r/''^> r^Js' Ux).r,n>a^ was tile anti-j^^nosllc in-
torpH'tation ol" tlio Holy Smptures) ; Orip'ii, liow-
ovor, canio very near accepting it (sec, dc princip.
2)r<ti'J'.), i.e. in the beginning of the ^{d centnry the
Alexandrian Cliurcli was following the Roman, and
gradually hecanu^ " Catholic". Later still the Syrian
churches also followed, as the documentary source
of the Apostolic Constitutions proves, which knows
nothing of the "apostolic rule of faith" in the
Occidental sense. Only at the end of the 3d century
did the Catholic Church become a reality through
the common apostolic lev and distinguish itself
sharply from the heretical parties ; remote churches,
indeed, probably came first through Nicea to an ac-
ceptance of an "apostolic rule of faith." But even
the Nicene creed was not accepted at a single stroke.

B. The Eecoguifion of a Selection of Well-
known Scnptnres as Virtually Belonging to the
Old Testament; i.e. as a Compilation of Apostolic
Scriptures (see the "Introductions to the N. T."
by Reuss, Holtzmann, Weiss). By the side of the
Law and the Prophets (t« ,3ti3?.{a) there was in the
churches the Word of the Lord, or briefly " >j x'V"^'",
which was indisputable. The words and deeds of
the Lord (" the Gospel ") were recorded in numer-
ous, oft-revised scriptures closely related to each
other, which were called the " Lord's Writings", also

ho
he

>
of
er-
ich

THF I.AYINfJ OK TMK KnlND ATloN.

loll.

">.«Yf'/", thru yet in>l till aft«'r tlic niiddlo of tlic "^d

century — '* i''>'iyy!/.>u'' ainl " 'irrnnvriHi^innura r<it.> »irr«<-

#rr«/««v"; tliene wore puhlicly ivml at least after C.
110 (Jnstiii). Th<» last named title oxi)resses the
jiidj^nieut, that everything which was reported of
the Lord could he traced directly (»r indirectly to
the apostles. Out of these luinierous evani'clical TatimrM
writings there wore in certain churches, already
before the middle of the '^d century, four tluit were
prominent — our pvesciit (Ittsjwls — which, c.f/., very
soon after HiO were worked over hy Tatian into a
single Gospel (Diatessaron). About the same time
they took on their final form, nion* than likely in
Rome. Together with those writings the Kj)istle8
of tho apostlo Paul, which had been collected earlier,
were read in the churches, i.e. by tho leaders, as
the Epistles of Clement, Barnabas, Ignatius and par-
ticuhirly Polycarp testify. While however tlie (ios-
pels had a direct relation to the kerygma and met
there(iuiremonts of tradition (Ignatius, Justin), such
was not tho case with the Paulitto Epistles. Finally
all definite scriptural productions of prophetic spirits
{j:-^vj;La7n<puin>>.) were rovorod as inspired Holy Scrip-
tures, whether they were Jewish apocalypses with
high-sounding names, or the writings of Christian
prophets and teaciiers. The yi>'i-<fy} was primarily
the Old Testament, but with, " '- xfyt"? Uyti^'' {yiyitar.rat
or simply -^-V^O) apocalyptic verses were also cited.
Of like worth, but different in kind, was the cita-
tion: o xofuns; Uysi h TiJ tnayytkiu} (fulfilling of pPOph-

>l|

'' : •

■!

' 1

I 1

* ^ i

' ■ ; f

t
1

1
1

y^i

Fitl

'it

i,
•I

Marclfiii'H

( 'llllOII.

Foruiing

of N. T.

Canon.

tH)

Ol'TMNRS OK TfriO IMSToKV oV I)0(JMA.

<*i*y — t'tliital rules). Many tcaclicrs gladly spoke in
the words of the apostle Taiil, without according
them the .same rank as the Scriptures and tho Word
of the Lord (were the Kpistles of Paul puhlicly read
in the churches Ix'fore c. ISO?).

Marcion, who rejected the Old Testanient and the
prophetic i>roofs, formed a new collection of Scrip-
tures and gave it canonical rank (Luke's Ciospel, 10
Paulines Kpistles). At the same time i)n;hal)ly, or
a littler later, the gnostic school leaders did tlu' same,
favoring the writings in widest circulation among
th(^ churches, hut with new additions (X'alentinus,
Tatian, Encratites). Everywhere in such circles tho
Epistles of Paul came to tho front; for they were
theological, soteriological, and could bo interpreted
as dualistic. The new critically constituted collec-
tions, which the gnostics set over against the (.)ld
Testament, w(»re clothed with the same authority as
tho ( )ld Testament and were allegorically interpreted
in harmony with it (still, besides, secret tradition and
secret scriptures). Again, a reference to the r/'^'^f^i
and the xn/no^^ did not suffice for tho leaders of the
churches. It was necessary, (1) to determine which
evangelical writings (in which recension) were to
be taken into consideration ; it was necessary, (2) to
deprive the heretics of everything which could not
bo discredited as new and false ; it was neces^ry,
(;j) to put forth such a collection of writings as did
not overturn the evidence from tradition, but on the
contrary by their inherent (jualities even added

"ti J!

■(

THK ?.\viN(j (H«- rm: KnrNr>ATi()N.

!•!

wt'ij^Iit. At Mist tluT cniirmrtl tlu'iiisi'lvcs tt> \\\v
proclamation of tlic four (iosiK'ls uh the only aiitlicii-
tic aptislnliv rcconls of tlu» Lord. Thcsr wvw al-
ready hold ill an cstct'in so noarly <'(|iial to that of
the ( )ld 'rt'staiiu'nt, that tlu> inunrnsc stride iicces-
sary to declare tiie words and letters holy was
HOtireely recoj^nizcd as an innovation; hesides, what
th(3 Master had said was from the he^inniii}^ «*onsid-
(>ro<l holy. Many and, indeed, most of tlie churches
alMxle ])y this decisitni until far into the :{d century;
see, for example, the documentary hasis of Jie Apos-
tolic Constitutions ; some ( )riental churches cont inued
touse thoDiatessaron. No second collection came to
be uHtcemod, and the four Gospels were joined to the

alongside of these stood the testimony of pneumatic
scrihblings, ever however having decreasing diginty
(Montanist controversy) .
But wherever the contest with heresy was most rnurs

1. pistil's

vehemently carried on and the consolidation of the a.i.i.-.i to
•' hiiuf (Jos-

churches upon stable principles was most intelli- '"'**■

gently undertaken — in (Asia Minor and) Rome, a
neic Cdfliolic-aj'iostolic voUection of scripfnrcs
was opposed to the new gnostic collection, more in
defence than in attack. The Epistles of Paul were
added to the four Gospels (not without some scruples
in transforming scriptures which were written for
special occasions into Divine oracles and conceal-
ing the process even of transformation) and conse-
quently included under the argument from tradition.

•i

, I

:'!i:

■P' !H

OITTMNKS OF THK IfFSTORY OF DOOMA,

jneut.

SO tJint. ihrcm^li tiio iiu-dium of a very recent book,
the Acts of the Apostles, they were associated with
the supposed preaching of the twelve apostles, i.e.
subordinated to it. The Paul sanctioned by the
twelve apostles in the Acts, and made hardly recog-
nizable by the Pastoral Epistles, thus became a wit-
ness '^f the o'.'^'r/ij Ota zwy i{i' a-unrnXoy^^ i,e. OUC WaS

under obligation and had the right to understand

him in accordance with the Acts of the Apostles,

which surely came into the collection only faiite de

\ mieux and was obliged to support a tradition far

New Testa- bcyoud its oim words. The two-, more properly

ment

^''same°° thrce-fold new apostolic collection (Gospels, Acts,
ourTt^sui- Pauline Epistles), now placed as the New Testa-
ment on the same plane with the Old Testament and
presently raised above the latter, already recognized
by Irenreus and TertuUian (in practice, not in theory,
the Gospels and the Pauline Epistles seemed to be
of equal worth), gradually came into use in the
ciiurches, beginning in the Occident, and when this
was once accomplished the result could hardly be
disturbed. Whereas a fourth and fifth ingredient
could never really win a perfectlj'^ firm form. First,
men sc^ight to strengthen the history of the apostles
by means of scriptures written by the twelve apos-
tles, Tt was natural that they should wish to have
such scriptures, and then there were highly esteemed
scriptures from Christian prophets and teachers
enough to suggest their acceptance (they could not
be ignored), but without any apostolic authority (in

THE LAYING OF THE KOL'NDATION,

[K]

the strict sense). Thus arose the group of C'ldhnlic
Epistles,, for the most part denominated apostolic,
originally anonymous writings (most scholars held
them to be pseudonymous), whose ancient authority
could be rescued only by ascribing them to the
twelve apostles. This group, however, with the
exception of two epistles, did not become fixed as
regards its extent or its dignity until the 4th century
and even later, and this without thereby really en-
dangering — strange to say — the respect given to the
entire collection. Second, the apocalypses presented
themselves for admission to the new collection. But
the time which produced them was wholly gone b}-
and indeed combated them, and the nature of the
new collection required apostolic, not prophetic
sanction ; the latter rather excluded it. The apoca-
lypses of Peter and John could, therefore, alone come
under consideration. The former was quickly re-
jected for some unknown reason and the latter was
finally <'J9 ^£« T:up6'i rescued for the new collection.

A closed New Testament there was not in the
churches in the 3d century ; but where there was at
hand a second collection, it was used virtually as the
Old Testament and no quetstions were raised. The
incomplete collection served ad hoc every purjwse
which, as one might think, the complete alone could
serve. Catholicism never came, however, to be a
religion of the book. The words of the Lord re-
mained the standard for the guidance of life, and
the development oi doctrine pursued its own course

Cathollo
E|iist!»s
Added.

Ap<x"i-
lypst's <if
Peter and

John.

No Closed
N. T. in
3<1 Cen-
tury.

Im-

•I 'I

Ilt'sults

wliich ful-

Iftwed Ai-

coptancf (jf

N. T.

I .1

! 'ilr

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOliMA.

at all times, being influenced only in a secondary
way by the New Testament.

Results: (1) The New Testament conserved the
most valuable part of the primitive literature; but
it gave over to destruction almost all the remaining
literature as being arrogant or corrupt; (2) the New
Testament made an end to the production of inspired
writings, but it also made an ecclesiastically profane
literature possible and likewise set fixed limits to it ;
(3) the New Testament obscured the historic sense
and the historical origin of its own documents, but
it at the same time occasioned the necessity of a
thorough-going study of these documents and pro-
vided for their active influence in the Church ; (4)
the New Testament repressed the enthusiastic ten-
dency to the production of " facts " ; but, in requiring
that all the statements in its own documents should
be considered entirely harmonious, clear, sufficient
and spiritual, it necessitated the learned, theological
production of new facts and mythological concep-
tions ; (5) the New Testament set boundaries to the
time of revelation, exalted the apostolic age and
the apostles themselves to an unapproachable height
and thereby helped to lower the Christian ideal and
requirements, but it likewise preserved the kno2vl-
edge and power of the same, and became a goad for
the conscience; (G) the New Testament guarded
effectively the hesitating canonical esteem for the Old
Testament; but it likewise mac^o it an offeiuo to
exalt the Christian revelation above that of the Old

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

l»5

Testament, and to brood over the specijic meaning
of the former; (7) the New Testament encouraged
the fatal tendency to identify the Master's words
with apostolic tradition (teaching of the apostles),
but through the acceptance of the Pauline Epistles it
set as a standard the loftiest expression of the con-
sciousness of redemption, and through the canoniza-
tion of Paulinism it introduced most valuable leaven
into the histor}- of the Church ; (8) through the claim
of the Catholic Church that both Testaments be-
longed to her alone, she robbed all other Christian
churches of their title-right to them ; but while she
made the New Testament a norm, she constructed
an armory from which in the time to come the
sharpest weapons have been draw^n out against her-
se'.f.

C. The Transformation of the Episcopal Office Tmnsfor-
in the Church into the Apostolic Office. Historu KpiscoiKli
of the Transformation of the Idea of the Church. ^^R^^."''^
The claim that the apostles formulated a rule of
faith was not sufficient; it was necessary to show
that the Church had kept the same ^fure and that she
possessed within herself a living court of appeal to
decide all points under controversy. Originally men
simply referred to the churches founded by the apos-
tles, in which the true teaching was to be found, and
to the connection of these with the disciples of the
apostles and the "ancients". But this appeal of-
fered no absolute certainty; heme Irenajus and Ter-
tullian, influenced by the imposing development of

y ■
.Iff »

- — ««,««(,.».-j,.i.ijiasiaBiSfi-i

OUTLINES OF THE IILSTORY OF DOGMA.

■;

ll!

! vi

f '!

Apostolic
Succes-
sion.

the episcopate in Rome '*nd by the aiicieiit respect
once given to the apostles, prophets and teachers
now transferred to the bishops, so conceived of the
same that the "orc/o episcoporum per successionem
ab initio decurrens " guaranteed to them the inviola-
biUty of the apostolic inheritance. With each this
thesis oscillated between an historical (the churches
are those founded by the apostles; the bishops are
the disciples of the disciples of the apostles) and a
dogmatic aspect. Yet already with Irenaeus the lat-
ter is clearl}^ prominent : " episcopi cum episcopatus
successio)ie cerfuni veritatis charisma acceperunt "
(the charisma of truth depends upon the office of the
bishops which rests upon the apostolic succession).
This thesis is simply a dogmatic expression for the
exalted place which the episcopate had already
actually won for itself; it did not, moreover, orig-
inally in any way entirely identify apostles and
bishops; it remained also uncertain in its applica-
tion to the individual bishops and left room still
for the ancient parity: spiritus, ecclesia, fideles.
Calixtus of Rome, however (v. Tertull., de pudic.j
HippoL, Philos. IX.), claimed for himself full apos-
tolic regard and apostolic powers, while TertuUian
allowed to him only the locus magisterii. In the
Orient and in Alexandria the apostolic character
of the bishops was quite late in gaining recogni-
tion. Ignatius knew nothing about it (the bishop
is the representative of God unto his own church)
and neither did Clement, and even the basal docu-

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

ment of the xVpost. Constitutions is silent. Yet in
the time of Origen tlie doctrine began to establish
itself in Alexandria. The idea of the Church was
greatly influenced by this development. Originally
the Church was the heavenly Bride of Christ, the
abiding-place of the Holy Spirit; and its Christian
claims rested upon its possession of the Spirit, upon
its faith in God, its hope and its well-ordered life :
He who belongs to the Church is sure of his
blessedness ( Holy Church) . Then the Church be-
came the visible establishment of this confession of
faith {fides in regula posita esf, habet legem et
salutem de observatione legis) ; it is the legacy of
the apostles, and its Christian character rests upon
its possession of the true apostolic teaching {Catholic
Church in the sense of universality and pureness
of doctrine, — the form of expression since the erfU of
the 2d century) . One must be a member of this em-
pirical, one apostolic Church in order to partake of
salvation, since here alone is found that knowledge
which gives blessedness. The Church ceased to be
the sure communion of salvation and of the saints
and became the condition of salvation (v. the fol-
lowing chapter). This conception of the Church
(IrensBus, Tertullian, Origen) which represents the
development of the churches into the one definite
Church — a creative act, to be sure, of the Christian
spirit — is not evangelic, neither is it hierarchic;
it has never entirely disappeared from the Catholic
churches. But almost from the beginning it was in-

Idoa of
Church

IiiHiH'nft'd
by this

Develop-
ment.

-'.

' H«

;. ! ,

I 'f

i I

I [

h ■

!' t

•ii

iHrnrchi-

oal Church

Mi'a.

Calixtus,
Cyprian.

1>8

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOCiMA.

flueiiced by tho h ierarch ical Church idea. The hitter
was only hinted at by Irenieus and Tertullian (the
last named finally contended against it and in this
contention he even reverted to the primitive Church
idea: spiritus equals ccclesia, universal priesthood) ;
it was farther developed by Calixtus and other
Roman priests, esi)ecially by Cyprian, while the
Alexandrians blended the earliest Church idea with
a mystic-philosophical conception, and Origen, al-
though greatly impressed by the empirical Church,
never lost sight of its relative significance and office.
Calixtus and Cyprian constructed the hierarchical
Church idea out of existing relations and the exigen-
cies which these imposed ; the latter rounded out the
standard of the former, but on one point, touching
the justification of the earthly character of the
Church, he lagged behind, while Calixtus had reso-
lutely advanced to its completion (v. the following
chapter). The crises were so great in the 3d cen-
tury that it was nowhere sufficient, — save in isolated
communities, — to simply preserve the Catholic faith;
one must obey the bishops in order to guard the ex-
isting Church against the openly proclaimed heathen-
ism (in practical life) , heresy and enthusiasm (the
primitive Christian recollections) . The idea of the
one episcopally constituted Church became supreme
and the significance of doctrine as a bond of union
was left in the background: The Church, resting
upon the bishops, who are the successors of the
apoetV^s, the representatives of God, is by reason of

g
t
t
c
r(

THE LAVINi; OF THK FOUNDATION.

these fuiulaincntal facts itself the apostolic legacy.
According to Cyprian the Church is the seat of sal-
vation {extraquam nulla aalus), as a single^ organ-
ized confederation. It rests wholly and solely upon
the episcopate, which, as the continuation of the
apostolate, equipped with the powers of the apos-
tles, is the bearer of these powers. The union of tho
individual with God and Christ is therefore con-
ceivable only in the form of subordination to the
bishops. The attribute, however, of the unity of
the Church, which is of equal significance with that
of its truth, since the unity comes only through love,
manifests itself primarily in the unity of the epis-
copate. This has been from the beginning a unit
and it remains a unit still, in so far as the bishops
are installed by God and continue in brotherly inter-
change. The individual bishops are to be considered
not only as leaders of their own particular churches,
but as the foundation of the one Church (''ecclesia
in episcopo est"). Thence it follows farthe)*, that
the bishops of those churches founded by the apos-
tles possess no longer any peculiar dignity (all bish-
ops are ecjuai, since they are partakers of the one
office). The Roman chair, however, came to have
a peculiar significance, since it was the chair of the
apostle upon whom Christ first conferred the apos-
tolic gifts in order to indicate clearly the unity of
these gifts and of the Church; and farther also, be-
cause historically the Church of this chair was the
root and mother of the one Catholic Church. In a

ClmrHi

Ili'sts upon

Episoi-

piito.

Roman
Chair.

■•;:

I, i;

100 OUTLINES OF THE TIISTORY OF DOOMA.

severe Carthaginian crisis, Cyprian so appealed to
Rome as if communion with this Church (its bishop)
was the guarantee of the truth ; but later he denied
the claims of the Roman bishop to special rights
over other churches (contest with Stephen). Fi-
nally, although he placed the unity of the organiza-
tion of the Church above the unity in articles of
faith, the essence of Christianity was guarded by
him to this extent, that he demanded of the bishops
everywhere a Christian steadfastness, otherwise they
ipso facto would forfeit their office. Cyprian also
as yet knew nothing of a character indelihilis of the
bishops, while Calixtus and other Roman Inshops
vindicated the same to them. A consequence of his
tlioory was, that he closely identified heretics and
schismatics, in which the Church did not then fol-
low him. The great one episcopal Church, which
he presupposed was by-the-bye a fiction ; such a homo-
geneous confederation did not in reality exist; Con-
stantino himself could not complete it.

CHAPTER III.

CONTINUATION: THE OLD CHRISTIANITY AND
THE NEW CHURCH.

[Sec the Literature on Montanism and Novatianism. ]

Montan-

isin, iNova-

tiaiii.sm.

1. The denial of the claims of the ethical life, the
paling of the primitive Christian hopes, the legal and
political forms under which the churches protected

THK t-AVrxn OP TITR FOrNDATION.

101

tlieniselvcs aj^aiiist the world and aj^ainst hcivsics
called forth soon after the middle of tlie '^*d century,
first in Asia Minor, tlien in other Christian commu-
nities, a reaction which sought to estaiilisli, or rather
to re-estahlit>h, the primitive times find conditions
and to protect Christianity from the secularizing
tendency. The result of this crisis (the so-called
Montanist crisis and the like) was, that the Church
asserted itself all the more strenuously as a legal
organization which has its truth in its historical
and objective foundation, that it accordingly gave a
new significance to the attribute of holiness, that it
expressly authorized a double state, — a spiritual and
a secular, — within itself, and a double morality, that
it exchanged its character as the possessor of certain
salvation for that other, viz. to be an indispensable
condition for the tnmsmission of salvation and to be
an institution for education. The Montanists were
compelled to withdraw (the New Testament had
already thereby done good service), as well as all
Christians who made the truth of the Churcli de-
pendent upon a rigid maintenance of its moral claims.
The consequence was that at the end of the 3d cen-
tury two great Christian communities put forth
claims to be the true Catholic Churcli : viz. the na-
tional Church confederated bv Constantine and the
Novatian churches which we refused with the rem-
nant of Montanism. The beginnings of the great
schism in Rome go back to the time of Hippolytus
and Calixtus.

I . I

t'i!

; ;

102 OUTMNRS OF THE IIISTOMY OF DOfJMA.

^'"'"i',"""** 'i. The M(t!il;i!iist opposition liad uiult^rgont' a
groat trunsfornialion. Originally it was tlio stupen-
dous undertaking of a Christian prophet (Montanus),
who with the assistance of proi)h(^tesses felt called
upon to realize for Christianity the rich prophetic
promises of the Fourth Ciosj)el. lie interpreted these
in accordance with the Apocalyi)se, and proclaimed
that the Paraclete had appeared in his own person,
in whom also Christ, yea, even Clod Alnii^ht}', luul
come to his own in order to lead them into all truth
and to gather tt)gether into one fold his scattered
flocks. Accordingly it was Montanus' highest aim
to lead the Christians forth from their civic relations
and communial associations and to form a new,
homogeneous brotherhood which, separated from the
world, should prepare itself for the descent of the

oppofWHi heavenly Jerusalem. The opposition which this ex-
of Church, orbitant prophetical message encountered from the
leaders of the churches, and the persecutions under
Marcus Aurelius, intensified the already lively es-
chatological expectations and increased the desire for
martyrdom. That which the movement lest, how-
ever, in definiteness (in so far as the realization of
the ideal of uniting all Christians was not accom-
plished, except for a brief period and within narrow
limits) it gained again after c. 180 inasmuch as
the proclamation of it invested earnest souls with
greater power and courage, which served to retard
the growing secularizing tendency within the Church.
In Asia and Phrygia many Christian communities

THE LAYING OF TlIK FOUNDATION.

loa

acknowledgoil iu corporc the Divino mission of tlio ^^'^|',|'',^,'„i"
prophets ; in other provinces asscinblies were formed '""J*^'"^-
in which tli(» ciirrent teachings of tliese prophets
were considered as a (fospel, at the same time vari-
ous modifications were going on (synipathit^s of tlie
confessors in Lyons. The Roman bishops came near
acknowledging the new prophecies). In the Mon-
tanist churches (c. 1!K)) it was no longer a question
of a new organization in the strict sense of the word,
or of a radical re-formation of the Christian organi-
zations, but rather, wherever the movement can be
clearly traced, were these questions already pushed
aside, even when they were active and influential.
The original prophets had set no bounds to their en-
thusiasm ; there were also no definite limits to their
high pretensions: God and Christ had appeared in
them ; the Prisca saw Christ living in female form ;
these prophets made the most extravagant prophecies
and spoke in a loftier tone than any one of the apos-
tles; they subverted apostolic regulations; they set
forth, regardless of every tradition, new command-
ments for the Christian life; they railed at the great
body of Christian believers ; they thought themselves
to be the last and therefore the highest prophets, the
bearers of the final revelation of God. But after
they had passed off the stage, their followers sought
an agreement with the common Christian churches.
They recognized the great Church and begged to be ^g^^J?^
recognized by it. They were willing to bind them- 'church.'°
selves to the apostolic regula and to the New Tes-

i J

■h i .r

101 (U'TlilNKS OK Till', lllsroKV <)|.' I)0(SMA.

tainciit ; tli(<3' no Ioniser licsilahMl to accept tlio
ecclesiuHtical organization (the bishopH). And they
ftccordingly deniandod the recognition of their own
prophets, wlioni tliey now Mougiit to commend as
successors of the earlier propliets (prophetic succes-
sion) ; the "new" i)rophecy is really a /((tcr rervhi-
fi'on, which, as the Cliurch understands it, presui)-
poses the earlier; and the hiter revelation i)ertains
simply and solely (in addition to the confirmation
which it gives to the Church fcachhig as opposed to
the gnostic) to the burning questions of Christian
discipline which it decides in the interest of a more
rigid observance. Therein lay the significance of
the new prophecy for its adherents in the empire
and accordingly ihey had bestowed their faith freely.
Through the belief that in Phrygia the Paraclete
had given revelations for the entire Church in order
to establish a relatively severe regimen (n^fraining
from second marriage, severer fast regulations,
mightier attestation of Christianity in daily life,
complete readiness for martyrdom) , the original en-
thusiasm received its death-blow. But this flame
was after all a mighty power, since Christendom at
large made, between the years 100 and 220, the
greatest progress toward the secularization of the
Gospel. The triumph of Montanism would have
been succeeded by a complete change in the owner-
ship of the Church and in missionary operations:
its churches would have been decimated. Con-
cessions, therefore, (the New Testament, apos-

THK LAVIN(i <»K TIIK KnlNDATION.

lor)

tolicii rci/nhi, rpiscopalc) <litl not lirip tlio Monta-
nistH. The l)isln)pH attackc*! tlu^ form of tin* lu'w
propliecy as an innovation, threw suspicion on its
content, interpreted the earlier future liopes as nia-
terialistic and sensuous, and declared the ethical de-
niunds to l)0 extreme, legalistic, ceremonial, tfewish,
contrary to the New Testament, .nnd even heathenish.
They set over against the claims of the Montanists
to authentic divine oracles, the newly formed New
Testament, declared that every reijuirement was to
be found in the declarations of the two Testaments
and thus clearly defined a irrchtfion epoch, which
extended to the present time only through the New
Testament, the apostolic teaching and the apostolic
office of bishops (in this contest the new ideas were
for the first time made perfect, (1) that the Old Tes-
tament contained i)roi)hetical elements, thc^ New
Testament was not prophetic, but apostolic, {'i) that
apostolic dignity could not bo reached by any person
of the present day). They began finally to distin-
guish between the morality required of the clergy
and that required of the laity (thus in the (luestion
of one wife). In this way they discredited that
which had once been dear to the whole of Christen-
dom, but which they could no longer make use of.
In so far as they repelled the alleged misuse, they
rendered the thing itself less and less powerful (chil-
iasm, prophecy, right of laity to speak, rigid sanc-
tity), without being able to entirely suppress it. The
most vehement contest between the parties was in

Altink

Miiiil/iii-

Imiii

^t ' y^H

pi,

^ nr^^H

i^fii^M

! ■:

Heiitcd
Controver-
sy ahont
ForKivt'-
iioss of
Siu.

lOG OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

regard to the (luostion of the forgiveness of sin. The
Montanists, otherwise acknowledging the bishops,
ascribed this right to the Holy Spirit alone {i.e., to
those who possess the Holy Spirit), — for the power of
the Spirit is not necessarily attached to the office —
and recognized no human right in the forgiveness of
sins, which rested far more on the (rare) laying hold
of the Di'/ine mercy {^''potest ecclesia {spirit us)
donare delicta, sed non faciam'"). They therefore
expelled from their churches all who had committed
mortal sins, committing their souls to God. The
bishops on the ':)ther hand, contrary to their own
principle, were obliged to maintain that baptism
alone cleanses from sin, and to vindicate the right
conveyed by the power of the keys by a reference to
the apostolic office in order to protect the standing
of the ever less holy churches against the dissolu-
tion which would have resulted from the earlier re-
gime. Calixtus was the first to make use of the right
of the bishops to forgive sins in the widest sense,
and to extend this right even to mortal sins. He
was opposed, not onl}^ by the Montanist, Tertullian,
but in Rome itself by a very high ecclesiastical rival
bishop (Hippoly tus) . The Montanists were com-
pelled to withdraw with their " devil-prophecy", but
they withdrew willingly from a Church wdiicli had
become " unspiritual " (psj'chic). The bishops as-
serted the stability of the Church at the expense of
its Christianity. In the place of the Christianity
which had the Spirit in its midst, came the Church

THK LAVlN(i OF THE lOlNDATION,

lo:

organization which pc^ssessod tiio Now Te.itanient
and the spiritual office.

3. Meanwhile the carrying out of the pretensions
of the bishops to the right to forgive sins (opposed
in part by the churches and the Christitm heroes,
the confessors) and the extension of the sfune to
mortal sins (contrary to the early practice, the early
conception of bai)tisni and of the Church) was at-
tended by great difficulties, although the bishops
encountered not only the early practice of the j)rinn-
tive rigid discipline, but also a wide-spread laxness.
The extension of the forgiveness of sins to adulterers
was the occasion of the schism of Hii)polytus. After
the Decian persecution, however, it was necessary to
declare even the greatest sin, apostasy, as j)ardona-
ble, likewise to enlarge the ancient concession that
one capital sin after baptism might still be ])ardona-
ble (a practice founded upon the Hernias Pastor) and
to abolish all rights of spiritual persons (confessors),
i.e. to make the forgiveness of sin dependent ui)on
a regular, casuistic, bishoply action (Cornelius of
Rome and Cj^prian). Only then was the Church
idea radically and totall}' changed. The Church in-
cludes the pure and the impure (like Noah's ark) ; its
members are not collectively holy and every one is
by no moans sure of blessedness. The Church, solely
in virtue of its endowments, is holy (objective), and
these have actually been conferred, together with the
})ure teaching, upon the bisho})s (priests and judges
in the name of God) ; it is an indispensable salva-

Bishops
Assiiiiie to

I'lii'trivi'

Sins. <'Vfti

Mortal

Sins.

Idea nf

Cliin'cli

Ka.lically

CliaiiL'i'ii.

."!

-*i('^

108 OUTLINKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

tion iiistituto, so that no one will bo blessed who
remains without; it is also societas fidei, but not
Jideliiini^ rather is it a training-school and eultus-
institutc for salvation. It possesses also, in addition
to baptism, a second cure for sin, at least in practice;
the theory, however, was still confused and uncer-
tain. Now for the first time were the clergy and
laity sharply distinguished 7'eligiou.slf/ {"^ ecdesia
est numerus cpiscoporum^'')^ and the Roman bish-
ops stamped the clergy with a character indelibilis
(not Cyprian). Now also began the theological
speculation in regard to the relation of the Church,
as a communion of saints, to the empirical holy
Church, to the milder secularizing of Christianity
Novatian tempered by the "means of grace." But all this

Opposi-
tion, could WKjt be accomplished without a great counter-
agitation which began at Rome [Novatian) and
soon spread among all the provincial churches.
Novatian required only a minimum, the unpardona-
bleness of the sin of apostasy (upon the earth) , other-
wise the Church would no more be holy. This
minimum, however, had the same significance as the
far raore radical demands of the Montanists two
generations before. There was in it a vital remnant
of the ancient Church idea, although it was strange
that a Church should consider itself pure (katharoi)
and truly evangelical, merely because of its unwill-
ingness to tolerate apostates (later perhaps other
Second mortal sinners) . A second Catholic Church, stretch-
chiirch. ing from Spain to Asia Minor, arose, whose archaic

THE LAYING OK THE FOUNDATION.

109

fragments of the old discipline, however, did not
help it to become a more independent earthly system
of life; nor did it really distinguish itself from the
other Church, although it declared the ministrations
of the same invalid (practice of re-baptism) .

With wisdom, foresight and relative severity the
bishops in these crises brought their churches around
to a new attitude. As it was, they could use only
one bishop's Church and they learned to consider
themselves rightly as its pupils and as its sheep.
At the same time the Church had taken on a
form in which it could be a powerful support to
the state. Besides, its inner life was much better
organized than formerly in the empire, and the
treasure of the Gospel was still ever in its keeping
(the image of Christ, the assurance of eternal life, the
exercise of mercy) as once the monotheism and piety
of the Psalmists remained alive within the hard and
foreign shell of the Jewish Church.

Note 1. The Priesthood. The rounding out of the '^'''^j^'jp*^-
old Catholic Church idea is clearly manifested in the
completed development of a priestly order. Hier-
ourgical priests are found first among the gnostics
(Marcion's followers) ; in the Church the prophets
(Didache) and the local ministers (I. Clement) were
formerly likened to the Old Testament priests. Ter-
tuUian first calls the bishop a priest, and from that
time until about 250 the priestly character of the bish-
ops and presbyters was evolved very rapidly in the
Orient, as well as in the Occident ; so strong indeed

ho(xl.

wH iii mi

no outlinb:s of the history of dogma.

¥y

Appeal

MaUt' to

.It'wish

System.

Sacrifice.

was the influence of heathenism at this point that an
ordo of priestly assistants (lower ordination) arose
(in the Occident first). The completed idea of priest
meets us first in Cyprian, in the Roman bishops of that
time, and in the document which lies at the basis of
the Apostolic Constitutions. The bishops (second-
arily also the presbyters) were held to be the repre-
sentatives of the Cliurch before God (they alone are
permitted to bring the offering) and representatives
of God before the Church (they alone grant or with-
hold the Divine grace as judges in the place of God
and Christ; they are the depositaries of the myster-
ies, who dispense a grace which they thought to bo
an anointing of a materialistic sort). In support of
this claim, appeal was made increasingly to the Old
Testament priests and the entire Jewish cultus sys-
tem, naturally in a supplementary way. Doors and
windows were thus thrown open, as regards the
rights and duties of the priests, toward heathenism
and Judaism, after that they had disregarded the
exhortation of the aging Tertullian to return to a
common priesthood. Tithes, cleansings and finally
Sabbath ordinances (transferred to Sunday) were
graduall}' established.

Notei. The Sacrificial Offering. Priesthood and
sacrifice condition each other. The sacrificial idea
had from the beginning the widest play in the
Church (see Book I. Chap. 3, Sec. T) ; therefore
the new conception of the priest must of necessity
influence the conception of the sacrifice, even though

the
tore
nty
igh

THE LAYING OF THE FOINDATIOX,

111

the old representation (pure sacrifice of the spirit,
sacrifice of praise, the whole life a sacrifice) still
remained. This inlluence, manifested itself in two
ways, (1) within the Christian life of sacrifice
was introduced the special acts of fasting, of vol-
untary celibacy, of martyrdom, etc. more and more
prominently (see among others Hermas) and these
received a meritorious, and even " satisfaction "
significance (see Tertul.) ; this development appears
complete in Cyprian. To him it is self-evident that
the Christian, who cannot remain sinless, must
through penance (atoning sacrifice) reconcile the
angry God. Deeds done, where special sins are not
to be erased, entitle one to a special reward. Next
to penitential exercises, the giving of alms is the
most effective means (prayer without alms is barren
and fruitless) . In the writing, Dc ope re ef eleenios. ,
Cyprian has given an elaborate theory, one might
say, concerning alms as a means of grace which a
man can provide and which God accepts. Follow-
ing the Decian persecution i\\i> opera et eleemosynae
crowded into the absolution system of the Church
and secured therein a firm footing : ( )ne can — through
God's indulgence — win again for himself his Chris-
tian standing through works. If men had remained
wholly satisfied with this, the entire system of moral-
ity would have been encompassed by it. Hence it
was necessary to enlarge the conception of graiia
(lei, and not as hitherto to make it depend s(jlely
upon the sacrament of bai)tism. This was first accom-

Mcritori-

(lUS

Works.

14 J

;; l\

«i

112 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Priestly
Re-enact-

iil-

Christ.

plished, however, by Augustine; (2) the idea of
"nfil^H^T' sacrifice underwent a change in the cultus. Here
also is Cypi'itin epoch-making. He first clearly as-
sociated the specific off^'ering of the Lord's Supper
with the specific priesthood; he first declared the
passio domiui, and also the sanguis Christi and
the doniiiiica hostia the object of the eucharistic
offering, and thereby reached the idea of the priestly
re-enacting of the sacrifice of Christ (^z -fwnifo(,a zob
(TU)!iaro^ xai to^j a'tiuiro^ also in the apostolic Church
regulations) ; he placed the Lord's Supper decidedly
under the point of view of the incorporation of the
Church and of the individual with Christ, and cer-
tified in a clear way for the first time that the
commemoration of those taking part in the offering
{vivi et defuncti) had a special {deprecatory) sig-
nificance. The real effect of the sacrificial meal for
those participating was, however, the making of
prayers for each other more efficacious ; for unto the
forgiveness of sins in the fullest sense this act could,
notwithstanding all the enrichment and lofty repre-
sentations of the ceremony, not be referred. There-
fore the claim that the service was the re-enactment
of the sacrifice of Christ remained still a mere claim ;
for against the conception so closely related to the
cultus of the times, that participation in the service
cleansed from sin as in the mysteries of the magna
mater and of Mithras, the fundamental ecclesiastical
principle of baptism and repentance stood in opposi-
tion. As a sacrificial act the Lord's Supper never

lip

rou

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

113

Means of
Grace,

attained to ecjual importance with baptism; but to
the popular imagination this solemn ritual, modelled
after the ancient mysteries, must have gained the
highest significance.

Xote 3. Mcaufi of Grace, Baptism and Euclia-
rifit. That which since Augustine has been called b^p^"^'"-
" means of grace ", the Church of the 2d and Ikl cen-
tury did not possess, save in baptism : According to
tlio strict theory the baptized could not expect any
new bestowal of means of grace from Christ, he
must rather fulfil the law of Christ. But in practice
men possessed in absolution, from the moment when
mortal sins were absolved, a real means of grace,
whose significance was screened by baptism. Re-
flection upon this means of grace remained as yet
wholly uncertain, in so far as the thought that God
absolves the sinner through the priest was crossed
by the other (see above) , that the penitential acts of
sinners the rather secure forgiveness. The ideas con-
cerning baptism did not essentially change (Hoefling,
Sacrament der Taufe. 2 Bdd. 184G). Forgiveness
of sins was looked upon in general as the result of
baptism (however, here also a moral consideration
entered : The sins of the unbaptized are sins of blind-
ness ; therefore it is fit that God should absolve the
penitent from them) ; actual sinlessness, which it was
necessary now to preserve, was considered the result
of forgiveness. Often there is mentioned in connec-
tion with the remissio and the consecutio ceterni-
tatis the absolutio mortis, regeueratio hominis,

'H'

'it

1
1 ,

it'

(

i ^

;'Mm

( 4;4r^

■vw

^r^^

Wfr-.

''','M

■i\

f ,

Mystr-
riuiii.

Lord's
Supper.

114 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOKY OF DOGMA.

restitutio ad similitndineiii (Jci, ronsecutio spiri-
tus snncti {'^lavacrnm rcfjcnerniionis et scmctiji-
cafitmis''), and all possible blessings as well. The
cver-ineroasiTig enriehment of the ritual is in part a
consecpienco of the purpose to symbolize these pre-
supi)ose(l rich effects of baptism; in part it owes its
origin to the desire to worthily ecpiip the great mtjs-
tei'inm. An explanation of the separate acts had
already begun (confirmation bj- the bishop). The
water was looked upon as a symbol and vehicle.
The introduction of infant baptism lies wholly in
the dark (in the time of Tertullian it was already
wide-spread, but condemned by him, de hapt. 18,
because he held that the cunctatio was indicated
by reason of i\\Q iwndus of the act; Origen referred
it back to the apostles). The attempts of some to
repeat baptism were repelled. The Lord's Supper
was looked upon not only as an offering, but also as
a divine gift (Monographien von Doellinger 1826,
Kahnis 1851, Rueckert 185G), whose effect, however,
was never strictly defined, because the rigid scheme
(baptismal grace, baptismal duties) excluded such.
Imparting of the Divine life through the Holy Sup-
per was the chief representation, closely connected
with purely superstitious ideas {<fd/i, aaxnv fhHa\>a(Tia(i) \
the spiritual and the physical were strangely mixed
(the bread as ^vwrr:? communication and ?">'j'). No
Church father made a clear discrimination here:
The realistic became spiritualistic and the spiritu-
alistic mystical; but the forgiveness of sins re-

lll'f

THE LAYING OF THE FOrXDATION.

115

ixed

ere :

•itu-

re-

treated entirely from view. In aecordance with this
the representation of the relation of the visil)le ele-
ments to the body of Christ bej^^an to take form. A
problem (whether syiiil)olieal or realistic) no ont^
dreamed of: The symbol is the inherently potential
mystery (vehicle), and the mystery apart from the
symbol was inconceivable. The flesh of Christ is
itself "spirit" (no one perhaps thought of the his-
torical body) ; but that the spirit becomes perceptible
and tangible, was even the distinguishing mark.
The anti-gnostic fathers recognized that the con-
secrated bread was composed of two inseparable ele-
ments, — one earthly and tlio other heavenly, — and
thus saw in the sacrament that which was denied by
the gnostics, viz. : The union of the spiritual and the
fleshly and the warrant for the resurrection of the
flesh which is nourished by the blood of the Lord
(even so Tertullian, Avho has falsely been classed as
a pure symbolist). Justin spoke of a transforma-
tion, but of a transformation of the participants; the
idea of the transformation of the elements was, how-
ever, already taking form. The Alexandrians saw
here, as in everything which the Church at large Ai.'xan-
did, the mystery behind the mystery ; they accommo-
dated themselves to the administration, but they
wished to be such spiritual Christians that they
might be continually nourished by the Logos and
might partake of a perpetual eucharist. Every-
where the service was departing from its (jriginal
significance and was made mon; and more precise^ as

Justin.

''I
.'■ Ill

i^ I

;

Jlvsturit'.s.

116 OUTLINES OK THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

regards its form and content, both by the learned
and ignorant (practice of infant communion testified
to by C-yprian) .

Magical mysteries, superstition, authoritative
faith and obedience, on the one side, and a highly
realistic representation of the freedom, ability and
responsibility of the' individual in moral matters, on
the other side, is the mark of Catholic Christendom.
In religious matters authoritatively and supersti-
tiously bound, therefore passive; in moral matters
free and left to themselves, therefore active.

That the Roman church led the way throughout
in this process of broadening the churches into cath-
olicity is an historical fact that can be unquestiona-
bly proven. But the philosophic-scientific system of
doctrine, which was evolved at the same time out of
the faith, is not the work of the Roman church and
its bishops.

■■ji

THE LAYINO OF THE FOUNDATION.

ii:

II. ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY AS

DOCTRINE AND ITS GRADUAL

SECULARIZATION.

ClIAPTKU IV.

ECCLESIASTICAL CHRISTIANITY AND PHILOSOPHY.

THE APOLOGISTS.

M. V. Eugelhardt, Das Christen thuin Justin's, 1878. Kiilin,
Octaviua, 1883. Ausgabe Uer Apologeteu in it Comnieutar,
von Otto.

1. The apologists wishing to declare and defend tikapoi-

ogist.s.

the Christianity of the churches stood therefore in
all things upon the hasis of the Old Testament, em-
phasized the universalism of the Christian revela-
tion and held fast to the traditional eschatology.
They rejected gnosticism and saw in the moral
power which faith gave to the uncultured a princi-
pal proof of its genuineness. But anxious to present
Christianity to the educated as the highest and surest christian-
philosophy, thoy elaborated as truly Christian the p,','y"/i^".
moral cast of thought with which the Gentile Chris- '"^""'"
tians from the beginning had stamped the Gospel,
thereby making Christianity rational and giving
it a form which appealed to the common sense of all
earne^'t, thinking and reasoning men of the times.
Besides, they knew how to use the traditional, posi-
tive material, the Old Testament as well as the his-
tory and worship of Christ, simply as a verification
and attestation of this rational religion which had

k 1.

* 1

•J

•V

,(h,'

■

IIK OLTMNKS OK TIIK illSTOlCV OK I)0(iMA.

Imm'U liillicrto waiiliii}^ Jiiid had Imhui soiij^lii fur with
fVrv(!Mt «h»sir(>. In tlio a|)<)!n;^Ttic thj'ology C'liriH-
tiaiiit}' is concoivccl as a religious clovelopment
brouglit about by God hiiiisdf and corrospouding
to tho primitivo condition of man and placed in
the sharpest contrast with all polytheistic national
religions and ceremonial observances. With the
gr(»atest energy the apologists proclaimed it to be
the religion of the spirit, of freedom and of absolute
chriHtian morality. The whole positive material of Christian-
formwl. ^*^^y» however, was transformed into a great scheme of
evidence; religion did not obtain its content from
historical facts — it received it from Divine revela-
ti<m, which is self- witnessing in the creature-reason
and freedom of mankind — but the historical facts
serve for the attestation of religion, for its elucida-
tion, as against its partial obscuration, and for its
universal spreading.

And that was what the majority were seeking.
In what religion and morality consist, that they
believed they knew; but that these are realities,
that their rewards and punishments are sure, that
the true religion excludes all forms of polytheism and
idolatr)^, were claims for which they had no guaran-
tee. Christianity as an actual revelation brought
the certainty they desired. It gave to the highest
product of Greek philosophy and to the sovereignty
of theistic morality victory and permanence ; it gave
to this philosophy as knowledge of the world and as
morality for the first time the courage to free itself

TIIK LAYINCJ OK TIIK F()INI)ATK)N.

110

tiVf

from tlio polytlu'isiM <>f t!u' past jiiul to doseviul from
tho piano of (ho learned to tho plane of tho common
jKioplo.

Tlio ai)()lo!^ists wero in contrast with tho gnostics Aj><.i.>;?istH
cunseri'dtici'^ inasmuch as thoy wore not really dis-
posed to investigate at any ixjint the traditions of the
Church or to make the content of the same compre-
hensible. Tlio argument from prophecy, now liow-
ever formulated in the most external way, allied
them with the Church at large. The gnostics sought
in the Gosi)el a netr reliyion, the apologists by
means of the Gospel were confirmed in their relig-
ions moral sense. The former emphasized the re-
demptive idea and made everything subordinate to
it; the latter brought all within the radius of natural
religion and relegated tho redemptive idea to the
circumference. Both hellenized the Gospel; but
only tho speculations of tho ai)ologists were at once
legitimized, because they directed everything against
polytheism and left the Old Testament and the
kerygma untouched and emphaKized in the clearest
manner freedom and responsibility. Aj)ologists and
gjiostics carried forv/ard tho work which the Alex-
andrian Jewish thinker (Pliilo) had begun as regards
to the Old Testament religion; but they divided the
work, so to speak, between them : The latter devot-
ing themselves rather to the Platonic-religious side
of the problem and the former to the stoic-rational-
istic side. The division however could not be sharply
made ; no apologist entirely overlooked the redemp-

Apolopists
mitl Olios-
tics ("on-
timn*«l
Work of
I'hilo.

,')"

/
I

; '

120 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

,! 1' ■

iW I

IrenH'us

Two I'rub-
leuis.

Christian-
ity is Plii-
losopliy
and Reve-
lation :
Thesis o,'
Apolop^'ots.

tive irlea (rcdemplioii fi-Din the pinver of the demons
can be wrought only bj" the Logos). AVith Irenseus
begins again in the theological work of the Church
the blending of the two problems ; not only the con-
test with gnosticism made this necessary, but the
spirit of the age turned more and more from the
stoic morality to the Neo-Platonic mysticism, within
whosb shell lay concealed the impulse toward religion.
2. Christianity is philosophu and revelation:
This is the thesis of every apologist from Aristides
to Minucius Felix. In the declaration that it is
philosophy, the apologists encountered the wide-
spread opinion among the churches, that it is the
antithesis to all worldly wisdom (see the testimonj^
of Celsus) ; but they reconciled this difference through
tiio friendly understanding that Christianity is of
supernatural origin and as revelation, notwithstand-
ing its Tc 'ional content, cannot be apprehended save
by a diviuv iy illumined understanding. On the
principles v. jderlying this conception the apologists
v\'ere all agreed (Aristides, Justin, Tatian, Melito,
Atlicnagc; -aS; Theophilus, Tertullian, Minucius Felix
and othci i whose writings are attributed to Justin) .
The stron^^ost impress of stoic morality and rational-
ism is found ill Minucius ; Justin's writings (Apol-
ogy and Dialogue) have the most in common with
the faith cf the churches. On the other hand Justin
and Athenagoras think the most favorably of philos-
ophy and. of philosophers, while in the succeeding
time the judgment became ever harsher (already by

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION.

121

lie

.1-
ih
n

Tatian) without changing the view of the philosophic
content of Christianity. The general conviction may Summarr.
be thus summarized : Christianity is philosophy, be-
cause it has a rational element and because it gives a
satisf actor}" and generally comprehensible ans\^er to
those questions in regard to which all true philoso-
phers have exercised themselves; but it is not a phi-
losophy, — indeed it is the direct antithesis to philos-
ophy, so far as it is free from all mere notions and
opinions and refates polytheism, i.e., originates
from a revelation, therefore has a supernntural, Di-
vine origin, upon which finally the truth and cer-
tainty of its teaching alone rest. This contrast with
pliilosophy shows itself also above all in the unphil-
osophical form in which the Christian preaching
went forth. This thesis permits in detail various
judgments in regard to the concrete relation of
Christianity and philosophy, and it urged the apolo-
gists to labor at the problem, why then the rational
needed to be revealed at all? The following general
convictions however may also be laid down here:
(1) Christianity is, according to the apologists, rev- christian-
elation, i.e. it is the Divine wisdom which from uf
old has been proclaimed through the iwopliets and
possesses through its origin absolute trustworthiness,
tvhich is also clearly evidenced in the fulfilment
of the ivords of the prophets (the evidence from
prophecy as the only sure evitionce; it has nothing to
do with the content of religion, but is an accompani-
ment to it). As Divine wisdom Christianity stands

elutiou.

• ,

1 1 m j

I III i }

BU^i

fty is Pi;i-
losophy.

Revelation
Necessary.

Philoso-
phers In-
debted to
Prophets.

Christ
ouly B^ni-
phatii/ed
Prophets.

122 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

opposod to }«11 natural aiul philohophical knowledge
and makes an end to sncli. {'I) Christianity is the
manifestation which accords with the natural, thouj^h
darkened reason of mankind; it includes all the
essential elements of philosophy — it is therefore the

philosophy {fj >:«'''' i,"-''''-^ (ftXaniKfia^ ij /3fa/>(5«/>ury (fihtcrixfia)

— and it assists mankind to realize the truths which
philosophy contains. (3) Revelation of the rational
was and is necessary, because mankind has fallen
under the dominion of demons, (t) The efforts of
the philosophers to discover the true knowledge have
been fruitless, which is above all clearly shown by
the fact that neither polytheism nor the wide-spread
immorality has bean overthrown by them. So far as
the philosophers have discovered any truth, they are
indebt'^d for it to the prophets (thus the Jewish Alex-
andrian philosophers already taught) from whom
they borrow^ed it; it is, to say the least, uncertain
whether they also have come to the knowledge of
any fragment of the truth through the sporadic activ-
ity of the Logos (see Justin on S< ?rates) ; certain is
it, however, that many apparent truths of the philos-
ophers are the aping of truth by evil spirits (to these
also the whole of polytheism was referred, wliicli is
partly aLo the aping of Christian institutions). (5)
The acknowledgment cf Christ is simpl}" included
in the acknowledgment of the prophetic wisdom ; a
new content the teaching of the prophets did not
receive through Christ; he only gave it currency
and energy (triumph over the demons; Justin and

THE liAYINTJ OF THE FOrXDATTOT^T.

1 :3:]

Tortullian ivcogiiizr a new rlcnKiii in tli«' (Gospel).
(0) Tlio practical luvStiiig of Cliristianity lies, (a) in
its apprehensibility (the unlearned and women bo-
come wise), (b) in the expulsion of demons, (c) in its
ability to produce a holy life. In the a};ologists
Christianity accordingly despoiled antiquity, i.e. the
proceeds of the monotheistic knowledge and ethics of

the Greek : <'>^i ~n<itl -an: za/w^ zl[iy^-:a'. r^y.w.' rCo-^ y[n(7riiv^v>:>

i'JTt' (Justin). I i dates itself from the beginning of chnstian-

^ o r» ityoldiis

the world. Everything true and good that mankind ^^"^ ^^'iJci.
extols came through Divine revelation, but is, at the
same time, trul}' human, because it is only a clearer
expression of that which men find within themselves.
It is at the same time Christian, since Christianity
is nothing but the teaching of revelation. One cannot
think of another form in which the claim of Chris-
tianity tc be the world-religion comes out so strongly
(hence the effort to reconcile the world-empire with
the new religion) , nor can one think of a second form
in which the specific content of the traditional Chris-
tianity is so thoroughly neutralized. But its truly spiritual

^ o ^ ./ Culture

epoch-making character laj" in this, that the spiritual wjHi'ReiiK-
culture of the race appeared now to be reconciled and
allied with religion: Revelation is wholly an out-
ward, miraculous communication (passivity of the
prophets) of rational truth ; but rational truth — theis-
tic cosmology and moral it}' — vras set forth simply
dogmatically and as the common possession of man-
kind.

3. The " dogmas " of Christianity — this conception

ion.

I' 4

■I

124 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ai^Rathl- ^^^^ ^^^^ otlier, ^'^£o^o^u^^ Were first introduced into
philosophical language hy the apologists — are those
rational truths which are revealed by the prophets in
the Holy Scriptures, and which are all summed up
in Christ {\fn(Tzdis koyi,'; xa\ >o,'io^^) and have as their
conseciuent true virtue and eternal life (God, liberty
and virtue, eternal reward and eternal punishment,
i.e. Christianity as a monotheistic cosmology, as a
doctrine of liberty and morals, as a doctrine of re-
demption ; the latter however is not clearly set forth).
The instruction is referred back to God, the estab-
lishment of a virtuous life (of righteousness) God
must needs have left to men. The prophets and-
Christ are therefore fountains of righteousness, in
so far as they are Divine teachers. Christianity
may be defined as the God-transmitted knowledge of
God, and as virtuous conformity to rational law, in
the longing and striving after eternal life and in the
certainty of reward. Through the knowledge of the
truth and through the doing of good, men become
righteous and partake of the highest blessedness.
Knowledge rests upon faith in the Divine revela-
tion. This revelation has also the genius and the
power of redemption, in so far as the fact is unques-
tionable that mankind cannot without it triumph
over the dominion of the demons. All this is con-
ceived from the Greek standpoint.
fS?F^?fh (^) ^^^ dogmas which set forth the knowledge of

^of God.*'*^ God and of the world are dominated by the funda-
mental thought, that over against the world as a

THE LAYING OF THE FOL'NDATION.

1-^5

created, coiulitioiUHl and transient existence stands
the Self- Existent, Unchangeable and Eternal, who is
the primal Cause of the world. He has no attri-
butes, which are attributable to the world ; therefore
he is exalted above every name and has in himself
no distinctions (the Platonic expressions concerning
God were held as incomparabl}- good). He is ac-
cordingly one and (done, splrifmil and faultless
and therefore perfect; in purely negative predicates
he is best characterized ; and yet he is On'yin (Cause)
and the Fulness of all existences; he is Will and
Life, therefore also the kind Giver. The following
theses remain fixed with the apologists as regards
the relation of God to the world: (1) that God is to s»i"niary,
be thought of primarily as the final Cause, {'i) that
the principle of the ethically good is the Principle of
the world, (3) that the Principle of the world, i.e.
the Godhead, as immortal and eternal, forms the
contrast to the world as the perishable. The dogmas
concerning God are not set forth from the stand-
point of the redeer 'd Church, but on the basis of a
certain conception of the world on the one hand,
and of the moral nature of man on the other ; which
latter however is a manifestation within the cosmos.
The cosmos is everywhere permeated with reason
and order (opposition to gnosticism) ; it bears the
stamp of the Logos (as a reflection of a higher world
and as a product of a rational Will) . The material
also which lies at the basis of its composition is not
evil, but was created by God. Still the apologists

CoKnios
rt'niu-at'-d
with Ufa-
son.

f\l

iil

'ill

(.', I

iiN'ii

120 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

(lid not maku Ood the immetliato creator of the
world, but the personified Divine Reason perceptible
in the world and inserted between God and the
world. This was done with no reference to Christ
and with no thought (in the gnostic sense) of sepa-
rating Clod and the world; the conception of the
Logos was already at hand in the religions philos-
ophy of the day, and the lofty idea of God recjuired
a being, which should represent the actuality and
the many-sided activity of God, without doing vio-
lence to his unchangeableness (a finer dualism: The

The Logos. Logos is the hypostasis of the active energizing
Reason, which makes it possible to think of the God-
head itself as resting n-e/)f>n(Tt<r,-^ lio is both the re-
vealing Word of God, the Divine manifesting him-
self audibly and visibly upon the earth, and the
creating Reason which expresses himself in the work
of his own hands; he is the Principle of the icorld
and of revelation at the same time. All this is
not new ; j^et the I-ogos was not proclaimed by the
apologists as a i^n^V^rw^y, but as the surest reality).
Beyond the carrying out of the thought that the
principle of the cosmos is also the ]irincii)le of reve-
lation the majority did not go; their dependence
upon the faith of the Church is evidenced, how-
ever, by their failure to clearly distinguish between

History of the Logos and the Holy Spirit. The history of the

Lopos.

Logos is as follows : God was never akoyoi; ; he ever
had the Logos within himself as his reason and as
the potentiality (idea, energy) of the world (notwith-

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

127

standing all negative assertions, God and the world
were somehow bound together). For the sake of tlie
creation God put the Logos forth from iiiniself (sent
him forth, permitted him to go forth), i.e. through a
free simple act of his will generated him out of his
own Being. lie is now an independent hypostasis
(>>:<)^^ in i'h<)->) whose real essence {»'^)T{a) is identical
with that of God; he is not separated from God but
only severed, and is also not a mere mode or attribute
of God; but is the independent result of the self-
unfolding of God, and, although being the compen-
dium of the Divine Reason, he did not rob the Father
of his reason; he is God and Lord, possesses the es-
sence of the Divine Nature, although he is a second
being by the side of God {ilp'Jhi.oi ezs/)o> tj, //eo^ (hi'm-
f»"t); but his personality had a beginning {^^ fuit
tcinpus, cum pafri filius non fin' f " TcvtuW.). Since Begotten

God,

then he had a beginning, and the Father did not, he
is, as compared with the Father, a Creature, the
begotten, created, manifested God. The subordina-
tion lies, not in his essence (for monotheism would
then have been destroyed), but in the manner of his
origin (^ipyo-^ r^fuozorir/Mv ziin rar//Ms'). This made it
possible for him to go forth into the finite as rea-
son, revelation, and activity, while the Father re-
mains in the obscuritj' of his unchangeablencss.
With the going forth of tlio Logos begins the reali-
zation of the world-idea. He is the Creator and to a
degree the P7*ntotype of the world (the one and spir-
itual Being among the many sentiment creatures).

Creator

and J'loto-

tyi.f.

■t'\

ii :

k !

128

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP" DOGMA.

I : <u

Doctrines
of Free-
dom.

Virtue.

Righteous-
ness.

which had its origin from nothing. Man is the true
aim in the creation of the world, and the true aim of
man is to attain unto the Divine essence through
the reason (image of God) and freedom created with-
in him. As spirit-embodied beings men are neither
mortal nor immortal, but capable of death and of
eternal life. In the doctrines, that God is the abso-
lute Lord of the material world, that evil is not in-
herent in matter but originated in time and through
the free decision of the spirit (angel), finally that
the world advances toward the light, dualism ap-
peared to be fundamentally overcome in the cos-
mology. Yet it was not overcome in so far as the
sentient was actually looked upon as evil. The
apologists held this teaching in regard to God, the
Logos, the world and mankind as the essential con-
tent of Christianity (of the Old Testament and of the
preaching of Christ) .

(b) The doctrines concerning freedom, virtue,
righteousness and their reward were so held that
God was looked upon simply as Creator and Judge,
and not as the principle of a new life (reminiscences
in Justin). The d(ff}ap(Tia is at the same time reward
and gift, linked with correct knowledge and virtue.
Virtue is withdrawal from the world (man must re-
nounce his natural inclinations) and exaltation in
every respect above the senses, and love. The moral
law is the law for the perfect, exalted spirit, which,
inasmuch as it is the loftiest being uix)n the earth,
is too lofty for the same. The spirit shoidd hasten

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

129

e.
e-
in
al

Rewards.

(iod is !{(>-
dt'omor.

from the earth to the Father of Lights ; in equanim-
ity, fulness, purity and goodness, which are the nec-
essary consequences of right knowledge, it should
make it manifest that it has already overcome the
world. The vicious die the eternal death, the virtu-
ous obtain the eternal life (strong emphasis upon the
idea of the judgment; recognition of the resurrec-
tion of the body of the virtuous; the idea of right-
eousness is not pushed beyond the leijal recjuire-
ments) .

(c) God is Redeemer in so far as he (although the
cosmos and the reason are sufficient revelati(^ns) has
still sent forth direct miraculous dispensations of the
truth. Inasmuch as the fallen angels at the very
beginning gained the mastery over mankind and
entangled men in sensuality and polytheism, God
sent his prophets to enlighten man's darkened per-
ception and to strengthen his freedom. The Logos
worked directly within them, and many apologists
in their writings were satisfied w- itli a reference to
the Holy Scriptures and to the evidence from proph-
ecy. But all indeed recognized with Justin the
complete revelation of the Lol?os in Jesus Christ, i-'^p'^ 'J*^
through whom prophecy is fulfilled and the truth
made easily accessible to all (adoration of Christ as
the revealed Logos). Justin still more zealously
defended the adoration of a crucified " man " and
added many things from the traditions concerning
Christ that make their appearance first again in

Irenaeus.
9

Christ.

ii
I i .

130 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOKY OK DOCJMA.

CHAPTER V.

BEGINNINGS OF AN ECCLESIASTICO - THEOLOGICAL
EXPOSITION AND REVISION OP THE KULE OF
FAITH IN OPPOSITION TO GNOSTICISM ON THE
PRESUPPOSITION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT AND
THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY OF THE APOLO-
GISTS: IREN'^EUS, TERTULLIAN, HIPPOLYTUS,
CYPRIAN, NOVATIAN.

irenocus. 1. Irenyeus, a piipil of Polycarp and a teacher
from Asia Minor, who resided in Lyons and was
conversant with the tradititjns of the Roman church,
set forth in his great anti-gnostic work tlie apos-
tolic norms of the Catholic Church and also made
an attempt to develop a system of Church doctrine.

roinbinod He souglit to Combine the apohx/cfic theolony with

Ai)ol<)p'tic *^ -I ./ ./,/

witli Hail ^ theological revision of the Ijaptisinal confession;

'fessioii.'" he took from the two Testaments that material
which served not alone to attest his philosophical
teaching; like the gnostics he placed the thought of
the realized redemption in the centre and sought
thereby at the same time to express the primitive
Christian eschatological hopes. In this way arose
a "faith" of unlimited extent, which was to be tJie
faith of the Church, of the learned and unlearned,
composed of the most divers elements — the philo-
sophi co-apologetic. Biblical, Christosophic, gnostic-
anti-gnostic and materialistic-fantastical (the pistis
should at the same time be the gnosis and vice versa;

THK LAVINCi OF THE FOUNDATION.

131

all consriou.snoss that rational theology and fides
credcnihf mv irro('oncilabl(> niagnitiules was want-
ing; everything stood upon an even plane; sp(»'.'nla-
tion was jnistriisted and 3'et was not discvirded).
This complicated structure received its outward compH.at-
unity through the reference of all declarations to the '""'■
rule of faith and the two Testaments, and its in-
ward unity through the strong emphasis of two fun-
damental thoughts: Thai ihe Cveatin'-Hod is also
the Redeenter-Ctod, and that Jesus Christ is the
Redeemer saleltj on this accointt, beeanse he is the
incarnate God {fdius dei fdins honi i n is f actus).
In the carrying out of the latter thought, Irenjcus is
superior to his pupils, TertuUian and Hipi)olytus.
For the former especially ^^'as entirely incompetent
to unite the apologetico-rational, the historico-re-
demptive, and the eschatological ranges of thought,
but he developed., conformably to his juristic temper
and equipments, a well-rounded system in certain
particulars, which was very influential in the sub-
sequent times (terminology of the trinitarian and
Christological dogmas; giving Occidental flogmatics
a juristic trend).
, The joining of the old idea of salvation with the rhristia.i-

" ^ ity lit'-

thoughts of the New Testament (salvation-history) through"
and with the apologetic rationalism was the work of gixi"'
Iremuus. Christ ianitfj is to Jiini real redemption.,
hroiif/ht about bf/ the Creator-God. This redemp-
tion is to him reccqjitnlatio, i.e. restoration to a
living unity of that which has been unnaturally

I I
I

„:t

!: I

!! '

I I

ili

liicariui-

lintl Kllll-

(laiiictital

Do/'iua.

Gained
Ready Ac-
ceptance.

i;j?. OUTLINES OK THE HISTORY OK DOGMA.

ai'pantfrd through death and sin; e8iH3cially, as re-
gards mankind, the restoration of human nature unto
the Divine image through the gift of imperishable-
ness. Tliis .salvation is accomplished, not through tlie
Logos in itself, hut solely through Jesus Christ, and,
indeed, through Jesus Christ in so far as he was Goil
and became man. In that he took upon himself hu-
manity he has inseparably united and blended the
same with Divinity. The incaniafioii is therefore
alotuf with the doctrine of the unitij of God the
fiDidamental doijma. Thus the historical Christ
stands (as with the gnostics and Marcion) at the
centre, not as the teacher (although Irenjeus' rational
scheme in many respects intersected his realistic
theory of redemption) , but by virtue of his constitu-
tion as the Ood-man. All else in the Holy Scriptures
is preparatory history (not simply ciphers in the
evidence from prophecy), and the history of Christ
(kerygma) himself is the unfolding of the process
of the incarnation (not simply the fulfilment of
prophecy). Although the apologists in reality did
not pose the question " cur dens homo " at all, yet
IrenoBus made it fundamental and answered it with
the intoxicating statement : " That we might become
Gods". This answer was accordingly highly satis-
factory, because, (1) it indicated a specific Christian
benefit from salvation, (2) it was of like rank with
the gnostic conception ; indeed it even went beyond
the latter in its compass of territory regarding deifi-
cation, (3) it met the eschatological trend of Chris-

TIIK I,AVIN(J OF TIIK ForNDATION.

133

tianity luilf-way, yet at the sumo tiino it coiiUl tako
the j)lacoof tlio fantastic-uschatological t^xpoctatioiiH,
(1) it oxpresHotl tho mystic Noo-Platonic trend of tlie
time and gavo tho nanio tho greatest satisfaction, (5)
it replaced tho waning intellectiialisni (rationalism)
by tho certain hope of a supernaturid transformati(»n
of our nature, winch will make it capahU' of appro-
priating that which is above reason, (•')) it gave to tho
traditional historical utterances concerning Christ,
and the entire previous history as well, a firm founda-
tion and a definite aim, and mad > j)ossible the con-
ception of a gradual unfolding of the history of
salvation {inxn»,ix{a i^vr>; appropriation of Paulino
ideas, distinguishing of tho two Testaments, vital
interest in the kerygma). Tho moral and eschato-
logical interest was now balanced by a real religious
and Christological interest: Tho restoration of hu-
man nature unto the Divine imago j^er adopt ioneni.
" Through his birth as a man tho eternal Word of
God secured the legacy of life for those who, through
the natural birth, had inherited dojith ". The carry-
ing out of this thought is indeed crossed b}' many
things foreign to it. Jrena3us and his pupils warded
off tho acute hellenization by the bringing in of the
two Testaments, by the idea of the unity of creation
and redemption, by their opposition to docetism;
they taught the Church anew that Christianity is
faith in Jesns Christ; but on the other hand they
promoted the hellenization by their superstitious
conception of redemption, and by turning the inter-

Ironnpiis
atid I'lipils

Wii 1(1.(1
off Jlcll.-n-

i:l1

l;)4 OUTUNES OF THE TITSTORY OF DOGMA,

Declared

[lllillisill

iJfstioyt'd
Oinnij'o-
teuee of

UlHi.

Ai'oei)t

(Jiiostic

DeiiiiiirKf-

est towai'd tlu> luitures rather than toward the living
Pevson.

'I. The early Catholic fathers, in opposition to the
gnostic theses, declared that dualism destroys the
omnipote ICO of God, therefore in general the idea of
God, thai the emanations are a mythological fancy
and endanger tho unity of the Godhead, that the at-
tempt to ascertain tho inner Divine constitution is
audacious, that the gnostics could not avoid placing
the final origin of sin in the pleroma, that criticism
of the constitution of tho cosmos is impertinent, the
same is muL'h rather an evidence of wisdom and good-
ness, that docetism gives the lie to the Deity, that
the freedom of man is an undeniable fact, that evil
is a necessary means of correction, tii.it goodness and
justice do not exclude eacli otlun*, etc. E- orywhere
they argue accordingly for tho gnostic demi^n'go as
against the gnostic Redeemer-God. They refer
above all to the two Testaments, jind have therefore
been eulogistically called '" Scripture theologians " ;
but the " religion of the Scriptures ", whereby the
latter is wilfully interpreted as inspired testimony
(IrenfBus looks askance at the gnostic exegesis, but
comes xery near making use of it) gives no guarantee
of contact with the Gospel. The relation between
the rule of faith and the Scriptures (now super-,
now sub-ordination) also did not come to a clear
statement,
^oofrout^^ 111 the doctrine of God the main outlines were
All Time fimily drawu cor all time. A middle way between

i'^

THE LAYING OF THE FOUND ATIOX.

the disavowal of kiiowlodgo aiul an o'. or-ciirious
speculation vas much prized. In IreT^ieus are found
tendencies tc make love^ i.e. Jesus Christ, the prin-
ciple of knowledge. God is to be known through
revelation, whereby the knowledge of the world is
declared, now to be sufficient, and now insufficient;
Fov Irenaeus, the apologist, it is sufficient, for Ire-
na^us, the Christologist, it is not; but a God with-
out a creation is a phantom ; always must the cos-
mical precede the religious. The Creator-God is
the starting-point, blasphemy of the Creator is the
highest blasphemy. Hence also the apologetic idea
of God is virtually made use of (God the negation
and the Cause of the cosmos) ; but Irenasus is still
enthused by it, since a real interest is at hand as
regards the historicia revelation. Especially was it
pointed out against Marcion, that goodness re(iuires
justice.

In the L()(jos-iI()ctriite Tertullian and Hippolytus lo^os-doc-

trine; Ter-

manifest a deeper apologetic interest than IremBus. tuiiiau aiui

^ r t-> Hippoly-

They adopt the whole mass of apologetic material ^""^^
(Tertull. Apolog. 21); but they give it a more par-
ticular reference to Jesus Christ (Tertull. de came
Christ i and adr. Pra.v.). Accordingly Tertullian
fashioned the formulas of the later orthodoxy, in
that he introduced the conceptions substance and
person, and notwithstanding his very elaborate sub-
ordinationism and his merely economical construction
of the trinity, he still hit upon ideas concerning the
relatioi'S of the thret. Persons v/hich could be fully

ii :

i-i

i ^ !

!lt

I i

'. ;^ I.-

Una Siib-

stiintiii.

Trcs Per-

SOUIL'.

LoRos Der-

iviitio ft
Portio D'.'i.

1.30

OUTLINES OF TUK HISTORY OF DOGMA.

rec'ijgnized upon the soil of the Niceiie Creed {'^ una
substantia, tres personw. ") . The unity of the God-
head v,vas set forth in the una substantia; the dis-
position of the one suhstance among the three Per-
sons {trinitas, -fifi-^ first by Theophihis) did not
destroy the unity (the gnostic eons-speculation is
here confined to three in number). Already it was
considered a heresy to maintain that God is a numer-
ical unity. But the self-unfolding (not partitioning)
of the Godhead had made a beginning (the realiza-
tion of the world-idea is still ever the main-spring of
the inner Divine dispositio) ; the Logos became a
distinct being {" secundus a deo constitutus, perse-
vcrans in sua foi-nm"); since he is derivatio, so is
he por^?o of the Deity ("pafer tota substantial^).
Therefore notwithstanding his unity of substance
{unius substantice — v/woufTux^) he has the charac-
teristic of temporality (the Son is not the world-idea
itself, although he possesses the same) : He, the
Stream, when the revelation has accomplished its
aim, will finally flow back into its Fountain. This
form of statement is in itself as yet not at all distin-
guishable from the Hellenic; it was not fitted to
preserve faith in Jesus Christ, for it is too low ; it
has its importance merely in the identification of the
historical Christ with this Logos. Through this
TertuUian united the scientific idealistic cosmology
with the declarations of the primitive Christian
tx'adition concerning Jesus, so that both were to
him like the wholly dissimilar wings of one and the

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

137

same building. The Holy Spirit Tertullian treated
merely according to the schema of the Logos-doctrine,
— an. advance upon the apologists, — yet without any
trace of an independent interest (" tertiKS est spiri-
tus a deo et filio ", " vicaria visfdii ", subordinate to
the Son as the latter is to the Father, yet still " iiiiius
substantice ") . Hippolytus emphasized the creature-
character of the Logos still stronger (Philos. X, ;33 :

koyou TO TzapadeiytLa) ^ but did not attribute an indepen-
dent prosqpon to the Spirit (adv. Noet. 14: i-^-t ''^sf'V

Tveufxarixs) .

While T'ortuUian and Hippolytus simply add the
Christ of the kerygmas to the complete Logos-doc-
trine already at hand, Irenteus took his point of de-
parture from the God-Christ, who became man. The
" Logos " to him is more a predicate of Christ than
the subject itself. His declarations concerning
Christ were won from the standpoint of the doctrine
of redemption; the apologetic Logos-doctrine even
troubled him; but he could not rid himself of it,
since redemption is recapitulaiio of the creation,
and since John 1 : 1 teaches that Christ is the Logos.
However, he rejected from principle every -nofitiXrj^
emanation and theological speculation. Christ is
the eternal Son of God (no temporal coming-forth) ;
he is the eternal self -re vela cion of the Father; there
exists between him and God no separation. Yet so
greatly did he strive to reject the eon-speculation —

Holy
Spirit.

Irenspus
Dim-rs
fro'n 'IVr-
tiillian and
Hippoly-
tus.

138

OUT LINES OK

TifR iiisToirr

OF DOCJMA.

L< i \ /-»/ Vl 1 1 i 1 t-* /^T- / <

niT/\ LJ r\r\ tXmx I

Iit^iii/^ tt\ 1 Mitiit

.+ ;«

Ironnnus'

Doi'trinc of

Mau.

Fall Ex-

cusaliK'

and Adviin-

taj^eous.

the redemption; he was obhged to give him apart
ill the creation, and then he taught nothing different
from Justin and TertuUian. But he always had the
inearnation in view, whose subjeot must be the full
Divinity. "God placed himself in the relation of
Father to the Son, in order to create, after the like-
ness of his Son, men who should be his sons". Per-
haps the incarnation was to Irenrous the highest
expression of purpose in the sonship of Christ. In
regar<l to the H0I3' Spirit Ircnreus spoke with the
greatest indefiniteness ; not once is -rfitd^ found in his
writings.

In llio teaching of Irenauis concerning flio (Jcsfiuy
of ina)iJ:in(J, Uteir original sfafe^ fall and sin, the
divergent lines of vhought become very appannit
(apologetico-moralistic, Biblico-realistic), and hnve
characteristically remained so for the doctrine of the
Church. Onl}^ the first is clearh' developed. Every-
thing created, therefore also man, is in the begin-
ning imperfect. Perfection could only be the destiny
(native capacity) of mankind. This end is realized
through the free decision of man upon the basis of
his God-given capacity (imagc^ of God). The i)rim-
itivo man stumbled and fell into death ; but his fall
is excusable (he was tempted, ho was ignorant, he
allowed himself to be seduced prrcicwfu inimorfali-
tiifis), and even teleologically necessary. Disobedi-
ence lias been advantageous for the development of
man. In order to become wise he must see that dis-

TlIK LAVTNTi OF THE FOUNDATION

130

tie

obcdioiK'o works dcatli ; ho must l(>arn the distance
between man and Crod, an<l tli«> riij^lit use of freedom.
It is a question of life and death; the consequence of
sin is that wldch is really dreadful. But the good-
ness of God showed itself at once, as well in the re-
moval of the tree of life, as in the ordaining of tem-
poral death. Man regains his destiny, when he tle-
cides freely for the good, and that he can still ever
do. The significance of the prophets and of Christ
reduces itself here, as by the apologists, to the tvdch-
ing which strengthens freedom (s(j taught Tertul-
lian and Hippolytus). The second course of thought ircnfrus

lllllut'IK't'll

by Irenjx3us flowed out of the gnostic-anti-gnostic '>>• t^^i"'-

recapitulation-theory and was influenced by Paul.

This encompasses entire humanity as the sinful

Adam, who having fallen once cannot help himself.

All offended God in Adam; through Evt» the entire

race has become subject to death; the original end

is forfeited and God alone can help by descending

again into conmiunion with us and restoring us to

likeness with his Being (not out of freedom does

blessedness flow, but out of C(^mmimion with God,

" in quantum dens nulUus indiqef, in tanfuni homo ciuist sec-
ond Aduiu.

indigef dei commuiiione^\ TV. U, 1). Christ, as
the second Adam, redeems the first Adam (" Christ us
liberfateni restantxirif), in that he step for step
restored in bonnm, what Adam had done in malum.
(The testimony of prophecy is liere changed into a
history of destruction and salvation). This relig-
ions, preconceived historical view is carried out in

11^ !

i I

ivlf'

Idea of
Gcxl-Man
Domi-
nates.

Perfect
Union Be-
tween Lo-

fjos and
Man Jesus.

140 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

an almost naturalistic way. Jrom the consetjuence
of tho apokatastasis of every individual man Ire-
naeus was preserved only by his moral train of
thought.

The idea of the God-man dominated this entire
scheme. Ecclesiastical Christology, so far as it em-
phasizes tne oneness of the Divine and human in
Christ, stands to-day still bj' Irenteus (TertuUian did
not so clearly see the necessity of the oneness) . Jesus
Christ vere homo vere deus, i.e., (1) he is truly
the Word of God, God in kind, (2) this Word be-
came truly man, (3) tho incarnate Word is an insep-
arable unit5^ This is carried out against tho
"ebionites" and Valentinians, who taught the de-
scent of one of the many eons. The Son stands in
natural, and not in adopted kinship (the virgin
birth is recapitulatio: Eve and Mary) ; his body is
substantially identical with ours; for docetism
menaced the redemption just as did "ebionitism ".
Therefore must Christ, in order to be able to restore
the whole man, also pass through a full human life
from birth to mature age and to death. Tho unity
between the Logos and his human nature IrenaDus
called, '^ adunitio verhi dei adj^lasma'^ and "com-
munio et cominixtio dei et hominis". It is to him
perfect; since he did not care to distinguish what
the man did from what the Word did. On the con-
trary TertuUian, dependent upon Irenseus, but not
viewing the realistic doctrine of redemption as the
key to Christianity, used it is true the formula,

i I !

THE LAYING OK THE FOUNDATION.

"homo deo niLrtns'\ but not understamling tho
"homo FACTUs" ill the strict sense. He speaks (adv.
Prax.) of two substances of Cb:ist {corporalis ct
spiritualis), of tho "conditio duariim siibsfanti t-
rum'^ which in their integrity persist, of tho "du-
plex status domin/i, non confusus, sed cujunctiis
in una persona — deus et honio''\ Here is ah'eady
the Chalcedon (juristic) terminology. Tertullian
developed it in endeavoring to ward off the thought :
God transformed himself (so some patripassionists) ;
but he did not see, although ho used the old formulas,
" deus crucifixus ', * nasci se cult deus ", that the
realistic redemption becomes more strongly menaced
through tho sharp separation of the two natures,
than through the acceptance of a transformation.
Indeed he only asserts the oneness and rejects tho
idea that Christ is "teriiamquid". But even Ire-
nseus could not persuade himself, against his own
better judgment, to divide the one Jesus Christ after
the manner of the gnostics: (1) There are not a few
passages in the New Testament, which can be re-
ferred only to the humanity of Jesus (not to tho God-
man), if the real Divinity on the other hand is not
made to suffer (so e.g. the descent oi the Spirit at
his baptism, his trembling and shaking), (2) Ire-
nseus also conceived of Christ in such a way as to
make him the new Adam {" perfectus homo^')., who
possesses tho Logos, which in certain acts in tho
history of Jesus was inactive. The gnostic distin-
guishing of the Jesus patibilis and the Christus

Two Sub-
stanct's

Non Con-
fusus.

Two-Na-
tur»> Doc-
trine.

, •

; 'I

f:-Xt

•r

In-iiaMis
I'V.th.'f (if
Tiii'ulojry
of Facts.

AVork (if

( 'In ist

Vii'ionsly

IiUcr-

112 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

«T«>7)j9 was by Tertulliaii explicitly, and by Irenfeus
indirectly, legitimized. Tiius arose the ecclesias-
tical two-nature doctrine. Hi])polytus stood be-
tween the two older teachers.

However, the oneness was still the penetratinjjj con-
cept'on of Irenieas. Since Christ becam;* what we
are, he as God-man likewise passed through and
suffered what we slioi.ld havo suffered. Christ is
^ot oidy " sahis ef salcot<)r'\ but also his wliole li'e
is a work of icden jjiion. From his conception to
his burial everything was inwardly nrcessary. Ire-
nreus is the father of the " theology of facts " in the
Church (Paul emphasized only tlie death and the
resurrection). The iniiuence of the gnosis is unmis-
taka!.le, and ue even uses the same expressions as the
gnostics when he conceives redemption as fully ac-
complished, — on the one side, in the mere manifes-
tation of Jesus Christ as the second Adam, on the
other, in the mere knowledge of this manifestation

(IV. 3(3, 7: r/ yMOfTii nth uin') run >'i^iri^ y'lri^ r]> diff^apnifi) .

Still he empiiasizes the personal meritorious service.
He looked at the work from many points of view
(loading back into communion, restoration of free-
dom, redemption from death and the devil, propitia-
tion of God); the dominathig one is the procuring
of the aif<^aniiia (adoption unto Divine life). But how
uncertain all is to him, he betrays in I. 10, 3, when
he attributes the question. Why did God become
HeshV to tlu^se who will have nothing to do with
the simple faith. He can alsn still ever rest satis-

THE LAYING OF THV! FOUNDATION.

143

fiod with the hope of the second coming of Christ
and the resurrection of the hody. Between tliis
hope and the deification-idea lies the Pauline view
(gnosis of the deatli on the cross) ; Irentcus exer-
cised himself to prove its legitimateness (the death
of Christ is the true redemption). Still he had not
reached the idea ()f the atonement (the redemption
money is not paid to the devil ui)on his '• with-
drawal'"); within the recapitulation-theory he ex-
presses the idea, that through disobedience upon \\h)
tree Adam became a delator toward God, and through
obedience u])on \\w tree God became reconciled.
Retiections on a substitutional sacrifice are not found
in Ironrous; seldom do we find the idea of sacrificial
death. Forgiveness of sins he did not really recog-
nize, but only the setting aside of sins ar.d their
consequences. The redeemed become through Christ
bound together into a true unity, into true human it}-,
into the Church, whose head Christ is. In Tertullian
and Ilippolytus the same points of view are found,
except that the mystic (recapitulating) form of the re-
deinption recedes. They oscillate con cmiore between
the rational and the Pauline representation of r(>-
demption (" ir*o/?</>z Chrifiiiani noininis et pondns
vt fructus mors CJirisfi'\ adv. ]\Iarc. III., S); but
Hippolytus (Philosoph. fin.) gave a classical expres-
sion to the deification brought about by Christ, inter-
weaving therewith the rational schema (knowledge
redeems). More sharply come out in Tertullian
the conceptions, culpa, rcains pcccati, etc.; he

Did Not
Ucai-h

Id.Mof

Atinif-
nii-nt,

Uippolytus
I'liijilia-

sizes Deifi-
cation.

.1 '

|.; I ,

^ *■•»-.,.

144 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

' ■• I.' .

Christ

nrkk'-

i^rooin of

Indiviiliial

Soul.

Esc 'hat ol-

has also already ^^ satisfacere deo*\ " vicritum^',
''^ promereri deum ", which Cyprian carried out more
Tcrtuiiian precisely. Filially we find in Tertullian the por-
trayal of Christ as the Bridegroom and the individ-
ual soul as tho briile, a fatal modification of the
primitive Christian representation of the Church as
the body of Christ, under the influence of the Hel-
lenic representation (see also the gnostics), that the
Deity is the husband of tho soul.

Very striking is tho impression made upon one by
the eschatoloyij of the early Catholic fathers; for
it corresponds neither with their rational theology,
nor with their mysticism, but is still wholly archaic.
They do not, however, repeat the same in any urgent
way (perhaps on account of the churches, or the re-
gula, or the Apocalypse of John), but they and the
Latin fathers of the 3d, and of the beginning of the
4th, century live and move altogether in the hope
of the earliest Christian churches (like Papias and
Justin). The Pauline eschatology they felt as a dif-
ficulty, the primitive Christian, together with its
grossest chiliasm, not at all. This is the clearest
proof that these theologians were only half - hearted
about their rational and mystic theology, which they
had been compelled to adopt in their contest with
the gnosis. They had in fact two Christs: The
returning Christ, who should conquer the antichrist
and set up his judgment seat as the victorious
King, and the Logos, who was looked upon, now as
a Divine teacher, now as God-man. This very com-

I'apias,
Justin.

■ I

TIIK LAYINtS OF TIIK FOUNDATION.

plication recommeuded the now ChiuH'h doctrine.
The details of the eschatological hopes in Ironwus Tfrtllnhm.
(I.V., see also Melito), Tertullian and Hippolytus tuH.
(de antichr.) are in the main as stereoty|)od, in par-
ticulars as wavering, as in the earlier times. The
Johaunean Apocalypse, together with its learned ex-
positions, stands with Daniel in the foreground (six>
or rather seven thousand years, heathen earthly-
power, antichrist, site in Jerusalem, cami)aign of tho
returning Christ, victory, resurrection of Christians,
visible kingdom of joy, general resurrection, judg-
ment, final end). But after the Montanistic crisis
there arose in the Orient an o])i)()sition movement ^M'P'^s'tif.n
against this drama of the future (the " alogoi ") ; the
learned bishoi)s of the Orient in the IJd century, above
all the Origenists, opposed it, yes, even the Johannean
Apocalypse (Dionysius Alex.) ; they found howevei*
tenacious oppposers among the ^' siniplices et idio-
tic " (Nepos in Egypt) . The Christian people of the
Orient also unwillingly suffered themselves to be
robbed of their old faith, they were obliged however
to submit gradually (the Apocalypse disappears often
in the Oriental church canon). In the Occident
chiliasm remained unbroken.

There remains still fJie docfrine concernina the i^ysj,'"'ne

*^ Oil WO

two Testaments. The creation of the New Testa-
ment threw a new light upon the Old Testament.
This passed now no longer simply as a Christian
book (Barnabas, Justin), and also not as a book of

the Jewish God (Marcion), but by the side of tho old
10

Testa-
ments.

■I

':.:iv

1 1

'■ \

■ . -:.?..■

m i

T fi'!'.

' *"^ll

! ' ■ i

. :} <- ' '

\4Ci OUTLINES OF TlIK IIISTOKY OK DOOMA.

conception thfit it in (MiriHtian in every lino and
Htands upon the summit of tlie Christian rovehition,
was peacefully established the other which is in-
consistent with it, that it was a }>v<>}><iv(i1()r(i shtf/c
to (Jhrist and tiie New Testament. This view, in
wiiieh an historical conception faintly ai)pears, was
first sot forth by the Valentinians {o}). Pfolcniaei
ad Florani). Men varied according to necessity:
im'nt Con- Now tho Old Testament is held to contain the wholo

tiiincd All. , , ,

truth in the form of proj)hccy, now it is a Icgisdafio
in servitiiton by tho side of the new Icfji.schdio in.
liberfatcm, an old transient covenant, which pre-
pared tho way for tho new, and whose content is tho
history of God's pedagogy of tho human race, — in
every portion of saving value and j^et transient, and
at tho same time the forecast of the future and typi-
cal. As over against the gnostic attacks tho fathers
tried to set forth tho incomparableness of tho cere-
monial laws, and Paul is distorted for tho pur[)OSO
in order to prove by him also devotion to tho law.
Prophecy, typo, pedagogy were the decisive points of
view, and only when men were restricted by no op-
position did they admit that certain Old Testament
requirements had been abrogated. In all this there
lay, notwithstanding the confusion and the contra-
diction which persists even until tho present time, a
An Ad- real step forward. Men began to make distinctions

vauce.

in the Old Testament, they hit upon the idea of ad-
vancing stages of truth, of historical conditions (Ter-
tuUian, de oraf. 1: '^ (jiiii<l(/ii id retro fiici-at, out de-

THE LAYINCi UF THE FOUNDATION.

117

unddfnin est [wr ('Itris/nin iit vircinncisitt^ lud
fiftpplctinn iif r('h<in(i /c.r, itnf inipL fnni nl pm-
plivtin^ (tnl perfect tan nt Jide.s /y>.s7( "). liiasnuicli
as tvvu Te.Htaincnts wltc now accoptrd, tlu' spccilic
sij^nificanw of tlio Cliristian rovoiiant hccMnic inoni
proiniiiont (Tcrtull. *' /r.r et pvojtln'tde v.s<pie ad
JoliaiiHCin " ; tlio apostles f^roatcu* than tlio prophets) ;
true, tho now Covenant .vas still ever treated as
"/ex*", and tho ho})eless (piestion was aeeordingly
discussed, whether Christ has lighttMied or weighted
the old law? The pinlai^oij^ical salvation-histon\ i'"'i'iprnj:i-

' " " •' ' i-al Salva-

as it was first put forth by Trentcus and intertwined "'['.'r"'**'
with the testimony of prophecy, ina(l(^ a tremendous
inii)ression {iih initio — Moaes-Cltrist) ; tho Tertul-
lian addition (Itli stajjje: purdcletn.s as iunnis le<jis-
lator) did not gain acceptance, yet it has ever re-
appeared in the history of the Church, since even
Christ and Paul cannot be included in the scheme
of new law-givers for th(^ Church life.

3. The value of the work of the old Catholic \y',"|!;;J
fathers to the Church— in the Occident Novatian '"','.! kI;:'"
worked out tlu? Tertullian Christology, Cyprian es-
tablished the ref/uld as d( veloped into a salvation-
history and made a part of the Tertullian formulas
current in larger circles — did not consist in their
construction of a system of dogmatics, but in their
refutation of too gnosis and in the theological frag-
ments whi(

they

-gnostically

interpreted " rule of faith ", which was coupled with
the chief statements of the aj^ologetic theology (vide

iil!

14.S OUTLINES OF THE HISTCl.Y OF DOGMA.

! I ■ )■ : l")

;: 1

f :

IflR''

11
^ 1

'i'

fi^'

above all Cyprian's writing, "testimonia" ; here
the doctrine concerning the two Testaments, as Ire-
nsBus had developed it, forms the ground-plan in
which the particular articles are introduced. Doc-
trinal passages from the rational theology change
with the kerygmatic facts ; everything, however, is
proven from the two Testaments; faith and theol-
ogy are not at a tension). In order to become a Cath-
olic Christian one was obliged above all to believe the
following articles, which stand in sharp contrast to
'^FakhV^ the opposing doctrine: (1) the unity of God, (2) the
christiaifs. identity of the highest God and the Creator of the
work' , I. e. the identity of the Mediator of creation and
of redemption, (3) the identity of the highest God and
the God of the Old Testament and the acceptance of
the Old Testament as God's old book of revelation,
(4) the creation of the world out of nothing, (5) the
unity of the human race, (()) the origin of evil from
man's freedom and the inalienable character of that
freedom, (7) the two Testaments, (8) Christ as God
and man, the unity of his personality, the essential
character of his Divinity, the reality of his human-
ity, the verity of his fate, (9) the redemption and
covenant through Christ as the now, final manifesta-
tion of God's grace to all men, (10) the resurrection
of the entire man. In closest connection with these
doctrines stands the Logos-doctrine, j^es the latter
formed measurably the foimdation of their contents
and just claims. How it was carried out will bo
indicated in Chapter VII. On the carrying out of

■^}fm<'<dm-Siiiiiiisiilikiil^-;

THE LAYING O.^ THE FOUNDATION.

149

this, however, hung also the decision of the weight-
iest questions, whether the Cliristian faith as in
former times should rest upon the hope of the return
of Christ and upon his glorious kingdom, or in the
faith in the God-man, who has brought full knowl-
edge and transformed the nature of man into the
Divine nature.

CHAPTER VI.

THE TRANSFORMATION OF ECCLESIASTICAL TRADI-
TION INTO A PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION, OR THE
ORIGIN OF SCIENTIFIC ECCLESIASTICAL THEOL-
OGY AND DOGMATICS : CLEMENT AND ORXGEN.

Guericke, de Hchola qua) Alex, floruit catechetica, 1824.
Bigg, The Chrit.tian Platonists of Alex., 188G. Wiuter,
Ethik dcs Cioinfus, 1882. Redepenning, Origenes, 1841, f.
Denis, Philosophie d'Origone, 1884,

1. The gnostics sharply distinguished pistis and ^J^l^"',','."*'
gnosis ; Irenaeus and Tertullian made use of science
and speculation only from necessity and in order to
refute them, reckoning that to faith itself which they
needed for theological exposition. In the main they
were satisfied with the authorit}-, hope and holy ordi-
nances of life; they were building upon a building,
which they themselves did not care for. But after
the end of the 2d century there began to be in the
Church a movement toward a scientific religion and
toward a theological science (schools in Asia Minor, sciiuoi's!
Cappadocia, Edessa, Aelia, Caesarea, Rome; alogoi, dria.

'! 1

150 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Alexander of C{ii)pa(l()('ia, Julius Africaiius, Tlieuk-
tist, Tiieodocian schools). It was the strongest in
the City of Science, Alexandria, where Christianity
became the heir of Pliilo and where evidently, until
toward the year 200, there had not been a firm organ-
ization of Christians upon exclusive principles. The
Alexandrian church comes into the light of history
together with the Alexandrian Christian school (c.
100) ; in the latter the entire Hellenic science was
taught and adapted to the service of the Gospel and
ciomenta the Church. Clement, the pupil of Pantajnus, pro-
Pauta>nus. (Juiced in his Stromata tlie first Christian ecclesiasti-
cal work, in which the Greek philosophy of religion
served not only an apologetic and polemic purpose,
hut was the means of first restricting Christi-
anity to thinking men (as by Philo and Valen-
tinus). Ecclesiastical literature was in itself un-
familiar to Clement ; he acknowledged its authority,
because the Holy Scriptures appeared to him as a
revelation; but it was his conscious purpose to
work their content out philosophicall}' and to make
them his own. The pistis is given; it is to be
recoined into gnosis, i.e. a doctrine is to be de-
veloped which will satisfy scientific demands by a
philosophical \iew of the world and of ethics.
Gnosis does not conflict with faith, but on the con-
trary it supports and enlightens it, not only in cer-
tain points, but it lifts it up into a higher sphere out
of the domain of authority, into the sphere of pure
knowledge and inner spiritual harmony flowing

Pistis is
Oiveu.

t ■•'

I \{ I

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

151

a
to

e-
a

ics.

from the love of God. Pistis und gnosis, however, ^'i^lulis-s''
are bound together in this, that both have their con- g"tiier.*^
tent in the Holy Scriptures (yet in practice Clement is
not an exact Scripture- theologian like Origen). Into
these Scriptures tiie highest aim and the entire ai)pa-
ratus of the idealistic Greek philosophy is read ; they
are at the same time referred to Christ and ecclesi-
astical Christianit}' — so far as there was such in Alex-
andria at that time. The apologetic purpose, which
Justin had had, is hero transformed into a systemati-
co-theologic. The positive material is accordingly
not shoved into the proof of prophecy, but, as by
Philo and Valentinus, is carried over with infinite
pains to scientific dogmatics.

To the idea of the Logos who is Christ, Clement,
in that he exalted it to the highest principle of the
religious view of the world and of the exposition of
Christianity, gave a far richer content than did Jus-
tin. Christianity is the doctrine of the creation,
education p.nd perfecting of the human race through
the Logos, whose ^v'ork reaches its climax in the per-
fect gnostic, and who has made use of two means,
the Old Testament and Hellenic philosophy. Logos
is everywhere, wherever men rise above the plane
of nature (the Logos is the moral and rational prin-
ciple in all stages of the development) ; but the
authentic knowledge of him can be w^on only from
revelation. He is the law of the \7orld, the teacher, "viefel^"^
or in Christ the hierourge, who tlirough holy ordina- ^^'^''"°"'"8®-
tions conducts to knowledge ; linally, for the perfect,

Idea of
Logos.

I ;

Clement
Attacked
Problem.

Ie52 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the bridge to union with Ood himself. Aside from
the Holy Scriptures the Greek combination of knowl-
edge and ceremonial ordination made it possible for
Clement to let ecclesiastical Christianity pass cur-
rent. The ecclesiastical gnostic rises, so to speak,
by means of an attached balloon to the Divine realms;
he leaves behind him everything earthl}^ historical,
statutory and authoritative, yes, finally, the Logos
himself, while he struggles upward in love and
knowledge; but the rope remains fast beneath, while
the pure gnostic on the contrary severed it. This
exaltation is accomplished in gradual stages (Philo),
under which scheme the whole philosophical ethics
is set forth, from reasonable moderation to the excess
of consciousness and of apathetic love. Ecclesiasti-
cal tradition is also set forth; but here as yonder the
true gnostic should upon the higher stage overcome
the lower. When the spirit's wings are grown he
needs no crutches. Although Clement succeeded
very poorly in arranging the unwieldy material
under his proposed scheme — he stuck fast in the midst
of his undertaking — yet his purpose is perfectly plain.
While Irensens wholly naively blended discordant
material and therefore won no religious freedom,
Clement advanced to freedom. He was the first to
give attention to the problem of future theology:
In connection with the historical deposits, through
which we are what we are, and in connection with
the Christian communion, upon which we are
thrown because it is the only universal moral- relig-

. i ;.

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

153

ious communion, to win for ourselves freedom and
independence witli the Gospel and to .so set forth
this Gospel that it shall appear the highest message of
the Logos, who makes himself known in all rising
above nature, and therefore in the whole history of
mankind. Truly the danger was for Clement at
hand, that the ideal of the self-sufficient Hellenic
seer should stifle the voice that declares that we live
in Christ by the grace of God; but the danger of
secularization was in the trammelled exposition of
Irenseus, which placed value upon authorities that
have nothing to do with the Gospel, and alleged facts
pertaining to salvation that oppress us, in another
way, indeed, but none the less. If the Gospel is to
give freedom and peace in God and pre])are us for an
eternal life in union with Christ, then Clement un-
derstood it in that sense. His was virtually an at- Attempted
tempt to fuse the aim of the Gospel to make us rich Gosp. raud

Plat on ic

in God and to gain from him power and life, with
the ideal of the Platonic philosophy to raise oneself
as a free spirit above the world unto God, and then to
bind together the instructions pertaining to a blessed
life which are found in the one and in the other. But
Origen was the first to succeed in putting this into a
systematic form, in which the most scrupulous Bibli-
cism and the most conscientious regard for the rule
of faith are conjoined with the philosophy of religion.
2. Origen was the most influential theologian in
the Oriental church, the father of theological science,
the author of ecclesiastical dogmatics. What the

I'hilos-
upliy.

Origen,

i .

' " v

"!(

154 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

apolojjfists, g'liostios and old Catliolic tli(M)logiaiis
had taiiylit, ho brought together and comljinod; he
recognized the prc^hleni and the proljlems, the histori-
cal and the speculative. He sharply distinguished,
with the clearest virion, between ecclesiastical faith
and ecclesiastical theology, and spoke one thing t(^
the people and another to the discerning. His nni-

o'niwTve" versal spirit did not wish to destroy anything, but
everywhere to conserve; he found on every hand that
wliich is valuable and he knew how to give to ever}'
truth its place, be this in the pistis, or in the gnosis ;
no one should be "offended", but Christian truth
should triumph over the systems of the Hellenic phi-
losophers and tlic old Catholic gnostics, over the
superstition of the heathen and Jews and over' the
defective presentation of Christian unitarians. This
Christian truth bore as gnosis Neo-Platonic marks,
and indeed to such a high degree that a Porphyry
commended the theolog}' of Origen, and rejected only
tl)e intermingled "strange fables". Origen presup-
poses the rule of faith in a firmly outlined form (see
his principal work, -zin '^'iiy/o^-)^ together with the
two Testaments: He who has these has the truth
which makes blessed, yet there is a deeper, more
gratifying conception. Upon its summit all con-
trasts become mere shades, and in the absolute har-

orthodox- moiiy wliicli such a view gives, one learns to estimate

Tniilitioii- _ o 7

aiist Bib- the relative. Thus is Origen an orthodox tradition-

lu'ul Tlieo-

i.ta'/isHc alist, a strong Biblical theologian (nothing should
phec. pass current which is not in the Scriptures), a keen

Prosni)-

poses Rule

of Faitli.

THE I.AVIN(; OF Till-: I' ( )r ND ATION.

1 :>:»

t'liristiari-

itv for

Hot 1 1

C'lusst'S.

idijilistlc plillosoplicr wlio Iraiislati'd tlu» content of
I'aitli into ideas, {•()iiH)K't('d tlio structure of the world
lluit is within, and finally let nothing jiass save
knowledge of God and of self in closest union, which
exalts us above the world and conducts unto deilica-
tion. Zeiio and Plato, howe\er, should not bo tho
leaders, bu.t Christ; for the former did not overcome
polytheism, xior make the truth generally accessibUs
nor give a system of instruction which made it pos-
sible for the unlearned to bec«jme any better than
tiieir natural ability permits. That Christianity is
for i)oth classes, — religion for tli(> common man with-
out polytheism (of course with jjictures and signs)
and religion for the thinking mind, — Ori gen recog-
nized as its superiority over all other religions and
systems. The Chrisfian rcJii/ioii is the onhi reli(/- Vi'V''^''"^
ion irhicJi is also truih in iiiyfJiical fonn. Tlieol- Mj^hiVai
ogy it is true is obliged — as always, so also here — to
emancipate itself from the positive traits (character-
istic of the positive religion) Ix'longing to external
revelation and statutes; but in Christianity this is
accomplished under the guidance of Holy Scrii)ture
which establishes the positive rc^ligion for the masses.
The gnosis neutralizes everything empiricallv histor- onosis

Ncutial-

ical, if not indeed alwavs in matters of fact, yet iz.s Kn.-
wholly so as regards its worth. It sublimates first
from tho empirical history a higher transcendental
history, which begins in eternity and rests behind
the empirical; but in reality it sublimates this trans-
cendental once again, and ther*,' remains now only

^>' :■

,1): i-

Christol-

System
Monistic,

yet has
Dualistic
Element.

]5(; OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

tho unchangeable (jrod and the created houI. This is
most clearly brought out in Origen's Christology.
Back of the historical Christ reposes the eternal
Logos; he who appeared first as physician and re-
deemer, appears on a dee? r vi' ' u< the teacher —
blessed are *cho adva.'-^. i od<'-'. v^-h^ need no more the
physician, the shepherd i..id ■; itt'eemer! — but the
te*.icher is finally no longer necessary io those who are
become perfect ; such rest in God. Thus is ecclesi-
astical Christianity here stripped off as a husk and
thrown aside like a crutch. That which in Justin is
proof of prophecy, in Irenteus salvation-history, van-
ishes in Origen for the gnostic, or is only a picture
of a spiritual history. In the final analysis there
fails in his high-flying, all-comprehensive ethics the
sense of guilt and fear of the Judge.

The system w^as intended to be strongly monistic
(that which was oreated out of nothing has only a
transitory significance as a place of purification) ; yet
in fact there dwelt within it a dualistic element.
The dominating antithesis is God and created things.
The amphiboly lay in his double view of the spiritual
(it belongs on the one side, as the outgoing of God's
nature, to God himself, on the other side, as that
which has been created, it stands in opposition to
God) , which keeps cropping out in all Neo-Platonic
systems. Pantheism was to be warded off, and yet the
supermundane character of the human spirit was to
be stoutly maintained. This spirit is the free^ heav-
enly eon, conscious of the right way, but uncertain

'li I

^' :•

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

157

ThrtH'
Farts.

L its Btriviiig. Divine origin, divine end, and free
cL'jice constitute its essence. T \e knot is tied how-
e\ er, v that moment when the spirit comes forth in
manifestation, "^hero is therefore a history prior to
temporal history. The system is divided into three S3f»t<'iii ni
parts: (1) God and his outgoing, {2) the fall of the
created spirit and the consequences, (3) redemption
and restc ration. That freedom will only be a sem-
blance, if the spirit must finally attain unto its end
( )rigen did not observe. In carrying out his sche" . :
he was so earnest that he even limited the Divine
onmipotence and omniscience. Out of the Hi.'
Scriptures the God-world drama is educed (secret tra-
dition which still played a great role in Clement en-
tirely recedes). As the cosmos is spiritual, psychic
and material, so also the Holy Scriptures, the second
revelation, consist of these three parts. Thereby
was a secure method given for exegesis ; it has, (1) to
discover the verbal sense, which, however, is tlie
shell, (2) the psychic-moral sense, (.'3) the pneumatic.
Here and there this pneumatic is alone taken into
consideration and the verbal sense must even be cast
aside, whereby only one is permitted to discover the
deeper sense. This Biblical alchemy Origen devel-
oped with the greatest virtuosity.

(a) God is the One, who stands over against the God is one

Over

many that point back to him as the Cause ; he is the tife^Man*^
absolute Existence and spiritual Being, who stands
over against conditioned existences. He is different
from the many, yet the order, the dependence and

Oript-n's
Ex«'Kt'si.s.

158 OiriJNKS OK TUE IIISTOKV OF DOCiMA.

Mi.

O'..' Not

Absolutely

Oiiiiiis-

cii'Tit and

Oimiipo-

tciit.

Lotr<is is
(lod.

tho longiiij^- of tlio many tell of liiiii. God as the
absolute Causo, with Hclf-consciousness and will,
is sot forth as nioro living and, so to spoak, as moro
personal by Origcn than by tho gnostics and tho
Noo-Platonists. But God is over eausality, and
thoroi'oro never to bo thought oi apart from rovc.'la-
tion. That ho creates belongs to his being, which is
revealed indeed even in tho many. Since however
all revelation nuist bo partial, Origen permits no
limitless conceptions to be applied to the Omniscience
and Omnipotence; God cdu only what he irillj ho
cannot do that which is in itself contradictor}' and
is not able to become existent (all miracles are natu-
ral) ; ho cannot indeed make tho created absolutely
good, since tho conception of tho created includes a
privatio of being; he can make tho same only poten-
tially good ; for tho idea never goes forth without re-
serve into the substance which gives it form. Free-
dom also places limitations upon God, which he, it is
true, imposed upon himself. Thus are relative ideas
applied to tho idea of God. God is love and goodness ;
righteousness is a manifestation of his goodness.

Since God is eternally revealed, the world is eter-
nal, but not this world, yet tho world of spirits.
With this world, however, God is united through
tho Logos, into whom, laying aside his absolute
apathy, God once again entered. Tlio Logos is
God himself and at the same time tho totality' and
the creator of tho many (Philo), a special hypostasis,
like indeed the self -consciousness of God and tho

THE LAYTXr; OF TIIK FOUNDATION.

150

Hi- is \U"

to tln>
Miiiiy-

potency of tlio world. Tlu' Lojjjos is tlie perfoi't like-
ness of God (">'">'''"T£"v) . Ill" has nothii).i; (•(•rporeal
uhoiit him and is therefore true God, yet a second
God (no sharing of Divinity, "'> xara inrnnrtia-^^ iOJA
Xjur onni'vj ffzo^). Hu /.s' hn/oftcii of the essence oi tlu»
Father from eternity; there was no time when he
was not, and ho over goes forth from the Father's
heing through the Divine constraining will. But
even because ho is siibslnntid suhsfdiilidlUcr sfih-
sistois, he is as such no '/y'-^'-"'/'"^; he is an uiTiarn,^
the Father is -[>oj7 </•>£«*>. Accordingly he is the
first stage in the transition fnmi the One; to the n-ui'iMmn"
many; from the standpoint of God the xTi>T;ia i>;i(ii>n-
(T'.iry^ from (jur standpoint the manifest, essential God.
For us alone therefore does the essential likeness of
the Father and Son exist; his uncliangeahleness is
therefore only relative, since it does not reside in tlie
autousie. Everywhere in this speculation in regard
to the Logos-Creator, there is no thouglit of the
Logos-Redeemer. The Holy Spirit also — the rule of
faith necessitated him — is included in tlie Godhead
as a third unchangealjlo being and reckoned as a
third stage and hyi)Ostasis. He is become through
the Son and is related to him as the Son to the
Father. His sphere of activity is the smallest —
strangely enough, indeed, the most important. The
Father is the principle of existence, the Son (jf
reason, the Spirit of that which is holy. This grad-
uated trinity is a trinity of revelation, but even on
that account also innninent and persistent, since God

Holy
spirit.

I '

H-'

'ii^

('rfat4'(|
SpiritH.

100 OUTLINKS OF THK HlSTOliY OK FXXiMA.

can never bo thought of {ipart from revelation. The
Holy Spirit is tlio transition to tho fulness of spirits
and ideas, which, created through the Son, are in
truth tho unfolding of his own fulness. Tho charac-
teristic of cvvdled spirits is the hoconu'ny (advance,
7r/>»x»*:rr;'), i.e. frecidoui (opposition to tho heretical
gnosis). But tho freedom is still relative, i.e. in a
broad sense they are free; fundamentally however
there exists the rigid necessity for the created spirit
Frotdom. to reacli the goal. Freedom therefore is snh specie
aetenutatis necessary evoUition. Out of freedom
Origen sought to understand tho actual world; for to
tho spirits belong also human spirits; they were all
created from eteniiff/ (G(xl is ever a Creator), orig-
inally alike in substance; but their duties are dift'er-
ent and therefore their development. In so far as
they are changeable spirits they are all endowed with
a kind of corporeality. In tho fact itself of being
created there is ordained for angels and men a kind
of materiality. As to how they might have devel-
oped themselves Origen did not speculate, but only
as to how they have developed.

(b) They should all attain unto a persistent exist-
ence, in order to make room then for new creations.
But they fall into idleness and disobedience (pre-
existent fall into sin) . To curb and purify them the
visible world was created; this is also a house of
correction and the spirits are, through the bondage
of the soul, shut up in divers bodies, the grossest of
which have devils, the finest angels, the medium

Fait,

World Crc-

att'd to

Kfdft'in

TlllMll.

THK I.AVIN(J OK TIIK KorNDATION.

IGl

rnon, wlio are Mupj^orted and ('ndjiiij^crcd by devils
iUid angels (acceptance of popidar repn^sentatidns).
Lifi3 is a discipline, a contlict under the pennissiou
and loading of (iod, wliich will end with the con-
<luost and destruction of evil. Thus harshly, almost
ihiddhistically, did Origen think of the world — he is
however fundanientallv an optimist. .Man consists Man con-
of Spirit, soul ai".d body (after IMato and because the s-tilil'i'imi
s[)irit cannot be the principle of action antagonistic
to God. The soul is treateil just as inconsistently as
tlio Logos : It is a spirit grown cold and yet no spirit.
It was thus concci V(hI in order to makt.' the fall conceiv-
able, and yet to guard the integrity of the reason!d)lo
soul). Man's conflict consists in the striving of those
powers inherent in his constitution to gain dominion
over his environment. Sin inheres on the one side
in the earthly state (in reality all /////.s7 l.'e sinners) ;
on the otlier, it is the product of freedom, but is even
tlicrefore conquerable when God assists. For with-
out him nothing is good.

' '^ ' Natiirt'. of

through the laws * *" Moses, then through the Gos})el Gospel',
(to each according to his kind and according to the
measure of his receptivity) ; the peifect he hi'lps
through the cfcntal Gospel, wliich has no outer shell
and no representation. Revelation is a manifold,
gradual I'endering of help, which (\)mes to the assist-
ance of the growing creature (the significance of the

people Israel is recognized) . But the Logos must him-
11

H \

'if»i

riiris-

Coiniilt'x.

102 Ol'TLINKS OF VHE HISTORY OF I)0(;MA.

self appear and help. His work must be as compli-
cated as the need is : He must exhibit to the one class
the true victory ovor death and the demons, must, as
the God-man, bring an offering which represents the
expiation of sin, must pay the price of redemption
which shall end the dominion of the devil — in short
ho must bring a comprehensible redem}>tion in
''deeds''. (Oi'igen first introduced into the Gentile
Church a theory of reconciliation and atonement;
but one should consider in what age he wro^e.) To
others, however, he must, as Divine teacher and
Hicrourge, disclose the depths of knowledge and bring
to them a new principle of life, so that they may
share his life and, interwoven with the Divine Being
himself, may become divine. Return to connnunit)n
with God is here, as 3'onder, the goal; 3'onder
through facts toward whi(^li man directs his faith ;
here through knowledge and love, which, striving up
beyond the Cruciiied, lays hold upon eternal lif(> as the
Logos himself encompasses it. The " facts" are also,
as with the gnostics, not simulation or an indifferent
basis of truth, but are truth, though not fJie truth.
Thus he reconciled faith and the philosophy of relig-
ion. Ho can commend the cosmic significance of
the death on the cross, a work which encompasses
all spirits, and yet rise above this occurrence by spec-
idatioDS which have no history.

In accordance therewith his Christologv takes its
form; its characteristic is its comj)lexity: Th(» \ie-
tleenicr wat- all tliat Christians <';>n think him tolia\o

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION,

1 r,3

i>
lie

je-
ts

,0-

boen. For the gnostic ho is the divine Principle,
the Teacher, the First-Born, the knowablc, Divine
Reason. The gnostic knows no " Christ ol()<j;y" : From
Christ on began the perfect indwelling of the I.ogos
in mankind. Here, there^'^re, neither tlie Divinity
nor the humanity of Christ is a (juestion or a prob-
lem. But for the imperfect Christian Christ is the
God-man, and the gnostic is in duty bound to solve
the problem which this expression offers and to
guard the solution from errors on the right and on
the left (against docetism and ebionitism). The
Logos could unite itself with the body only through
the medium of a human soul. This soul vras a pure
unfallen spirit, which had destined itself for the soul
in order to serve the purposes of redemption. It was
a pure spirit fundamentally united with the Logos
and became then, by reason of its moral worthiness,
a medium for the incarnation of the Logos (closest
inner union, but really perfect only through incessant
exercise of will from both sides ; therefore no ming-
ling). The Logos remains unchangeable; only the
soul hungers and suffers, inasmuch as it, like the Eifmeut.
body, is truly human. But because both are pure
and their substance is in itself without (pialities, his
body was still acfuidhj totally different from ours
(Clement is still more docetic). The body could at
any moment assume such a character as the situa-
tion reijuirod, in order to make the strongest imi)res-
sion upon different persons. The Logos was also not
shUi, up within the body, but wrought everywhere as

pocotii'

» I

104 OUTLIX?:S OF THK HISTORY OF do(;ma.

■' t

hilhorto and united itself with all pious souls. It
is true the union was with none so close as with the
soul of Jesus, and the same was true as regards his
body. The Logos illumined and deified the soul
gradually during the earthly life, and the soul the
body. The functions and the attril)utcs of the in-
carnate Logos form a gradation, in tlie knowledge
of which believers progress. The union became so
close {/.iifMO'^ia^ lvo)(T.<^ (hd/.itaf!'.^) that the attributes
are interchanged in the Holy Scriptures. Finally
Jesus api)ears transformed into Spirit, received into
.lUKusiiiui the Godhead, Ihc same irith the Lof/os. But the

LOLMS

:tiiieaiiy uuiou is f undamcntall V ethical and finaliv not unique.
All conceivable heresies are here touched upon, but
guarded by cautions (Jesus the heavenly man — yet
all men are heavenly; the adoption Christology —
but the Logos behind it; the conception of two Logoi ;
the gnostic severing of Jesus and the Christ; mo-
nophysite commingling; docetism), save only modal-
ism. That in a .'^vicnfijic Christology so much room
was left for the humanity is the important thing;
the idea of the iiicdriiaiion is accepted.

Tlu^ redemptive adaptations are in all this already
indicated: Freedom and faith are in the van. As in
Christ the human soul gradually united itself with
the Logos, so man receives grace gradually, in keep-
ing with liis progress (Neo-Platonic progressive
stagi's (»r knowledge from simple science and sensu-
ous things oiiwai'd; yet ecstasy and visions recede;
there is little that is shadowy). Everywhere a blend-

Frccdorn
.111(1 Faith.

1
U

THE T.AYINC OF THE F< H'NDATK )N.

Klf)

ing' of freoiloni iiiul riiligliteiiiiicut is lU'Ct^ssai'v, and
the ecclesiawtical faith remains the starting-point also
of tlie "theoretic life", until this conies to j<^yous as-
cetic contemjilation, in which the Logos is the friend
and bridegroom of the sonl that is now deified in love

and rests in Divinity. Regeneration Origen recog- uepiMia-

tidii
izod only as a process; but in him and (dement are ui'navss.

fomid st[itements joined to the New Testament ((hul
as Love, as the Father, regeneration, adoption) which,
free from the shackles of the system, set forth the
evangelical annomicement in a surprisingly pertinent
wav. In the highest sense there are no " means of
grace", but the symbols which accomiiany tht^ be-
stowal of grace are not ecpially good. Tho system M.!;Ji""torJ
of numerous mediat(jrs and intercessors (angels,
martyrs, living saints) Origen first brought actually
into oiXTation and encouraged praj'ers to these (as
regards praying to Christ Origen was very reticent).

According to Origen all s])irits will, in the f(;rm rniy.Tsai
of their individual lives, be finall\' rescued and glor- """
ified (apokatastasis), in order to make way for a new
world-epoch. The sensuous-eschatological expecta-
tions are i)i fofo banished. The doctrine of the
resurrection of the liody Origen adopted (rule of
lit he conceived of it in such a

'),

»3'

corpus spiritale will rise, in which all sense-facul-
ties, y«'s all the members which have sensuous func-
tions, will be wanting, £md which will shine brightly
like the angels and stars. The souls of those who ^'"''k^^"">'
have fallen asleep will go at once to paradise (no

Lopos-
C'liiis-
tolugy.

IOC OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

sloe})iiig of tlio soTil) ; tlio souls which aro not yet
purified will pass into a new condition of ;^)unish-
meut (purgatory), which will purify them still far-
ther (the remorse of conscience is hell). Only so far,
however, did Origen accept the ecclesiastical doctrine
of damnation; at last all spirits, the demons them-
selves, will return to God pnrified. Yet is his doc-
trine esoteric: "for the common man it is enough to
know that sin will bo punished". This sj'stem drove
fr(jm the field the heretic gnostic theology and later
dominated the ecclesiastical theology of the Orient.
But the Church could not for any length of time ap-
prove of all the teaching of Origen or content itself
with his sliarp discrimination between faith and the
svieiice of faith. It was obliged to iry to miite both
and to put them upon the same plane (like Irenaius).

CHAPTER VII.

DECISIVE RESULT OF TIIEOLOCJICAL SPECULATION
AVITHIN THE REAL\I OF THE RULE OF FAITH,
OR THE DEFINING OF THE ECCLKSlASl iCAL DOC-
TRINAL NORM THROUGH THE ACCEPT INCE OF
THE LOCJOS-CHRISTOLOGY.

The L v>g )s-(Jln'i8*-ology alone permitted a uniting
of faith and scinnce, corresponded to the doctrine that
Godlvcauiv '.n\ ii\ ordartiip' v/e might becon^e gods,
and thiv- Mr^iporlul Christianity from without and
from withn Bit 't .vhs by no means wide-spread

TliE LAYING OF TTIE F(^rNT)ATTON.

\'.\7

in the ehiirche'S in tlu) yonv lOO, or even later; rather
was it in part unknown, and in part feared as
heretie-gnostic (destruction of the Divine monarchy,
that is, on the other hand, of the Diviniiy of Christ) ;
Tertull. adi\ P)-a.v. ',}: '' Siuiplices qu((2nc, nedixe-
reni iitpiiidotfcs et idiotac, quae malor semper
pars cre(le}iti 1(1)1 est, ((uouiam et ipsa requJa jidei
apluribiis diis saeeuli ad tnu'einn et rerion deitm
transfert, uon. iiiteJligeitfes iiuiemn (piidein, sed
cum sua ir./.ir,,>i,.i(L esse eredeiidum, e.vpavescunt ad
oixuvofjL'M . . . Jfaque duos et tres iam iactitaut a
nobis pradieari, se rero unius dei cultures prae-
sumunt . . . )no)ntrcJiiam iiiquiunt tenemus^\
The establishment of the Log'os-Christology with- Estab-

lislit'u J>y

in the faith of the Church — and indeed as articu- .u.out :^(h>

*' Effect.

lus fuiidamoitalis — was accomplislied after severe
conflicts during the course of a hundred years (till
about 300). It signified the transformation of the
faith into a system of beliefs with an Hellenic-philo-
sophical cast ; it shoved the old eschatological rejire-
sentations aside, and even suppressed them ; it put
back of the Christ of historj' a conceivable Christ, a
principle, and reduced the historical figure to a m< -e
appearance; it referred the Christian to "natures"
and naturalistic magnitudes, instead of to the Person
and to the ethical ; it gave the faith of tlu^ Christians a
definite trend toward tlie contemplation of ideas and
doctrinal formulas, and prepared the ^^'ay, on the one-
side for the monastic life, on the other for the chap-
eroned Christianity of the imi)erfect, active laity ; it

Monarrh-

ianisiu
Rt'Kisted.

Resistance
in Vain.

ins OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOCiMA.

logilimized ji liiindrod questions in metaphysics,
cosmology, and natural science as ecclesiastical, and
demanded, inider threat of l(jss of bliss, a definite
answer; it went so far that men preached, instead of
faith, rather faith in the faith, and it stunted religion
while it appeared to broaden it. But in that it made
the bond with natural science perfect it i-aised Chris-
tianity to the world-and-everybod3''s religion and
prepared the way for the act of Constantine.

The tendencies in the Church, which strove against
philosophical Christianity and the Logos-Christology ,
men called monarch iaii (so first Tertullian). The
name was not hai)pily chosen, since many monarch-
ians acknowledged a second hypostasis, yet made
use of it for everything except for Christology. Two
tendencies can be distinguished among the monarch-
ians (see the old Christologies, Book I. chap. 3, sub (i) :
The adoption, which looked upon the Divine in
Christ as a power and started from the human per-
son of Jesus which was deified, and tlie niodalistic,
which held Christ to be a manifestation of God the
Father. Both contested the Logos-Christology as
"gnosticism"; the first through an avowed interest
in the historical rei)resentation of Christ (Synoptic),
the second in the interest of monarchy and of the Di-
vinity of Christ. Both tondcnicies, passing into each
other, were CafJioIic, maintnining the fundamental
principles of the ru1(* of f;».itli (neither " ebi(mitic ",
nor gnostic) ; but after the New Testament had es-
tablished itself as such the contest was in vain ; for

TUV: I,AYIN(i OK TUK KolNDATlUN.

IGO

altlumgh there are passages in the New 'Pcstanieiit
ill favor of these theses, the other passages whieli
maintain the pre-existeiiee of Christ as a speeial
hypostasis outweigli them — at least aeeording to
the interpretation then enrrent — and it seemed self-
evident that the "lower" in the e.\])r('ssions should
everywhere be interpreted aeeording to the '"higher"
(pneumatie), (therefore the Synoptics in aeeurd-
anee with John). In all eeelesiastieal i)n)vinees
there were nionarehiaii contests; but we know them
only in ])art.

(1) The licjeciiou of Df/uiiiiiic MouarcliiaN-
isniy or A(Joj)fiottisi)i. — {(() The alo(/oi (iiicl; ;.: .i-;
sources: Ireiunis, Hippolytus, Epiphanius) in Asia
Minor were a party of the radical anti-]\Iontanis-
tic op})osition, which rejected (/// prophecy in the
Church; they a])peared at a time when there was as
yet no Xew Testament. They criticised the Johaii-
iiean writings on historical grounds and rejected them
on account of their proclamation of the Paraclete
and the apocrdypse, at the same time proving tlu^ in-
accuracy of the historical narratives in the Johaimeaii
Gospel. But tlu>3' criticised also the docetism of the
Gospel, hesitated at the Logos, and decided that the
untrue writings, which, on the one hand, contained
Jewish-naturalistic elements, on the other, docctic-
giiostic, must have originated with Cerinthus. Their
own Christology was fashioned after the Synoptics:
The miraculous birth, the descent of the S})irit upon
Jesus, his develoiimeiit, the exaltation through his

Adiiptidii

i s I u
Kej.i't.-a.

Svnnptic
Chris
tulDKy.

"Si

II :

■ '

•)l

> )

k >

Expelled

from

KoriiH.

170 OUTLINES OF TIIR HISTORY OF DOfJMA.

resurrortioTi coiistituto liis dignity. The earliest op-
jxnicnts (Irciia'iis, Hippolytiis) treated these in a
measure respectfully, since these "alogoi " did good
service* against the Montanists. But one must s/iy,
notwithstanding the high esteem which the '* alogoi "
had for sound historical criticism, that their relig-
ious inspiration could not have been of a very high
order; for they were neither apocalyptic enthusiasts,
nor mystics: Wherein then consisted the power of
their piety?

[b) The same can be said of the Roman-adopfioii
parties of fJie Theodotiaiis, who stood in evident
alliance with tlie " alogoi " (the cobbler Theodo-
tus and his party, Theodotus the banker, the
Artemonites). They established themselves after
al^out 1 85 in Rome (the elder Theodotus was from
Byzantium, a mai; -^f unusual culture); but already
had bishop Victor (;f Rome expelled Theodotus (c.
l'J5) from the Church, because he held Christ to be
a (/nko<s o.vhi)o)-o^ — the first case where a Christian who
stood upon the rule of faith is disciplined as an
unsound teacher. Theodotus taught as did the
"alogoi" concerning Christ (-/"'^'>-y/' of the miracu-
lously born man Jesus, equipped by his baptism and
pre})ared for his exaltation through the resurrection ;
stress upon the ethical proof), but recognized the
Johannean Gospel already as Holy Scripture, and
carried on his Scripture argument in the same sound
critical way as did the latter (Deut. 18: 15; Jer. li:
9; Isa. 53: 1 seq.; Matt, i"^: 31; Luke 1: 35; Jno.

THK I.AV1N({ OI' TIIK FOlNDATION.

171

S: 4(»- Arts - -> ; I. Tim. "> : 5). Und.r their most ^i-M-
distiiiguisliL'd pupil TluMuU.tus, tho baniu-r, the
adoptionists zc.dously cultivated the eriticisui of
the sacred text, empirical science aud natural
phenomena (not willi Plato), and stood as a school
alonu:side the Church (see the description in FAiscbius,
H. E. V, -.^S). Their attempt to found a church
(bishop Xatalis) was soon frustrated (at the timc« of
})ishop Zephyrinus); they remained as officers with
an ever-dwindling army. Out of their thesis, that
the Holy Spirit, ^vhose hypostasis (as eternal Son of
God, see llermas whose Christolo^y they followed)
they acknowledged, stood higher than Jesus, since
the latter is only an adopted God, their opponents
made a capital heresy. Inasmuch as they ascril)ed
the Old Testament theophanies to this eternal Son
of God and took Melchisedec to be a manifes-
tation of the eternal Son, they were called Melchis-
edecs, because they prayed to him. Of the learned
labors of these men nothing remains to us. Ilippo-
lytus informs us that some of them would not concede
that Christ is a God, even after his resurrection;
others acknowledged the ^^^o::,nr,n:,. It became clear in
the contest that an alliance with the science of Aris-
totle, Euclid, and Galen, was not compatible with the
Church, but on the contrary that it demands an alli-
ance with Plato, and that the old Christology of
Hermas~the adoptionists app'aled t<^ such docu-
ments-was no longer satisfactory. Some decades
later there appeared in Rome in the person of Arte-

Cliris-
rUiltiiiic.

i I

?!:

(PP

' I

I7'i OITI.INKS OF THE IIISTOKV OF DOfJMA.

moil a still uu>vv iiiii)(»rtaiit adoidioiiist teacher, of
whom, liowevcr, littlo is known. He also put asido
the predicate? "(jjod " im applied to Christ, but seems
not to have agreed rigidly in all particulars with the
AdupHnii- 'I heodotians. About the 3'ear "350 ad opt ion ism was

ism N'liii-

isin-; rr,,m insignilicaul in Homo (Cvprian is silent; yet see
Novatian. (/<' lriiiH.)\ but in the Occident it contin-
ued for a long time in the Church formulas, as
'' '!jjirilns sdiichis del Jilins, caro Jesus — spirH us
scinefns Chrislus — spirit us earui lui.rfus ,/esns
C/u'ishfs'' (through tli(> reading of tlic highly es-
tt»emed TIermas) ; and it is instructive that Augustine
still a short time before his conversion thought the
adoption C-hristology to be the Catholic. Therefore
the orthodox Christological fornmlas were still little
known in the fourth century in the Occidental laitv-
wt)rld.

((*) From the writings of Origen one gathers that
there were adoptionists also in the Orient. Origen
treated them as misguided, i.e. as simple-mindetl
Christian brethren, who needed friendly instruction;
did he not himself make use of the adoption view in
his com})licated Christology (accordingly he was later
unjustly classed with the adoptionists; against this

Boryiius..f Pam])hilus defended him) ? Ber^dlus of Bostra, the

nostra. i 'J ' .

mcHiarchinn tivicher who won a large following in
Arabia and Svria, became conyinced of the truth of
the Log()s-ChristoU)gy through Origen (Euseb. VI.,

33 : T'''V (7(1)7," iiu xo.) /.')ii'.()v rjiiuv /j-r^ 7:(i(i>"Kf£f7T'J'/ac xaz idiw^

Ail<i[iti()n
i.-^iii ill
C)i'it'nt.

TlIK LAYFN(i OF TIIK FOUNDATION,

ir:3

7:aT(nxy^), Thoso Ej^yptiaii rliiliiists, wliom Dioiiy-
sius of Alexandria opposed, and whose teaeliin^ '-/n

acknowledged as necessary, may have favon d dynam-
ical representations. But no great adojdion move-
ment was nndertaken in the ( )rient, s; ve \)y Paul of
Samosata, nu>tro})()litan nf Antiocli (JMiseh. Vil,
27-;J(); other material in Kouth, liel. Sacr. 11.1.), tho
national Syrian l)isli()|>, who opjiosed the (Jreeks and
their science as well as the Unmans and their chnrcli.
That two great Oriental general council - at .Antiocli
proved ineti'ectivo against him, and t)idy the third
condenmed and deposed him (ver}' prohahh' 2GS) is
an evidence of how little even yet the Alexandrian
dogmatics had found acceptance in the ( )rient, Paul
was a learned theologian (unspiritual, vain, shrewd,
sophistical; a "man oi the world" his o))ponents
called him), wdio wished to hreak tlu> powi^* of the
Hellenic (Platonic) philosophy in the luu'ch and to
maintain tho old teaching. In later times he ap-
pears to the Church as a heretic of the first order, like
a Judas, ebionite, Nestorian, monothelite, etc. His
conception was this: God is to he thought of sim-
ply as individually personal y-- z/torrozir^). It is true
that in God a Logos (Son), i.e. a Sophia (Spirit), can
be distinguished — both are otherwise also to be iden-
tified — but these are citiriJ)ntes. God from eternity
sent forth tho Logos from himself, so that one can
call him Son, but ho remains an impersonal power.

Pnnl of
Suuiusuttt.

PaiiTs
DiK'trine.

ri.

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

2.2

I.I

11.25

u m

11° IIUI2.0

1.8

U IIIIII.6

III

Vj.

f^ >

^c>:

Photographic

Sdences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, NY. 14580

(716) 872-4503

'<*

174 OUTl.INKS OK TIIK HISTORY OK I)0(;MA.

t :;;.'<.'

Ho worked in Mosoh and the proi)het.s, /inUnv xa)
liiatfzin'ivTw^ ill tlio Son of David, born of the virgin.
Tlie lledeenier iri a man from "beneath", but the
Logos from above worked within him (in-dwelling
by means of an inspiration working from without,
so that the Logos becomes the " inner man " of the
Redeemer). The communion which thus arises is a

oufTiiuiii'^ri :> fT(i);w-i) ; tlie Logos did not dwell in Jesus
<>n(rui>il<'>s\ ])ut xaT'l-iii'hr^ra-^ tlierefore is ho alwaj'S to bo
distinguished from tlie latter as the greater. The
lledeemer is the man wrought upon by the Logos;
but he possessed in a nniqiic way the Divine grace,
just as his position is uni(iue. His testimony bears
witness to his endowments. Between two persons —
therefore also between God and Christ — unity of dis-
position and of will alone is possible. Such unity is
realized only through love; but also onl}' that which
comc.i from love has value; that which is gained
thnnigh " nature " is indifferent. Jesus by reason of
the unchangeableness of his love and will is like God
and has become one with him, inasmuch as he not
only himself remained without sin, but through con-
flict and endurance overcame the sins of our progen-
itors. Like as he however advanced and persisted
in the confirmation of the good, so also did the
Father endow him with might and miraculous deeds,
])y which he made known his unswerving will toward
God. Thus he became the Redeemer and entered
into an indissoluble and eternal union with God, be-

lAi'

THK LAVINc; OF TME FOINDATION.

11"' r

ranso his love can lun'cr fail. As a reward of his
victorious love \w has obtained a name above every
name, judgment and Divin(» dignity, so that one may
call him " tlu' Clod born of the virgin", which he has
ever been in (iod's decree and proclamation (through
grace and conhrmation did he attain unto Godhood ;
the steps were here also i)irth, baptism, and resurrec-
tion). This (»vnng(»lical Christology, which was the
only one to consciously cast aside the religious
physics, Paul sii])ported by Scripture })roofs and zeal-
ously refuted its oi)])on(Mits, es])(M'ially the "old ex-
])ositors'\ the Alexandrians. He did away with all
(Miurcli liturgies in which the essential Divinity of
Christ was ])roclaimed; he would know nothing of
"substances", but held fast to the living Pmsou.
His teaching was considered heretical in the highest
degree by lh(^ learned Hellenic bishoi)s: He has be-
trayed the mystery ! In the confession of six bishops
against him the physical Logos-doctrine was set forth
in broad terms as a most important })art of the apos-
tolic and Catholic Church faith. At the s^'uod the
word '^ <',aiin''i(T:(>i" was also expressly cast aside, evi-
dently because Paul had used it for the Logos in
order to prove b}' it that God and the Logos arc; one
subject. With Paul's deposition and removal {'Vt'i)
it was decided that no Catholic Christian dare any
more doubt the Divine />////.s'/.s' of the Redeemer. But
the teaching of Paul did not succumb in Antiocb
without leaving its trace behind. Lucian and his
renowned lu'ofessional sclmul, the birthplace of

F.vnntrrli-
Clianu't^T.

Taiil
lK'pi>S«'(l.

Lucian.

\\i

Irif

V.'fljll

*' 'il

; " ' f
1

1 , t

f i^ •

« "

•i» •

tk '

Photlnus.

Modalistic

MonfU'ch-

iani.sm.

W) OITTI.INKS OK TUK HISTOIIV OF iXXiMA.

Arianism, wero fructified by tlio spirit of Paul.
However, the doctrine is badly disfigured in Arian-
ism by reason of its combination with the hyposta-
tized ki'iyn^-y-iniia. On the contrary Phot inus and the
groat Antiochians — although the latter acknowledged
the Nicene symbol — learned their bi^st lesson from
Paul: So-called Nestorianisni h.id its roots in Paul's
teaching, and in it Paul was once more condemned.

How long nid)roken adoption views held their
sway in outl^'ing Oriental churches is indicated by
i\\Q Act (( ArcJtehti, written at the Ix^ginning of the
fourth century. What its author, a clerical teacher,
says about (Mu-ist is very like the teaching of Paul.
But in the great centres of Christianity adoptionism
was totally broken down by about '110.

(•^) The Rcjccfion of Modalistic Mo)i((irhian-
isni. Not adoptionism, but nn)dalism was the dan-
gerous opponent of the Logos-Christology between
ISO and iJDO, the doctrine according to which the
Godhead itself is seen incarnate in Christ, and ho
himself considered the very and only God. Against
this view Tertullian, Origen, Novatian, and espe-
cially Hippolytus contended most enorgoticallj^ (" pa-
tripassiani", they were first called by Tertullian;
in the Orient later the most common expression was
" Sabelliani ''). Hippolytus says that in his time tlio
question agitated the whok^ Church (Philos. IX, G:

liiyinTov Tfifiaytty xara -rd'^za r^'^ xi'iiT/ur^ cv rurr'.w T(>^.<i "CTrr*??
ilL,3dXh»j(rv^)^ and Tertullian and Origen testify that
the majority of Christian people think "monarch-

THE LAYINCJ OF THE FOUNDATION.

1 < I

pa-

I\va8

tho

:,G:

that
:ch-

iaiiically". In Ronio, from Victor to Calixtiis, y,,I^.f,^;"';;'.\,,
modalism was the otlicial doctrino; among tlic Mon- vi,'.u„"i'o"
tanists one-half thought modahstically; the ^larcKj-
nite church also leaned toward this view, and in the
Catholic Church from the earliest times on many
formulas were used which served to promote this
form of thought, which indeed in reality best agreed
with the plain, unrellcctiug faith (" '''^''s' /"">» -V'''''*''0'
But an exclusive modalislic docfrinc was first de-
veloped in opposition to gnosticism and the Logos-
Christology, (!) in order to ward ofl" ditheism, {'i) in
order to maintain the full Divinity of Christ, (:!) in
order to sever all connection with gnosticism. Now
for the first time men sought to (establish this faith
energeticall}' as (loctvinc. Scientific; theologians came
to its defence. But to this religious conception more
than to any other contact with thought and science
must needs prove detrimental : It was the beginning
of the end; however, the death-struggle! continued a
long time. The stoic philosophy with its pantheism
and its dialectical formulas was called in to assist
(the adoptionists relied in part upon Aristotle; see
above). The contn)vers3' thus i)resented a })hase
which makes it appear related to the controversy of
the Platonists and common stoics about the idea of
God (whether the /'^'-v-'Vi')^' is the Intimate God, or
whether there still stands behind him an apathetic ^>v
as '^£''9). The oldest defenders of modalism, hf)W-
ever, had at the same time an express Biblical in-
terest.

II '

1; 4 ,

Calixtus'
( 'iiiiipro-

misf

178 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

un.Tuo'm.' (^^) Here also wore Asi<( Minor (uid Rome the

Tii.'iMTs. fn'st theatres of the controversy. In tlie former was
Noetus (he, however, was i)r()hal)l\- finally (xcom-
munieated), in the hitter his pnjiil ]^]j)iju,(>nus (ahont
'-ioo), who won lirst Kleonienes, tlien Sahelliiis to his
cause. Against them Hipjx^lytnscanK? forward; hut
tlie hishops of Home favored the school (above {dl
Z(»i)hyrinns). Calixtns (•*! r-2*^'2), originally a modal-

runiiuia. ist, sought to satisfy all j)arties l)y a ('onii)ronnse
formula and found himself tluM-eby obliged to excom-
municate Ilipjiolytus (rival bishop) as well as Sabel-
liu.s. His formula seems to have pacitied the maj( r-
ity. How imperfect our knowledge of this matter
is, is indicated by the circumstance th.it lIi})polytus
is wholly silent about the modalist Praxeas in Konie
(sec Tertullian). Probably the latter came to Pome
before Epigonus (perhaps even under Eleuthcrus),
but had not at that time aroused opposition, h^ince
ho also went to Carthage and was an out-and out
anti-Montanist, Tertullian used his name in order
to combat the Roman modalism in general (about
210). Certain is it that Victor, whoexconnnunicated
Theodotus, did so, not from the stand{)oint of the
Logos-Christology, but rather from that of modalism.

Two Moil- Yet it is to be observed that the two monarchian

Hl-C'lliilll

rostiiiutos. views are more nearl}' related to each other than
is either of them to the Logos-Christology. Both
defend the redemptive historical view of llie Person
of Christ, as against the naturalistic historical, and
often pass from into each other (as to Beryllus one

I i

^mmmmsmmmm--

lU'O

(n;t
dvY
out
it>(l
the
^m.
ian
laii
oth
son
111(1
one

Noi'tus.

TIIK LAYlNCi OK TIIK KOlNPATIoN. 1.!)

can (lucstion whcllici- lie was an adoptionist or a
niodalist; in the wiitinj^s of Origon not a few )>as-
sai^cs leave us in doubt whieli party ho is contcndijip^
against; tho conii)roniiso fornnda of Calixtus is alM)
varioj^atfd). Tlie siinpKst form of modaliMu is rep-
resented l)y No<"'tus (see llippolytus) : (Christ is the
Father himself, who was horn and died. If Chiist
is not tlie Fnth(»r, tlien is he not (jod. Next lo tiie
monotheistic interest (ojjponents were called o.'/:":)
was the interest in the full Divinity of ClnMst {(/''txhu-

«T'.> t7f»'.<TTn'^ 4 va »'/;'/> — 7! (!">/'//.> ~ii'.u) t)ii~i/'^(try r-v \ n'.rfzi'i'/

xa: rsoxjui rjia^ (loyr^'if). Scripture evi(lenc(» was Ex.
;!: 0; -H): 2 scq ; Isa. 41: C; lo: 5, H; Baruch :J :
:U); Jno. 10: :U»; 11: S .srr/.- Rom. ii:"); theJohan-
nean Gospel was recognized; but hixr^.r^^ ii.bj y^yzt
/.i>Y„y^ a).A tuliDi a).).r,Yi>iiii. The Conception "Logos"

SpiiciUu-

was rigidlv reiected. 8i>eculatively the idea of tivci-i.-aof

'^^ ^ •' ^ "^ God.

God is grounded (in Kleomenes) upon the thought
that God is invisible if he wishes, visible however
when he permits himself to be seen; intangible when
he does not wish to be touched, tangible when
ho presents himself to bo touched; unbegotten
and begotten; mortal and immortal (old Churcii
fornudas justified by the stoic idea of God). I'ho
Father so far as he deigned to be born is the Son;
both are therefore only noiniuaUfi to be distin-
guished; but the distinction is also an historical, re-
dem})tive one. In favor of the identity they called
to miud the Old Testament theophanies. That they

IJM

i i

: I.

Old Niiivc

M'Hl.'ilisiii

llcvivcd.

InO orriJNKs OK THI-: history ok i)0{;ma.

after the maiinor of tlic stoics altrihutcd to the fjod-
lioad itself tlic ("Icnioiit of tiiiiteiicss caiiiiot \)v proven.
It is tii(M)l(l nilivo niodalisni, whicli is hen- exalted
to a theory (oth(T\vise, ol)sorve that all early Chris-
tian writers, who W(»ro not philosophieal, knew only
o//r birth of th(> Son, that from the virgin). The
theory was wrecked in this, that in tlie rilos])ols
withont donht two subjects (Father and Son) are
pr(»su])posed. However the modalists hardh' de-
clared nnc^cpiivocally : The Father snffenMl ; they
said, tlu» Son, who sntVered, is identical with the
Father (bishoj* Zei)hyriinis : ly^* "''''^t '=■'■""■ •'';"> \/'.'^r.-y

/refill' .1 y.ii.'. ;://> (ivrir> izijia irin^'/a ^r^r^r"/ xu'. T.aih'ir^^ luit :

r*-"y <; -iL7i^p n~l<i<L\,z-^^ I'llhl o 'Kii<). ^forc coni})! icatcd is
rnixras. the doctrine of " Praxeas '' and the formulas of Ca-
lixtus; they indicate a trac(^ of th(> difticulties:
"Logos" is no sul)stance, it is nothiuii; else than
sound and word. Praxeas, in tendency and in Scri})-
ture argument at oni^ with Noi'tus, made, however,
a clearer distinction between the Father and the Son :
God through the assumption of the Hesh made him-
self into the *So^^- ihe jlcnh nidkrs the Fa flier hi to
the Son, i.e. in the Person of the Redeemer the flesh
(the man Jesus) is the Son, the Spirit (God, Christ)
is the FathcH' (citation of Luke 1 : :}")). That trhich
was horn is the Son; the Si)irit (God) could not suf-
fer; so far as he entered into the flesh he shared the
M.Miaiisin suffering' (" y>^^/c/" connxissns c.s7 /i/io""). vVs soon
■^'ism',"" :i« tlu^ distinguishing of <<tro (Jih'ns) and ,s])/rifns
{ j)nt('r) was taken strictly modalism ])asses over

111 %

)iit :
ilis
Ca-
ios:

laii

•ip-

oil :

im-

)tfo

esli

ist)

ich

iif-

the

Don

his

vvv

THK r.AVIN(J (»K TIIF F< UNDATION.

ISl

into Ji(l(Ji)tionisin. Tliis took place in |»ai-t ihioiigli
Calixtiis, who in lii^ foniiula of reconciliation ac-
('ei)te(l the Lot;-os (i>nt as adesiijnation of the KathiT
also) and an adoption element (this Hipjiolytiis has
well ohserved), hnt l»y means of it actnally trans-
ferred the faith of the Roman church to the Lol;()S-
Cliristolo;^y, and to the physico-deilicalion doctrine —
excommnnicatint^ his olil friend Sahellins. Vet the
^iiostical snhordinationism of Tertnllian and Hippo- F<iimiiu.
lytiis coiild ncrrr ^ain acceptance /// Rome (C'alix-
tlls' formula: ''> f-oy'-' anr')'^ i:>'/f oiir/^ a'')'r<'''^ xn] rur'/xi
(stoic /''^"s*- '*'*'' v) ^•"■'- ~u7-iia ii/nnun ii.iv xa^ji'i/ievoy^ tV f7c
<'v r<) ~'yt''f).a an'.a'iicriiv • n'l/. ti/./.n i]>ai ~ar^/tu^ ii)J.n »); u't<>v^
i'y oj xa\ Zn a'>T) ''TTfif)^:'./' X't'. T'l. irnwzn y'ih'.^ rir> f'fiim)
7:'/e'\aaT(i^ zii. rr w^ut xai xurvf xa\ e]'^a'. r'\ -Iv rrj 7:a/i>h!vfi}
(Tai)xu»'f~'y z'^e'i/ia n'ty izznn'^ -rafni r''> ~ar'i)a^ i).)JA iv xa\ T(<
ii'izi't. I\(i: Tii'tZn ^'yui 7/ £:o7j//.;V()> • Jiio. li: 11, yV, fitv
yon /J/srro/iCx/v <'~:i> iTrr^ a'/i^/iiozii'^ r</"<7«* exit Znv olov
Zn o: ;> Z(p D'.iij y(i»in^>'t !> rr>i''//a zirizo £;>'/{ z^v 7:az'fia ■ on
y"/'i ^^i'^'-'^i -(""^ ''"' '''^"''v ~tizliin XIV. o:')v^ a).K i\>it. f) yo/t
iw a'izw yz/<>,'i.:'/(i^' -azy'n r:<iiiT).fii'inij.;-/ii^' r/^y <T'/ftxa i>'l:<i~i>:7^iTtv
IvOKTw^ Id'jzu)^ x(L'. Ir.it'.y^nz'^ cv^ u)^ xiu.z'.nihn -(Lz'.na xiv. oViv
i\>a f'f;i'i> XIV. zi>'>zi> i> "> ~iii'/(T(i>r:ir^ n:/^ O'lyuirHai i]'^ai ilno
xai () .'Twv T'"-v ■razifKi aoiir.zr.iv^i^ i/iv. zih nlih • !>•> yuf) f^iXzt

Certain is it that the learned and influential Xova- v\u^^'
tiaii (r/c fninf.) did much toward bringing about Ai.un.ioued
the final abandonment of the Logos-Christology in Occident.
the Occident. About the year '^'CO the Roman bis-
hop DionysiuS wrote : -afl.'V.tn^^ [l).a(T(fr,!J.z'.^ anzow Tov ul')-^

<i :

..r

.i , ' U

i.t

'ill

fi ''i 'fil
'if

Mr''-,
1 1 II

■■ 1'

18SJ Ol TMNKS OK TIIK IIISTOIJV nK IKHiMA.

ctvat I'ymj r.> r.ar'.im^ ('ypriaii mjirkcd pal I'ipa.ssiaii-
iHin as a ix'stilmtial Iiorcsy lik(» Marcionitism, and lu»
liiiiircir sIm»V((1 into a socond recension of the Kninaii
syn»l)(»l (A(iiiileja) tiie phrase :" f '/vv/o /// Jrn jufhc
nmnipolnifc, iinisihili <-f iin/Kissihi/i" . However,
tlie liOj^os-Christoloj^y liad never i'oinid a eoii^'etiial
soil in tile ( )('eident ; men lei it pass, l)ut they lieltl
inueii inoreiirinly — in tins there was a real inten'st —
to tin; article of faith: Christ is true, complete ( {od,
ami there is oidy onr (lod. Tliis attitude of tlie Oc-
cident became of most decisive sij^Jiificance in the
Arian controversy: The I*Nict»ne doctrine is, not as a
j)hiloso]»hical speculation, hut as the direct, symboli-
cal faith, as much the jn-operty of the Occidental
church of the third century, as the Ohalcedon doctrine.
Accordingly many Occidental t{>acbers, who W(»ro
not influenced by Plato and the ()ri(?nt, used in
the third and fourth centuries modalistic formulas
Occidental witliout hesitation, abovc^ all Commodian. The tlie-
August iuc. ^^<^»y ^jf ^^^^ Occident until Augustine shows in gen-
eral a mingling of Ciceronian morality, massive,
primitive Christian eschatology, and unreflecting
Christolog}' with more or less latent modalism {oiu^
God in the strictest sense; Christ God and man)
and practical Church politics (penitential institute),
which is wholly fV)reign to the Orient (Arnobius,
Lactantius, Commodian). They were no mystics,
in part opponents of Neo-Platonism. How hard it
would have been for them to make themselves at
home in the speculatit)us of the Orient is indicated

.,.kJL^ Mm^^a^^^

TIIK l,ANIN(i (»!<• IIIK KoiNDATFoN,

IS.}

an)
te),
us,
cs,
it
at
ted

l)y tluMMior^ctic, l»ut .'ilxtrtivr alirm|»t of 1 1 ilariiis and
the tlu'olooical Itarharisiii of Lucifer. It is well
iiiulcrstood tliat inodMlisin did not coiitinui' in tlio
( Hridcnt as a strt, so loiij^; as in the ( Orient ; it fonnd
in llic latter, even in tlie prevailin*^ form of teacliin}^
es|)eeially wIkm'c the IjOj^os was accepted, a shelter.

(h) The aeconnts of the oh/ iiKKlnlisni in tli<' <>i.i M<Kiai-

JHiii ill

Orient are very turhid; for suhse((nently everythiiij^* ^'■'^'"«-
is called " Salx'llianisni", which ixjrtains to the eter-
nal and endiiiinj^' hypostasis of the Son (r.f/. ^larcel-
1ns' doctrine ). Ahcady in the third century in i\w
Orient speculntion concerning the modalistic theses
incri'ased |.;i'eatly and was carried out into manifold
forms, and the historians of tlu; movement (Kpipha-
nius, Athanasius, etc.) a<ld thereto still other discov-
ered forms. Just as one can write no history of the ii»pf>s«ii'>"

♦^ to Wnti'

Logos-Christology in the Orient from Origen to "'rJiunsm'

Athanasius — the sources have been destroyed — so

also one can write no history of modalism. It is

certain that the contest began later in the Orient,

but it was more passionate and enduring and K'd to

the development (^f the Origenistic Christology in

the direction of Arianism (also antithetic). The first

great agitation took place ir. tiu; Pentapolis, after

that Origen combated the " singular " modalists as

Christian brethren and sharply criticised bishops

(Roman), who made the distinction between Father

and Son merely nominal (the condemnation of Origen

at Rome under Pontianus may also have had reference

to his Christology). Perhaps Sabellius himself near

in Orient.

■■ 1!

fii

I' i

■''f

OITMNKS <»K THK IIISTOKV f»F T)m;MA

DiIctHnr ^'"' •'''' "' '''"^ '""' ^^'"'"^ (ili;;i ill?) l|n|n lvn|||(> into

llic IN'iita|H»lis. Ili'was jilrcady dead wlicii J)i(»ii3'-
sius <»f' Alexandria ('(iinljatt'd Salx'llianisiu tliciv.
He is t » Ix' disliiii^iiislied Inmi Noi'tus hy Ids inon'
('arclid tlu'oloi^ical drdiictions and hy his regard for
the Holy Spirit: To one iM-iiij^ arc attached three
names (Kathcf, Son, and Spirit), otherwise polythe-
ism would he estaliii- 111 d ; tlu^ three names are at tlie
same time three ciicn/ir.s. The one Hein|4' is to bo
called ":"""*'"/' — a dcsiii^nation lor the hein^;' (»f (Jod
himself. lloW(?ver this l>i'in<^ is not at the same
moment Father and Son, but in thr»'o consecutive, in-
terchanging energies (prosopons) he acts as Creator
and Law-giver, as Kedeemer, as Quickener (tlirough
this teaching the conception " Prosopon ", "Person"
became discredited in the Orient). Whether it was
possible for Sabellius to carry through the thought of
strict succession, wo. do not know. Perhaj)s he still
permitted the Prosopon of the Fatlu^r to continue
uctive (the Sabellians fell back ujion the Old Testa-
ment Scriptures, but also upon the Gosi)el to the
Egyptians and other apocrypha — a proof that the
Catholic canon had not yet established itself in tho
Pentapolis). This distinguished itself from the ear-
lier modalism, not by a stronger pantheistic tendency,
nor by a new doctrine of the trinity (both came
thereto first later in the fourth century, if the modi-
fications were not introduced by the historians), but
by the attempt to explain the succession of the Pro-
sopons, by the attention given to the Holy Spirit (see

Sal)t'l!iai)s

Aililiico
O. T., (Jus-

jii'l ti)
EK'vptiaus,

t'tC.

THK I.AVIN'C OK TIIK K Jl' ND ATloN.

isr»

ill

line

'ar-

mo
.di-

Iro-
see

;ili()Vr) ami Ity lln' (IiMwin;^- nt a I'Mrin.il |iai;illrl l»«'-

twcoii tlir l*n»s»ij»«»ii of llic Katlicr and tlic twu otiuT

Prosopniis, wldcli iiid«'«'d tclidrd toward tin- accrjit-

aiu'o of H /i»v'/v-A''/'<'v l)a('k of tlic l*ro>o|)on {T-hrridf^ and

7:karonii.n^)^ who iicViT rcVi-als luiiisi'lf, lull Ih'coIIU'H

known only tliroiii;li his activity (this view is favored

by Sc'ldeionnach* r, Thcol. /tschr. is-.>-.> jj. :;). (*<.s- sui-iuan.
*^ isiii I'll-

moloj^y is introduced hy Sahcllius as a i)arall(l t(» j ,',','. '"'y,^iyj',?
Hotorioloj^y, without the prefeicnce hciui; ^^iviii to Tms.
the Knther, and therehy in a jteculiiir nianni'r the
way was |)re[)ared for i\iv A UnnKisiidi ClnisfohK/j/^
i.e. iUv AuL^ustinian. This is the decisive signifi-
cance of Sahellianisni in the Oi'ient. It jjrepareil
there the way for the '''iwonnm^'^ for tiiatthe Sahelliaiis
made use of this word (on the other hand also I'anl
of Samosata) is dear. While within modalism there
was hitherto no firm connection between cosmology
and soteviology, nnder the later Sahellianisni tlio
history of the world and of redeni})tion became (me
history of th(> self -revealing God; this became of
ecjual rank with the Ix)gos-C^liristology. In different
ways Marcellus and Athaiiasius sought to reconcile
the main lu'inciples of modalism and the Logos-
Christology: The former failed, the latter succeeded
in that he almost entirely excluded the world-idea
from the Logos-idea, i,<\ restored the Logos (as the
Sabellians the olo^)^ to the being, yes, to tiie numerical
unity of God.

ii:

}

to 400.

«y

":»;

ISn Ol'TIJNES OF THE HISTORY OF DO(JMA.

' ?

Alexan-
drians
Submit to
Rome.

Contro-
verHy Pre-
lude to
Ariau.

(jiieiKH? of Tiiodalism was tliat tlic followors of Origen
gave to tlio Logos-Christolog}' a strong subordination
cast. Dionysius of Alexandria went so far as to set
fortli in a doctrinal letter the Son simply as a crea-
tion, which iji related to the Father as the vine to the
gardener and as the boat to the builder (Atliana-
sius, (fe scntent. Diouy.). He was denounced by his
R<jman colleague of the same name (about 20(1); \he
latter published a warning, in which he very charac-
teristically branded modalism as aluTcsy; first, on
the ground of its affinity with the Cliristology then
current in Alexandria, which ho however totally
misunderstood and represented in its coarsest form ;
second, on account of its tritheism. And v/ithout
any adjustment, he proclaimed the paradox, that
one must believe in the Father, Son, and Spirit, and
these three are at the same time one. The Alexan-
drian college, presenting now the other side of the
Urigenistic Christology, humbly submitting, ex-
plained that it had nothing against the word 'v^""''^-
<7f'^•; the Father was always Father, the Son always
Son, and the latter is related to the former as the
beam is to the light, the stream to the fountain ; they
even went farther and explained that in the very
designation "Father" the Son is included; but in
the diplomatic writing the bishop allowed himself a
mental reservation ; he would have been obliged to
set aside the Neo-Platonic philosophy, i.e. science,
if he had rejected every iiepKriw^ in the Godhead. This
controversy was a prelude to the Arian, it ended

tho
bey
-ery
in
Ufa
to
ce,
'bis
ided

THE LAVIXd OF THE FOUNDATION.

isr

quickly and its cubniuatioii did not iXMiuiro tbc Alex-
andrians to restrict tbeir speculations. Tbey were
besides also very anxious U) re])lace tbe old sini[)le
faitli in tbe cburcbes (wben it became inconvenient)
by tbe pbilosopbical (Dionysius labored in Egyjjtian
villages against cbiliasni; liis oi)ponent was Nepos;
Euseb., 11. E. VII, -M, '^^■i), but at tbe same time to
refute' tbe empirical pbilos(jpliy (l)ionysius' Tract
on nature against tbe atomic tbeory). Tbe Logos-
and Cbristus-doctrine was worked out by tbe leaders
of tbe catecbetical scbool in tbe spirit of Origen
(finer i)bilosopbical polytbeism) ; but out of tbe C(jm-
prebensivc literature we bave only insignitlcant frag-
ments : Pierius, tbe junior of Origen, expressl\' (le;iig-
nated llio Fatbor and Logos as two cVraj and two
(f'xrti'i and subordinated llie Holy Si)irit very greatly
to tbe Son, as tbe lbi)-d <>'>aia. He tauglit tbe pre-
existcnce of souls and contested tbe verbal sense of
some Scripture passages as not autboritative. Tbe-
ognostus (in tbe time of Diocletian) composed a com-
]irebensive dogmatic work, wbicli as a system sur-
passed tbat of Origen and bad a foi-m tbat bas been
in use until to-da5\ lie moreover developed Origen -
ism in tbe direction of Arius. x\notber Origenist,
Hierakas, establisbed an order of moidcs, in wbose
celibacy bo saw somotbing new in Cbristian etbics
and, as it seems, empbasized more strong!}- tbe sub-
stantial unitv of the Fatber and Son. At all events
Peter (f as martyr oil), bisbop of Alexandria, did
this. In bim tbe Alexandrian bisbop again in-

The-

opiiostus
Dfvcloiis
Orij^cnisui
in Direc-
tion of
Ariauism.

Peter,

ill

i fl

-t- i

! i.

I t

i ''

188 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOr,MA.

<i 4'

..■i

If MS

.1 I

i- >.i

■

II )

I r

Il:i

UMi-

clined toward tlie views of tlio Domotrius, who had
condomned Origoii. Under wliat eireuiiistanees this
hapi)ened is unkiiowii. But from his extant writ-
ings it is elear that he substituted IJililical realism
(history of the creation and the fall) for the Ori-
genistic spiritualism and designated this as imfhina
ri,^^ ' i:).h,.>ix7,>i -atth{u<i\ Yet this reaction on the part
of Peter was still not a radical one; he only rounded
off the points; he began in Alexandria the adjiist-
Dtent between the realistic faith of the simple-minded
and the scientific faith, by means of subtractions and
additions : That which was before his mind was a
concordant faith which should bo at the same time
ecclesiastical and scientific. But the time for this
was not yet at hand (see the Cappadocians) ; freedom
still ruled in theology, which latter, it is true, was
pushing on toward its complete secularization and
submersion. Already every future conception was
current ; but there was wanting as yet a definite
statement of them and a fixed value *, yes, they were
looked upon as unbiblical, by many still as suspicious,
^'hfumr The state of the doctrine of faith is best reflected
turgus. .^^ ^j^^ works of Gregory Thaumaturgus, the en-
thusiastic pupil of Origen, the most influential

* Thus /lovac, Tpiri(;, nlaia, <pl'(7/r^ I'TTOKFi/avm', vTrdaraa/c, TrpdauKOv,
7repi}im(prf, inpiCft!^^ni^ diatju'iv, irhirvvFiv, (Tv-} Ktipa? aiom&ai, KT^eiv,
TTOiEiv^ yiyveax^ni, ytvi'di^ uunobennr;, h r/'/c oiving mv znTftu^^ 6ia tov
^n^.f/ftarog, i^cof ek &t:ov, ^wf t'/c ipuror^ j Evvfp'^h'-n dv :Ttn?/-&EVTa, fjv ote
ovK fjv, oi'K i)v OTE ovK 7/1', ETFpoc kot' ovolav, aTpETTToc, ava?.?.oio)Tng ,
a}EVVJ]Tog, d?.?.6Tpio^, T^TiV "'/:,' '^toryjToq^ 6vo ovaiai, ovaia ovauofiEvr/,
Evdv^fMoTy/a/i;, i^toi'i^^xjrof, evuc:^ ()vaiwh]<;^ ivuciq Kara /uETuvaiav,
GVfdijyEia Kara fidi)>/aiv Kul fitrovaiav^ avyKpdai^ evoikeIv, etc.

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

189

en-
itial

[DTTOV,

/'Ce/v,
t roil
V ore
urng,

aiav,

theologian in Asia Minor. One sees here that the
" scientific " itself trembled bef(;re the fine pol^'theism
which it introduced, and farther that Christology
became pure philosophy : Thi> symbol which Gregory
disseminated among the churches hardly corresponded
in a single sentence with the Biblical statements; it
is a compendium of the i)urest speculations, recall-
ing the Gospel onl\' in the words, Father, Son, and
Spirit. Therein Christian faith was expected to rec-
ognize itself once more !

No wonder that a reaction set in, if indeed a tame R<^action;
one. By the side of Peter of Alexandria there ap-
peared here and there in the Orient about the year
oOO opponents of ( )rigen who compelled those who
still honored him to come to his defence. The most
significant and influential of these opponents was
Methodius (about ;](>()). He was no eneni}- of Plato
and of speculation — (piite the contrary ; but he wished
to harmonize the Biblical realism and the verbal
sense of the rule of faith with science — a new Ire-
njBus, he wanted a consistent faith whicli would be
purely ecclesiastical and ])U rely scientific. Moreover
all the heretical i)oints of Urigenism nuist be rcnmded ^.V^rTT

* *=' Modified.

off, in order that the latter may be thereby introduced
in this form into the ecclesiastical faith {spcculaiire
realism; Methodius had read Irena^us). Above all
the pessimism of (^rigen as regards the world (with-
in the cosmolog}') must be set aside : Matter and the
human b(Kly were approved by God and will there-
fore be glorified and remain eternal. In accordance

I '

,: I

! ;
1

'■

I ^

mLi

nji!

LJli

100 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

with tliis tlio Oragv^nistic tcarhing roTirorning tho
otcriuil creation of s}»irits, concorniiiL; tlio fall in a
prc-exi.st(Mit state, concerning the character and pur-
pose of the world, etc., were sot aside. In the i^ace
of the same the ?y///-s7 /co-realistic teaching of Irenreus
concerning Adam (mankind) was reintroduced, but
was still more mystically developed and brought into
an alliance with the recapitulation-theor}'. Man-
kind before Clirist was Adam (in need of redemption,
but in the condition of children). Throngh tho
second Adam the Logos unites himself with us. But

^s?'t'oi"i^ Methodius went a step farther; the new mankind
as a whole is the second Adam. Every one should
become Christ, inasmuch as the Logos unites itself
with every soul as with Christ (tlie descent of the
Logos from heaven and his death must be rei)eated
for every soul — namely within). This comes to pass
not so much through knowledge as through virginity
and ascetism. The theoretic optimism was also bal-

Extn'ino aucod bv tlio renunciatiou of the world ex])ressed in

Hctrani tor *' '■

\ iiKiiuty. vii-gii^ity, 1^0 ecclesiastic before Methodius had so
prized virginitj^ as he, so prized it as a means of
mystic union with the Godhead (virginity is tho
end of the incarnation). In that the realism of tho
doctrine of faith was here bound up with the Origen-
istic speculation, the two-foldncss of faith and the
science of faith reduced t(^ one, theoretical optimism
(as regards the sensuous world) joined to the practi-
cal renunciation of the world, and everything mado
dependent upon the mystic union with the Godhead

l(i.

THE LAYINO OF THE FOUNDATION.

191

lity
al-
iii
so
of
tho
tho
en-
tile
sin
ti-
de
ad

without a denial of tlu^ objective significance of
Christ as the Redeemer (although this is pushed
into the back-ground), the dogmatics of the future
in its main outlines triumphed.

That which ]\Iethodius had done for dogmatics ^'"f,'.-^;,?"*^'
as developed doctrine, the bishops did about the 'hui.'o"
year ;}0() for the rule t)f faith, in so far as they in-
troduced the scientific Logos-doctrine into the in-
structional symbol, thereby neutralizing the distinc
tion between faith and scientific dogmatics and
placing the chief contribution of Hellenic speculation
under the protection of the apostolic tradition. Tlie
Oriental symbols of this time (symbol of CVrsarea,
of Alexandria, of the six bishops against Paul, of
Gregory Thaumaturgus, etc.) ])ut themselves for-
ward as the incontestiblo apostolic faith of the
Church and are the j)hilosophical constructions of
the rule of faith : The e.vccicti cat-speculative iheoto- Exp^'tic-

al Sptvu-

qu was introduced iuto faith itsetf. This came •'i''/*'
to pass through the Logos-d(x*trine; the dogma was ^'i''^*''-
now found and established. A divine Being has
actualljj appeared upon the earth, and his appear-
ance is the key to cosmology and soteriology. How-
ever, these fundamental theses were acc('j)ted only
in the widest circles. But men could not rest with
this, so long as it was not definitely determined Jioir
the diA'ine Being, who has a])p(>ared ui)on tlx' eai-th,
is related to the higliest Divinity. Is the divine
Being who lias apjx'ared upon tlie earth the Divinit}'
himself, or is he a subordinate, second Divinity?

N
B

• •

t .i/s

102 OUTLINES OF THK HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Are WG redeemed by God himself unto God, or do we
Istand also in the Christian religion only in a cosmic
system, and is our Redeemer only the subordinate
God who is at work in the world?

.. i '■ I

'!' !f I

part 2.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOCMA.

BOOK I.

HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOGMA AS
DOCTRINE OF THE GOD-MAN UPON THE
BASIS OF NATURAL THEOLOGY.

CHAPTER I.

HISTORICAL SURVEY.

Walsch, Entw. einer voUst. Historic der Ketzereien,
1702 ff. Hefelo, Concilieugosch. 3. Autt., Bd. I-IV. His-
toiies of the Roman Empire, by Tillemont, Gibbon, and
Ranke. Reville, Die Religion z. Rom. unter den Severern
(German by Krueger, 1888). Dorner, Entw. Gesch. d. L. v.
d. Person Christi, 1845. H. Schultz, Die L. v. d. Gottheit
Christi, 1881, Gass, Symbolik d. griech. Kirche, 1873. Den-
zinger, Ritus Orientalium, 3 Bdd. , 1803 f.

THE Christian religion in the 3d century made ^'n^y.J^oi^
no compromise with any of the pagan relig-
ions and kept far away from the numerous intersec-
tions out of which, under the influence of the mono-
theistic philosophy of religion, a new religiousness
developed itself. But the spirit of this religiousness
entered into the Church and produced forms of ex-
pression in doctrine and cultus to correspond with
itself. The testament of primitive Christianity — the
Holy Scriptures — and the testament of antiquity —

inusn<'ss

KntfTs

L'lmicli.

il i

193

. 1 i

h'l

1,,

■> I

rjiuroh
I>i)ctiinp
HccniiK's
MysU-ry.

Doctrine,
Polity, and
C'ultus Re-
ferred to
Apostles.

104 OI^TTJNKS OF THK HISTORY OK DOCiMA.

the Now-Platonic speculation — were by the entl of
the 3d century intimately and, as it seemed, insep-
arably united in the great churches of the East.
Through the acceptance of the Logos-Christology Jis
the central dogma of the Chtorh, the Church doctrine
was, oven for the laity, firmly rooted in the soil of
Hellenism. Tliereb}' it became a mystery to the
great majority of Christians. But mysteries were
even sought after. Not the freshness and clearness
of a religion attracted men — there must needs be
something refined and complicated, a structure in
Barrcxpie style, to content those who at that time
wished to have all the idealistic instincts of their
nature satisfied in religion. United with this desire
was the greatest reverence fcjr all traditions, a senti-
ment peculiar to epochs of restoration. But, as al-
ways, the old became now by conservation and the
new was placed under the protection of the old.
What the Church utilized in doctrine, cultus and
organization was "apostolic?", or claimed to be de-
duced from the Holy Scriptures. But in reality it
legitimized in its midst the Hellenic speculation,
the superstitious views and customs of pagan mys-
tery-worship and the institutions of the decaying
state organization to which it attached itself and
which received now strength thereby. In theory
monotheistic, it threatened to become polytheistic in
practice and to give way to the whole apparatus of
low or malformed religions. Instead of a religion of
pure reason and severest morality, such as the apol-

DKVKI.Ol'MENT OF DOC'TRINK OF INCARNATION. 105

ion,
niys-
lying

and
leory
;ic in
IS of
on of
apol-

ogists had onco rcpivsontod Christianity to b<', tho
hitter hocamo tho religion of tliv most pofcrrful con-
sec rati oils, of the nio.st nii/sterious vied id (i)ul of
a sensKoKs sauctit}/. The tendency toward tin; in-
vention of mechanically-atoning ctmsecn lions (sac-
raments) grow constantly mo ])ronouncod and of-
fended vigorously thinking honthen even.

The ada])tation of the local cults, manners and A.iantation
customs mnst needs lead linally to a complete seen- ^"'^"' '''^'•
larizing and splitting of tho Church (into national
churches); hut for the time th(Miniting force was
stronger than tho dividing. The acknowledgnu>nt
of the same authorities and formulas, tho lik(> regard
for the same sacramental consecrations, the horr(>r
at the coarse polytheism, and tho tendency toward
asceticism for the sake of the life heyond, formed,
together with the homogeneous and well-compacted
episcopal organization, the common hasis of the
churches. All these elements were not sul. ant, T.MKi.ncy

however, to preserve the unit}- of the churches. If int.) ' Na-
tional
Constantino had not thrown ahout them a ncnv hond cuurchos.

by raising them to tho Church of the empire, the
split which one observes from tho *)th century
would have taken place much earlier; for tho (Episco-
pal-metropolitan organization carried within itself a
centrifugal element, and the asceticism in which all
earnest thinkers found themselves at one, could not
but dissolve the historic conditions u])on which tho
religion rested, and destroy tho communal veneration
of God ; besides, differences crept more and more into

19G OUTLINKS OK TTIK IIISTOKY OF T)OC;MA.

:hl*^

l;tffi ■

f'liristian-
ily Tlin-at-
ciifil with

( 'lllllpIt'tC

Scfiilari/ii-

anil TIk'h-
loKiaiis'
Cliufch.

tho oxpuiimliiig of the author'itios and doctrines,
which rendered thoir internal harmony questionable.

Taking one's stand at the end of the Ikl century
one cannot avoid the impression, that ecclesiastical
Christianity at that time was threatened with com-
])lete secularization and witii external and internal
dissolution. The danj^er from within Just prior to
tho Diocletian persecution, Eusehius himself has es-
tablished (IF. Vj. VIII, i.). He admits — at least as
regards the churches of the Orient — that they threat-
ened to mingle with the world, and that pure pagan-
ism vaunted itself among them. The Diocletian
persecution fidded the external danger, and it cannot
be said that it was the strength of the Church alone
which triumphed over the danger.

Already at that time tho Church was a bishops' and
theologians' church. But the power which, as mat-
ters then stood, was alone able to support energet-
ically the distinctive character of the religion — the-
ology — came very near dissolving it and handing it
over to the world.

In concluding " Part I " it was described how
philosophic theology gained the victory within the
Church and how it naturalized its theses in the
very formulas of the faith. "Ebionism" and
" Sabellianism " were conquered. The banner of the
Neo-Platonic philosophy, however, was raised in
spite of the shaking off of gnosticism. All thinkers
still remained under the influence of Origen. But
since the system of this man was in itself already

I>i;\ Kl.oi'MKN r OK DOCTIMNK (»F IN'( A |{N.\TI()N. I'.l?

hetorndox, tlic (levclojdnriit of tlic Alcxainlri.ni tlM>- |\|','|',^'V",,^.
ology tlnv{it«Mi(Ml tlir ( '!u!»cli with fiirtlicr daiipTs. MMt.'"' "
Origin had kept gnosis and pistis unmixed; ho
thoiiglit to link toj^cthcr in a conscrvalivc sense
evorythin{^ vahiahh' and to hrin^* to a kind of vi\\\\-
Hl)rium tho divcM's factors (cosniolojjfir and sotrri-
ologir); lie had j^iv(»n to liis thcoloL^y ])V a strict ad-
herence to the sacred text a I'ihlical stamp and
demanded throuLrhout Sci'iptnre ])roof. With the <>i;ip:iiisru
epigonoi, however, occurred cl>nn<;«>s everywliere:
(1) Tlie pupils as well as the oi)i)onrnis of Orit^en en-
deavored to place pistis and {gnosis attain upon the
same plane, to add some philosophy to tlu^ foi'niulas
of faith and to subtract somethinpj from the gnosis.
Precisely thereby- a stajjjnation and confusion was
threatening, which Origen had carefully' warded off.
The faith itself became obscure and unintelligible to
the laity; (2) The cosmologic and purely philos()j)hic
interests obtained in theology a ])reponderance over
the soteriologic. In accordance thercAvith (^hristol-
ogy became again in a higher degree ? ]>hil()so])hic
Logos-doctrine (as with the apologists) and the idea
of the cosmic God as the lower, subordinate God
alongside the highest God, threatened monotheism
outright. Alreadj^ here and there — in opposition to ^''^l\l'^^^ ',J
" Sabellianism " — articles of faith were being com- ^'i7istlnic
posed, in which there was no mention of Christ, but
in which the Logos alone was glorified in a profu-
sion of philosophic predicates as the manifested, but
subordinate God ; already the incarnation was cele-

X-

11 1

I'lxpt'IlSt' of

"listoric
Cellist.

EllS*>l)lUH
of

Ccesui'i'u.

<^onstan-

tine,

Atlia-

uaiius.

lOH olTMNKS OF TIIK UrSTOIIV oV ixxiMA.

bratiMl jiH tlio rising of thr sun which //////// ///c.v all
men; ah-cady iiu'ii socmtMl (U'simus of ad.ndinj? jdio-
noincna and vico-rcLCcnts to tlic Nt^o-IMatonic idea of
tho one nnnainal)K' l^cini^ and his ^raiU'd and more
or less nnmerons powers, wliilethey encircled nil with
a chaj)let of philosophic artificial ex])ressions; (.'»)
Kven the Holy Scriptures jj^ave way somewhat in
those endeavors; vet onlv in a formal manner and
without forf(Mtin}jj their vahu'. The theology which
was formed out of these elements (c. </. Kusehius of
Caisarea is its representative) let everythin;^ j)ass
that kept within the hounds of Origenism. Its n^p-
resontatives considered themselves as ('(Discn'dhfcs,
since they rejected everj' more precise definition of
the doctrine of God (doctrine of the trinity) and of
Christ as an innovation (antipathy toward precise
definition of hitherto not precisely defined dogmas has
always animated the majority of the Church, since
precise definition is innovation), and since thc»y exert-
ed themselves solely for the sake of science and the
" faith " to give form to the Logos-doctrine in a cos-
mologic sense and to subordinate ever^'thing inward
and moral to the thought of the frtHnlom of choice.

Neither thoughts of an heroic asceticism, nor real-
istic mysticism in the sense of Methodius, nor deduc-
tions from the heterodoxies of Origen could aid here.
Theology, and with it the Church, seemed to be irre-
trievably swallowed up in the current of the times.
But in the beginning of the fourth century there ap-
peared a man who saved the Church seriously threat-

DKVKhorMKNT OF DOCTKINK OK IN( AKNATION. llM.t

('110(1 l)y inward strif(> and outward ix^rsccutioii —
(Vnistafiiinc — so at tho hhiuo timo tluM'o appeared aii-
otlier man wlio preserved tlu* Clnncli from the ('(»m-
plete secularization of its most fundamental faith —
Athanasius. Tru(>, reactions ayjainst the Loj^os-doe-
trine in tlu» direction of the complet(» alienation of
the Son of (lod from the Father were prohahly at no
time lackint^ in the Orient; hut Athanasius (assisted Kt'<i(«mp-
by the West, the hishops of which however did u'.'H/i',,
not at first recoj^nizo tlio pith of tli(» (question) first nu'uttti
secured to the Christian religion its own territory
upon the i)reoccupiod soil of Greek speculation and
brought everything hack to the thought of r(Ml(Mnp-
tion through God liimself, i.e. through the God-man,
who is of the sdtnc csficnce with God. Ho was not
concerned about a formula, but about a decisive basis
for faith, about redemption unto a divine life by the
God-man. Upon this surety alone, that the Divine
which appeared in Christ has the nature of the God-
head itself, and only on that account is able to ele-
vate us to a divine life, can faith n^ceive its power,
life its law and theology its direction. But while
Athanasius placed faith in the God-man, which alone
frees us from deatli and sin, above everything else,
he at the same time gave to practical piety, which
then well-nigh exclusively lived in monkish asceti-
cism, the highest motive. He united the 'tiii(»»'>(no<i^
which guarantees the deification * of human nat-

nighf'st

Motiv.'

(jiven tu

Piety.

* Vergottung: The causing to partake of the Divine nature, restoration
to the Divine likeness.

■PW

Father of

EccU'.sias-

tictil

Ortlio-

doxy.

I ■ i

200 OUTLTXES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

ure, in tlio closest rolations with the monkish as-
ceticism and lifted the latter out of its still subterra-
nean, or insecure sphere into the public life of the
Church. While he combated the formiihi of the
A<>yn<i-xTt(Tfj.a^ the Nco-Platouic doctrine of a descending
trinit}', as pagan and as a denial of the essence of
Christianity, he also in like manner combated ener-
getically the tendency to worldlj^ living. He became
the father of ecclesiastical orthodoxy and the patron
of ecclesiastical monasticism: He taught nothing
neic, new only was the dohig, the energy and exclu-
siveness of his conceptions and actions at a time
when everything threatened to dissolve. He was
also not a scientific theologian in the strict sense, but
he descended from theology to piety and ^ound the
fitting word. He honored science, even that of Ori-
gen, but he went beyond the intelligent thought of
his time. While acknowledging its premises, he
added to them a new element which speculation has
never been able fully to resolve. Nothing was here
more unintelligible to the thought of the day than
the assumption of the essential oneness of the change-
less and of the working Divinity. Athanasius fixed
^xciudes a gulf between the Logos, of which the philosophers

hers'

lOgOS.

thought, and the Logos, whose redeeming power ho
proclaimed. That which he expressed concerning
the latter, while announcing the mystery emphat-
ically and powerfull}^ and in no way indulging him-
self in new distinctions, appeared to the Greeks an
offence and foolishness. But he did not shun this

^^j^m^

•ii-

xed
hers
r ho
tiing
)hat-
lim-
s an
this

DF.VEI.OI'MENT OF DUCTltlNE OF INCARNATION. X'Ol

reproach, rather did lie circumscribe for the Chris-
tian faith within the ah'eady given speculation its
own territory, and thus did he find the way to ward
off the complete hellenization and secularization of
Christianity.

The historj' of dogma in the Orient since Nica^a
shows two intermingled courses of develoimient. In
the first place, the idea of the God-man hecame defi-
nitely defined in every direction from the point of
view of the redemption of the human race unto a
divine life — the creed of Athanasius — (histt)ry of
dogma in the strictest sense of the word). Secondly,
the aim was to determine how much of the specu-
lative system of Origen, i.e. of the ' E>.).r,y.x>i -rmueia^
would be endurable in the churches; in other words,
in what measure the Sacred Scriptures and rule of
faith would bear a speculative restatement and spirit-
ualization. The treatment of both problems was
rendered difficult by countless conditions (also pt)liti-
cal ones), but above all was it obscured and vitiated
because the Church was never allowed to concede to
itself a theological handling of dogma, and because
at the same time the great majority of Christians
in fact denounced every effort leading to ne\v forms
as an apostasy from the faith, since the same was
an innovation. The semblance of the ^',sein])er
idem " must ever be kept up, since the Church
in its " apostolic inheritance " surely possesses every-

In Orient

T\v(j D»'vel-

opineuts.

II i»;

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

it>

TJii'olo-
Kiaiis Dis-

ficditfd
Ity Lat.-r

Geiit'ra-
tious.

Conson-a-

tives
Triuir.ph.

thing fixed and final. The theology and the theo-
logians — oven the best of them — came thereby dur-
ing their lifetime and .after their death into the
worst predicament; during life they were considered
innovators, and after death, when the dogma hnd
progressed above and bej^ond them, they came often
enough wholly into discredit, for the more ])recisely
perfected dogma now became the standard which
was applied even to the theologians of the earliest
times. The Church found rest onlj- when dogma-
building ceased and when by the side of the com-
pleted dogma, a scholasti co-mystical theology and a
harmless antiquarian science succeeded which no
longer touched the dogma, but either explained it as
settled, or indifferently laid it aside. Thus was
gained at last what the " conserviitives " had alwaj'S
longed for. But vital piety had in the mean time
withdrawn from the dogma and regarded them no
longer in truth as the sphere in which it lived, as its
original and living expression, but looked upon them
as the sacred inheritmice of antiquity and as the
primary condition to the enjoyment of the Christian
benefits.

ii i:

Unification

of
Churches

IlllJIOS-

sible.

Periods of the Hlstonj of Dogma in the Orient.

Constantine made possible a unity in the develop-
ment of the Church into dogma (ecumenical synods
Rs forum publicnnij in place of the symbols of the
provincial churches a homogeneous dogmatic confes-

DKVELOPMKNT OF DOCTIIINK OF INCARNATION. 'i^K^

nt.

sion was introduced); but tlio uuilicutiun of the
churches in the strict sense never became perfect,
and the tendency to a pecuh'ar individuality of the
national churches grew stronger in direct contrast to
Bjv.antinism, but it was overc(jine in tlu* Occident,
since there the old Roman enipire took refuge in the
Roman church. While the East crumbled to pieces
and Islam finally wholly wrecked the creation of
Alexander the Great, separating Greeks and Semites,
the West and the East fell more and more ai»art.
Yet till the end of the dogma-building period in the
East, the West took the most active and often de-
cisive interest in dogmatic decisions.

I. Period from 318-381 (383): Precisely defining orthodoxy
the full Divinity of the Redeemer: Athanasius,
Constantine, the Cappadocians, Theodosius. Ortho-
doxy con(piers through the firmness of Athanasius

and a few men in the West, through the course of
world-wide historic events (sudden end of Arius,
Julian and Valens ; appearance in the East of Theo-
dosius from the West) and through the ability of the
Cappadocians to place the creed of Athanasius — not
without deductions, to be sure — under the protection
of the Origenistic science.

II. Period from :)83— i51 : The independent theo- QuamHn'-

tWt'fll

logic science f/vA/r/zu/^ -auhui^ Origen) was alread\' Amioiii
violently combated; the ecclesiastical leaders aban- ^llihl."
doned it and threw themselves more and more into
the arms of communal and monkish orthodoxy. The
most violent (piarrels, behind which the question of

i
ill

' !'

)i:: '

StHlition

and
Scbisin.

204 OUTLINKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

power hides itself, aros(^ l)etvve(>n Aiitioeh and Alex-
andria over the Christohjgieal dogma. The correct
^kiX'suh"*^ doctrine con(inered at Ephesiis, 440; hut, united with
the tyranny of the Alexandrian patriarchs, it must
needs share the fate of the latter and triumph over
emperor and state. Nothing was left to the pm-
peror but to proclaim the Occidental creed as the
orthodox one (the Chalcedon), which at first was
strange to the Orient and seemed, not without rea-
son, to be heretical.

III. Period from 4r»l-5r);) : Sedition and schism
in the Orient on account of the Chalcedon addition ;
monophysitism is exceedingly t^nergetic; at first <jr-
thodoxy Avas at a loss. But speculative Platonism
had exhausted itself; in its place had come even in
the common science the Aristotelian dialectics and
schohisticism; on the other side a mysteriosophy
which knew how to make something out of every
formula fmd every rite. These powers succeeded in
interpreting the formula that was forced upon them
Justinian (Lcoutius of Byzautium, the Areopagite). Justinian,
Dogma, ivjecting this and that, codified the dogma as well as
the law, and closed not only the school of Athens,
but also those of Alexandria and Antioch. Origen
and the theologians of Antioch were condemned.
Theological science remained a science only of the
second order — scholasticism and the cultus-nij^sti-
cism, these indeed in their fundamental principle
and aim heterodox, were outw^ardly however en-
tirely correct. The Church did not renew the agita-

111

Ian,
as

ills.

gen

tlie

rsti-

iple

en-

dta-

Monntlio-
U'tic Strife.

DEVELOPMENT OK DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 205

tion. for it hna always wished peace, and piety had
long since thrown itself into inonasticism and the
mysteries.

IV. Period from 55;)-(lS(): The monotheletic (juar-
rels, primaril}' partly after-play partly rei)etition of
the old strife, were born not of conviction, but of
politics. Here also the West must finally come to
the rescue with a bloodless formula.

V. Period from T"iG-S4:i: In truth the conflicts of imapocon-

trovLTsy.

this period (Image-contest) sliow already that the
history of dogma is at end ; but there existed still a
conflict about what seemed to be the practical issim
of the history of dogma, about the right of being
allowed to perceive and venerate in a thousand sen-
suous objects the deification, the unification of the
heavenly and earthly. Besides, here is seen plainly
at the conclusion what seems a subordinate factor
in the whole history of dogma, but is not, viz. : The
fight betvreen the state (the emperor) and the Church
(the bishops and monks) for supremacy, in respect
to which the formation of dogma and cultus is of the
highest importance. The state must finally abandon
the introduction of its state-religion, but in return
for this concession it remains the victor in the field.
The Church retains its cultus and its peculiar,
practical fructifying of the dogma, but it becomes
definitely de[ endent, a prop, a plaything, in certain
ways, indeed also the palladium of the state and
of the nation.

("huroh
and State.

»v,.' ■'

. 'I*

i t"*

■ it-ni

I it^

! ' h\

206 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

V a I

M '

Orthodox
CoiK-epMim

of
Salvation.

CHAPTER 11.

THE FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTION OF SALVATION
AND A GENERAL SKETCH OF THE DOCTRINE OF
FAITH.

Hernnann, Gregorii Nj'ss. sentcntiae de salute adipisc. ,
IHTr). Schultz, Lehre v. d. Gottheit Christi, 18HI. Ritsclil,
Die clnistl. Lelire v, d. Rechtfert. und Veraoh. , 2. Auti.
Bd. I. S. 3 ff.

1. In the dogmatic conflicts from the 4th to the
Tth century, it is clear that at that time men
were contending about Christology with the con-
sciousness that it contains the essence of the Chris-
tian religion. Everything else was asserted only in
vague expression^ and on that .'oCcount had not the
value of a dogmatic declaration in the strictest sense
of the word. Accordingly for orthodoxy the follow-
ing fundamental conception of salvation obtained:
The salvation offered by Christianity consists in the
redemption of the human race from a condition of
perishableness and sin, consequent upon it, unto a
divine life {i.e. on the one side deification,* oil the
other blissful enjoyment of God), which has already
taken place through the incarnation of the Son of
God and which accrues to humanity by reason of the
indissoluble union with him. Christianity is that
religion which frees from death and leads men to a
participation in the Divine life and es.seuce, per
adopt ionem. Redemption, therefore, is conceived

♦ See page 199, note.

DEVELOrMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. WH

as the abolition of the natural state through a mi- '^'i'|,';[[''''
raculous transformation (doitication is the central Minir'uious
thought) ; the religious benefit of salvation is defi- matiou.
nitely distinguished from the moral, and the idcd of
atonement accordingly remains rudimentary ; for the
present state only a i)rovisional enjoyment of salva-
tion is presupposed (calling, knowledge of God and
of salvation, victory over the demons, heli)ful com-
munications from Cxo(\, enjoyment of the mysteries).
Accordingly the fundamental confession is that of
Irenseus : " We become divine for Christ's sake, since
he also for our sakes has become human". This
confession, rightly weighed, demands two principal
dogmas, no more and no less : " Christ is 'Ve^v,' uiunrmu,^^^
this ''>; 's" <'H()o'')(T(n<; has taken human nature into his
own being and fashioned it into oneness with him-
self".

But these dogmas were carried through only after
severe conflicts; they never gained a porfectl}' clear
stamp and never obtained the exclusive dominion,
which they demand. The reasons for this are as
follows :

(1) The formulas which wererecpiired, being nrii',
had the spirit of the Church against them, which
suspected even the best of innovations ;

(2) The pure exposition oi JaitJi is at all times the
most difficult problem; but at tluit lime it was es})e-
cially hampered by apologetic, as well as by other
foreign considerations ;

(3) The orthodox formulas conflicted with every

DoRinas

Cut it '(I

thri>nt;li

afttT

StruKglt'S.

208 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

I , " I

'l I

philosophy; they proved an offence to disciplined
scholastic thinking; but it was a long time before
men recognized in the incomprehensible the charac-
teristics of that which is Holy and Divine;

(-1) The conception of the salvation obtained
through the God-man was joined to the scheme of
"natural theology " (moralism), i.e. grafted upon it;
natural theology endeavored thenceforth to build
upon the dogma and to bring itself into conformity
with it;

(o) The mystical doctrine of salvation and its new
formulas had not only no Scriptural authority in
their favor, but conflicted also with the evangelical
idea of Jesus Christ; New Testament ideas and
reminiscences, Biblical theologomena in general of
the most varied kind, have always surged about the
growing and matured dogma and prevented their
exclusive domination;

(ij) The peculiar form of the Occidental Christology
interfered as a disturbing element with the Oriental
history of dogma. Thrown upon its own resources,
the Orient would have been obliged to legitimize
monophysitism ; the Gospel, the Occident and the
emperors prevented it from doing so. An incorrect
formula triumphed, but it received a correct inter-
pretation ; vice versa, at the end of the fourth cen-
tury, the correct formula of Athanasius triumphed,
but under an interpretation which was influenced by
the secular science of the Cappadocians. Each re-
sult had the historical consequence that the orthodox

o
a

.i^mMM^^>iSl

fts Uflatrd
to

Morality.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCAUNATInN. 209

Church reniaiiied in contact with Biblical theology
and with science (scholasticism).

2. Since the doctrine of salvation was kept strictly ^'j'JIvHrioi'i''
within the scheme of the mystico-realistic idea of
redemption, it was in itself indifferent to the moral;
bat on every side men were sure that Christianity
also embraced the highest morality. Accordingly
the benefits of salvation were adjudged only to mor-
ally good men, but the morally good conceived as
the product of the free agency of man and as the
condition of sanctification to be fulfilled by him,
whereby God at the most was conceived of as assist-
ing (this concerns positive morality; the negative,
asceticism, was regarded as the direct preparation
for deification *). The dogmatic form of the Chris- Freodomof

' ^ Election

tian religion was, therefore, balanced by the idea of
freedom of election (See already Clem. Alex. Pro-

trep. 1, 7: i"'' ''^ C'/-' edioa^sv i ::'.</• a .>:)<,' w>i^ (hdarrxaXtK^^ 'iva

To «££ C>> uffre/xr^ (US' 'Vi-'? xi'i>fiYf','^l)-> ^uid this is only the
shortest expression for the whole natural theology
which the Charcli appropriated from the ancient phi-
losophy and treated as the self-erident presupposition
of its specific doctrine, reckoning upon a general un-
derstanding of the same. Consequently Greek Chris-
tianity oscillates between two poles, which are simply
co-ordinate with each other. Dor/ mas in a strict
sense exist only within the doctrine of redemption;
on the other hand, there exist only 2>''^''S?//;po.s'///o//.s'
and conceptions (so far, deviations in simple mat-

*See papp lO'i. note.
U

• '1*

1 ' 1

■ t

r^'

:»

n>i

■f.

'■■*

' 1

(

i ' '

(■■

> ■!

I it I

Rlhllcnl

lifiilisin

and Vcr-

baliHiii.

Natiiral
Theology.

210 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

tors aro hero not insiipportabk'). But since the
Greek natural philosophy stood in conilict in not a
few points with the letter and spirit of the Holy
Scriptures, and with the rule of faith (mh, above all,
the theology of Origen pi'oves), problems must arise
her(5 also, which in an increasing measure were
solved in dcfdil in favor of Biblical realism and
Biblical verbalism, contrary to reason and an idealis-
tic view, even though in gcnrnd the rationalistic-
moral scheme remained unscathed (vid. dogmatics of
John of Damascus; Sophronius of Jerusalem: ''^sio-
fkuiit'j fhiai'i fj.-Ta,3<i/.(u<i xai fit,urjfTzfTi'^) . An cntireh' subor-
dinate part was played by the primitive Christian
eschatology ci.ongside of the redemption-mysticism,
rationalism and Biblicism; gradually, however, it
also was aided by Biblicism (cf . the history of the
Apocalypse in the Greek Church) ; men began again
to add apocalyptic ideas to dogmatics, which how-
ever remained without any real effect. The valua-
ble part also of the old eschatology, the expectation
of the Judgment, never played the part in Greek
theology^ which is due to this highly important rem-
nant. In spite of the rejection of the Origenistic
eschatology there remained in Greek dogmatics a
slight trace of the conception of history as an evolu-
tion.

3. As a result of this examination it follows that
after sifting the authorities and sources of informa-
tion, (A) that one has to treat natural theology as pre-
supposing the doctrine of redemption; this, however,

DEVELOPMKNT OF DOCTKINK OV INCAHNATTON. 211

tliat
irma-
^ pve-

ever,

divides itself into the doctriiK' i>f f/oJ Mnd thedoc- ";;';.lji!|;;,;.'^
trino of man. Fartlior, (I*) the doctrine of redt'inp-
tion itself must be treated in its historic (Icrc/o/nuciif
as tlio doctrine of the trijiity and Christology. The
conchision forms (C) the doclrino of the mysteries, T).Miiin.-.,f
in which alnvidy in this life the coming deification *
of the temporal is rejiresented and can be (»n joyed.
To this should bo added a sketch of the history of the
origin of the orthodox system.

Note: Only through Aristotelianism did the Greek ^'^!S,l[^y
Church after Origen arrive again at a dogmatic masnis.'"
system, which was, however, by no mesms a uni-
versal system (Jt)hn of Damascus). A knowledge
of the history of Greek dogma is therefore to be
gained, aside from the acts and decisions of synods,
(1) from the numerous works on the incarnation of
the Son of God, (2) from the catechetical writings,
(3) from the apologetic treatises, (4) from the mono-
graphs on the " six days' work " and similar composi-
tions as well as from the exegetical works, (.5) from
the monographs on virginity, monasticism, perfec-
tion, the virtues and the resurrection, (''<) from
monographs on the mysteries, cultus and priest-
hood, (T) from sermons. In using these sources
this fact with others is to be considered^ that the
fathers frequently wrote '^f^Arxrufwv-, and that the
official literature (sjmod literature) in an increas-
ing measure bristles with falsifications and is per-
meated with conscious untruth and injustice.

t S.'(- (.i-c I'.l'.i. imt".

.""I'

s •

" 'J

2l'i

OUTLINES OF TIIK IIISTOUY OF DOGMA.

CHAITKII III.

1 )

•iti!

Cathulio

Aiillioii-

ties.

Holy

;M'ri|itui'('s

riiiiiiic
Autliuiity.

Tin-: soL'RCEs OF knowlkf)(;f anf) the au-

THOItlTIFS, OK SCKIPTUIiK, TKADITION, AND
THE CIILIICH.

St'C the IntroductioiiH to tho Old an<l New Tostanu'iits.
Jacobi, Die k L v. <1. Trad if ion u. h. Schrift. 1. Al>tli.,
1H17. Ildlt/inaiin, Kaiioii u. Tradition, IHW. Sodcr, Dor
Hcj^rifT d. KallioliritiU d. K. , ISMl, Scclierg. Studicu z.
(icsch. d. Bi'grill'H d. K. , IHH'). Router, Augustiu. Studicu,
isss.

The extent aiitl value of tli(» Catholic authorities
wa.s already essentially estahlished at the beginning
of the 4th eentury, although iK-rhaps not their mu-
tual relation and the maimer of their exposition.
Undernealli the great contrast between the more
liberal theology and pure traditionalism lay also ii
different conception of the anthorities, bv.t this never
found a statement. Changes took place during the
period between Eusebius and John of Damascus,
keeping pace with the growing traditionalism; but
no one undertook to make an inventory, a proof that
opponents of the method, worthy of notice, failed to
palm oil" the existing state of the Church as the tra-
ditional (apostolic). The sects alone protested and
continued to agitate.

]. The Hoi 11 Scri))tuvcs had a unique authority.
To depend upon them alone was in reality not un-
catholic; Scripture-proof one might ahva^'s dinnand.
But an entirely accepted agreement, even respecting

...j^.juhkMt/if*'^

UEVKLOl'MKNT OF DOCTKINK OK INCAHNATIUN. "^'l:*

jrity.
iin-
land.
cting

Au>,'im-

tiiic's

Vifw

the oxtoiit of tho Hil)!*', did not oxist {hvo the sclmol
of Antiocli witli its criticism of the canon). As
regards the Old Testament thi' llehraic canon only
was, in theory, for a long time considered the stand-
ard in the Orient; nevertheless, in practice, the writ-
ings which were coined with th(» T^XX had value.
Only in the ITth century through lloman inllueiico
did the e(iualization of the canonical and dcuitero-
canonical writings tak(» place in the Ori(>nt, yet not
in the form of an olhcial (hrlaration. In the Occi-
dent the uncritical view of Augustine gained tlu^
victory over the critical one of Jerome (synods at A..v|.t.-,i

^ , iristfiiil III'

Hii)po, '.VX], and Carthage, IJ'.iT), which had oidy a Jfiuin.'s.
slight after-eft'ect. Into the Alexandrian canon,
moreover, were also introduced apocalypsi^s like
Hernias and Esra. — Regarding the Xew Testament,
Eusehius made rather a relative end to a highly in-
secure state of atl'airs. Witli tin? threo categories
which he ado])ted one could not content oneself, and
the early decrees of provincial churches had an after-
effect, especially in the Orient. Yet after the mid- Kssentiai

A^^TflMlll'llI

die of the -1th centurv there prevailed (save in the kv M'.i.iir

'■ ^ of 4lli

Syrian churches) in the Orient an essential agree- ^'^'"^'">
ment in regard to the New Testament. Only the
Apocalypse of John remained still for a long time
excluded; slight fluctuations were not wanting.
How the Occident came to accept the Epistle of
James, of II. Peter and III. John is entirely in the
dark. The Epistle to the Hebrews was received
through the celebrated mediating-men of the 4 th cen-

it J

t -

<-,

1:1

.1,

1.1

.11

I %i:

HI?

'.it

Sr !l!i'

Holy

Scriptures

Divine.

214 OUTLINES or THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

tury. Augnstino's views in regard to the extent of
the New Testament lias been the aiitlioritative stand-
ard for the whole Occident (see also the so-called
" Docret. Gelasii"). However, an ecclesiastical judg-
ment on this (jiiestion, excluding every doubt, did
not take place until the Tridentine council.

All predicates concerning the Holy Scriptures dis-
appeared behind that of their cUviiicness (works of the
Holy Spirit); insi)iration in the highest sense was
now restricted to them. From their inspiration came
the demand for spiritualistic (allegorical) exegesis,
and also for conforming the content of the texts to
each other as well as to the accepted dogmatic teach-
ing. Yet the letter should also be hoi}' and contain
that which is most holy (against Origen) ; laymen,
eager for miracles, and critics (Antiochians) took
oides in favor of the letter and of history. A safe
method was wanting: Opposing views were the
spiritual exegesis of the Alexandrians, the histori co-
critical one of the Antiochians which sought for a
jxed type, the literalistic, realistic one of barbarian
monks and of sturdy theologians (Epiphanius).
Very gradually a compromise was made in the
Orient in regard to the most important Scripture
or-rfpuistic passages and their interpretations. The Origenistic,

aud

Antiochian and Still morc the Antiochian exegesis was repressed

I'iXepesis " ^

hi oiS! t)ut not vanquished, the literalistic, realistic one, made
palatable through mystic fancies, pushed forward (see
John ot" Damascus, and his interpretation of Gen.
1-3.) The Occident became acquainted with the

I' i:

' Hi' I

J)KVEL01\MENT OK DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION.

'4[.)

spiritual, scientiiie metliod of tlio Cappadocians
through Hilary, Ambrose, Jfrome, and Riifmus.
Before and afterward there was a complete lack of
system; regard for the letter went hand in hand
with allegorical fancies and chiliastic interests.
Jerome was too cowardly to teach his contempo-
raries the better view, and Augustine, although he
learned from the Greeks, never rose abovy the latter
and did not even reach them. He introduced into
the Occident the Scripture-theology with its waver-
ing three- and four-fold sense, and above all the strict
Biblicism, although he himself knew that religious
truth is an inward assurance to which tlie Scriptures
can only lecid^ and that there exists a Christian free-
dom which is also independent of the Scriptures {cle
doctrina Christiana). Through Junilius especially
the more methodical Antiochian exegesis exerted an
Influence over the Occident, without being able to
remedy the lack of method and the tendency to apol-
ogetic renderings on the part of the commentators.
After-all the Scrijitures received in fact a position in
the life of the Church in the Occident, different from
their position in the Orient (formerly it was other-
wise; see e.g. Cyril of Jerusalem); they occupied a
more prominent place. This is to be explained pri-
marily from the influence of Augustine and from the
fact that ecclesiastical dogmatics in the Occident was
never so assertive as in the Orient. Just as the ex-
tent of the Scriptures was never securely settled, so
also their properties were not. The predicate of iner-

Jcrome,
Augustine.

Junilius

Influences

West.

- -S

-111

::,V

^■^

"«,

' %l.

t:f

TiK'rr.'uicv :
Two Tfsta-

UU'UtS.

Tradition.

Faitii of
Church.

21G OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOM A.

ranry had indeed t(j submit to gentle restrictions and
men did not really come to a clear conception of the
sufficiency of the S^-riptures. In regard to the two
Testaments there remained the same want of clear-
ness as formerly (the O. T. is a Christian book as
well as the N. T. — the O. T. throughout is a record
of the prophecies — the O. T. is the book which con-
tains, with certain restrictions and under definite en-
cumbrances, the verities of the faith, and it has led
and leads pedagogicc.'lly to Christ).

2. Trail ii ion. Scripture did not succeed (at least
not in the (Orient) in ridding itself of the conditions
under which it originated, and in becoming a fully
independent authorit}-. The Church, its doctrines
and institutions, was in itself the source of knowl-
edge and the guarantee of the authority of the truth.
Everything in it is fundamentally apostolic, because
it is of apostolic origin. Hence it is plain why the
making of an inventory of tradition could not take
place. It remained de f^icto always elastic; what
the apostolic Church found necessary is apostolic,
therefore ancient. But at first one did not foiego
distinctions and proofs.

Trpdition was above all the faith of the Church.
The symbols were considered apostolic ; yet only the
Roman church prod nmed its creed as apostolic in
the strictest sense (composed by the apostles). But
the content of the Nicene and Chalcedon creeds
was considered as apostolic, yes, as the legacy of the
apostles xar£^oj(rjv and as the quintessence of the Holy

ifg?;.-.>-^;-A.^,,:i:i ff, --. ;-, , ,„mtepai,..ii..MM—

tho
in
kit
ids
the

DELELOPMEXT OF DOCTRINE OF INX'ARNATION. -^17

Scriptures. Yet tho rehition between Scripture and
symbolB remained elastic. In the Orient the so-
called Conslantinopulitan creed became the chief
symbol; in the Occident the apostles' creed held tho
first place and was explained according to the former.

But tho regulations also of the organization and ^"^i"-!]}^!,""''
cultus were i)laced under the protection of apostolic •^^'"*'^*' '-•
tradition, and one pointed as i)roof to their general
spread and also to tho legends concerning the apos-
tles. Besides, men began in the -ttli century — not
without influence from tho side of Origen and
Clement — to introduce the concentions of an apostolic
Taf)d<lo(n>i nYi>a(fi>i^ in the wholly uncertain content of
which they even included dogmatic teaching — how-
ever, very rarely trinitarian and Christological watch-
words — the understanding of which was not every-
body 's concern (thus especially the Cappadocians).
But this gnostic conception of tradition (secret tradi-
tion), although it became mo'-e and more settled, was
yet felt to be dangerous ; use was made of it in dog-
matic discussions only in extreme cases {e. (/., in the
doctrine of the Holy Spirit), and it was otherwise
applied to the mj'steries and their ritual expositions.

Since it was understood that the decisive authority
was vested in the Church itself by virtue of its union
with the Holy Spirit (Augustine: ^^ ego erangelio
noil crederem^ nisi me catholicae ecclesiae commo-
veret aiicfoiitas"), the questions must arise: ^j^^.^^^^ ,j

(1) Through whom and when does the Church ^Loes"

, „ Church

speak? niwiikt

1 1<(

i"*

,'m§

Mil

21 S OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OK IXXiMA.

Iniiova-
tious.

I|f

,rr

^« M

' Episco-
pate
Represents
Cnurch.

Ecnmeni-

cal
Couucils.

!;• *

(2) How aro i\u) innovations in tho Church, espe-
cially within the realm of doctrine, to be interpreted
if the authority of the Church is lodged entirely in
its apostolicity, i.e. in its permanence? Both (ques-
tions, however, were never distinctly put, and there-
fore only very vaguely answered. Fixed was it that
the representation of the Church was vested in the
episcopate (see Euseb. II. E.), although the strict
theory of Cyprian had not at all become common
property and the idea had never cr()i)ped out that the
individual bishop is infallible. But already there
was attributed a certain inspiration tt) the provincial
synods. Constantino first called an ecumenical synod
and declared its decisions to be without error.
Slowly the thought of the infallible authority of the
Nicene coinicil crept in during the 4tli century and
was later on transferred to the following councils,
in such a way, however, that one synod (^d) was
stamped 2^ost factum as ecumenical, and the dif-
ference between them and tho provincial synods re-
mained for a long time unsettled (Was the synod
of Aries ecumenic?). Through .>ustinian the four
councils were placed upon an unapproachable height,
and after the 7th council the principle established
itself firmly in the Orient, that the sources of knowl-
edge of Christian truth are the Scriptures and the
decrees of the seven ecumenical councils. Even to-
day men assume frequently in the Orient an air as
if the Church did not possess or need any other, s

But this apparently simple and consistent develop-

liiai '

lop-

DKVKI.OPMENT Ol'^ DOCTlilNK (»K IN'CAKNATION. 'i\U

nioiit solved by no moans all tho ili Ilk' ill ties, bucauso
councils were not always at band and otber anllior-
ities also bad still to bo taken into account. How
sbould one act if the Cburcli lias not yot spoken?
Does not an especial autbority belong to tbo occu-
pants of tbe great aj)ostolic episcopal cliairs, or to
tbo bisbops of tbe capitals?

Ans. 1 , Tbo Cburcb also sjjoaks tbrougb unan-
imous ancient testimonies. Tbe citing of tbe
" fatbers '' is important, even decisive. Wbatever
bas universality and anticpiity is true. Besides, tbe
conception of " anticpiit}' " grew (>ver more elastic.
Originally tbe disciples of tbe jipostlcs were tlu^
"ancients", tben tbey counted also tbe .')d and 4tb
generations among tbe ' ancients", tben Origen and
bis disciples were tbe "ancient" expounders; finally
tbe wbole ante-Constantino epocli was considered
classic anticpiity. But since one could make use of
rather little from tins period, appeal was taken to
Atbanasius and tbo fatbers of tbe -Itli century, just
as to tbe "anci<'nts", and at tbe same time to numer-
ous falsifications under the namc^ of tbe fatbers of
the 2d and 3d centuries. At tbo councils one counted
more and more only the voices of the " ancients " and
employed very general explanations to confirm tbe
new formulas and watcbwords. Tilings came tbus
to be decided more and more according to autbori-
ties, wbich one indeed frequently first created. Tbe
council was therefore infallible, only and in so far
as it did not teach anything else but the "fatbers".

How Aft

when

Chuivli

lias utit

Si>okeii?

* \*

■.I

»Hf.

i'**

■ :W

• lit

•: •!»

•^■"M

<""*f|

■*n\

^ Jil ^

-.Ui

-,^1: ,

;-3: ■

ii-t!

:.V'[

^ ^

;•■■•■

■

ji'. a ' .

1 .

■>\rt

til , '■
i ■

'¥M

' ' I

lit r

!, ,^ i

MM' :

iliit

2i30 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

The infallibility was therefore primarily not a direct
one.
Special Ans. 2. Aiigustine recalled to mind the especial

Authority

Beiongto authority of the a])ostolic chairs (also the Oriental)

Apostolic */ L \ /

Chairs? ^^jj ^\^q question concerning the extent of the Holy
Scriptures. But in the (Jrient this authority was
merged in that of the chairs of the capitals and
therefore Constantinople moved to the front, being
strongly attacked by the Roman bishop. The Roman
chair alone was able not only to preserve its ancient
authority in the Occident, but also to heighten it
(only apostolic chair in the Occident, Peter and Paul,
fall of the West-Roman empire, the centre for the
remnant of Romanism in the West) and (thanks to
the favorable circumstances of political and ecclesi-
astical history) to fortify the same also in the Orient,
under great fluctuation to be sure. To the Roman
bishop was always attached an authority peculiar in
kind, w^ithout its being possible to define the same
more closely. It only ceased in the Orient, when
Orient and Occident possessed nothing more what-
ever in common. But before the same became ex-
tinct the Roman bishop, in league with the eastern
Roman emperor, had gained the point that in the
Orient attempts at a primacy of any bishop, espe-
cially the Alexandrian, should be suppressed, to
whicn suppression the Christological contests contrib-
uted. The great chairs of the patriarchs in the
Orient, weakened through schisms, partially deprived
of their real importance, stood in theory in equal

Chairs of
Capitals.

le-

Ito

(.'nuni'ils
Not Au-
thorita-
tive.

Apostolic
Lt'Kacy.

DKVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. '2*2 1

positions toward one another. Tiieir occupants also
represented in their co-oj)erations a kind of dogmatic
authority, which however was defined neither in
itself, nor in its rehition to the ecumenical councils.
They form simply a r clique of anti(iuity.

From statements made it follows, that the ability
to transmit new revelations to the Church did not
belong to the councils; rather are the same rendered
legitimate through the preservation of the apostolic
legacy. Therefore did the declaration and adoption
of new formulas {oi the o/woo(tco<^^ of the oneness of
the trinity, of the two natures, and so on) cause
such great difficulties. When at last the Nicene
doctrine gained the victory, it was accomplished only
because the Nicene creed itself had become a piece
of antiquity and because one endeavored, poorly
enough, to deduce from the Nicene all later formulas
by giving out (as Irenn?us had once done) asj;rf-
scribedj together with the text, also a definite expo-
sition of the same. The ability of the councils even
to explain the doctrines authentically had not been
clearly declared in the Orient; therefore the excuse
has onlj seldom been made for the earlier eastern
fathers, that at their time the dogma had not been
explained and definitely formulated. Whereas a
western man (Vincent of Lorinunip) in his Coni-
monitorium, after having asserted the criteria of plnj^n."sin
the true tradition (that which has ]>vou believed
everywhere, always and l)y all), and after having
warned men against the heresies of otherwise ortho-

Vincent of
Leriimin;

h ■

I"* .

I» *

• ;«

;':i. ■ ■,-'• ■

.^Oi • i .i.il

..•,.,ll 1

"n •■

li.,Jii ;

- M' j

!■■;«'■ ;

'"i^'l 1

'„ i'*i| 1 ;

:> !

|8!::i'

'fi'ci

!
1

■--.;*

* ; 'SI

;■ i )

I'lii

Idea of

Tradition

Vague.

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

dox fathers, mlmitted an " organic " progress in doc-
trine (from the more uncertain to the more certain)
and proclaimed tlio councils as agents in this
progress {"^ cvcitnta hcvreticornm novitatihns^").
Augustine expressly taught, that so long as luieipiiv-
ocal decisions on a question had not been given, ilio
bond of union between dissenting bishops shoul(^. bo
maintained. The Roman bishop has always acted
according to this rule, but has reserved for himself
the decisions and the time for the same.

The conception of tradition is therefore entirely
vague. The hierarchical element does not play i)i
theorfj the first part. The apostolic succession has
even in the Occident not been in theory of such great
importance for the confirming of tradition. At the
councils, since the time they were called, the author-
ity of the bishoi^s as bearers of tradition was ex-
hausted. Still, perhaps that is saying too much.
Everything w^as very obscure. But in so far as the
Greek Church has not changed since John of Damas-
cus, the Greek even at the present time has a per-
fectly definite consciousness of the foundation of
religion. By the side of the Holy Scriptures, the
foundation of religion is the Church itself, not as liv-
ing power, but in its immovable doctrines and time-
honored orders. The Scriptures also are to be ex-
plained according to tradition. But the tradition is
primarily always two-fold, — the public one of the
councils and fathers, and the secret one which con-
firms the mysteries, their ritual and its interpretation.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 223

V-

lO-
X-

is
le
n-
11.

o. The Clinrch. As guarantee of tlio tnio faith,
and administrator of 11k' mysteries, theClunrh above
all came into consideration. Furthermore, men re-
flected about it when they thouj^ht of the Old Testa-
ment and false church of the Jews, of heresy and the
organization of Christianity, as also of tlio presump-
tion of the Roman bishop (Christ alone is the head
of the Church). Again, the Church was represented
in catechetical instruction as the communion of the
true faith and virtue, outside of which there cculd
not easily be a wise and pious pers(jn, and the Bibli-
cal declaration regarding it was that it was the only
and holy one, guided by the Holy Spirit, Catholic
in opposition to the numerous impious unions of the
heretics. A'"ery evidently men identified thereby the
empirical church with the Church of the faith and
virtue, without, liowever, coming to a closer reflec-
tion on corpus roruni et pennixtum and without
drawing all the consecpiencos which the identification
demanded. In spite of all this the Church was not
primarily a dogmatic conception, Ix longing to the
department of the doctrine of salvation itself ; or it
became so only when men thought of it as the insti-
tution of mysteries, from ^vhich, moreover, the monk
was permitted to emancipate himself. Through the
restrictions under which the Greeks viewed the duties
of the Church and through the natural theology,
is this disregard to be explained. The Church is
the human race as the totality of all individuals who
accept salvation. The doctrini; of salvation exiiausted

Clmrcli

fiiianmlfc

of Trut'.

Fuith.

Empirical
Church iukI
('htin-h of

Fuith
Idciitilied.

':^'

•'i;^i

^ ' '3

\-\

224 OUTLINES OF THK HISTORY OF l)()(;MA.

Pnp?nat ic

l(lfll of

I'hiircli
Not Fixi'il.

\V«'stt»rn

Chiircli

Wi'a Dc-

velopinj^.

itHolf in the roncoptioiiH : God, luimanily, Christ, tho
mystoi'it's, tlio individiuil. Tho coiicoi)tioii of tho
Church as tho motluu' of boliovors, as a diviiio crea-
tion, as tho body of Christ was not worktul out dog-
matically. Tho mystical doctrine of redemption also
and tho doctrine of the eucharist did not assist tho
Church to a dogmatic position (it is wanting, for ox-
ample, in John of Damascus). Its organization,
thorough as it is, was not perfected beyond the grade
of bishops and was seldom treated dogmatically. Tho
Church is not the becpiest of tho apostles, but of
Christ; therefore its importance as an institution of
worship takes the first rank.

All this has reference to the Oriental Church. In
the Occident, through the Donatist contest, the
foundation was laid by the Church for new and rich
conceptions. The Church itself was at tho end of
the early period divided into three great parts : The
western Church, the Bj'zantine, the Semitic eastern ;
and the latter was cleft into manifold parts. Each
part considered itself the one Catholic Church and
extolled its particular palladia.

A. THE PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE DOCTRINE
OF SALVATION, OR NATURAL THEOLOGY.

Natural
TliiMilojjy.

Natural theok)gy with all the fathers was essen-
tially the same thing; but it shows shades according
as Platonism or Aristotelianism j)redominated and ac-

rl|:

1)Kvi:l()I'mp:nt of ixx tkinf-: of in( aijnation. 'i'ib

cordinj^ to tlio nioasurc in wliicli the letter of tbo
Bible exerted an influence.

CHAPTER IV.

:-n ;

ni-

!«»•

lic-

TTIE rRESL'PPOSTTIOXS AND CON'CEPTIONS OF (JOD,
THE CUEATOK, AS DISPENSER OF SALVATION.

The main itriiK'inles of tho doctrino of Ciod, as the I'ortrin.'of

* '^ (i(mI.

apologists and anti-gnostic fathers had ostablislicd
them, remained firm and wore directed i)articnlarly
against Manichaiism, but were hardly touched l)y tho
development of the doctrine of the trinity, since tlie
Father as /''-■^rj zr;^ ^'hoTr/Tog alone came into considera-
tion here. Yet with ^he growing Biblicism and the
monkish barbarism, anthropomorphic conceptions
forced themselves more and more into theology.
Concerning the ({uestion of man's ability to know
God, Aristotelians (Eunomius, Diodorus of Tarsus,
especially since the beginning of the 0th century) and
Platonists contended with each other, and yet were
fundamentally agreed. That man k:iows God only '^",?j,^|^*)If *'
through revelation, more exactly through Christ, was
generally allowed, but to this declaration as a rule
no further consequences were given and men as-
cended from the world to G(xl, making use of the
old proofs and supplementing them with the ontolog-
ical argument (Augustine). Neo- Platonic theolo-
gians assumed an immediate, intuitive perception of

God of the highest order, but they nevertheless per-
15

God.

.: •

,! i

'I .A

fe:.

t hi

1^ Ji'i ii '

■

1 .

« 1l»

!■- 1

Ni'pativo

AttriliulcH

Kmi>li(i-

Si/AMl,

2:.*n Ol'TUNKS OF Tin: HISTORY OK DO(i.M.\.

footed very pnjcisfly tlio Hcliolastic form of this
knowledge) (tho Arcopagite: Negation, exaltation,
causality).

Tli(! loftiest expression for the being of God was
as yet that ho is "not-tho-world", tho spiritual,
immortal, apathetic rhihstanco (tho "^^v), to which
alono real being belongs (Aristotelians thought of
cause and puriiose, without correcting radically
tho Platonic scheme). His goodness is perfection,
unenviousness and creating will (additions leading
to a better conception by Augustine: God as love,
which frees men from self-seeking). The attributes
of God were treated accordingly as expressions of
causality and power, in which the purpose of salva-
tion was not taken into account (Origen's conception
became tempered, i.e. corrected). By tho side of the
Moral At- naturalistic concei)tion of God as tho "f>v stood the
moralistic one of Rewarder and Judge; upon this
also the idea of redemption had hardlj'^ any notice-
able intluenco (less than with Origen), since "re-
ward " and " punishment " were treated as one. Yet
Augustine recognized the worthlossness of a theol-
ogy which places God only at the beginning and the
end and makes men independent of him, instead of
acknowledging God as tho Power for good and the
Source of the personal, blessed life.

The cosmology of tho fathers may be thus stated :
God, who has carried in himself the world-idea from
eternity, has through the Ijogos, which embraces all
ideas, in free self-determination created in six days

tributes.

Cosmology
of Fathers.

I>KVKI,(M'MKNT OV DnCTIMXK OK INCAHNATTnV. 'i'27

Iff

thu

lis

re-

lYet

the

Id of

the

Ited :
•cm
all

ciys

out of nothing' tlii.s world, wliicli lias had n iH'^itmiiijjj
and will havo an ctid ; it was cn^itcd after the pat-
tern of an upper world, which was hrouj^ht f«»i'th Ity
him, and has its ridniination in man in order to
prove his own kindness and to permit creatures to
participate in his bliss. In this thesis the lieresies
of Origon were set aside (especially his pessimism).
Still men did not succeed in entirely justifying; the
verbal meaning of Gen. 1-;J, and in the representa- <^''" im
tion of an ui)per world {xnTfun; vn^fn'i^^)^ whose lesser
copy the earthly is, there remained a significant
piece of the Neo-Platonic-Ongenistic doctrine, which
was then greatly amplified, after the Areopagite, by
the Platonizing mystics. But the pantheistic hore-
sios were scarcely felt thereafter, if only in some
way the verbal meaning of Gen. 1-3 seemed to bo
preserved. The theodicy — still always necessary on Thoodioy.
account of Manichseism and fatalism — sought to hold
its ground through empirical considerations, but
since it too must be natural theology it revealed its
ancient root in an oft-estranging casuistry and in
doubtful claims. Men referred to the necessity and
fitness of the freedom of the creature which must
have as a consequence wickedness and evil, to the
harmlessness of evil for the soul, to the unreality of
wickedness and to the value of evil as a means of
purification.

In regard to the heavenly spirits the following ^^^l*"^''^
])oints were settled: That they were created by (j|od,
that they are free and lack material bodies, that

' I*

<•

.'•-II

..,11

■a

! I

.5 '■

l^^'i<m

*»»

',\ I'

!.[

Vcnoratioii
of Anp'ls.

2C8 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

tUoy have passed through a crisis in which a part
have fallen, that God uses tlio good spirits as instru-
ments in governing the world, that the existence of
wickedness in the world is to be traced back to the
v/icked spirits, whom God allows to have their way
and who are incorrigible and have almost unlimited
power over the world which only the cross can break
and who are going to receive d'lmnation (against
Origon). After the 4th century, however, the poly-
theistic t'.'ndency became stronger and stronger
toward angels and demons, and already by about 400
A. D. the piety of monks and laymen was nourished
more by tliese than by God. While tiie synod of
J^aodicea about 3()0 declared angel- worship to be idol-
atry, still the veneration of angels became more firmly
established (guardian-angels, faith in their interces-
sion) and was ecclesiastically fixed at the 7th council,
78 (' {-f>(>(TX'')vrj(T','i) . It contributed much ioward this,
that the " scientific " theology in the form of the Neo-
Platonic mysticism, after about 500, incrdased the
esteem given to angels, and that they were received
into the system as most important factors (but see
alread}^ the Alexandrian theologians) : The angels in
graded ranks are, on the one side, the unfolding of
the heaveidy, on the other, the mediators between
the hejivenly and men. To the earthly hierarchy with
its grades, agencies and consecrations, corresponds a
heavenly, graded hierarch}' ^v^th heaveidy sacrifices,
intercessions, etc. ; in divine worship both unite
(vid. the Areopagite and his expounders). Thus

'1 1

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INC'ARNATiON. 2'20

arose — truly aftor U)iig pivi)aratic»:i — a now ecclesi- ^^'^"l"-'.";*;',"'^'
astical Jieosopliy which was ])iii\'lyi)agan and wiiitli "'^^"i">''
was finally a shamefaced expression for jiigglering
the idea of creation and redemption and for reviving
the fantastic pantheism which the bizarre theosophy
of perishing antiqnity had created : E^'erything that
exists streams out from God in manifold ratliations
and must, since it is remote and isolated, be jjurifi
and returned to God. This has taken place in nec-
ess'tri; processes which were so represented that all
needs, even the most barbaric, v.'ere taken into con-
sideration, and all authorities and ft)rms were re-
spected. But the living God, besides whom the soul
possesses nothing, threatened thereby to disai)pear.

CHAPTER V.

' ^

♦ ■

eo-
tlio
ved
see
s in
of
een
ith
Is a

THE PRESUPPOSITIONS AND CONCEPTIONS OF MAN
AS THE RECIPIENT OF SALVATION.

The common conviction of the orthodox fathers Doctrine of

Muii.

may be stated somewhat as follows: ]\Ian, created
after the image of God, is a free self -determining
being. He has been endowed with reason, in order
to decide in favov of the good and to enjoy immortal
life. Having indulged himself and still ever in-
dulging himself in sin, misled, or of his own free
will, he has missed tliis destination without, how-
ever, having forfeited the pri\'ilege and power of a
vi:^tuous life and the capability of immortality.

^' 1

9\ ' ,''' .i

f
f

. a '

i
\
i •

Points
under
Considera-
tion.

Idea of

Niitural

Freedouj

Central.

2;jo

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA,

Through ihc (*hiistiaii rcvohition, which comes to
the aid of the darkened reason with full knowledge
of God, that ability has been strengthened and the
immortality restored and proffered. Upon good or
evil therefore the judgment decides. The will has,
strictly speaking, no moral quality. In regard to
details there were varying opinions : ( 1 ) What was
the original inheritance of man, and what his desti-
nation? (2) How far does nature go, and where does
the gift of grace begin? (;)) How far-reaching are
the consequences of sin? (4) Is mere freedom char-
acteristic of the being of man, or does it inhere in
his nature to be good? (5) Into what elements is
the human personality to be divided? ((5) In what
does the Divine likeness consist? and so forth.

The various answers are all compromises; (a) be-
tween the religious-scientific theory (doctrine of Ori-
gen) and Gen. l-o ; (h) between the moralistic con-
siderations and a regard for the redemption through
Christ; (c) between dualism and the recognition of
the body as a necessary and good organ.

1. The idea of inborn freedom is central ; with it
reason is included. It constitutes the Divine im-
age, which therefore means independence as regnrds
God. Whether there belongs to the nature of man
only the sensuousness of the creature, or whether
he is endowed with reason and even immortalit}^,
remained in controvers3\ However, the controversy
was quite immaterial, since the glorious nature of
man was after all ever considered a gift of grace,

«1BS^S

^fe^TTl'

aiffii

I -;

i 1

\
1

■11^

ler

DKVRLOrMENT OF DOCTRTNK OF INCARNATION. 21)1

and this gift of grace was c'()nsi<lore(l hy the majority
as natural. The heing of man was represented as
trichotomous, by others as dichotomous. The Greek- or^glnhitic
Origenistic conception of the body as a prison was Rejected"
finally officially rejected — man is rather, even as a
spiritual being, a microcosm and the body is also
God-given — but the same never ceased to have
an after-effect, because the positive morality was
always obliged to give way to the negative (asceti-
cism), I.e., because it received in the conception of
the opera supererogatoria an ascetic cast. The
late^' Noo-Platonic mysteriosophists, indeed, knew
how to make good use of the idea of the glorification
of the body, but in truth the corporeal was still con-
sidered by them as something to be "absorbed," even
though they no longer dared to shake the verbal mean-
ing of the formula of the "resurrection of the body".

Concerning the origin of individual souls (the soul ^sS"'^
is no part of God; but in reality many theosophists
after all considered it as such) the pre-existent view
of Origen was expressly condemned, 553, but the
traducian theory was not able to carry the day;
rather did the creation theory (continued creation
of individual souls) become dominant.

As regards the God-likeness, men still continued [?[,if,!"lJ
in the antinomy, that goodness and purity can bo ^*"'^'*''""
the product only of human freedom ; that, however,
the likeness imprinted by creation cannot reside
in the possibilitas iitriusque, but in a determina-
Hon of reason and freedom, and that it has in part

•3'
■^11

I «

!' i

la It

•li,i

H ' 'i\

'•■'.1

•, 'fi J

i:'

Theories

Regardin}?

Origin of

Siu.

232

OUTLTXES OF TITE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

been lost. According!}' the conceptions also regard-
ing the primitive condition of man were as hazy
as by Irenrens. On the one side, the perfection of
man was siiid to have been practically realized at
the beginning and was later restored by (Jhrist; on
the other, the primitive condition was said to have
been the child-like state out of which man had first
to develop himself unto perfection and which he
therefore in reality could never lose, but only im-
prove (thus especially and emphatically the Antio-
cliians). The Cappadocians still taught in the main
much like Origen ; but later men were forced to bind
themselves strictly to Genesis, and the speculative
conceptions were cultivated as much as the rational-
istic ones of the Antiochians. Doubts about the
primitive condition of man resulted in indefinite con-
ceptions of asceticism, which have never b'^en cleared
up in the Greek Church : Some saw in asceticism
the natural constitutional condition of man, others
(especially the Aniriochians) conceived of it as some-
thing supei'terrestrial and superhuman.

2. It was acknowledged that the human race since
its origin, i.e. since Adam (express rejection in the
Gth century of the doctrine of Origen as tc the
fall in a pre-existent state), has turned away from
the good (cause: Not a created sinful power, not
matter, not the Divinity, not inheritance of the sin
of Adam — Adam was for the majority the type, not
the progenitor of sinners, — but abuse of freedom by
reason of demoniac betrayal, and transmission of

t III Jin It atiiMiijijingggii

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCAKNATION. 2;J3

f '1

Ot'iicsis
Rnimuis V.

bad customs. Besides, indeed, with the majority tlie
unsubdued thought still remained in the background,
that the inducement to turn from God comes with a
certain necessitj' from the sensuous nature and the
creature infirmities of man ; that is, from a conjoin-
ing of the man and his liability to death — be it nat-
ural (the Antiochians), or acquired through nus-
takes, or inherited. One finds, therefore, in the same
fathers the contradictory expressions, that goodness
is natural to man and that sin is natural to him).
Genesis and Rom. 5 forced the Greeks more and
more to give to the fall of Adam, agjiinst their eni-
pirico-rationalistic theory, a world-historic impor-
tance. But the Augustinian doctrine of hereditary
sin they have not accepted during all the cen-
turies; they have even declared it plainly to be Mani-
chceism. Therefore, since they were prevented from
supporting tlie Origenistic doctrine, and since the
Bible forbade the conseciuent rationalism of the
Antiochian theologians, they remained involved in
nothing but uncertainties. Most of them proclaimed
universal mortality (hereditary death), the darken-
ing of knowledge (therefore polytheism) and a cer-
tain weakening of freedom on account of the fall of
Adam, enlarging the latter even to almost complete
loss of freedom when they thought of the work of
Christ, but hardly mentioning it when they wrote
against the Manichseans. But since they never in- ^i^yJ^t'S"^^*^
tended to put in the place of the moral idea of sin
the religious, and since the philosophumenon, evil is

■i:- *.<

Il f-

* 1 l\

Natural

Theology

Domiuates.

Redemp-
tion Natu-
ralistic.

Man

Related to

God only

as Creature

to Creator.

Doctrine of
Uod
Rational-
ized.

234 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the noii-bciiij^, never entirely left their memory, and
since they always felt the conse(iiieiiccs of sin more
severely than sin itself — to which consideration their
conception of the work of Christ also led them — they
were never able to give to the gravity of sin, i.e. to
guilt., a satisfactory expression: Sin is a bad single
deed ; it is accident and again fatality ; it is the con-
sequence of the liability to death ; but it is not the
dreadful power which destroys union with God.

The influence of natural theology (and of the
rationalism and mysticism akin to it), pre-eminent
in the doctrine of God and man, upon the actual
dogmatic teaching was fundamental:

(1) Man is led through redemption to that des-
tination which he can also reach by virtue of his
freedom (danger, that of looking upon redemj^tion
merely as an assistance) ;

{'I) Man, as the image of God, an independent
being also as regards God, can have no other rela-
tions to him than as to the Creator and Judge ; God
himself is not his life, but the law of God is his rule
of conduct (danger, that of looking upon the Gospel
and salvation as knowledge and law, upon punish-
ment as the greatest misfortune, and upon repent-
ance as the cause of pardon) ;

(:j) The doctrines also regarding God, the Redeem-
er, must needs be treated according to the rationalis-
tic scheme (rationality of the doctrine of the trinity,
of the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, etc.) ;

(4) In the last analysis man can gather nothing

DKVKI.OI'MKXT OF DOCTKINK OK INCARNATION. 2:55

from history; but to liistory, iiuUvd, belongs the
Xnyu'i hnaiixii'i ; tliG view tlioivfoiv was iiot entirely re-
jected, that there is r. standpoint from which the
historical Christ, since he is only un assisting
teacher, has no nieanii^g: ]Man, who through gnosis
and asceticism has become a UKjral hert), stands free
by the side of God ; he loves God and God loves him ;
in him will a Christ be born. The most vital piety
of the Greek fathers and the most energetic attempt
to make themselves at homo in religion, have even
been the least safeguard against their losing the
historical Christ. Still it was a danger which only
threatened. Divinity has descended, God has become
man in the historical Jesus; faith in this immense
fact — " the newest of all the new, yes, the only new
fact under the sun " (John of Damascus) — as well as
the mystery and terror of death restricted all ration-
alism. Man must be redeemed and has been re-
deemed.

B. THE DOCTRINE OF REDEMPTION THROUGH
THE PERSON OF THE GOD-MAN IN ITS HIS-
TORICAL DEVELOPMENT.

CHAPTER VI.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE NECESSITY AND REALITY
OF REDEMPTION THROUGH THE INCARNATION
OF THE SON OF GOD.

Ilistoriral
Christ l>f-
preoiutt'd.

^ i

w ■

!' I

I
J

I !•

The incarnation of God alone balanced the whole ^-'^•'•"'■* ""^

system of natural theology.

Value (if
ImuriKi-

iiecause men believeu tiou.

' '^

I! 1

' "

Athana-

sius"

TJH'ory of

Incariui-

tiun.

Two

Results

Secured.

'■I'M'i OUTLINES OF Tin-: IIISTOKY OF IXXJMA.

ill its reality, ihoy also asserted its necessity. Tliey
referred it to deatli, to the dominion of demons, to
sin and error, and not seldom in this connection they
made, regarding the wickedness of man, assertions
which recall Augustine. But when a definite theory
was given, the idea of the aholition of perishableness
and of the sting of death 'done held out; for the
doctrines oi frecd()in excluded an (vxplation of sin
and, on the other side, brought home the thought
that heart-felt repentance before (j(»(1 frees from sin
(thus, t^.f/. Athanasius, do iiicarn. VII.). After Ire-
najus, Athanasius first > rt)poundeil a definite theory
of the incarnati(m (1. c.). He bases it, on the one
hand, upoi) the goodness /f God, i.e., upon his self
assertion and honor; on the otlie)', upon the conse-
quences oi sin, i.e. perishableness. These the Logos
only is able to remove, who also originally created
everything out of nothing. Regarding the means,
Athanasius has recourse to all the Biblical concep-
tions (sacrificial death, expiation of guilt, etc.) ; but
he onl}^ carries out sti'ictly the thout;ht, that in the
act of incarnation itself lies the changing from the
doom of death to a(f>'h/.f>fTia, in so far as the physical
union of the human with the Divine (the dwelling of
God in the flesh) elevates humanity into the sphere
of bliss and of the nfffhiiKria. The conseqaence of
the incarnation is, therefore, primarily a transfox'-
mation into the imperishable (renewal of the Divine
likeness), but secondarily also the restoriiig of the
knowledge of God, in so far as the earthly appe<ir-

DEVEI.OrMENT OF DOf'TRTNE OF INCAKNATION. 2'\7

anceof Divinity ^iu Christ) mak( s Divinity recogniz-
able to the dullest eye ami thereby eradicates poly-
theism. Athanasius, in disserting this double result,
was also able to explain the particular result of tlie
incarnation : Only those are benefited by it who
know Ood and who regulate their lives according to
this knowledge. The ai)otheosis of human nature nHnoatinn

*^ * of liiiiiiiin-

(participation in Clod through son-ship) and not "/i'ohi't!"
knowledge was to Athanasius the main point.
Therefore his whole concern was with the exact
determining of the (juestion, how the Divine which
became man was constituted, and into what con-
nections with humanity he entered. On the con-
trary the Arians and, later, the Antiochians placed
the principal stress upon the knowledge; they i)erse-
vered in the rationalistic scheme. ( )n that very ac-
count they had not in general a decided interest ir
the two (juestions, and when tliey had, they answt: '■
them in another way. It is plain that the great
dogmatic contentions have their root herein : f^'ub-
stantial participation in God, or knowledge of him
which assists freedom — Christ the Divinitv, or the
intelligent Reason of the world and the Divine
Teacher — Christ the inseparable God-man, or the
inspired man and the dual Being. Athanasius had
on his side the highest Greek piety, his opponents
the more intelligible formulas and, in part, the letter
of the Bible.

No other Greek father has answered the (luestion ^y''\ P'''
why God became man so cU'arly as Athanasius. ''""""' '^^'"''

Uont of
DoKHintic
Conten-
tions.

r
''I ■

!' I

\ ■

I- -.Wirt ill I

»i

^;]H OUTLINKS OV TIFK IIFSTOKY OF DOGMA.

firoRory (if
NyHsa.

Incarna-
tion Only
Fully Ac-
coniplislit'd
in Ri'siir-
rection.

l'li\ sico-
Phaniiaco-
lotrical
I'rocfss.

Pantheistic
Element.

Next to him conu'S tho Platonist, (Irogoiy nf Nyssa
(larg<^ catocliisin) , sinco in general tho whole concep-
tion of (loc;trino is possible only upon tho basis of Pla-
t(jnisni. Gregory at some points strengthened the
deductions, in iiiany instances, however, he followed
Methodius. In contending with Jews and pagans
he shows that the incarnation is the best form of
redemption; he conceives the whole sinful state as
death, and gives, therefore, to this conception a wider
scope (all turning away from G(xl to the non-exist-
ent sensuous is death) ; he viewed the incarnation as
fully accomplished first in the resurrection of Christ
(Origonistic declaration: Redemption presupposes
separation from the body) ; he expressly taught that
Christ did not assume the nature of an individual
man, but, as second Adam, human nature itself, so
that according to this mystic-Platonic view, every-
thincj human has blended with tho Divinity; he con-
ceived of the whole strictly as a physico-pharmacolog-
ical process : Humanity became thoroughly pene-
trated by the leaven of Divinity (the counter-weight
is the demand for the spontaneous fulfilling of the
law) ; he brought the sacraments into the closest re-
lation with the incarnation. But, finally, he gave a
pantheistic turn to this realistic and, to all rational-
ism, apparently hostile idea, which deprives it of its
peculiarity and is quite in accord with a rationalis-
tic conception : Christ's incarnation is an act of
(cosmic importance; it n>aches as reconciliation and
restitutit)n over the whole world from the highest

DKVELOl'MENT UV DOC IK INK OF INCAIJNATION. 2.il)

■ill'

anj^cls down to the (Iccpcst (l('i)ths. Thus it dis-
solves, as with Origi'ii, into a necessary cosmical
process; it l)econies a special case of tlie {jjenerai
omniproscnco of the Divine in creation. In the
cosmos the alicnati(^n from God is set forth in the
same manner as the return to him. Gregory assisted
in transmitting to futurity this pantheistic idea,
which he himself indeed never (juite clearly thought
out so as to .separate it from its historical conditions.
The pantheistic doctrine of redemption appears in
after times in a dou^»le form (pantheistic monoj)hy-
sites, the Arcopagite and his discii)les, etc.) : Either
the work of the historical Christ appears as a special
instance, i.e. as a symbol of the general purifj-ing
and sanctifying activity which the Logos in common
with the graded orders of super-sensuous creatures,
and at tliQ same time for them, continually effects by
means of holy agencies — or instantly with the thought
of the incarnation the union of each individual soul
with the Logos is conceived of, in which there is
repeated what occurred in regard to Christ. A third
form still is the view, that the humanity of Christ
was a heavenly one, i.e. that the Logos always car-
ried humanity within itself. Even unconcealed j)an-
theism (nature as a whole is of one essence with
Divinity) was not wanting.

But all this lay only in the background, while the
thought that Christ took upon himself humanity ;vs
generally conceived spread iu the Ea.st and West, and
destroyed the idea of a moral union of the l>ivinity

Form of

PaiUlH'istic

Doctrim*.

H<Hl(>mp-

lion Rc-

ffiTt'd to

Sill anil

IVfitli.

' I

I
3

5
'i

: i'i

i h

• •!•

Adjiist-

IlK'Ilt of

Facts ill

ilcsiis' Life

to Ut'dt'rniH

tioii

Theory.

210 OUTLINKS OK TMK IIISTOHV OF IXMJMA.

with Mti individual man, from wiiicli, of conrso, tho
certainty of our participation in God cannot bo in-
ferred. Tiioso who tauj^ht this moral union (Anti-
ochians) ordinarily conceived redemj.tion, not as a
restitution, the necessity of wliich they did not exactly
feel, but as a leading up to a new state, as the close of
the Divine pedaj^ogy. Whereas the theologians fol-
lowing Athanasius and Gregory always conceived of
the incarnation as a no(,'essary restitution and referred
it tlierefore to sin and deatii. Accordingly they firm-
ly maintained, so far ns the}' were not misled by pan-
theism, that the incarnation was an historical deed
of unfathomable Divine compassion, by means of
which humanity has been restored to Divine life.

Supplemoif. Men attempted to fit the facts of the
history of Jesus into the work of redemption, which
indeed was a success as regards the resurrection, but
not wholly so in any other single point. The death
on the cross remained in particular unintelligible,
although Pauline points of view wore continually
repeated; for by the incarnation everything had
re£dly been given and deatli could at the most be but
the conclusion of the "becoming flesh" (the sacrifi-
cial view moreover has seldom since Grigon been far-
ther fertilized according to the scheme of the Greek
mysteries). Nevertheless there can be no doubt
that death was considered a blissful mystery, before
which one should bow down, and it is after all a
question whether the dogmatic reticence here of the
Greeks is less worthv in contrast with the bold reckon-

^ ii

PKVKI.01'.MKNT OF DOCTRINE OK INCARNATION. 5J41

the (Sri'tit
Topes.

in^' and harj^ainiii}^ of the Occidfntal (li(M)l(>^ianH.
•Tho latter hIik-o TuituUiaii and Cyprian havo over ,^''i!£i'J|;,'
considered the endurance of death as a service, the
value of which should be appraised in juristic ft)rnui-
las; they have looked upon death as J^dtisfdctio and
placaUn del and ai)[>lied to it the view gained hy the
contemplation of the legal scheme of atonement (abo-
lition of sull'ering and punishment for guilt through
ilmcj'piatiou, i.e. through the mcrif of Christ's death
which pacified an angry God. C^alculating the value
to God of Christ's death : Ambroses Augustine, the A^."SsTine
great popes). Moreover since And)rose they consist-
ently advanced to the assumption, that the expiation
(the merit) of Christ was made as nntn^ since hu-
manity is the (h'btor and since? any services rendered
can be ascribed onl}' to the man, who, to be sure,
received his worthiness from his Divinity. Tliereby
the West alienated itself from the East : Here is God
who has taken humanity into union with his being,
in conscMiuence of which his constitution as Re-
deemer; yonder is man, tho propitiator, whose endur-
ance of death has a Divine value. But the West, it
is true, did not possess as yet a strict theory. It also
still accepted the gnostic-eastern conceptions that a
ransom was })aid to the devil, who thereby was de-
frauded.
16

r
i

, 1
! i

il 1

I 1;

242 OUTLINES OF THE Hl.^TORY OF DOGMA.

S'.

Hnmonsios
of Fathor
and Son.

Liician,

Adoptiou-

isiu.

CHAPTER VII.

TliE DOCTRINE OF THE HOMOUSION OF THE SON OF
GOD WITH GOD HIMSELF.

Principal sources: The Church historians of the 4th and
nth centuries and the works of the fathers of the 4th century.
Gvvatkin, Studies of Arianisin, 1882; Molder, Athnnnsius,
1827; Zahn, Marcell., 1867; Hahn, Bibliothek d. Synibole, 3.
Aufl.

Is the Divine, which has appeared upon the earth
and reunited man with God, identical with the high-
est divine Being who rules heaven and earth, or is
he same scini-diviner That was the decisive ques-
tion of the Arian controversy.

1. — From the Beginning of the Controversi/ until
the Council of Nica'a.

At Antioch, 2G8, the Logos-doctrine had been car-
ried through, but the ''/^'^'W^/^ was rejected. Yet the
legacy of Paul of Samosata did not perish. Lucian,
the most learned exegete of his time, took ic up and
founded a i)oi)ular, influcntijd (wogotico-theological
school, which for a lung time held aloof from the
Cliurch, but later made its peace with the same, and
became the foster-mother of Arianism. Lucian
started from adoptionism ; the high value which he
placed upon the dereJopnient of Christ {-no/.u-rj)
proves this, But he condescended to introduce the
hypostatic Logos, still as /.<'>y„^'-y.T':>-;ia^ as created,
capable and in need of development, which is to be

f.TW^Wf^^'^^T^^^

le
(1,

DEVELOPMENT OF POCTRINE OF 1N(\\RXATI()X. '243

sharply (listinguished from the etornul, impersonal
Logos of God. The ego in Christ is tlierefore a
heavenly pre-existent Being (no longer man, as with
Paul) — by this admission Lucian made his peace
with the dogma and the Origenists — hut human
qualities were attributed to the same, the incai-nation
became a mere assuming of the flesh, and by means
of the Aristotelian dialectics and Biblican exegesis
a doctrinal principle was now propounded in which
the unhegotten Creator (the " Eternal ") was placed
in sharp contrast with all created beings, conse-
quently also with the IjOgos-Christ, and theology
became "technology", that is, a doctrine of the un-
hegotten and the begotten was worked out in syllo-
gisms founded upon the holy codex, without genu-
ine interest in the th(Hight of redemption, yet not
v/ichout moral energy, and this was spread abroad
by disciples closely allied and proud of their dialec-
tics and their exegetical art.

To these Arius also belonged, who at a ri])e age
became deacon and presbyter in Alexandria. There,
at that time, a tendency was represented in the epis-
copate which mistrusted the luv^para zi]< 7.7/.y^>.'x>;s-
tpiXo(70(fia< and put aside the thought of the difference
between Father and Logos. Although Arius had
for some time combated Christological errors along
with his bishop Alexander, yet about the year 3 1 8
he began to differ with the latter, and the bishop
found it necessar}^ about 3"2() to condemn and dispose
Arius and some of the other C

i^J t

Tlioolnpy

IV'COtlK'S

Ti'chnol-

Arius.

■ rO'

2U outlinp:s of the history of dooma

:MJ:i

I )

EiiRobins

of Nico-

niedia.

Constaii-

tinc,
Hosius.

Alexan-
der's
F<irinula.

in Alexandria, on account of their Christolojjfv.
But ho stepped into a wasp's nest. The followers of
Lucian and above all the influential Eusebius of
Nicomedia took decidedly the part of Arius, and the
majority of the Oriental bishops were indeed in
sympathy with him (also Eusebius of Cesarea) . Let-
ters were written on both sides to gain assistance ;
synods also were held. Arius was able under pro-
test to take up again his work in Alexandria. When
Constantino, o"2 3, became ruler also of the Orient, the
contest spread to all the coast provinces of the East
(Tludia of Arius; derision of Jews and heathen).
The emperor sought at first to reconcile both parties
by a letter delivered by the court-bishop, Hosius, of
Cordova (the dispute is an idle, unbecoming quarrel) .
But the letter had no effect, and Hosius, who cham-
pioned the Tertullian-Cyprian doctrine of the trin-
ity, probably at that very time came to an agreement
with Alexander. Through him the emperor also
was gained over and the Nicene decision prepared
for. Following his advice, Constantino called a
council at Nic^ea.

Alexander's doctrine (vid. his two letters and the
cpi.'^f. Aril ad Euseh.) was, as a matter of fact,
essentially identical with the later one oi Athanasius;
but it was not clear in its formulations. Especially
did he hardl}' raise the '''luionntn^ to a rallying-cry,
since the same was repudiated in the East. Hosius
probably introduced it as a translation of the W(^st-
ern nn ius sabstantiae. Alexander's formulas were :

DEVELOPMENT OF 1)()(T1:T\K OF TNCAKNAT[( )X.

•) 1 f;

azi>n<i) TvA TT/Kifiyet n >'^ei"i ro'') ol<r>^ '/£: ''/i''v', de) 0'.i'i<. i^ annr)

Ttr) f'/eirj o 6».''a;. AloxiiiKlor assei'ted the eternal co-ex-
istonce without beginning of the Father Jind the Son
(influence of IrenaiusV) He inclmled the Son in the
being of the Father as a necessary constituent part;
he refuted the tenets, that the Son is not eternal, that
he was created out of nothing, that he is not (f'xrst
God, that he changes, that he has passed through a
moral development [uid is only adopted Son. He
consciously contended for the conmion faith in the
Church, for the Divinity of Christ, and he rejected
above all the dialectics about "begotten " and "un- xJlat'-efri
begotteii'\ He quoted in favor of his view the Scrip- Begotten

and UiiIh!-

ture proofs (John 1: 1-3; 1: IH; 10: 30; U: 8, !» Koiten.
and 28; Math. IJ: 17; 11 : 27; I. John 5:1; Col. I :
15, U); Rom. 8: 32; Heb. 1: 2 seq.; Prov. 8: :50;
Psa. 2: 7; 110: 3; 35: 10; Isa. 53 : 8). llewasfond
of using the favorite expression of Origen : Tlie Son
is the perfect reflection; but even the following ex-
pression does not satisfy him : -'> nnziu yai>ay-r^i>i^iz(n o

r.azr^n. He approaches Sabellianism, but desires to ^s^'^sXn'
reject it strongly, and asserts that the Fatlier is
nevertheless greater than the Son who belongs to
his being. He wants to see the " coming forth " of
such a Son revered as a mysterj^ : It is a question of
faith, not of speculation. Still he often uses unin-
telligible, confused and contradictory expressions,
among which even T.azi>uy^ ^Uoyo'-'ia is not wanting,

" !

I i

5
^

'■-

tAi

24(5 OUTLINES OK THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

I ■':

Arius'
Ductriue.

God Alone
Ett'iiiiil.

which contrast unfavorably with liic phiiii, clear
sentoncos ol" Arins, for whom it was an easv task
to show that llie doctrine of Alexander was neitlier
protected against dualism (two '''r-"'^;'"), nor against
gnostic emanationism (-""/5r»//;, d-i'i/iinna)^ nor against
Sabellianism (ofo-'/rw//), nor against the representa-
tion of the corporeality of God, and had the character-
istics of a chameleon and was Biblicall}^ untenable.

Arius taught the following (see his own letters
and the letters of his friends, the fragments of the
Thalia, the characterization in Alexander and Atha-
nasius, the writings of the later Arians) :

(1) The one God, besides whom thei'o is no other,
is alone unbegotten, without beginning, eternal ; he
is inexpressible and incomprehensible; furthermore
he is the cause and creator oi all things. In these
attributes consists his nature (the unbegotten Gen-
erator). His activity is in creafuuj ("to Ijoget" is
only a synonym). Everything wdiicli is, has been
created — not out of the nature of God (otherwise he
would not be simple and spiritual), but out of his
own free w411. Accordingly God has not always been
Father, else the created would be eternal ; tlie created
also can never receive the essence of God ; for this
precisely is uncreated.
Hhn Dwc'H (*^) ^'^i^^iii tliis God dwcll, as inseparable poi(;er,9,
and Logos. Wisdom and Logos; there are beside many created

poive7^s.
When Son ('^^ Before the world was, God created out of his
v>as Not. ^^^^ £j^.g^ ^^Yi an independent Being {(>o(T':a, ur.uaraai^)^

DEVELOl'MENT OF DOCTKINE OF INCARNATION. 247

Son Dis-
tinct from
Fatlier.

as an instnnneiit fur ilic production of the other
creatures, who according to Scripture is called Wis-
dom, Son, Likeness, Word; like all creatures he was
created out of nothing and had a heginning. There
was therefore a time when this Son was not. He is
only called inappropriately "' Son " ; the other crea-
tures are also called thus by Scripture.

(4) This " Son " therefore is, according to his
being, an independent magnitude, totally distinct
from the " Father". He has neither one being with
the Father, nor like qualities of nature (otherwise
there would be two Gods) . Rather has he a free will
and is capable of changing. But ho has resolved
permanently upon the good. Thus by virtue of his
choice he has become uncliangeable.

(5) The " Son", then, is not very God, and he has
Divine qualities only as acquired and only in part.
Because he is not eternal, his knowledge also is not
perfect. To him, therefore, is not due like honor
with the Father.

(G) Still he differs from all creatures; he is the ^''"froiH''''"
xrint'.a rihuv^^ through whom everything has been
created ; he stands in an especial relationship of grace
to God. Through God's communication and his own
progress, he has become God, so that we may call
him "only begotten God".

(7) This Son has truly assumed a human body.
The attributes, Avhicli the historical Christ mani-
fested, show that the Logos to which they belonged
is a being capable of suffering and is not perfect.

Son not
Very Ood.

Son Truly
Incar-
nated.

" i

t i 1

II '

Scripture
Proof.

248 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

'siffl"* (^) By the side of and below tho Son stands the
uaoo.on. j|,^,]y t^pii-jti for tho Christian boHeves in throe
soparato and different onrtiut {''TzotTrdne's)'^ the Holy
Si)irit was created througli the Son.

(!») Scripture proofs for these doctrines were : Deut.
G: 4; 32: UO; Prov. S : 22; Ps. 45 : S; Math. 12: 2S;
Mk. i;i: ;32; Math. 20: 41; 28: 18: Lk. 2: 52; 18:
1!); John 11: 34; 14: 28; 17: 3; Acts 2 : 30; I. Cor.
1: 24; 15: 28; Col. 1: 15; Phil. 2: .syv/.; Heb. 1:
4; 3: 2; John 12: 27; 13: 21; Math. 20: 3'.); 27: 40,
etc. Dialeetically the sophist Asterius above all de-
fended this doctrinal conception. With strict Arian-
ism the tradition coming from Paul and Lucian had
most weight; with tho more liberal party (Eusebius
of Cesarea) the doctrine of subordination as taught
by Origen.

Athanasius' doctrine, in its dogmatico-scientific
delineation not imi)ortant, was great in its victorious
perseverance in the faith. It comprises really only
one tenet: God himself Jtas entered into humanity.
It is rooted wholly in the thought of redemption.
Judaism and paganism have not brought back hu-
manity into communion with God: Only God could
deify us, ?*.c., adopt us as his sons. He who denies
that Christ is very God, is still a Jew or a heathen.
Athanasius has in fact no longer a Logos-doctrine ; he
is a Christologian. He thinks only and always of that
Christ who is God. He did not care for a formula;
even the ('>iioo>'>fno^ is not so often used by him as one
might think. His main principles are the following :

Athana-
sius'
Opposing
Doctiiiif.

DEVELOI'MKNT OF DOCTKINK OF INCAKNATION. '-it'.t

old Lo(;()s-

Dortriiif

I)()iif Awiiy

witli.

(1) If Christ is Gotl— and that he must be as lie- ^'J^V.^iiv'
(leenier — theti he has as such nothing creainre-like in cv.'i't.'ir.s.
him and belongs in no sense to created existences.
Athanasius makes jnst as strict a distinction bo-

tween created and uncreated as Arius, but he sets
the Son aside as belonging to God in opposition to
the world.

(2) Since the Divine in Christ is not created,
it can also not be postnlatcd (jf tlu» world and
the creation of the world ; besides, God needs no
mediation for the creaticjn of the world. Conse-
quently the idea of the Divine, who has redeemed
man, is to be separated from the idea of the world ;
the old Logos-doctrine was done away with. Nature
and revelation were no longer considered identical.
The Logos-Son is the principle of salvation, not the
principle of the world.

{',]) But since Divinity is a unity {!><»'h) and the
Son does not belong to the world, he must belong to
this very unit}^ of the unbegotten Power which is the
Father.

(4) The very name " Father '' signifies that there
is present in Divinit}' a second being. God has i''***^ ^""•
always been Father; he who calls him this, names

the Son also; for the Father is Father of the Son,
and not properly Father of the world, for it has been
created; uncreated, however, is the Divine trias, ex-
isting in unity.

(5) Consequently the Son is yi'^-^r^.na Ton -ar/><j^\ be- fj'/^J' /]|^f Ijj
gotten out of the being of God, as the light from the ^''{^'od.*'^

Soil Be-

1()I1K« to

Uoillicad.

Naiui'
f\ither Im-

i.\

I ti

Ron

Eternal,

Esst'utiiillv

250 OUTLINKS OF THK HISTORY OF IXXJ.MA.

sun, thi'ougli an iiiiior nocossity. He is tli(3 likeness
proceeding from the divine Being. "To be begot-
ten " means nothing else than to have complete par-
ticipation by nature in the whole nature of the
Father, without the "^^ath-^ th Teby si'tt'erin^ loss in
<iny way.

(<!) Therefore th«. A/?, is, as.s^'rtions are false; the
Son is rather («) alike eternal w itli the Father, {b)
out of tile being of the Father, (c) in all parts as to
nature etiually endowed with the Father, and he is
all this because he has one a}i(I the same essence
ivitJi the Fattier and forms ivitli him a strict unity
— "essence", however, in regard to God means noth-
ing else tluui " being". It is not true that the
Father is one Being in himself and the Son another
in liiniself, and that these two have like qualities —
that would annid the unity of the Divinity, but the
Father is the Divinity; this Divinity, however, con-
tains within itself lis self-sufficient and self-efficient
product a "going forth" which also possessed from
eternity, and not by virtue of a comnuuiication, the
same divine nature — the true Son, the likeness pro-
ceeding from the divine Being. Father and Son are
one Being, which includes in itself the distinction
between f'^r/v and ^/vvr^/ia, consequently between prin-
ciple and derivation and, in this sense, a subordi-
nation, which however has nothing to do Avith the
subordination of the created — this is the meaning of
the uiJ.<>t)')(TU)^ in Athanasius.

(7) All creature-(iualities which the Scriptures

DKVi'.I.Ol'.MKNT OV |)()( TlilN !•; Ol' I N( A KNATK >N". -i.M

ascrilK) to oosiis Clii'ist luiw ivfcri'iicr iikmcIv to jiis !i'""'lll'"''

•* *,j'l Ull 1 1 li 'S

lii'luii); to

His

lliiiiiiiii

Nut lire.

Ariaiiisni,
Alhuiia-
Riniiisiii.

huiiiaii nature. The exalt; it ion also rd'crs to the
sanM; i.e. to onr exaltation; for tlie union of the
God-Logos with human nature was from the hegin-
ning a substantial and perfeet onc^ (Mary as '''^'-rn/ov) :
The body beeame his l)ody. Prover])s S: •.'•.' scq.
also has reference to the incarnate Logos.

Both dootrlnos are formally iu this rcsiu'rt alike, tli;., ih
tlu'in religion and theology are most intimately mingle ,in<i
groiuuleil upon the Logos-doetrine. liut Arianism is ■ -lu m
of adoptionism with the Origenistic-Neo-PIatonie duetriii of
the subordinate Logos which is the spiritual prineip of ttio
world, carried out hj- means of the resources of the .\iisto-
telian dialectics; the orthodox docti'ine is a union of the al-
most niodalistically colored dogma, that Jesus Christ is (iod
in kind, with the Origcnistic doctrini' of the I^ogos as the
perfect likeness of the lather. In tiie former, the principal
stress was pUu'ed upon the cosmological and rational ethical
side (descendijig triuiiy, I'nlightening and strengthening of
freedom) ; in the latter, upon the thought of redemption, hut
under a physical conception. In the former, the formulas
are apparently free from connivance and contradictions; hut
the speculative mythology, strictly viewed, is as had as pos-
sible ; furthermore, oidy ascosmologians are the Arians niono-
theists ; as theologians and in religion they are polytheists ;
finally in the background lie deep contradictions : A Son who
is no Son, a Logos which is no Logos, a monotheism wiiich ('".''t'"*i'|'L'-

" tlOllS 111

does not e.vclude polytheism, two or three iii-ma who are to be Ariuuisiu.
adored, v,-hile really only one differs from the creatures, an
indefinable being who only becomes God in becoming m;in,
and who is neither God nor man. Besides, there was novig-
ou>us religious interest, and also no real philoso])! ileal inter-
est, much more was everything hollow and formalistic, even

'■.1;

( ! I

> ">\

f^'>l .

li . a

25'^ OUTLINES OF TIIK IIISTOKY OF lUKJMA.

a i)ii('ril»' enthusiasm for sporting with husks ami shells and
a childish sclf-sullicic'ncy in setting at work unmejining syl-
logisms. The <»j)|)onentH wer<' (juite right : This doetrine leads
hark to paganism. A relative value only is due to it, when,
eoming in contact with uncultured and harharian nations, it
was ohliged to strip oir its philosophical garments and in that
way was able to j»ass itself otf essentially as adoptionism, as
the veneration of Christ by the sid(^ of (fod l)ased upon Hih-

Ortlirxlnx Heal jjassages ((Jerman adoptianism). The orthodox doctrine.
Dottriiif.
Valiii- unit on th(> contrary, possesses its histiiig value through its nuiin-

iJclctHs.

tenanceof the faith that in Christ (Jod himself has redeemed

mankind and brought us into communion with himself. P>ut,

since the (Jod in Christ was conceived as ''((Iter <'f/<' " of the

Father, and since redemption was conceived in a mystico-

])hysical form, there resulted,

Inconc(>iv- 1. Formulas, the direct gainsaying of which is evident

iiiili'
Fonmilas. (one = three), and ideas, which cannot be conceived, l)utonly

asserted in words. Thereby in the jtlace of the kiioirlechjc of
God which Christ had promised, was put a mystery, and this
was to be recognized as the most profound knowledge. By the
side of the miracle, as characteristic of religion, was i)laced
the miracle of ideas as characteristic of the true theology ;

2. The assertion that the Person in Christ is the Logos, one
being with (Jod, could be maintained only when one reversed
the interpretations of all evangelical reports concerning him,
and understood his history docetically. Therefore, the in-
troduction of the absurd, and the abandonment of the histor-
ical Christ in his most valuable traits, is the couseijuence of
the orthodox doctrine. But the claim that Jesus Christ has
led men back to God, and given to them Divine life, was
still maintained. This conviction of faith was saved by
Athanasius against a doctrine which, upon the whole, did not
appreciate the inward nature of religion, whicli sought in
religion only instruction, and finally found satisfaction in
an empty dialectics.

Contradict
Bcriptuiv.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTKINE OF INCARNATION. 25;)

It in eas\' to sec that with Alius, as wtH as with Atlmna- „P"**Vl
sins, the (ontradictioiiH and wcakiu'sst's flow from tho reception ThwloKy.
of Orif^cnisiii, that is, from thi- scicntilic theology. Without
this, that is. without the doetrim' of the pre existent, hypo-
statical Lo;4os, Arianism wouhl Iiave hceu adoptioiiism, or
pure rationalism, and Atlumasius would havo heen forced
either to turn to modalism, or to relin(iuish the idea of tho
Divine; "nature" of Christ.

At tlio synod of Nicwji {•.)-ir>) tho lionioiisios 'Jrh.mphT
(HosJus) finally concjueivd, thanks to tho awkward
tactics of tlio Avians and Eiisebians (Origenistic
niiddlo party), to tlio docisivonoss of tho orthodox
and to th(» dotonnination of tho emperor. Into the
Ctosarean creed tlu; watch-words ^£v>r^'V-'>ra on -nir,{hi-^.

ra, Ix T/]^^ nnnid^ T(r> 7:nzi>o^^ ujUHi'irsui'^ zip zazfti woro in-
serted, the Arian formulas expressly condemned, and
this creed was made the law of tho Church. Almost
all the bishops (oOO? ;U8?) submitted, Arius and a
few compfmions were excommunicated and their fol-
lowers persecuted. Athanasiiis attended this synod
as deacon, probably not without taking an important
part.

2. — Until the Death of Constantins.

Tho victory had been gained too (piickly. Neither prl-niature
formally, nor essentially had it been sufficiently
worked out, therefore the contest had really only
begun. Men saw in the homousios an unbiblical,
new formula, the making of two Gods, or the intro-
duction of Sabellianism, and, in addition, the death

■i

M'M

! t

25 J onr.iNEs of titr tttstoky of nOCJMA.

Athnnasius
Haiiislit'd.

Constnn-

tins Kiivors

Ariaiis.

Eusphius

of
Nicomedia.

of clear scioTicc. Among tlioopponontH who together
came forward ms coiiHcrvatives, two parties now be-
came clearl}' i)romiiieHl, the Arians nnd the Origen-
iHts (Kiis(>l)ians) to wlioni tl>c in(lilT<'nMils joiiird
tliems(>lves. I>tit the}' were united in the cont(>st
against ortliodoxy (jjrincipal champion jigainst it
was Eiisehius of Nicomedia),

Constantine soon understood tliat he would have
to come to an agreement with the jinti-Nicenc coali-
tion, which afl(>r o'l>< became anti-Athanasian, for
the young bishop was the most decided Xicene.
Personal difTerences arose at a time when th(» ambi-
tion and power of the ecclesiastics could iinally
reckon upon the highest gratification. In '.):]') Athn-
nasius was declared deposed at Tyre, and in .'l.'ir. he
was banished by the emperor to Trier, The solenm
reception of Arius into the Church was frustrated by
his death. In 'M]7 Constantine died, really aj)prov-
ing the promulgating, under the cover of the Niceno
creed, of hostile doctrines.

His sons divided the empire. Athanasius (;)I)T)
returned. But Constantius, the ruler of the East,
rightly understood that he could not govern with
orthodoxy, and he did not feel hijnself bound, like
his father, to the Nicene creed. He deposed the
orthodox bishop of the capital; Eusebius of Nico-
media took his place. In Cicsarea an Arian, Acacius,
succeeded Eusebius; Athanasius was deposed, but
he anticijiated his banishment by flight to Rome
(1339), leaving Egypt in wild disorder. The Euse-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 255

(.jl

l)iaTiH vvcro not ma.stors nf tlu? sitnation, hut i\w West
was true NicciK^ and the stioni^hold of Oriental ortho-
doxy. The EuHebians did not wisli to break with
the West; they were, therefore, ohlip'd to try to
(juietly ])ii.sh aside the Nieene creed, replacinj^ in
mere pretenee the lioniousios by In'tler l»il)li('al
fornndas and demanding \\\o carrying out of the de-
position of Athanasius. It was of great advantage
to the Orientals that a strict Nieene and a friend of
Athanasius, Marcellus of Anevra, did not sanction Miimiiim

" i)f Ancyru.

the common foundation of the teaching, the philo-
sophical-Origenistic Logos-doctrine, but declared the
Logos to be the Power of God, which only at the in-
carnation had become divine Person and "Son", in
order to return to the Father when once he had fin-
ished his work (the Orientals saw in this doctrine
"Sabellianism "). Julius of Rome and Athanasius
declar(>d ^larcellus to bo orthodox, and provcMl there-
by that they were concerned alone al)out redi^nptive
faith and laid aside the fonnulas set up by tli(>
Ori(>ntals at Antioch (:)U), although tiK> latter now
formally renounced Arianism and establishcvl a doc-
trine which ofild be taken for Nieene.

Political i'easons compelled Constantius to be obliLj- <,v""r'' "^

'■ ^ San lira.

ing to his orthodox brother, Constans, the ruler of
the West. The great council of Sardica {'.WA) was
intende<l to restore i

ity

'I'

But the Occidentjds refused the preliminary (lema?id
of the Orientals to acknowledge liie deposition ot"
Athanasius and Marcellus, and proclaimed after the

> t

M' ■'

/ •.'

Synods at
Milan.

flonstan-

titis Solo

Ruler.

Synods of

Arlt's and

:\Iilan.

250 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

exodus of tlio Orientals (to Philippopolis) the deposi-
tion of the leaders, taking tlieir position rigidly upon
the basis of tl^e Nieene creed. The opponents reit-
erated the !th iVntiochian formula. Constantius
himself seems to have mistrusted them for a time;
he certainly feared to irritate his brother who was en-
deavoring to gain the supremacy. The Orientals re-
iterated once more in a long formula their orthodoxy
(Antioch, 34: i) and the minimum of their demands.
.A.lthougli the West at the Milan synods (3i5-347)
i'ojeciod the doctrine of Photinus of Sirmium, who
from tiie doctrine of his master, Marcellus, had de-
veloped a strictly ado])tian conception (the Logos
never became a person), it yet remained otherwise
firm, while in the East political bishops already
meditated peace with Athanasius. The latter was
restored by Constantius, who was hard pressed by
the Persians, and ho was greeted with great rejoic-
ings in Alexandria (3-J:(!). About 31(S it appeared as
if orthodoxy had conquered; only Marcellus and the
icord o/Kio'irr'.!)^ seemed still to give offence.

But the death of Constans (350) and the defeat of
the usurper Magnentius (353) changed everything.
If Constantius during the hist years was obliged t(j
bow before a few bishops, his own subjects, who
ha(' ruled his brother ho now as sole ruler was de-
termined to govern the Church and pay back the
humiliations. Already in 351 ('^d Sirmian synod)
the Oriental bishops had returned to action. At the
synods of Aries (353) and Milan (355) the Western

j f r* . . ' .i . ^. art T ^;** ' * W'^'^^^r "

J^S ■ -.m^??^ T'.vrflt5'"'«J«^'^

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTHTNE OF INCARNATION.

'S-

episcopate was ol^liged to como to tonus. At first
nothing further was demanded of it than the con-
demnation of .Athanasins, but this meant a diver-
gence on the question of faith, and the bishops al-
lowed it to be forced noon them (a few exceptions:
Paulinas of Trier, Lucifer of C^ngliari, Eusebius of
Vercelli; also Hosius, Liberius, Hilarius had to go
into exile). Athanasius anticipated his deposition by
flight into the desert (:55fi). Union seemed restored,
but it was as state ecclesiasticism, against which
orthodox Western bishops fiercely inveighed, now
only remembering that emperor and state should
not meddle with religion.

The union of the victors was only a seeming one, Actius nn,i

" ' Eunoiniu.s.

for it became apparent that it did not go beyond
negations. Strict aggressive Arianism again came
forward in Aetius and Eunomius and wanted to
carry through the "anomoian" doctrine ('/>''/i"j<'9 y.a\

xara Tzdvra xat xut uhnia-^) . In opposition to this, semi-

Arianism placed itself in sharp contrast (the "un-
changeable likeness", v!i.ini>i xari/. r.'v.za y.a\ xara rr,,/ on-

(Tiav). These homoiusians (Georgius of Laodicea,
Eustathius of Sebaste, Eusebius of Emesa, Basilius
of ATicyra) had learned that the Son must be, as to Kusrbius

•J I 'of f.niesa.

Bn.siliiis of

Homoiu-
sians:
Georcius

Laodicen,

being, of like fsse/ice with the Father; as scientific Anc,
men (cosmol(^gians) they did not wish to abandon
the cosmic potentiality of the Logos and the descend-
ing trinity. They understood how, with the Scrip-
tures as a basis and in connection witli Cliristojogy,

to so formulate their doctrine that it made an im-
17

yra.

\i 1

,■•

Frnin

857 .'iin

CViiistiiii-

tiiis

Opt'iily

Fiivi lis

Arianisin.

Remi-

Ariaiis,

Syiidds at

SelciU'ia

and
Riiuiui.

258

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

pressi(m even upon Nicene Occidentals, who, to hr
sure, were still half idiots in scientific theolog}'. Tin;
third party was that of the politicians, who applauded
that formula which had the best prospect of settling
the contest (Ursacius and Valens : 'v/''^'^' ^'^^''^^ '^''/s-
y/ia(fd<^). The period from ;}57-3r)l is the time during
which the emperor, openly dropping the Nicene
creed, sought for a Cliristological imperial formula,
and proposed with all energy to carry it through at
the synods. Here, finally, only the " 'V' -"S" ^'-'"'^ ''h^
Ypatpd^ " could be presented; for with this unmeaning
formula, the Arians, semi-Arians and even the ortho-
dox could make friends, since it directly contra-
dicted no doctrine. The Sirmian synods had not as
yet accomplished what they ought, and they even
showed a passin" tendency to strict Arianism. At
Ancyra (358) the semi-Arians rallied powerfully.
Two great contemporaneous synods in the East and
West (at Seleucia and Iliniini) were expected to pro-
claim tlio Mh Sirmian formula, a dogmatico-political
masterpiece of the emperor. But when the one as-
sumed a homoiusian, the other an orthodox attitude,
they were terrorized, kept in suspense, and the ho-
moiusian imperial creed was forced upon them in
exchange for concurrence in the expulsion of strict
Arianism (synods at Nice and Constantinople .')('»<»).
Afterward all homoiusians wore nevertheless ban-
ished from the influential positions, so that, in spite
of the expulsion of Aetius, an Arianism, moderated

in
•ict
(»()).
){in-

ittnl

DEVKLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCAKNATIOX. 250

through want of principle, actually established itself
in the Church as the state religion.

3. — Until the Councils at Constantinople^ 381, 383.

In the year 3(;i C'onstantius died. Julian sue- '(^S^n.u-
ceeded him, and accordingly, instead of the artificial jiiiian^Kiii-
iniion, the real parties succeeded again to their rights.
But the honioiusians were no longer the " middle
party", no longer the ''conservatives" in the old
sense; for in o})positioii to Arianism, they had dec})-
oned and strengthened their doctrine (conservatives
possess elasticity). Conservative and conciliatory
were the homoians who inclined toward Arian-
ism. Here the change in the Orient — at first, in-
deed, only in the minds of the most prominent theo-
logians — is sliown. The hoinoiiisians^ disciples of
Origen, distinguished alike for ecclesiastical feeling,
asceticism a)ul pure seioice, capituUded to the
honiousios, an alliance which Hilarius zealously
urged forward.

Julian ])erinitted the l)anished bishops, therefore <7l'''."^^'°'^

'■ * ' Hislinps

also Athanasius, to return. The S3'n()d of Alexandria ^fnln"
( )<)•?) marks the turning-point in so far as Atha-
nasius there admitted that the Niceno creed sans
]}hrase should be valid; that is, he expressly re-
nounced the phrase "one being ^^ {one hypostasis)
and thus allowed such an interpretation of the
uiiMontno^ as made it "one essence'' (instead of "one

Exile.

2G0

OUTLINES OK THE HISTOTIV OF DOGAIA.

Tjucifcr.

Apnl linea-
ris (if

Laoilicca
iiiiii tilt'

heiuf/"), which constituted tlioroforo three liyposta-
sos. But this concession and the great leniency
toward those who once had signed the -Ith Sirniian
formula provoked the displeasure of some of the
prominent Occidentals (Lucifer) and martyrs of the
faith. In the West one felt that the old doctrine
(the substantial unity of the Deity is the rock and
the plurality is the m3'ster3') had been inverted (the
trinity of the divine Persons is the rock and the
unity is the problem), and Athanasius himself was
not able to add real friends to his new scientific
friends in Asia Minor, Cappadocia and Antioch; for
now tlie science of (^rigen had been rescued for ortho-
doxy. The great theologians, Apollinaris of Laodicea
and the three Cappadocians, started from Origen and

Tiiifc Cap-

padociaus. the <'ii<iii)'')(Tco<? ; but tlic}' rec(^gnized the I'lioonnto; now
and were able to carry on tlu;y' philosophical specu-
lations with it and liy the side of it; for one could
say that there are three hypcjstases, and still be ortho-
dox. By creating a firm terminology, they suc-
ceedetl at the same time in Viroducing apparently
clear formulas. (>nnia now received the middle sense
between the abstract idea of " beii^ " and the con-
crete idea of "individual !)eing"; so, however, that
i* v'erv s^.'ongly inclined t(^ the i'oiiner. 'y~o(7za(Ti<i re-
ceivi.'.! the iuiddle sense between person and attri-
bvK/' ^,u< itleiii, i.e. mo'alit}^), in such away, how-
■:'v'(;\ rh.ij t iie V oncepiion of person was the stronger.
///. io '.:;..v. since it soundi-d Sabellian-like, was
avoided. i.>ut \v<\ rejected. The unity of thc^ Deity,

1)K\ KLOI'MKNT OF DOCTRIXP: ' >V FXCAltNATION. 'IC]

ligov.

was

leity,

liilitatfd.

wliicli 1lu» (*;i{)j);i(l()('i;iiis were (•» iiccfiicd nboiil, was
not the same as Athaiiasius and tlif ( )c'('i(l»:iilals liad
in mind. '/:V>£ oO^;'u iv Tncrh n-dfrr'U'erriy lu^amo tlu»
formula. In order to render clear tb(> r(\d dilTerenco
in the Persons within the unity of the Deity, (Jre^-
ory of Nyssa added to them -/.';-.-; ■ rr<;//^.-(/K- (w/i/irr^r^s'
^ai>ay-r^y:X"''-T't'.. i:aintT(i. /n.'W'/ar/) , ;illd indeed to the

Father {\\o ''lyzy.-r^nia (not MS lu'ing', hut as mode of
heing ['"/''^;^~] of tli(» Fatiier), to the Son the Yvy.y,n'ji —
even the older homoiiisinns had heen here more re-
served than Greg')ry — and to tlie Spirit i/.-uinun:.:.
The Origenistie-Xeo-Platonic trinitv-siieculation he- ni-iKonistic
came rehahilitated. The Logos idea again came to t jo',"" k'Ii^,\.
the front. The unity of the Deity was again provr'd
from the monarchy of the Fath(^r, not from the ''"'-
ofxrio^. Thus "science'' formed its alliance with the
Nicene dc^ctrine. While in the beginning scientists
— also among the heathen — ackno\vde(lged Arius *o
he in the right, now men hecami^ champions of i >e
Nicene doctriiie, to whom even a Lil)anius exten- 'd
the palm branch. They stood upon the soil ' a
scientific contemplation of the worbl, were in uc-
ct)rd with Plato, Origen and Libanius, and i futed
Eunomius amidst the apphause of the philosophy's.
At the same time it was a victory of Xeo-Platoiiisni
over Aristotelian dialectics. Thus orthodoxy in
union with science had from about ',Vi()-'.V.)A a beanti-
ful springtime, followed, however, by destruciive
storms, or, rather, by the blight of traditionalism.
Men dreamed the dream of an eternal union between

Spritif,'-
Tiiiif of
Ortho-
doxy.

■J

i -

11.

m !

]'<.li(!(Ml
Mvi'iits

Hoiiio-

usios.

2rr.l

Ol'TUNKS OK rilK HISTOHY OK IXXJMA.

f.iitli .111(1 !-('i('Ji('(\ True, it was? not vnidistnrbed.
The old-t'aith urth<jduxy in tlio ( )c<'i(k'nt and in Aii-
tioc'li remained distrustful, even repellent. In Anti-
ocli a kind of sehisni broke out between tlie old and
the new scientific orthodox}'. The latter considered
the former Sabellian, although it could hardly shake
off th(3 suspicion of teaching " homoiusian".

But not only did science prepare the victory for
the homousios, the course of the world's events did
so as well. In Yalens the Orient obtained a power-
ful Arian emperor. The orthodox and homoiu-
sians had to go into exile, and they drew nearer to
each other. They again sought su]>port from the
orthodox West. Liberius of Rome; was not disin-
clined, and Basilius of Oaisarea was after o70 in vig-
(;rous activity. Yet Damascus of Rome returned to
the old harsh standpoint, and it needed several
synods (in the seventies) to convince him of the
orthodoxy of the new orthodox Orientjds. These at
last signed (at Antioch IiT'.i) tlu^ formulas of faith of
Damascus, without, however, being able to settle the
schism in Antioch. But the subscription was already
a sequence of the world- historical events tliat in the
year 375 in the West the youthful (iratian, wholl}'
devoted to the Church and orthodoxy (Damascus,
Ambrose) succeeded the tolerant Valentinian, and
after ;378 became sole ruler (Yalens died at Adri-
anople contending against the Goths). Tn the year
370 the orthodox Si)aniard Theodosius was elevated
iu 'oiU'ut. to be co-regent and emperor of the Orient. He was

(iratiaii

Sut'oi't'ils

'.'alt'iitiii-

iuii.

Tlicodo-

sius Bc-

cipiiii's Em-

DKVELOPMENT OF DOfTRINK OF TNCAHN ATIoX. '2(1:')

(IcU'i'inincd to govern the (*hurch likc^ Coiist.uitius,
but ill the souse of sfricf Oecidontal orthodoxy : The
celebrated ediet of Thessalonica showed this in the
year ;}8(> (issued by the emperor imnuMliately after
his baptism*). He deprived the Arians of all their
churches in Constantiiiopli* and forbade the heretics
in general to worship in the cities. But he soon per-
ceived that he could rule in the Orient onl}' with
Oriental orthodoxy, that he dare not apj^ly the severe
standard of the West, and that he must win half-
friends entirely over. He called, therefore, in '^Sl an
Oriental council at the capital and ai)pointed as pre-
siding officer Meletius, that is, th(» leadc o' Hie new
orthodox party in Antioch. Thereby he of course
gave offence to the Occidentals and Eg5'ptians, but
securcMJ to himself the Cappadocians and the Asia
Minor theologians. At the synod the contrast was
so strongl}' expressed that a rupture was near at
hand (the new presiding officer, Gregory Nazian-
zen, had to resign). But finally the synod (150 bish-
ops) proclaimed theNicene doctrine sans 2)Ji rase, the
complete homoousion of the three Persons, and also
expelled the Macedonifms. In fact, however, "e(iual-
ity of being '' concpiered in the sense of " equality of es-

*"Ci()K'/o.s popnlos . . . //I tali ruliiinJtn rcUiiUinc firsari. (pKiiii (U-
vinum Pi-tnim (ipostdl.ini triuddisse Romdiiis nlhiin k.sv/iu' <t(l nunc <ib ijiso
itisinnatd dirldytit (juaiiKjur pontifirctn rhtnidsiiin sr./iii rhd-ct H I'ctnuii
Ah'xnncfriue eiiiscopum rirniii opostoticiic sdiicfitafis, lioci'it, iif m-cioKhim
apotitolicdtii (lisciplinniii cvdiigclirdiiiqin- ddctrindin /idtiis vt J'llii if
spiritits sdHcti inidm ilcitatcni i^iib pari tudii stdtc it khI) jtia triiiitdti-
credonius. Hanc legem seqtientes Chn'stidnorinn eiiiholii-orum noiiun
uihemiis (nnplecfi, reliipios vera demrntfs n-sdiioyijiic iidlirtntfts ha'retici
ddfpiiatis iiifdinidiH sutitinrre. diviud j)riniu))i ritidictd. pust elidin inutua
iinst)i\ (luem e.r cwhsti (irhitrio suiiipsvrhnun. iiltioiic pli 4tijndns",

(Vniiu'il of

CoIISlHIlti-

nople.

'..'01

OlThlNIvS OF TlIK HISTORY OF I)()(JMA.

Cn'cd (if
Cuiistuiiti-

lICpll'.

s('iic(»'\ not unity of csscHcc. lint tlic s3'inl)ol, wliich,
Hiiico about 4r)() in the ( )ri('nt and ^)'M) in the ( )cc'i(lent,
is fonsidored to Ik* thatof tliis synod and obtained tho
highest ronsideration in the Chnreh and which has
supplanted the Nicene :is l)eintj;' only a mere nominal
('nlarg(»ment of it, is not the symbol of tliis synod,
w'hieh, moreover, was only by a (/Kid pro quo after-
ward stamped as eemnenical. Tlu» so-called Con-
stantinopolitan creed is older; it is the baptismal
symbol of Jerusalem, probably edited by Cyril soon
after 'MYl when he accomplished his transition from
semi-Arianism to the '<>fj.->(>n<Tc,\ In it the " ^x r>;^<
oorria? Tn^> -azfio's " is wanting, and it contains a formula
about the Holy Spirit which does not proclaim the
orthodox doctrine, but avoids the cjiiestion at issue

(ro xnillD'/, To !^till>Z<l'Jiy, To iX TiP> nUTftn^i i/.~(li)£0()flZ'^<r^ 7<)

(Tuv ~ar in xa] 0'<_i <yu'^~i<<)(7xtr/ii'>iii'^()v y.ni (Tov<lii^(/.^ii;j.e'/<iv To

Xah](7a,> tita t(7)> rytufr^Tib'^) . How it Came into the rec-
ords of the synod (through Cyril? EpiphaniusV) and
how it afterwards became the symbol of the council
ticivi' is (juite obscure. Still ecclesiastical legend-making

Legt'uil-

Makiug. iij^s iiere exercised a strange justice in appending to
the synod of the newly orthodox bishops a symbol
in which the anti-Arian anathemas and Nicene
watch-words are wanting. In reality under the
cover of the v!io<,oiTtog men indeed continued in the
Orient in a kind of liomoiusianisni, which is to
this day orthodox in all their churches.*

♦Concerning ll»i" symbol soc my article in Herzojc's R. Encyclop. 3.
Aurt

DKVKI.Ol'MKNT f)!' hoCTKINK nK 1\( AKNATION. '2n5

'i'ii(« orcidnit was hij^iiiy dispii-ascd witii tho ,i;*;;i;!;;i;i,

course 1)1" llic synod, sinco, among otiior tilings, it council,
had acknowledged tli(* orthodoxy of nion who in
R(^nio were strongly suspected. Ke})resontations
were made, a schism was threatened. I'ut tlie ( )rient
was no longer disjjosed to hend further under tho
dogmatic rule of Rome, and Theodosius, keeping tho
two lialves of the empire sei)arat(\ rcMuained firm
and ])rndent, and avoided consenting to a general
council, which (iratian (Amhrose) wished t(^ call.
In the year l{S-> thev dn>w nearer together, since in
Rome, as well as in Constantinople, synods wi^re
contemporaneously in session, and since these showed
themselves more conciliatory regarding personal
questions — to this point tho controversy had nar-
rowed down inasmuch as the Antiochian schism
continued. But, above all this, circumstance gn^atly
contributed to a reconciliation; the spirituid leader
of the Occident, Ambrose, went to school to the
science of the Cappadocians and became powerfully
influenced by it.

In the year 381 jperhaps nine-tenths of the Orient
was Arian, Theodosius endeavored to frighten
them, later, however, also to win them (synod of
3813 at Constantint)ple ; even Eunomius was invited) .
But soon he abandoned the gentle method and Am-
brose seconded him in the West. One dare assume
that most of the Arian and semi-Arian Greek bish-
ops did submit; only the extreme left r<.*mained firm
(Eunomius) . More rapidly than Hellenism did Arian

III 381
Niiic-
rciiths Df
< )ii»'iit
AriuD.

I ■

( '

2C)C,

OUTfJNKS OK TIIK lllSTOin' OK I)0(;MA.

ism (Ii(f out amorifj^ thn (ii'('<'ks. Truo, tlic ortliodox
l.iyiiicii, always consiu'vativo, coiisiikn'oU the ortlio
ilox foi'iiuila luoro as a nocessary evil and an iiiox-
pliral)l(> mystery than as an oxpivssion of their faith.
The victory of orthodoxy was a triumph of priests
and tlu'oloj^ians over the indeed deeply rooted faith
of the ])eople; but it did not make this faith an}'
clearer.

Supplement : The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit
and of the trinity.

Doctrinoof 1. Siuce the early davs, jdono:side of a belief in the
Spirit. Father and Son, there was a belief in the Holy S])irit ;
but what the latter was, m* wdiat significance it has,
became wholly obscure after the declining of Mon-
tanisni and the retiring of the combination "spiritus-
ecclesia". The scientific theology of the apologists
did, in general, not know what to do with it, and
even in the ;}d century the majority viewed the Holy
irencpiis, Spirit as a power. However, alrcnidy Irenteus and

Tertulliau.

Tertallian tried to honor it as a divine power within
the Ueit}'. Tertullian admitted it as " God " and as
" Person " into his descending but consubstantial
trinity {JUio subicctus). Now the Neo-Platonic
speculation, science, also found three Divine hy-
oripen. postases ncccssary. Origen in accordance with and
following the Bible took the Holy Spirit into his
theology as the third constant Being ; to be sure as a
creature subordinate to the Son, governing the small-

I>KVKM)I'.MKNT ( H' DOCTUINK < H' INCAKNATION. 20?

pst spluM'c, file circlf (if lli(> s.iiict illrd. Tlio inaiincr
of (lisposinj^ of tlic (loctriiir mI' the Holy Spirit l»y
IVrtiilliaii and <)rij<('i), \vli<tlly an a logo as to tlicir
treatment of tlie Lo^-os-doctrini^, shows that in gen-
eral there did not exist a s|)(»eilli' ( 'hrisliati inter(»st
in Ihis |i(.iiil oi docti'ine. 'i'hat Sahellius also was siihoiiius.
obligcil to take into view the II 'ly Spirit is only a
proof tliat the claims of tli(» general seitMititie doctrine
of the trinity and of the Hihlical formulas could no
longer he j)assed over.

NevcM-theless within the churches and among the /.'VnI!!

maioritv of the hish(^])s no notice Avas taken of these o'nrsii.,ii
•• • * . till ith

scholarly advances, even hy the beginning of tlu» 4th e.ntury.

century; the Xicene creed itself merely gives a place
to tlu> belief in tlu^ H<)ly Spirit, without addition or
explanation. Athanasius during the fu'st decade never
thought of it. Whoever considered it Divine in the
full sense deemed it a ])ower; he who conceived it as
I)ersoiial, took it for something (piit(> suboi'dinate : Tn
fact it was really only a word ;, id it remained such
within the trinity even afterward.

The Arians solicited the farther formulation of the
doctrine, since, by the concession of the inferiority
of the Holy S])irit, they were able to sujiport ea;ily
the subordination of the Son. Exactly for this Rea-
son, however, the orthodox became thoughtful.
Athanasius, after about :j58, gave his attention to ihri^'ALi-T
the Holy Spirit and never wavered a moment in re-
gard to the formula: Since he must be worshipped,
he is »^£'3s^ uriudixT'.o^^ like the Son, and belongs in no

Arians
niscuss

C^llrsliiill.

II :

'■.I

^^i^ -■ .0.

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0

I.I

'25

lis

^ m

1^ 1^

2.0

1.8

U IIIIII.6

O^ ■ v>

Hiotographic

Sciences

Corporation

4^-^

^Q>

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 872-4503

M <

' i ;

■,^i

n '

208 OITUNIOS OK TlIK IlISToKV OK fXMJ.M A.

Irwprtfd In scUSC lo tllc WOI'M ('7>y>. <l<l Si'tdlt.). At, tllC SVlKul
Nii-.,-n.' . .

cret'd, (,f Alexandria this (Uu-triiic^ of \\\v \\n\y Spirit was
]/iacv(l iindur the protection of tlio Niceiie creed: He
who denies it is a hypocritical Arian (the attempts,
it is tru(\ to discriminate between the agenc}' of the
Holy Spirit and that of the Son, remained empty
words). But thus strongly- did the. Occident agree
to this formula — in the Orient not only the Arians
but also the semi- Arians saw in it a manifest inno-
vation; even those who in the doctrine of the Son
accepted the htnnousios refused to acknowledge the
novum, and took under Macedonius, bishop of Con-
stantinople, a firm stand. Yet more — even the Cap-
padocians, although they countenanced the formula,
and confessed the lack of all tangible tradition, ad-
vised the greatest caution and considered it necessary
to keep back the formula at first as a mystery, ap-
pealing to the fact that it was indeed sustained only
by a -a/>iwrTt<; uyitaifixi. In their embarrassment in as-
signing to the Holy Spirit a proper kind of being in
relation to the Father, they decided to attribute to
him, according to John, the eternal txTzs/ifj't^ and l<"<'>f>-
^vorlt^^ e'"T£s\ But after 302 the theologians in the Occident
on Orient. Were indefatigable in imposing upon the half-won
Oriental brethren the Holy Spirit as '^eo? oimo'xTuts^,
and, in union with the Cappadocians, they succeeded.
It is true that still in the year 381 the Macedonians
(pneumatomachoi) were invited to the synod, but
only to hear their condenmation and to be expelled.
The anathemas of Damascus strengthened the situa-

DEVELOPMENT OF l>0( THINE OF INCARNATION. 0<'.'.>

tion. Honroforth one was no longer pcnnittc*! to
teach that the Holy S})irit is subordinate to th(* Son;
indeed, since to the Greek the Father remained the
root of the Deity, the homousios of the Spirit seemed
safely secured only when he is traced back to the
Father alone, the Son thereby not bi-ing taken at all
into account.

2. The Cappadocians, and before thom their great ^^inns^^Ui^-
teacher ApoUinaris, established the orthodox doctrine Trinity.
of the trinit}' (vid. page "2 GO) : One Divine essence
in three Subjects, the ecjual nature of which contained
in their consubstantialit}- is distinctly stami)ed in
their qualities and activities; their diirerences in the
characteristics of their mode of being ; but the Father
alone is fihar^, the two others airtara^ yet not as the
world is (really Tertullian had already used the for-
mulas " nature " and " person " ; to him, however, the
trinity was still entirely a trinit}^ of revelation, not
of immanence). By means of the trinity, so they
now said, Christianity is distinguished from the
pagan polytheism and the "stark" Jewish mono-
theism.

Ever since the appearance of the homoiusians, re- rSnlJi^nf

Triiiitv

gard for Christology exerted in the Orient an infiu- Has suhor-
dinatiini
ence upon the establishment of the doctrine of the Eit-ment.

trinity (there also nature and person; <''/i(ii(i»na origi-
nated there, and also the turning to account of the
analogy of the conc(»]»tions " humanity " and " Adam "
in their relation to tiie individiud man.) A sulxtr-
dination and Aristotelian element remained in the

270 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

■ \

I i

H%;

Oriental
and ()c(i
(lotital Con-
cept ions
iJissiiuil.u'.

trill ity-(l<x'trino of Oriental orthodoxy, and in the
later Christological contest the latter was drawn into
sympathy with it (however not strongly; for it had
grown already too stubborn). A few Apollinarian
nionophysites w^orked after 530 upon the conceptions
" nature " and " person " in Christology in an Aristo-
telian way, and thus also arrived in the doctrine of
the trinity at tritheism or Jit niodalism (^'Wrv =
''>zn(T7ain,; Askusnages, Johannes Philoponus, Peter of
Kallinico; against these Leontius of Byzantium and
John of Damascus). The latter, in ojjposition to tri-
theism, gave to the dogma of tiie trinity a turn ap-
proaching the Occidental concei)tion (the ny^'^r^'ria is
formally declared equivalent to the yt^^riTia^ the t-'
(uXr^hm of the three Persons is strongly emphasized,
thereby the ~-i>''/,(i>!>'>,<^'-'>^ but not (ruviumcr^ and (r'>ii.<f>>i)f7t.<i ;
the difference existing only for the l-i-oui) ; this con-
ception, how'.^H^r, remained without effect, since in
the most decisive point it allowed the tlno subordina-
tionism to continue : Joiin also taught that the Si)irit
proceedeth (tlu)ic froiti the Fidliar {i.e. through the
Son). The Father, therefore, remains the 'if/jj of the
Deity. Conse(]uently it is one spiritual picture which
the Orient, and again another \vhicli the Occident,
formed of the trinity; in the former the Father re-
mained the root of the two airiara ; the full reciproc-
ity of all three Persons appeared to the Orientals to
jeopardize the monarchy, and especially the deduc-
tion of the Spirit from the Son to jeopardize the
liomousion. Here Photius (8G7) struck in, search-

Hmm^fi'M,'-'

"ij,!

1«:

DEVKLOI'MENT OF IXX^THINE OF INCAKNATION. 2*1

ing for a dogmatic point of dispute, and rcproachod 'll',','!,';'^!'
the Occidentals, who taught the inuiKOii'ntc ]>rn- pruci-ssio.
cessio of the Spirit from the P^ither ami Son, with
innovati(nis, even willi Manichiean dualism, and
heightened this reproach with the still severer charge
of falsifying the holy symhol of Constantinoj)le by
the addition of "y/Z/o^z/c ". This wtml was really an
innovation therein that had originated in Spain. A
contest broke out which has never been settled, and tw.'.n i:a.si

nml WcBt:

in which to the Greek even the " ''£/ -"' o'.ir> " became; FiU.Miu.'.
susi)icious. . The (^ccidi-ntals, however, were obliged
to cling to their doctrine, because, according to their
spiritual picture <»f the trinity, they found the true
faith expressed only in the full unity, therefore also
only in the full reciprocity <'f the Perstnis. The
Greeks did not understand this, because secretly they
always remnined cosmologically interested, just as
the doctrine of the trinitv, under incessant scientific
treatment, has remained the vehicle which the phi-
losophy of anticpiity has handed down to the Slavic
and Germanic nations: It contains the Christian
idea of the revelation of God in Jesus and the testa-
ment of the ancient philosophy in a most peculiar
mixture.

In the Occident the doctrine of the trinity had not
as a rule been treated as an object of speculation. The
uniff/ was the safest thing, discrimination between
substance and person was understood more in tlu^
sense of a (through the jurispiudcnce) vnrreni form (tl
distinction. Augustine in his great work, " de trin-

AiifTiistinp

l>(Mtririt' (if

Tiiuity.

, r

ii i

! I

272 OrTMNKS OK THK HISTOKV OK DOCJMA.

;,i«i

it(ife^\ intended to give exi)ressi()n to fhis oonreption
of the trinity by nu»ans of (Neo-Platonie) science,
but he was guided also by his rehgious consciousness
wliich knew only one God.* The consequence was
a complete obliteration of every remnant of subordina-
tionism, the changing of the Persons into relations
(the old Occidental modalism merely veiled) ; but
at the same time there arose such a mass of contra-
dictory and absurd formulas as to cause a shudder
even to the author himself, now exulting in the in-
comprehensible and now skeptical (the three together
are ecjual to one; the ;d)solute simple must be under-
stood as triple ; the Son takes an active part in his
generation; sunt semper uivieeni^ neuter solus; the
economical functions, also, are never to be thought
of as separate — therefore: dicfuin est ^'tres per-
sonae'\ non iif illud (h'eeretur, seel ne faceretui).
This confession and the analogies which Augustine
makes use of regarding the trinity (they are alto-
gether modalistic) show that he himself never could
have hit upon the trinity, if he had not been bound
to tradition. His great work, in which naturally
also the procession of the Spirit from the Father and
Son is emphasized — for in ever}' act all three are
concerned — became the high school for the technico-
logical cultivation of the intellect and the mine of
scholastic divinit}' in the iMiddle Ages. Through
Augustine, first tlu; Spanisli cluirch, then others also,

* III rc^riii'ti to Augustine's rfljitinn to (lie fstulilislmifiit of tin' Oriental
doctrine of tiie trinity, see Renter, /eitsclirift f. KirchenROSoh. V. :^75 seq.
uml VI. 15o scq.

ind

ire

:o-

lital

]ieq.

DE\^:LOrMENT OF DOCTKINK OF INCARNATION. *273

permitted themselves to be induced to proclaim the
Jilioque.

The paradoxical formulas of the Augustinian doc-
trine of the trinity, which deny every connection
with the history of revelation and with reason, but
possess their truth in the endeavor to sustain com-
plete monotheism, l)ecame wide-spread in the Occi-
dent and were comprised in the so-called Sijniholnni
AtJici)iasia)iu)n, which arose gradually during the
Cc'irly part of the Middle Ages, and was on its recej)-
tion (8th to 0th century) proclaimed as holy Church
doctrine.* "He who will 1x3 saved nuist believe
them", i.e. must submit to them. In the Athanasiau
creed as a symbol stands foremost the transforma-
tion of the trinity doctrine, as an inwardly-to-be-
adopted thought of faith, into an ecclesiastical
law, upon the observance of which salvation de-
pends. With Athanasius the '''imo'xTuii was the de-
cisive thought of faith ; with the Cappadocians the
intellectually (jver-subtle theological dogma; with
the later Greeks the hallowed relic; with the later
Occidentals the ecclesiastical law which demands
obedience.

* On tlif "Athanasianum " sec Kiillncr. Symbolik I. M mn. nnd th«
works of Foulkes (1871), Swainson (1875), Otumancy (1875), Luniby (1887).

Paradoxi-
cal
Formuhus.

Syinholum
Athaiia-
sianuni.

ii *

■ I'

■■

'Wfl

ri>^

I; -V

It n

Iliiiiianity.
of ( hrist.

274 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE DDCTHINK OF THE PEIlFKrT EgUALITY AS TO
NATTRE OF THE INCARNATE SON OF CJOl) AND
HUMANITY.

Souiros: The fr.ii;inonts of Ajiollinnris, tlie writiii^^s ui
Atli.'inasius, of tlio I'appadocians and of the Autiochians.

The qnotttioii of the Divinity of Christ was only
l)rej)aratory totliO(jiU'sti(>n of the union of tlie Divine
and human in Christ. Into tliis jn'ohleni the whole
of dogmatics flowed. Irenanis, and afterward Atha-
iiasius, had estaljlished the Divinit}' of the Redeem-
er with respect to redemi)tion, i.e. upon that assump-
tion.

But the (piestion of the union presupposed not only
a precise conception of the Divinity, but also of the
humanity of the Redeemer. True, in the gnostic
contest the reality of the (r<ii>^ of Christ had been
secured (Tertull., de came Cliristi) ; yet a fine
docetism had in spite of it continued to exist, and
that not only with the Alexandrians but also with
all teachers. Scarcely one of them thought of a per-
fect human self-consciousness, and not a single one
attributed to the human nature of Christ all tln^ limi-
tations which surround our nature. Origen cer-
tainly — and not as the first — attributed to Christ a
human soul and a freewill; but he needed a connec-
tion between the God-Logo^- and mailer, and he has
shown definitely in his Chi i.-^lology — in so far as he

DKAKLOI'MENT OF DOCTKINK (>K INCAIiNATK ►N.

«»

I .)

(lid ii(»l separate tli<' Jesus and tlic (*!iri-t -tlwit \\\v
most evident docetisin remains active when niw
coiu'civos tlio ""'V'^, because wlmlly material, as with-
out (juality and cajtahle of every attrilnite.

With the ( )rigeni >tic thi-olns^ians, and amon^' tlie
Christian |)Ooj)lo generally, existed at the beginning
of the 4th century the most varii'd conceptions re-
garding the incarnation and humanity of Christ,
Only a few thought of a human soul and many
thought of the flesh of Christ as hi'avenly, or as a
transformation of the Logos, or as a vesture. Crass
docetic conceptions were softened hy Neo-Platonic
speculative ideas (the finiteness a moment within
the unfolding Deity itself). No one in the Orient
really thought of tiro natures; one eternal (iod-
incarnate nature, one nature having become (lod-
incarnate, a Divine nature having been changed for
a time into human nature, a Divin(^ nature dwelling
in the human, i.e. clothed in the covering of human-
ity — these were the prevailing couce})tions, and the
answers were just as confused to single (juestions
(Was the llesh born *A' ^lary, or the Logos Vvith the
tlesh? Was the Christ made man, or did he assume
human nature? Ifow nuich can be wanting to this
nature and it still be considered human?) and to the
Biblical considerations (Who suffered? Who hun-
gered? Who (li(>d? Who acknowledged his igno-
rance? The God or the man, <»r the G'od-man?
Or in reality an* not all these -'-"'''/ only apparent, i.e.
ecouumic?). A more or less tine docetism wa.s also

'I lit'i>ri<'«
.Mtniit In-

(MI'Mlltioll.

Various
(^U'stidiis.

• 1 !

I;.

rnity of

I'tTKOn-

iility
Fiirida-
nifiital.

Aftollina-
ris.

270 Ol'TLINES OK THR HISTORY OF DOCSMA.

in voncrcto lau^'lit in tin* Occiilcnt. Hut liy the
.sido uf it, after TcitulliMii .iiid Novatians, st(X)(l upon
tlio l)asis (tf tlio svuihol tlu' juristic formula: Two
.sul)stau('os, (t}u> person. This formula, as though it
were a protection and lioundary thought, was never
further inv(^stij^atcl; but it was destined to l)ccome
some day the saving phrase in the conflicts of the
Orit'ut.

The unHfj of the sui)ernatural personality of Christ
was here the common starting-point. How to pro-
vide a place for humanity in it was the problem,
which in its shari)nesy and gravity Ajjollinaris of
Laodicea first discerned. The Arians had given the
impulse, since they conceived the humanity of Christ
merely as '^'i/'^ in order to expr s the full unity of
the p(»rsonality of the Redeemer and at the same
time to be able to attribute to their half-divine Logos
the limited knowledge and capability of suffering
found in the Christ. They threw it up to the ortho-
dox, that their dcjctrine leads to two Sons of God,
or to two natures (which were still considered iden-
tical) . Apollinaris now recognized that this reproach
was justified; he made the problem of his theology:
(I) To express just as strict a unity in the person of
Christ as Arianism did in its Logos clothed merely
with the 'r«/'^, (•>) To unite with itthefiill humanity
of Christ. Here is the problem which occupied the
Church of the ;5d century, and indeed Apollinaris sur-
veyed it in its whole range as the chief problem of
Christian theology, as the nucleus of all expressions of

With tho ortiKHinx ;;---

I>EVKI/)I'MENT OK l>(>( THINK OF INCAKNATION. >*^ 7

faitli, and Im' (rcatcd it acc'nidinj^ly witli tlic ^ivatcst
ingciniity and witli a dialfctics that aiiticipati'd all
tenniiiologios of tlie tiitun'.
(AthaiiHsius) ho found fault, liccausc thi'j', in onU'r
to escajR^ tlit^ ()hjo('ti»)ns of the Allans, and in spito
of their iH'ttcr intentions, constantly discriminated
in Christ lu'tweon what the man and what the (Jod
did; tlierehy is tlie duality estahlished and redemp-
tion is made dependent thereon; for Christ must so
have been made man, that everything which is valid
of humanity is also valid of the Deity and rice rcrsa
(true, Athanasius never used the expression '' '"' v''"t;^^
likeOrigen; but ho was obliged against his will to
divide the unity of the ^'Y"v nuftxotfni'; in its applica-
tion). Ho censured the Arians because they also
take away tiio comfort of redemption in so far as
Christ did not assume entire humanity, but only the
flesh. He himself, holding fast to the idea of unity
as to a rudder, but not rejoicing like an Aristotelian
in the mystery of the faith, as did Athanasius, estab-
lished the doctrine that the God-Logos had taken
unto himself human flesh and a human soul (which
constitute human nature as nature), but not a human
Logos, i.e. — as w^e should now express it — not that
which in man constitutes the (individual) })erson,
therefore not free will. With the thus-constituted
human nature, however, the Logos was able to fuse
into a complete unity, because there never existed
two subjects; for the rocks which ApoUinaris had
recognized as dangerous were :

Also
AriiitiH.

II '

1 .

1 '

.
1
1
»

1 1

kJi^:

Vii

i 1.

iiraily,
fively.

a7K Ol'TI.INKS OF THK HISTOKY OK IMHJMA.

(I) 'I'Im' idt'.i of Iwn Sons, i.e. tlu' st'piiratiji^' of
tli<' mini .iiiil the ( 1(1(1, \\\v .losiis aiiil th«' CluiHt {" two
natiii'i's .'ire two Sons"),

(".') Tlu' conccptioM that J<'sns was an 'V>.v^w«r:os'

(.'J) Tilt' idea lliat lie liad a fire, clianL^c'aldc natiuv.
Tln' siihjcct nnisl l)(> removed IVoni the Iniinan
nature of Chiist, otherwis(» one wouM arrive at a
douhle-l)ein^' (liyhrid, niiiiotaur); wlienvis his concep-
tion renders tho /''■"■ </"'>Ttsi nri h'lynu tT£<Tanx(it/JL!yr^ clear.
ProvoHhis This Ai)ollinari« proved s()teriolo<ncallv (what tho
u'aiiy.'nih- ^'^'*'^ *^^*^ ^^*"^ niiist havo done and sufl'ercMl, othor-
1(1- wise the same has no power to .save: ''/»'i/>o)r:no {hhazn>;
on xaTUfiYzl r^>v fhharny ; tlu' Deity hecanie through Christ
the >"^'V and /''j-'^' of tlie entire humanity; the human
nature became tlu'ough Christ the ^'i/'^ of the Deity),
Biblicall}' — he was a very able (»xegete — and specula-
tively (the human nature is always the thing moved,
the Divine is the mover; this relationship comes in
the ^>''/'"v (Tui>/.inft£i<i to its perfect development and
manifestation; Christ is the heavenly Adam, who
consecpientl)' possesses incarnatitni potentially; in a
hidden way he always was i"'"'V' --vTa/'^tr^; his flesh is
vixonnnio^ to liis Divinity, because he was fitted for
incarnation; therefore is the incarnation in no way
accidental and differs from all mere inspiration; the
Logos is alwaj's Mediator — ustott^^ — between Deity
and humanity ; however, one does not know how far
Apollinaris went here) .
'Two^'^one. If the mysterj'' two = one (see the parallel to the

HKVKI.oI'MKNT OF IMXTIJINK OF IN( AKN ATION*. %»70

inysti'ry, tlircc <»ii<') is .it ;ill to Im' drscrilM'd, tln'H
tluMloctriiH' <•!' Apolliiiiiris, ir.t'usun'd l»y tlu' lirrsup-
positions and aims of tlic (jlrcck conception of Chris-
tianity as ri'li;^ion, is ftrrfccf. For tliis reason, loo,
ho found faitiifnl disciples, and all moTiophysitrs,
yos, even the />/o//.s' (J reek orthodox arejit the lM>ttoni
Ai)ollinarists : The acce[)tance of an individual human
Dcrsonality in Christ does away with his power as
Redoemcr, just as the idea of two unmixed natures
robs th«» incarnation of its effect. For that reason
Apollinaris struck out the liuman »>'>•{ like all Gnn-k
believers l)ef()re and after him — he, however, openly
and (»ner|j,etically.

But the demand for a coninlctr human nature onco f^j"""*' '^'
proclaimcd could no lonj^'er bo passed over in silence: Apoiihrn-
One could still say according to Apollinaris, that sec«iei.
the hum.'m '■">■"> would not bo saved; the doctrine
of God also appeared to totter, if God was made
to havo sufl'ered. Therefore the /V// humanit}' was
ahvady acknowledged at the Synod of .Akwandria,
30:2, and the Cappadocians rose against their revered
teacher, who was obliged (^TA) towithch-aw from the
Church, but formed a church of his own; the West
also condemned him. The full homousios of Christ
with humanity was exalted to a doctrine. Certainly
the gospel reports had a part therein ; but that which
the Cappadocians were ?\blo to set up in opposition
to Apollinaris were only wretched formulas, full ^'uoSCf*^
of contradictions : There are two natures, and yet
only one ; there are not two Sons, but the Divinity

hiJ'

Mli

^rn'i

UlH'

Nest<,^rian
Cimtro-
versy.

280 OT^'T.TNKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

acts in Clirisl in one way, the Innnanity in another;
Christ had human freedom, but acted under Divine
necessity. In reality the Cappadocians thought like
Apollinaris, hut they had to make a place for the
"perfect man", while the Greek piefij did not de-
mand this consideration. The sovere^ignty of faith
had dictated the doctrine to Apollinaris; he added
tt the Athanasian ''/jmnotno^ the corresponding Chris-
tology; like Athanasius he hesitated at no sacrifice
for the sake of his faith. Hiw opponents, however,
in upholding th-j full humanity (human subject) did
after all a great service to the Church of the future.
They were now obliged to try and reconcile the con-
tradictions (not two Sons, and y^t two independent
natures) . In what form that was to issue no one
knew as j-et.

CHAPTER IX.

CONTINUATION: THE DOCTRINE OF THE PERSONAL
UNION OP THE DIVINE AND HUMAN NATURE IN
THE INCARNATE SON OF GOD.

Sources : Tlie writings of Cyril and of the Antiochians,
the acts of the councils., Hefele.Concilieugesch. , Bd.I.and II.

1. The Nestoriaii Controversy. — How can the
complete God and the complete man be united in one
being? The most zealous opponents of Apollinaris
were his comjDatriots, and in part also his philosoph-
ical sympathizers, the Antiochians. They deduced
from the formula, " complete God and complete man",

DEVELOPMENT OK DOfTRTNR OF INCAHNATION. ".^Sl

the r()ns(>(Hioiu'G of two difforont natures. Diodorus
of Tarsus and above all Theodore of Mopsiiestia,
distinguished for their sober theology, excellent exe-
gesis and severe asceticism, were thorough Nicenes,
but they at the same time rightly recognized that
complete humanity without freedom and chang(\ible-
ns^s is a chimera; conse(j[uently Deity and human-
ity are contrasted and cannot b}' any means be fused
into one (incapable of suffering, capable of suffering).
In accord therewith they constructed their C*hris-
tology, which was therefore not fashioned according
to soteriological conceptions, but rather by the evan-
gelical picture of Christ. Christ consists of two sep-
arate natures (no iVwr^^ (^•unt/.r;) ; the God-Logos as-
sumed the nature of an individual man, that is, ho
dwelt therein; this indwelling was not substantial,
and also not merely inspirational, but xara xa/ni. i.e.
God united and joined (T'ji/'/^;r«) himself to the man
Jesus in an especial manner, yet analogous to his
union with pious souls. The Logos dwelt in Christ
as in a temple; his human nature remained su])stan-
tially what it was; but it developed itself gradually
to a perfect condition and constancy. The union was
therefore only a relative one {I'^iom^ tr^sr'.xrj) and it
was in the beginning only relatively perfect; it is in
itself a moral union ; but by the verification and ex-
altation one adorable subject was finally and forever
exhibited {yinpiXo) t«9 ipnnzii^ IvCo ty^v 7:f)o(Tx'')>r/t7(.'). The-
odore uses the later formula ; " Tivo natures, one per-
son " ; but with him the unity of the person is merely

Diodiiiiis

of Tarsus

and Tlu'M-

(lore of

5IO}J8U-

estia.

Two
St'paruto
Nuturi'8.

Two Na-
tures, Uue
Persou.

1 1

I >»■

ft;"

Ill ' 'ir

Anthropos
Enth»'(xs.

2H2 OUTLINES OF THE ITTfJTORV OF DOGMA.

one of names, of honor and adoration; in no sense a
substantial unity. He has (juitc* distinctly two per-
sons, because fu-o uatnrcs (person = nature) and,
besides, for believers an adorable -jinfrut-ov. Of nii
incarnati(jn, therefore, one maj" not definitely speak,
but only of an assumption of the man on the part of
the Logos. The functions of Jesus Christ are to lie
strictly distributed between the Deity and humanity.
To call Mary ^'^sorn ■/.„.; is absurd.

This doctrine is distinguished from that of the
Samosatians only by the assert ion of the i^ersonal-
ity of the God-Logos in Christ. In truth is Jesus —
invito Theocloro — nevertheless an «>'V"^""^" vAhoii.
That the Antiochians contented themselves with
this was a consequence of their rationalism. How-
ever deserving of acknowledgment their spiritual
conception of the problem is, still they were farther
removed from the conception of redemption as a
new birth and as forgiveness of sin, than the repre-
sentatives of the realistic idea of redemption. They
knew of a Perfecter of humanity who conducts it
through knowledge and asceticism unto a new xard-
<Tra<T£?, but they knew nothing of a Restorer. But
since they did not docetically explain away, or by
accommodation set forth the human qualities of
Christ, they held before the Church the picture of the
historical Christ, at a time when the Church was
obliged to depart in its formulas of doctrine farther
and farther from the same. True, a picture could
have no great effect in which they emphasized the

DEVELOrMEXT OF nOPTUINE OF INCAHXATION. '^Sl}

points of empty fiVLuloin .-iiid cipacily of sulTiM-ing
equall}' with wisdom and asceticism.

Their opponents, the Alexandrians, relied upon
the tradition which embarrassed the Antiochians,
that Christ possessed the Divine physis and th.at he
really became man; their deductions hicked till 431,
aitll even later, apprehensible clearness; but that
could not be otherwise; and their faith was all the
surer. Cyril of Alexandria, in many respects de-
serving of little esteem, strove for the fundamental
idea of piet}', like Athanasius, and luid tradition on
his side. This piety demanded only a strong and
sure declaration of the mystery, nothing more {tuut:^
-pii(T/.uviinHo) Tn n/ifn^zov). Upon the throrcfical state-
ment of the faith Cyril never wasted many words;
but he was immediately in danger of transgressing
the limits of his idea of faith, whenever he sought
to explain the myster}', and his terminology was in-
definite. His faith did not proceed from the histor-
ical Christ, but from the God who was made man.
This God was incorporated in i\\Q coniplete hmnan
nature^ and yet he remained the same. He did not
transform himself, but ' o took humanity into the
unity of his being, without losing any of the latter.
He was the same afterwards as before, the one sub-
ject. What the body suffered, he suffered. There-
foie Cyril used with special preference the following
phrases : el's" xa) o aoTo<i^ namely, the God-Logos, !'':'«>

izotsTv rrj'y ffa/txa otxo'^ontxw'^^ ;j.-fi^/r^xe.i nzsp r^v^ ix d''i(> (J'nrreojv
els', (TuvthufTC'i duo ipijaiu)v xa^ ivutaiv iWidoTiaaxo'^ dffuv^nrioii

Cyril or

Aii'x.iii-

di-iu.

Tlu'ory of
I near-
nut iuu.

I
It

■1

;! ,.

Ti ■?

Logos

Assumes

Humuu

Nature.

Cyril Real-
ly Mono-
phyaitic.

284 f)UTLINKS OF THK HISTOIIV OF DOGMA.

xai aTpiT:roi<;, IlcilOG : 'xwTfs' (fnnwi] (/«''/' (tr.i'inro.av^ aud

Ilia (f'tnii *"•' ''^^"'^ /'YOU nz(Taftxo>>i.ivfi) . Tho difference be-
tween ')T(^^ and or.t'xTzcKT'.^ QyvW hardly touched upon.
Yet he never said l^ 5'><> nrtxTTdneiov^ or (■'uxn.^ z«ra (fbno.
With him if'xn'i and uzi'xTTani'i coincide as regards the
Divine nature ; as regards the human nature they do
not. He rejected the idea that Christ became an
individucd man, although he acknowledged all the
constituents of humanity in Christ. Christ is the
Logos which has assumed hum an nature; onl}- thus
can he be the Redeemer. Before the incarnation
there were, according to Cyril, tiro natures, there-
after only one, to wit : The God-incarnate, which is
distinguished as ''>£w/>t''-£ tJ-ihr^. The Deity's capacity
for suffering is, to be sure, not the consequence of
the unity; but the Logos suffers in his own flesh.
Nevertheless he is '"'e''? (TTaupujfhii; and Mary is f^ttinhiKi.
For that reason, also, can the '7«'/'c Christ i in the
eucharist give Divine life ; for the same is filled with
the Deity.

This conception is at the bottom pure monophys-
itism ; but it does not wish to be so, and, in assert-
ing the humanity of Christ as not to be explained
away, it guards against the consequent monophys-
itic formula. Cyril was really orthodox, that is, he
taught what lay as a consequent in the orthodox doc-
trine respecting Christ. But the contradiction is
apparent — both natures were to be present, una-
bridged and unmixed, inclusive of a human Logos,
and yet there should be but one God-incarnate na-

n lii

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 285

tiire, and the human part is subjectless. It is also
apparent that the picture of the real Christ cannot
be maintained by this view: Docetic explanations
must necessarily be admitted {i.e. accommodation).
But this doctrine is after all more valuable than
that of the Chalcedon creed, because by it faith can
make it clear to itself that Christ assumed the com-
plete human nature, substantially united it with
himself and elevated it to the Divine. The contro-
versy broke out in Constantinople through the vain,
blustering, but not ignoble bishop Nestorius (l'^8),
who, hated by the Alexandrians as an Antiochian
and envied for his chair, stirred uj) hatred impru-
dently by his sermons and by his attacks \\\)on those
favoring Cyril, and specially by branding the word
y'^e<)r6xo<i and the like as heathenish fables. He sought
now to eradicate the " rottenness of Arius and Apol-
linaris" ; as a Christologian, however, he by no means
stood at the extreme left of orthodoxy, like Theodore.
He stirred up an agitation in the capital ; the monks
and the imperial ladies were against him, and Cyril
now took a hand in it. The formulas which each
used did not sound very differently — Nestorius him-
self was rather inclined to agree, with reservations,
to the I'hoTuxo^ ; but behind the formulas there lay a
deep dogmatic and ecclesiastico-political contrast.
Cyril fought for the one God-incarnate nature, and
for primacy in the Orient. He was able to gain over
for himself the Roman bishop, to whom at that time
the bishop of Constantinople seemed a more power-

Nestorius.

I.'

1^ ?

f 1

•f ■

,»r:

'■ 1 1-

, i

'It

280 OUTLINES OF TTIE IIISTOKY OF DOGMA.

Coeiestius. f,i| j-jval than the ono of Alexandria. Coulcstius,
also personally irritatod at Ncstorius, roi)udiatcd his
own Chri stole )|^ical view which ap})r()achod very
nearly to that of Nestorius, joined the anathematiza-
tion of C3'ril and demanded of Nestor i us a recanta-
tion. Cyril, hurling counter-anathemas against
Nestorins, compelled the calling of a general council
hy the emperor who favored him. But ho was able

connrii cf to dircct the general council at E])hesus (431) in

Eplu'sus. "^ i \ /

such a manner, that from the beginning it ])egan to
split. The decrees ofy. the Egyptian-Roman party
were recognized afterward. 5 as the decrees of the
council, while the emperor did not originally recog-
nize either these, or the decrees of the Antiochian
party. Cyril allowed no new symbol to be estab-
lished, but caused the deposition of Nestorius and the
declaration of his own doctrine as orthodox. Con-
trarywise the Council which was held by the Anti-
ochian sympathizers deposed Cyril. The emperor
at first confirmed both depositions and as regards
N.storins Nestorius the matter rested there. He died in exile.

iMi's in

Exile. -gj^j^ Cyril, influential at court, succeeded in main-
taining himself, and in order not to lose his influ-
ence, he even formed in the year 4'.]') a union with
the Antiochians, whose ambiguous creed stood, ac-
cording to the text, nearer to the Antiochian theol-
ogy. Yet for that very reason Cyril remained master
of the situation, and he knew how to strengthen more
and more the Al(^xandrian doctrine and the ecclesias-
tical domination.

i'.,M.

vmrtmBi*^^

Dioscuros.

DEVEI-OPMENT OF DOCTKINE OF INCARNATION. 287

2. The Enfi^rhfdii iUnitvoversn (vid. Mansi, Acts '''('S";;',?"
of the Councils, VI., YII.).— Cyril died in the year '"^^'
•444, and tliero were people in his own i)arty who had
never forgiven the union of 4;)3 which he made
through the desire to rule. Dioscuros became his
successor; he was not equal to him and yet he was
not unlike him. Dioscuros endeavored to carry out
the scheme of his predecessor in the chair of Alexan-
dria, to make of Egypt a domain, to rule the Church
of the Orient as pope and to actufdly subject to him-
self emperor and state. Already Theopnilus and
Cyril had relied upon the monks and the masses in
this matter, and also upon tlie Roman bishop, who
had an eipial interest in suppressing the bishop of
Constantinople. They had, furthermore, relaxed the
union with Greek science (contest against Origen-
ism), in order not to displease the gretit power of
the age, pious hco-hdrism. Dioscuros seemed to
really gain his object under the weak emperor The-
odosius II. (council of Ephesus, 441») ; but close upon
the greatest victory followed the catastrophe. This
was brought about by the powerful empress Pulcheria, v-mn
and her consort Marcian, who recalled to mind once
more the Byzantine state-idea of ruling the Churcli,
and through Leo I., wdio at the decisive moment
relinquished the traditional policy of the Roman
chair to assist Alexandria against Constantinople,
made common cause with the emperor and ])ish()p
iif the capital and overthrew Dioscuros. I->ut at the
moment of his fall, tlie opposition between the hith-

rpss
leria.

L<"<) I,

,11

1 "

it '

(

.« !

: i: !

.«'(

i ,■' I

If'-;

■n i

nv\

* -

■I'r

288 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

erto uiiitt'd powers (omporor and pope) was destined
to oonio out. J^oth wanted to take advantage of tlio
victory. Tiie emperor was not willing to surrender
the Church of the Orient to the pope (who had lx3en
called ui)on for assistance), although he set up the
dogmatic formula of the pope as the only means of
saving the Oriental Church ; and the i)ope could not
endure that the patriarch of the capital should sup-
plant the other patriarchs of the Orient, that this
church as a creature of the emperor should be at the
latter's beck and call, and that the chair should be
placed on a level with that of St. Peter's. In con-
rouncii of Be(iuence of the Chalcedon council the state indeed

Chalcedon. '■

momentarily triumphed over the Church, but in giv-
ing to the same its own dogmatic formula, which had
more than half the faithful against it, it split the
empire, laid the foundation for the secession of large
provinces, south and north, strengthened its most
powerful adversary, the bishop of Rome, at a mo-
ment when by the fall of the West Roman empire
the latter was placed at the head of the Occident, and
thus prepared a condition of affairs, which limited
the Byzantine dominion to the eastern Mediterra-
nean coast provinces.

These are the general circumstances under which
the Eutychian controversy occurred, and thereby
is declared what an important part politics had
in it.
Eutyches. Througli the union of 433 the Christological ques-
tion had already become stagnant. According to

M^^

DEVKLOI'MENT OF DOCTKINE OK INC'AHNATION. 280

the interpretation of the fornuibi, cvcrylxxly could
be taken for a heretic. The Alexandrian doctrine,
which really tallied with the faith of tho Orientals,
made in fact more and more profijress in spite of the
energetic counter-efforts of the honest and l)est-hated
Theoilore; and Dioscuros carried himself like a chief
bishop over Palestine and S3'ria. Tho »>m])eror
surrendered the Church to him outright. Dioscuros
persecuted the Antiochian sympathizers, endeavored
to exterminate the phrase "two natures", and even
allowed creeds to pass which sounded suspiciously
Apollinaristic. But when the old Archimandrite
Eutyches in Constantinople expressed his Cyrillian
Christology in terms like the following: " My God is
not of like essence with us, he has no awiia >hi'f/)wzi)u^
but a (Tcofia (hf^i>w-v,ir/\ j)ersonal opponents (Domnus
of Antioch, then Eusebius of Dorylseum) took this
occasion to denounce him to the patriarch Flavian,
who, himself no decided Christologian, pro. 1 by
the opportunity to get rid of an ecclesiastic favored
by the court. At a sj^nod in Constantinople (44S) j,p^p",[J," ^,
Eutyches was condemned as a Valentinian and nopK'm
ApoUinarist, although he after some hesitation ac-
knowledged the formula : " Out of two natures, one
Christ". From both sides, the court, the capital
and the Roman bisho]) were now set in motion.
Dioscuros saw that the moment for settling the ques-
tion of power had come, but not less did Leo I.
While the former obtained from the emperor the

calling of a council and was being equipped for it
19

• ■ t\

( !• I :

< i
1

200 OUTLINES OP THE IIISTOKY OF DO(iMA.

^0 '.

I-, '' 'i:'

I - '.' ' M

l> '

H ■

I/etter.

with uiiluNird-of sovereignty as tlu' trur popo, the
latter now saw — in sjnte of tlie decision of liis prede-
cessor, Ca'lestius, in favor of CVril — in Eutyches the
worst heretic, in Fhivian his dear, persecuted friend,
and souglit to frustrate the council by numerous
letters to influentinl jwrsons and he wrote to Flavian
the celebrated epistle, in which, as respects Chris-
^bratpd^" ^*'l*>Ky» ^^^ Veered toward the Tertullian-Augustinian
conception. In this letter the dcx'trine of two natures
is strictly carried out {'^ ctrfit vtraque forma cum
altering commrniionc, (/nod proprium esf^ verba
scil. operante quod rerbi est et came exsequenti
quod caniis <^s•/"), and the old Occidental, juristic
expedient exi)ounded, that one must believe in
one Person, which has two separate natures (sub-
stances) at its disposal, — an expedient which is
truly neither monophj'sitic nor Nestorian, since it
sharply distinguishes between the Person and the
two natures, and therefore really introduces three
magnitudes ; but it certainly stands nearer to Nesto-
rianism and does not do justice to the decisive inter-
est of faith, but excludes every concrete form of
thought and consecjuently satisfies neither piety nor
intellect. Besides this Leo knows only the heresies
of docetism and Samosatianism. Leo certainly ac-
knowledges in his letters the interest of our redemp-
tion; but he gave an interpretation which Cyril
would have strong!}" repudiated.

In August (NO) the great council of Ephesus as-
sembled imder Dioscuros' direction. Rome was at

Council of

Ephoaus,

449.

DEVKhOl'MKNT OK DOCTKINK OK INCAKNATION. 2H1

first tn'titcd as non-fxisU'iit, tlu'ii liiiinl)KMl in tlio
IKTHons of its legates, who, moreover, aeteil with
uncertainty. Dioscuros put througli the resohition
that the matter must sto]) with the synods of Nie;ea
and Ephi'sus (t.')l), wliich expressed the old creed:
"After the incarnation there exists one incarnate
nature"; no symhol was estahlished ; Eutyches was i^i'ii.stutr.d.
reinstated and, on the hasis of the Nicene creed, the
chiefs of the Antiochians; but at the same time Fla-
vian, Eusebius of Dorylteum, Theodoret, and Dom-
nus of Antioch were deposed; in short, tlie Church
WHS thoroughly purified from " Nestorian ism". All
this was done with almost unanimity. Two 3'ears
later this unanimity was declared as enforced by
many bisho})s who had taken part {httrocinimn uiumKphe-

sinum.

Eplicsiniiniy says Leo). Dioscuros certainly, with
the aid of his fanatical monks, terrorized the synod,
but a far stronger pressure was afterwards necessary
at Chalcedon. Dioscuros in reality raised the faith of
the Orient to a tixed standard, and the incomparable
victory which he enjoyed had, unless foreign powers
(the state, Rome) should interfere, the guarantee of
permanence. But Dioscuros roused against himself
the pope and the Byzantine state-idea, and did not
calculate upon the wide-spread aversion to the right
wing of his army, the masked Apollinarists. He
rehabilitated Eutyches, without expressly condenm-
ing the doubtful ti'rms which he and his followers
habitually used.

On the :i8tli of July (450) Pulclieria and Marcian a'»d l.o.

iili2 OUTLINES OF THE IIISTOKY OF DOGMA.

t''i

, i' '

rniincil of
Chalcedoii.

Dioscuros
Deposed.

succeeded TlicodoHiim; until tlion Leo had vainly
ondcuvored to raise uj)p08ition to the council. Now
Marcian, who wa.s detenninod to hreak the indepen-
dence of the Alexandrian hi.shops, stood in need of
hiin. Leo desired the condemnation of Dioscuros
and the acceptance of his own didactic epistle with-
out (I counvil; but the enii)eror was obliged to in-
sist upon one, in order to brinj; about a wholly new
order of things. Such a one could succeed only if a
now dogmatic formula were ostal)lished, which placed
the Egyptians in the wrong and still did not yield
the point to the Antiochians. Politics counselled the
formula of the Occident (Leo's) as the only way out.
Tho council really took place at Chalcodon in 451 ;
U) the pontiiicial legates were conceded the places of
honor; Leo had instructed them to derogate nothing
from the dignity of Rome. The greater part of the
500 to GOO bishops were like-minded with Cyril and
Dioscuros, highly opposed to all Nestorianism, hos-
tile to Theodoret; but the emperor dominated the
council. It was settled that Dioscuros must be de-
posed and a dogmatic formula in the sense of Leo's ac-
cepted, since the decree of 449 was annulled as having
been "extorted". But it was just as sure that the
memory and doctrine of Cyril must not be sacrificed,
Dioscuros therefore was deposed after a most shame-
ful process, not as an heretic, but on account of his
disobedience and irregularities. The majority of
the bishoi)s disavowed their past before the face of
the imperial commissioners and abandoned Dioscuros

r .Mi-!'' '■

-iiHri mx^'Um^n

I»KVKI,()I'MKN'r OK DOCTKrNK Ol' INC A IfNATION. *.*0.*l

iiiid t'n» (Ij'cn'c of I lit ; Imt only Itv f.ilsr ropn'snita-
tions juid threats did the hishops allow themselves to
ho induced to ackno\vled«^e the canon of I.eo, wliich
every Oriental conld not hut uiiderKtand as Nesto-
rirtH, and to sanction tlie doctrine that also after the
incarnation there were firo natures existent in Christ.
Even at the last iiour it was attenijtted — altluiuj^h in
vain — to exalt to a dojj^nia a merely nohOixd distinc-
tion hetween the natures. At the r)th sittinj^ the d(»-
creos of :{•.*.">, IJSl and \'M were confirmed and their
sutficiency acknowledged, hut it was remarked, that
on account of the heretics (who, on the one side, re-
jected the 'Vcor/'z^s' and, on the other, desired to intro-
duce a 'T'V;f'^'''>" -ind //"<T^' of the natures, "irrationally
inventing only onr nature of the flesh and th(^ Deity
and considering the Divine nature as caj)al)le of
suffering") it was necessary to admit the letters (»f
Cyril to Nestorius and the Orientals, {vs well as the Liters of

Cyril ami

letter of Leo. The declaration reads: r<ih l... a.i-

iiiittfd.

Trjv i'^wni.' ihtJzhhzDvza^^ dvai'tsfiuri'^et (this was the sacri-
fice of the thoughts of the heart). ' i'.-rniwMH roiviv to-v

dyt'nt^ 7:arfid(Ttv Ivaxai :u'j fWTuv n/inXoye'.v t>li)v r^v x'lfitov
Tj/iwv V. .\f). (70!i.(fiuvio)v anzov Iv fh>'f/w)Z''izrjZ(^ I'fsov uItiHo)^'
xai avi^pu)-rnv dlr^Hwii zuv anzuv^ then it reads : i"!^''' >'i-'- T/y
a'Wx Xpi(7zu'j . . . -v d'jt) tpuazav^ {Ix ?>>'n) ipunziav is a
later correction, favorable to monophysitism) dnoyyn.

Tiu-Z(u>i^ uya)ft>(TZiu^ yi'U)fjt!^n/i£'/^ onoa/f.o'' r/^9

f '

* I

204 OUTIJNES OF Trip] ITTSTORY OF DOGMA.

I'f ' J

Full

Iluinanity

Secured.

Monophy-
sitt! Con-
troversies.

iV: fj.i'i?J.ii> T/^'j" '.o'.i'izr^Tii^' [xari/ii/x <f'>fr:i»<f^ xai erV I'v zpnirm-uv
xa> ii.iav (>-6(TTa(rv^ fTUyTfi^yii'iirrj^^^ nnx e;^ ti'in r.ixKnur.a
fi£ii'.!^o;i£'.i()v ij otai/)<i')r).e'^(»^ a/.h). s'va xa>. rov anzi'rj oluv xiv.

By this distinction between natnre and person the
power of the mj'stery of ftiitli was paialyzed, a con-
ceivable mystery established, and yet the clearness
of the Antiochian conception of the humanity of
Jesus was after all not reached. The formula is
negative and cold; the pious saw their comfort, the
hu)(n<s ^uT'.xrj^ vanish. Hov/ shall our u((f in-c profit
by what occurred in the Person of Christ? The
hated " moralism", or the mysticism of the union of
the Logos with every human soul, seemed to be the
consequence. And, besides, one was expected to be-
lieve in a <f'>fr's >hor:()fTTafTcg, of whicli hitherto in the
Orient only a few had known anything I The gain
in having now secured the full humanity of Jesus
as an incontestible article of faith, invaluable for the
future, was too dearlj' bought. Peace was also not
restored. Emperor and pope were at variance over
the 28th canon, even if they did not allow the mat-
ter to come to a rupture, and the Church of the
Orient fell into dissolution.

3. The Monophiisite Contests and the 5th Coun-
cil. (Mansi, T. VII-IX; Loofs, Leontius von By-
zanz, 1887). — The century between tlie 4tli and 5tli
councils shows the most complicated and confuted
relations; during the time the dogmatic situation
also constantly changes, so that a short survey is

ESS3tti£OB^B&

|«».;Wfei#»-;'J

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF IN( AHNATION. ,!'J5

Bents

iiiipossil)l(\ Therefore only a few principal points
can be here stated.

(1) The opponents of the Chalcedon creed, the ^TOml
monophysites, were snperior to the orthodox in creed.
spiritual power and activity. In Egypt, parts of
Syria and Armenia, they kept the upper hand, and
the emperors succeeded neither by threats nor by
concessions in gaining them over for any length of
time; these provinces rather alienated themselves
more and more from the empire and joined the
monophysitic confession with their nationality, pre-
paratory to founding independent national churches
hostile to the Greek. In the main persevering
steadfastly in the doctrijie of Cyril and rejecting
the farther-reaching Apollinarian-Eutychian form-
ulas, the monophysites showed by inward spiritual
movements that in their midst alone the dogmatical
legacy of the Church was still alive. The newly-
aw'akened Aristotelianism, which as scholasticism
took the place of Platonism, found among them
learned defenders, who (John Philoponus), to be sure,
approached in their speculation very near to tri the-
ism. In regard to the Christological (juestion there
were two main tendencies (Gieseler, Comment, qua
Monoph. opin. illustr., 2 Part., 1835 seq.). These
(Severus, Severians, " Agnoetians", "Phartola-
treans ") were really opposed to the Chalcedon creed
only as a formal innovation, but agreed even to a
notional distinction between the two natures in
Christ, and, still more, were zealously anxious to

1 1
"i

: I

i i

!"i

rnr

Henosis
Phusike.

Adiapho-
rites.

296 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

keep the natures unmixed and to lay stress upon the
creature-ship and corruptibility (in theory) of the
body of Christ as well as upon the limits of knowl-
edge of the soul of Christ, so that they offended even
the orthodox. They might have been won, if the
Chalcedon formula, i.e. the epistolary teaching of
Leo, had been sacrificed. The others, on the con-
trary (Julian of Halicarnasses, " Aktistetcs," " Aph-
thartodoketes"), rejecting it is true the transforma-
tion of the one nature into the other, drew all the
consequences of the h^cj(7i<i ipoaur^ \ From the moment
of the assumptio the body also should be consid-
ered as imperishable and, indeed, as uncreated; all
the attributes of the Deity were transferred to the
human nature; accordingly all affections and re-
strictions, which one observes in the evangelical pic-
ture of Christ, were assumed by him freelj' J«'^ra
;f«/>£''', but were not the necessary consequences of his
nature. This conception, influenced solely by the
idea of redemption, alone corresponds to the old
tradition (Irenseus, Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa,
etc.). Finally there were also such monophysites —
3 ot certainly they were not numerous — as advanced
to a pantheistic speculation (" Adiaphorites ") : The
creature is in a mysterious manner altogether con-
substantial with God ; the ^ vw^r^^ (ponuij in Christ is
only the expression for the general consubstantiality
of his nature and the Deity (Stephen bar Sudaili;
the mystics; influence upon the Occident; Scotus
Erigena). Since the 5th Council and still more since

\ A

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 207

the advent of Irilam, the monophysitic churches have
pined away in isolation, the wild national and relig-
ious fanaticism and the barren phantasy of the monks
have delivered them over to barbarism.

(2) Since coercion had no effect, a few emperors n.notikon
sought, in order to maintain the unity of the empire,
to suppress temporarily the Chalcedon creed (En-
cyclica of Basiliscus, 470), or to avoid it (Henotikon
of Zeno, 482). But the consequence of this policy
always was that they won over only a part of the
monophysites and that they fell out with Rome and
the Occident. Thus arose, on the account of the
Henotikon, a thirty-five years' schism with Rome
(484-519), which served only to make the pope still
more independent. The emperors could not reach a
decision to sacrifice either Rome or the Orient, and
finally they lost both. In the year 511) the Chalce-
don creed was fully restored, in alliance with Rome,
by the emperor Justin, who was influenced by his
nephew Justinian. But the theopaschite contest
(enlargement of the trishagion by the addition: o
<TTai)pwih\<i oi rjfxd?^ i.e., the Validity of the formula:
" One of the trinity was crucified " : They are not
identical, for the one was a cultish innovation and
could be understood in a Sabellian way, while the
other is good orthodoxy) shows, since 518, that in
the Occident every Cyrillian ex})laiiati()n of the
Chalcedon creed was regarded with suspicion, while
the orthodox in the Orient would tolerate the Chal-
cedon creed only with a Cyrillian interpretation,

Theopas-
chite Con-
troversy.

' 1 ',

s 1

! t

."*■:

Lt'ontius

(if Byzau-

tiuiii.

JiiRtinian''3
rolicy.

208 OUTLINES OF Tin: HISTORY OF DOGMA.

hoping thereby still always for a reconciliation with
the nionophysites.

(3) While in the 5th century the Chalcedon ortho-
doxy had upon the whole no noted dogmatic repre-
sentative in the Orient — the strongest proof that it
was foreign to the spirit of the Orient — several ap-
peared after the beginning of the Gth century. The
formula had not only in time become more venera-
ble, but the study of Aristotle above all furnished
weapons for its defence. The scholasticism not only
permitted the retention of the Chalcedon distinction
between nature and person, but even also welcomed
it and gave to the formula still a strong Cijril-
lian interpretation. This was brought about by
the Scj'thian monk, Leontius of Byzantium, the most
eminent dogmatist of the Gth century, the forerunner
of John of Damascus, and the teacher of Justinian.
He pacified the Church by a philosophically conceiv-
able exposition of the Chalcedon creed and buried
the dogma in scholastical technicalities. He is the
father of the Christological new-orthodoxy, just as
the Cappadocians were the fathers of the trinitarian
new-orthodoxy. Through his doctrine of the en-
hypostasis of the human nature, he paid, in the
form of a fine Apollinarianism, full regard to the
idea of redemption.

(4) Henceforth the policy of Justinian, the royal
dogmatist, must be understood as a religious policy.
By unexampled luck he had brought the whole em-
pire under his sway, and he wished in like manner to

DKAIOF-OI'MKNT OK IXXTIMNK OK INCAHXATION. •,'•.»'.>

Means

Usoil.

sottle finally the law and llic dogmatit-s of the em-
pire. The following p(Mnts of view giiitled him: {(t)
Strict adhesion to the rcvlxil te.vt of the Chalcedon
creed as a capital decision e(pial in standing- to
those of Nicasa, Constantinople and Ephesns, {b)
Strict Cyrillian interpretation of the symhol (the
emperor was inclined to go as far as aphthartodt)ket-
ism), in order to gain over the monophysites and to
follow his own inclination. The means to it were:
(a) Numerons imperial religious edicts in the sense
of the Christology of Lcontins, {h) Pnhlic religions
discourses, (c) The carr3'ing out of the theopaschitic
formula, [d] Suppression of every more liberal and
more independent theolog}^; therefore, on the <me
side, that of Origen, who had many sympathizers
among the monophysitic monks, especiall}' in Pales-
tine, and, on the other side, of the Antiochian theol-
ogy, which also still possessed numerous adherents
(as the emperor had closed the school at Athens, so
he intended likewise to close all Christian scientific
schools; only the scholastic should remain), {c)
Enforced naturalization of the new-orthodoxy in the
Occident. The execution of these plans was rendcM'ed
difficult: (1) By the secret monophysitic co-regencv rjmicuUi.'s
of the empress Theodora, {'I) By the refusal of the
Occident to consent to the rejection of the Antioch-
ians, 2. e. of the " three articles " (person and writ-
ings of Theodore, anti-Cyrillian writings of Theo-
doret, letter of Ibas to Maris) . In the later condem-
nation of the Antiochians, tlie Occident (Facundus

tfi'f.i.

(I I.

i' ''

,1 1

t ; H

300 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOCJMA.

■ 'Mi

Origen and

"Three
Chapters "

Cou-

demued,

55:1

Monergis-
tic and
Mono-
theletic
Contro-
versies.

of Hermiane) rightly recognized an attempt to do
away with the doctrine of the two natures, as Leo
had meant it, and to substitute in its place a fine
monophysitism. However, the emperor found in
Rome a characterless pope (Vigilius), who, in grati-
fying the emperor, covered himself with disgrace
and jeopardized his position in the Occident (great
schisms in the Occident). The emperor obtained
the condemnation of Origen and of the " three chap-
ters " ; ho restored the dogmatic ideas of the two
Ephesian councils of 431 and 41!) without touching
the Chalcedon creed, and he caused all this to be
sanctioned by obedient bishops at the 5th council
in Constantinople, 553. But in spite of the fact that
one could now speak with Cyril of one God-incarnate
nature (by the side of the doctrine of the two natures)
and that the spirit of Oriental dogmatism had thus
gained the victor}-, the monophysites would not be
won ; for the Chalcedon creed was too much detested
and the antagonisms had long since become national.
4. 71ie Monergistic and Monotheletic Contro-
versies, the (}th Council and John of Damascus
(Mansi, T. X. and XL).— With the decisions of the
4th and 5th councils, the doctrine of one will in
Christ would agree, as well as the doctrine of ttvo
wills. In fact before the (Uli century, no one had
spoken of two wills in Christ ; for the Antiochians
also had said, as once Paul of Samosata, that the
human will was entirely blended with the Divine
will (unity of will, not singleness of will). But

-:;w;tJY,-!

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 301

the theology of Loontiiis tciidod on the whole toward
the doctrine of two wills. Yet it would hardly have
come to a controversy — the dogma had already, since
553, been surrendered to theological science (scho-
lasticism) and the cultus (mysticism) — if politics
had not taken possession of the question.

The ])atriarch of the capital, Sergius, counselled Emperor
the powerful emperor Heraclius ((510-041) to «**''k'"'^-
strengthen his reconquered territory in the south
and east by making advances to the monophysites
with the formula: The God-man, consisting of two
natures, effected everything with oiie God-incarnate
energy. Upon this basis a union was really formed
in G33 with many monophysites. But opposition
arose (Sophronius, afterward bishop of Jerusalem), iionorijis,

Sophro-

and Sergius in union with Honorius of Rome now
sought to do justice to all by giving out the watch-
word : One should be silent in regard to the energies
(that Christ had only one 'V//.r///a was still considered
self-evident). Thus also ran an imperial edict, the
eJdhesis (iVoS). But not only in the Occident were
the consequences of the doctrinal letter of Leo re-
membered, but in the Orient the ablest theologians
(Maximus the Confessor) were also so attached to
the Chalcedon creed through xVristotelian scholas-
ticism, that they classed the will with the nature (not
with the Person) and therefore demanded the dual-
ity. Now even monotheletism was condemned at a
Roman synod, OU (Pope John IV.). The Orientals,
who rejected the ekthesis, lied to Carthage and

nius.

Monotht'-

let ism Con-

(Icmtifd

at l!ume.

; I

M <

li,

I I

I ;

I, *

i ' i

;>()2

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Two-Will to give orders to the Church

Ddi'triiie

at Rom.', trine was formulated in strict

Rome and prct)arcd, in union with tlie pojK}, a formal
revolution. This, indeed, was thwarted (the ques-
tion was as to the freedom of the Church in relation
to the state; the effort continued in the image con-
troversy). Yet the em})eror found himself obliged
to surrender the ekthesis, replacing it by the typos
which forbade, under severe penalties, the contro-
versy over one or ttro wills. But Rome did not
consent to this either. At the Lateran synod, 641)
(Martini.), which many Orientals attended, the con-
spiracy continued against the emperor, who dared

The two-will doc-
in strict language, but,
strangely enough, the right of the correctly under-
stood sentence: /^:'« (f')<n<^ rob (^tiv) h'lyoo (Tz<Tapxii)iii\>rj was
conceded. A large number of Constantinopolitan
patriarchs of the latter days were condemned. Mar-
tin showed signs, like a second Dioscuros, of ruling
and stirring up the churches of the Orient, but the
emperor Constans, the sovereign of the pope, suc-
ceeded in subduing him (<jo3). Dishonored and
disgraced, he died in the Chersonesus. Maximus
the Confessor also had to suffer. Constans soon
found in Rome more accommodating popes, and
remained until his death (COS) master of the situa-
tion, making the tijpos of importance and putting
forward the reasonable expedient, that the two nat-
ural wills had become, in accordance with the hypo-
static union, one h3'"postatic will.

The reaction which followed in Constantinople is

1.^;^

DEVELOr.MENT OK DotTKINK OK INCARNATION. iiUiJ

nut perfectly clear. Perhaps l)ecauso one needed no IJVirT"'
longer to pay regard t(j the nionophysites, perhaps AK'Ht'hon-
because '' science " was favorable to the doctrine of two
wills, perhaps becau.se men desired to fetter, through
dogmatic concessions, the uncertain Occidental pos-
sessions and bind them more firmly to the capital,
the emperor Constantine Pogonatus made advances
and scnight to entice the powerful pope Agatlujn
to new negotiations. The latter sent a doctrinal
epistle as Leo I. once had, which proclaimed the in-
fallibility of the Roman chair and the dyotheletism.
At the Gth council in Constantino])le (()8(») it was conmii of
carried through after diverse proposals of intermcdi- ""'''*'' ^'^^'
ation and under protest, which however finally ceaseil,
i.e. the formal consequences of the decree of 451
were deduced (two natural 'Vs/r^/zara and two natural

energies «<J««:/';r(ws-, firpizTw^^^ dn.tjti<7rw<;^ dnuy/nrw^; ill

the one Christ ; they were not to be considered as
contradictory, for the human will follows and does
not resist nor contradict, rather is it subject to the
Divine and almighty will; the human will is not
suspended, but, on the other hand, a communication
takes place: It is the will of the God-Logos, just
as the human nature, without suspension, neverthe-
less became the nature of the God-Logos). At
the same time many of the Constantinopolitan ])atri-
archs and pope Honorius were condemned, 'lluis
Rome again dictated its formula, bc'dancod the 5th
council by the 0th and insinuated itself into the
Orient. But the agreement was of short duration.

\ ■

r I

I I

< II

304 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF IXHJMA.

Already at the second Trullan oouiicil in i)\)'Z the
Orient took a stron^j; position against Rome in mat-
ters of cult — and these were already the more de-
cisive things.
'trov.Tsy"" Tho form aids of the Byzantine dogmatics are C)c-
Dauiu8cu8. cidental; but the spirit, which in 4.'U and 5o;3 had
expressed itself, retained in the interpretation of
the formulas the upper hand, and the cultus and
mystic-system have always been understood mono-
physitically. On the one side, this was sht)vvn in the
image-controvers}', on the other, in the Christologic-
al dogmatics of John of Damascus. In spite of the
dyophysitical and dyotheletical formula and the
sharp distinction between nature and person, a fine
ApoUinarianism, or monophysitism, has been here
preserved, in so far as it is taught that the God-
Logos assumed human nature (not of a man) in
such a manner that the same was first individualized
by the God-Logos. That is the intermediate thing
already recognized by Leontius, which has no hypo-
stasis of its own, j-et is also not without one but
possesses in the hypostasis of the Logos its indepen-
dence. Furthermore, the distinction between the na-
tures was adjusted by the doctrine of the -c/>j;f<y/yr^/T£9
and the idiomae-communication. The ixszadotn^ [nlxei-
o)iTt<;^ d>T':do(Tt<i:) of the attributes of the two natures, the
Damascan will so definitely conceive that he speaks
of an £!"9 i'lA^Xa T(uv ./i^/iwv -zj)'.ywi)r,(n'i. The flesh in-
directly became truly God and the Deity pervades the
deitied flesh.

*"'"—^'"

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 305

C.-THE TEMPORAL ENJOYMENT OF REDEMP-
TION.

CHAPTER X.

THE MYSTERIES AND MATTERS AKIN TO THEM.

Already in tho 0th century the dogmatic (level- Trft'iitinn-
opment of tho Greek Church wjih conchuled and "''''»"'•
even before that each advance was obliged to con-
tend against aversion and suspicion. Tho reason
for it lay in tho traditionalism or, more correcth', in
tho ritualism, which more and more gained tho
upper hand.

This ritualism also has a tender, religious, even Knjnymfnt

' '=' ' of thpi

Christian root. It originated in the endeavor to ^'>'*'^*''"'*'''-
point out and realize tho enjoyment of an already
present salvation, which springs from tho same
source from which the future redemption flows — from
the God-incarnate Person of Christ — and which,
therefore, is the same in kind as tho latter. Origin-
ally men thought, touching the present enjoyment of
salvation, more of spiritmd blessings, of knowledge,
of the strengthening of freedom unto good works,
etc. But since tho future redemption was repre-
sented as a mysterious deification*, it was only con-
sistent that the}' should consider the knowledge also
as mysterious and to be communicated by holy con-
secrations, and that, in accordance with the idea of
a future physical union with the Deity, they should

♦ See pape KK), note.
20

' 1

lit

«ii

'If

■f

l! ■ ; i

!■!

Mfttln'His

Ix'CdIlU'H

Myslft-

306 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

rndoavor to verify for t\w present time also the way
unto, and foretaHto of, this divinenoss.

This tenclency, however, leads directly over to the
pa^anizinj^ of (Miristianity or, rather, is already a
S3'mi)t()ni of it. Tho n'i'''r^'ri'i hocomcH fiofTTu^toyiu'^ (ho
latt(>r, however, originally a shadowy union of the
spiritual and sensuous, tends more and more to nia<;ic
and jugglerj'. In this the ritual is the chief thing;
nothing, however, is more sensitive than a cere-
mony; it does not bear the slight(\st change. In so
far now as the formulas of faith lost more and more
their significance as ii.d{ir,(n^ and became in ever
higher degree constituents of the ritual, expressing
at the same time the meaning and purpose of it, ?'.<?.,
to make divine, they permitted no longer of any
change. Wherever the dogma appear valuable
only as a relic of olden times, or only in ritualistic
ceremony, there the history of dogma is at ^in end.
In its place comes the nn/stagogic thcol.jgu, and
Theology, jjjjp^^j ^i^q latter, together and in close union with
scholasticism, took already in the (Uli century the
place of the history of dogma. The mystagogic
theology, however, has two sides. On the one side,
in creating for itself upon the earth a now world
and in making of things, persons and times mys-
terious symbols and vehicles, it leads to the relig-
ion of necromancy, i.e. back to the lowest grade of
religion; for to the masses, and finally even to
theologians, the spirit vanishes and the pJtIegma,
the consecrated matter, remains. As the Neo-

Mysta-

|ig-
of

iO-

DEVELOl'MKNT 01" DOCTHINK OK IN( AKNATION. 307

Platonic pliilosopliy (li'm-nnal* d into n'lij;;i(»us bar-
harisni, so also (irt'clv Cliristiaiiity, under the iii-
lluoiico of tho expiring anticpiity wliich iHtiuratlu-d
to it its highest ideals and idols, became image-
worship. On tho other side, the mystagogic tlieol-
ogy retains for the "knowing oni's " its primitive
pantiieistic germ, tlu; fundamental thought that (iod
and nature, in tho deepest sense, are one, and that
nature is the unfolding of the Di'ity. The (Christian
mystagogic theologians also more or less clearlj'
thought out and rotaininl these ideas. Through speru-
hition and asceticism one can emancii)ate oneself from
all mediums, mediators and vehicles. Mysterioso-
pliy takes the place of the mysteries; those, like every-
thing concrete and historical, become for t\w know-
ing ones pure symbols, and the historical redemp-
tion through Christ especially is explained away.

It is not strange that two such different forms as ranth.>ism,

" Fetishism.

pantheism and fetishism, although balanced by ritu-
alism, should be tho tinal product of the devel(»pnient,
since both wore lodged already in the begiiming of
the movement and are bk)od-relations; then th(>y
have their root in the conception of the substantial
miity of God and nature. Tho history of the devel-
opment of the mysteries and of the theology of mys-
teries, strictly taken, does not belong here, therefore
only a few hints will follow.

1. At the beginning of tlu^ tth century the Church J^'>"*' •','.•'"',
.already possessed a great array of mysteries, the ik.s,"'"tc.
number and bounds of which, however, liad by no

« «

|( ;

308 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

means been definitely determined. Among them
baptism, together with the accompanying unction,
and the eucharist were the most esteemed; from
these also some of the other mysteries have been
evolved. S3^mbolic ceremonies, originall}^ intended
to accompany these mysteries, became independent.
Thus confirmation had its origin, which Cyprian al-
ready numbered as a special " sacramentum^\ Augus-
tine pointed it out as saci\ir.ientiim chrismatis, and
the Areopagite called it /wtrrrj/nnv T-XrjT7,<s!it')f>(>o, Later
men spoke also of a mystery of the sign of the
cross, of relics, of exorcism, of marriage, etc., and
Six iHys- the Areopagite enumerates six mysteries: (I'unia-

xzXD'./ir^/j.i.'iuv. The enumeration was very arbitrary;
myster}^ was anything sensuous whereby something
hCy might be thought or enjoyed. They corre-
spond -^^J to the heavenly mysteries, which have their
sourer in the trinity- and incarnation. As each fact
of -evelation is a mystery, in so far as the Divine
ba. through it entered into the sensuous, so in turn
is each sensuous medium, even a word or action, a
myster}', so soon as the sensuous is a symbol or
veliicle — there has never been a strict distinction be-
tween them — of the Divine. T)ie effects of the mys-
teries were celebrated in the highest terms as union
with the Deity; but since they cannot restore lost
commuiiiou with God (only Christ and freedom are
able to do tiiat) , strict dogmatics was able to say very

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 'M)'J

(P'

•<

11!

little about thcni. The true effect is purely one of
feeling, i.e. is experienced in the fantasy: Men
saw, heard, smelt, and felt the celestial, but a dis-
turbed conscience they could not comfort with the
mysteries, nor did one hardly try to do so.

On this basis, since the coarse instinct of the
masses pressed forward, mysteriosoj^hy was devel-
oped. Its roots are as old as the gentile niiurch and
two converging developments may be discerned, the
Antiochian and the Alexandrian. The first (Ignatius,
the Apostolic Constitutions, Chrysostom) attaches
itself to the cult and priests, tlie second to the true
gnostic, i.e. to the monk. The first sees in Divine
worship and in the priest (bishop) the true bequest
of the God-incarnate life of Christ raid binds the
layman, viewed as entirely passive, to thecultus hier-
archical system, by which one becomes consecrated
to immortality; the second desires to form indepen-
dent virtuosos of religion. The Alexandrian myste-
riosophy is heterodox, but it did not neglect a single
phase of the positive religion, rather did it make
use of them all by the side of the graduated ad-
vancing knowledge (sacrifice, blood, reconciliation,
atonement, purification, perfection, means of salva-
tion, mediator of salvation) ; true, viewing them all
as transition stages, in order to gain through specu-
lation and asceticism a standpoint from which each
vehicle and sacrament, everything holy which ap-
pears under a sensuous cover, becomes profane, be-
cause the soul now lives in the most holy and be-

MysttTi-

osojihy :

Aiil<-

oohidii

ai!«l Alt'X-

uiulriau.

. " )

II < I

!'l

D'onysius

AreopaK-
ita.

Mystery of

the
Eucluirist.

'MO OUTLINES OK THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

cause in each man a Christ should be born ; -ra/woffrj^

The two mystericsophies, the hierarchical and the
gnostic, convcxge in the mysticism of the great un-
known Dionysius Areopagita (preliminary stages
are represented by Methodius, Gregory of Nyssa,
Macarius), who, on the one side, viewed the cidt and
priesthood as an earthly parallel to the heavenly
hierarchy (to the graded world of spirits as the un-
folding of the Deity), on the other, adopted the in-
dividualism of the Neo-Platonic mysticism. Through
Maximus Confessor this combination became the
power which ruled the Church, tried to monarchize
it, and inoculated it with the monkish resistance to
the state — the only form in which the Greek Church
»7as or is able to assert its independence.

The peculiar character of mysteriosophy, as a
speculation regarding the making of the Divine per-
ceptible to the senses and the making of the sensuous
Divine, could in no mysteiy be more strongly ex-
pressed than in the eiichavi 4 (Steitz, Abendmahls-
lehre d. griech Kirche, i. d. Jahrb. f. deutsche
Theol.y Bd. IX-XIIL). Tliis, long since recognized
as the ground upon which the sublimest spiritualism
can extend its hand to the most massive sensualism,
became so develooed, that by it the Christological
formula, the fundamental dogma, appeared alive and
comprehensible. Without giving to the speculation
on the Lord's Supper a strictly instructional cast,
the same was so treated in general, especially after

'^S^M.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 'MX

Cyril of Ab xandria, tljat it was considered as tlio
mystery which rests directly upon the incarnation
and perpetuates the mystery of the ''/i<'>^.'s\ All other
mysteries, in so far as they also contain the blending
into one of the heavenly angl ^prthly, exist in reality
only by reason of the Lord's •oi)per. Here only is
given an express transmiitatio)i of the sensuous into
the divine body of Christ; for this conception gained
more and Uxore ground, abolished symbolism and
finally carried its point altogether. The transub-
stantiation of the consecrated bread into the body of
Christ is the continuation of the process of the in-
carnation. Thereby pure monophijsitic formulas
were used in relation to the Lord's Supper — highly
characteristic — and gradually the conception even
made its way, that the body into which the bread
is transformed is per assiimptionem the very
body of Christ, borne by the virgin, of which for-
merly hard>y any one had thought since the older
theologians also understood under t"/'! Xinnmo some-
thing " pneumatic". But as the Lord's Supper as a
sacrament was united in the closest manner with the
dogma of the incarnation and the Christological for-
mula (hence the sensitiveness of this formula), so was
it likewise connected as a sacrifice with the death on
the cross (repetition of the sacrifice on the cross ; hoAv- ^f''^j|I.'^(!;^i"
ever, the conception has not been so definitely ex- tiVJ'ci ""
pressed in the Greek Church as in the Occident) .
Accordingly it re-enacted the most important histor-
ical events, not as a remembrance, but as a continu-

Trnn-

substunti-

atiou.

,11 '

I
1

1 ■:

t ,

' }

08S.

»■.

I :

1 '•

KMffl

li ; i

Image-
Worsnip,
Supersti-
tion, Poly-
theism.

:U2 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

atiou, i.e. ;i repetition, whercb}'^ those facts were
deprived of their meaning and significance. At the
same time the immoral and irreligious thirst after
" realities " changed the sacred act into a repast, in
which one bit the Deity to pieces with the teeth
(thus already Chrysostom; completion of the doc-
trine of the Lord's Sui)per by John of Damascus).

2. The whole development of Greek Christianity
into image-worship, superstition and poorl}^ veiled
polytheism may, however, also be conceived as the
victory of a religion of the second order, which is
always prevalent in the Church, over the spiritual
religion. The former became legitimized and was
fused with the doctrina xmhlica^ although theolo-
gians enjoined certain precautions. As the pagan
temples wer^ reconsecrated and made into Christian
churches, so was the old paganism preserved as
angel-, saint-, image- and amulet-worship. The re-
ligion whose strength had once been the abomination
of idols, finally surrendered to idols and became in a
certain measure morally obtuse. True, the connect-
ing links are found in the doctrina puhlica itself; for.
Religion of (J) This was constructcd out of tho material of the
order. Qj-gek pliilosophy ; but this philosophy was inter-
twined by a thousand threads with the mythology
and superstition, (2) It sanctioned the Old Testa-
ment, though originally prescribing a spiritual inter-
pretation of it ; but the letter of the Old Testament,
which in fact expressed a subordinate religious stage
of development, became more and more powerful

JJ3lTJC^Hi^.W!«"A'iW^-l-'.WAVf»' '.''■-' "jp^

KStBH^ :.'■■:■

illl

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 31 IJ

and iiuido advauces to tlio inferior tendencies of the
Church, which it then appeared to legitimize, (i5)
The acts of baptism and the Lord's Supper, conceived
as mysteries, opened in general the doors and win-
dows to the inroad of the mystery-nuisance, (-4)
The faitli in angels and demons, handed down from
antiquity and protected by the d()vtvi)ia pnhlica^
grew more and more powerful, was fostered in a
crude form by the monks, in a spiritual form by the
Neo-Platonic theologians, and threatened more and
more to become the true sphere of piety, behind
which the inconceivable God and the (in consequence
of the Church doctrine) just as inconceivable Christ
was hidden in the darkness, (5) The old idea that Worship of

^ ' Saints.

there are " saints " (apostles, prophets, ecclesiastical
teachers, martyrs) htid already very early been cul-
tivated in such a manner that these saints interceded
and made atonement for men and took now more
and more the place of the dethroned gods, joining
themselves to the angel-hosts. Among them Mary or virgin

Mary,

stepped into the fore-ground and she— she alone — has
been specially benefited by the trend of the develop-
ment of the dogma. A woman, a mother now ap-
peared near the Deity, and thereby at last was offered
the possibility of bringing to recognition the thing
after all most foreign to original Christianity — the
Holy, the Divine in female form — Mary became the
mother of God, the one who bore God*, (0) From the ^^ R«Hcs.

♦ (."oiict'rninK angel-worship, in so far as the angels serve as mediutoi's
of the benefits of salvation, see the Areopagite; concerning the spread of
augel-worship (especially of the idea of guardian angels) as early as the

II :

M /

! n

■< y

-(
it

>'m

I' ' *>

Belief in

Mirai'les.

(Jonsultinx

of Onioles,

etc-.

314 OUTLINES OF TFIE HTSTORY OF DOGMA.

earliest times, deatli had been saored ^o Christians as
the birth-hour of true life; accordingly everything
which had any connection with the death of Chris-
tian heroes obtained a real sanctity. The antic^uo
idol and amulet business made itself at home, but as
relic- and bone-worship in the most disgusting form ;
in the contrast between the insignificanc, fright-
ful form and its religious worth Christians made
plain to themselves the loftiness of their faith, and
the more unsesthetic a relic appeared, the higher
must be its worth to those who recognized in the dis-
embodiment and obliteration of all sensuous charms,
the guarantee of its holiness, (I) Finally the Church
opened its doors to that boundless desire to live in
a world of miracles, to enjoj" the holy with the five

h^'i-

< .

; 1

4th century, Roe Didynms, de triiu't. U. , T.— Tlio worship of saints
(churches consecrated to a certain saint) was already by about the year
800 higlily developed ; but in the 4lh centin-y counter efforts were not
wanting (also not concerning angel-worship; see the synod of Liiodicea).
Tile (J \llic pi'iest Vigilantius especially fought against it, as also against
the worship of relics. But the most eminent teachers (Jerome) declared
against Vigilantius and worked out a "tlieology of saints", I'esi'rving to God
the Aarpeia, but conceding to the saints n^ij trxeTCK/j (npo(TKvyr]<TL<:'). The relic
business, already in bloom in the Ith centurj', rose however only in the
nionophysitic age to its full heiglit. Finally each church had to have its
relics, and the 7th canon of tiie Tth coinicil confirmed and solenmly sanc-
tioned the ecclesiastical use of relics. But the jjrineipal part in this reli-
gion of the second order was played by Mary. She alone became a ihxj-
mutical magnitude, cteoToxo?, a watch-word like 6ixoov(tlo<;: "The name of the
bearer of God rtpresents the whole mystery of the incarnation" (.John of
Damascus in liis homilies on Mary). Gen. 3: 3 was referred to her and au
active participatioii of 3Iary in the work of redemption was taught (espe-
cially following Cyril of Alexandria; yet, see already Ireneeus and Atha-
nasius, / .■ brose, JeronuO. Mary obtained a sacred history from conception
to ascension, a di:plicate of the history of Christ (legends and feasts of
Mary) ; she was considered an indispensable mediator. Still with the
Greeks she did not become "queen of heaven " and "mother of sorrows"
as with the Latins (Benrath, Z. Gesch. der Marienverehrung i. d. Stud.
u. Krit. 1880; Gass, Synd)olik der griech. Kirche, S. 183).

DKN'KI.OIVMKNT OF DOCTfMNK or INC AKN'ATION. HIT)

ud.

senses, to recoivo miraculoiis hints from llio Deitv.
Even the most cultured Church fathers of later times
did not know how any longer to discern between the
real and unreal ; they lived in a world of magic and
loosed complet<'ly the tie between religion and moral-
ity (aside from asceticism), joining the latter therebj-
the more closel}' with the sensuous. The ceremonies
out of the gray i)ast (jf religion, little modified, came
to the surface again: Consulting of oracles of all
kinds, judgments of Clod, prodigies, etc. The syn-
ods, originally hostile to these practices, finally con-
sented to them.

The newl}" gained peculiarity of the Greek Church
found its plainest ex})ression in iuKUjc-woraliip and
the imagp-couf rover.stj . After image-worship had
slowly crept into the Church, it received a mighty
invigoration and confirmation, unheard of in anti-
quity, by the dogma of the incarnation and the cor-
responding treatment of the eucharist (since the otli
centur}'). Christ is -^'./.(u-^ of God, and yet a living-
being, yes, r>r'V/^/ 'loiii-ii'j'r,'^ Christ has rendered,
through the incarnation, the Divine apprehensible to
the senses; the consecrated elc^ments are el/.tr^z^ of
Christ, and yet, at the same time, the bod}^ of Christ
itself. These ideas called up a new world for con-
templation. Everj'thing sensuous, which pertained
to the Church, became not onl}- a symbol, but also a
vehicle of holy things ; thus felt the monks and lay-
men and thus taught the theologians. But among
sensuous things the image shows plainest the union

Woishii) in
Churi'li.

I i

U I

t H

^'\

Monasti-
cism.

Image-
Con-
troversy.

:]\(\ OI^TTJNES OF TTIK TITSTOHY OF DOrJMA.

of tlu3 lioly with the material. Images of Christ,
of Mary and of saints were ah'eady in the 5tli (4th)
eentury worshipped after tlie antique fashion; men
were naive enough to fancy themselves now secure
from paganism, and they transferred their dogmatic-
al representation from the deified matter in an esix'-
cial manner to the images, in which — the Aristo
telian scholastics also was called in to aid — they were
able to see the veritable marriage of earthly matter
and the heavenly (holy) form (besides, the supersti
tious belief in images not painted by hand). Monas-
ticism fostered image- worship jmd traded with it ;
scholastics and mj^stics gave it dogmatic form.

But monasticism also advanced the struggle of the
Church toward independence, in contrast with Jus-
tinian's state constitution which fettered the Church.
In the 7th century the ecclesiastico-monkish resist-
ance to Byzantium retreated behind dyotheletism,
just as in the r)th and Gth centuries it had fled
behind monophysitism ; it grew more and more
powerful and sought to gain ecclesiastical freedom,
which the Occident already partly enjoyed. Pow^er-
ful but barbarous emperors endeavored to put an end
to this effort by substituting the army for priests
and monks, and to break the independence of the
Church by striking at its peculiarity — the image-
irorship. Thus originated the frightful image-con-
troversy, which lasted more than a century. In it
the emperors fought for the absolutism of the state,
and had as an ally only a single power, the military;

r !

DEVELOPMENT OF DOC'TlilNE OF IN'CAKNATION. 317

for tho remaining nllies, namely, religious cnJight-
ennieiit and the primitive tradition of the Church,
which spoke against the images, were powerless.
Tho monks and bishops had on their side the culture,
art and science of that time (John Damsc, Thco-
dorus Studita), the Roman bishop and, furthermore,
piety and living tradition; they fought for the cen-
tral dogma, which they saw exemplified in the image-
worship, and for the freedom of the Church. The
latter they could not obtain. The outcome, rather,
was that the Church retained its peculiarity', but
definitely lost its independence with reference to the
state. The Itli council at Nicaea (787) sanctioned

image- worship {ii(y~an;i.!'>v xa\ Ti/iriztxi^v TTfntfTxn'^r/tTt'^ aTo-
\^itici.>^ <)>) /xr^v TT^y xard Tziariv ijiiwv d/.rj>'hvrjV Xarpeiav^ rj Tzpiret
fjidvrj t9j f^zia (pnffzi . . . "fj T7J<i etxoyo'i rt/iij It:), to Trputrd-

ror.ov fh'xfiaivzi). Its logical development in its princi-
pal points was obviously concluded. The Divine and
Holy, as it descended through the incarnation into
the sensuous, created for itself in the Church a sys-
tem of sensuous-supersensuous objects, which offer
themselves for man's gratification. The image-the-
osophy corresponds to the Neo-Platonic idea (joined
with the incarnation-idea) of the One, unfolding him-
self in a multiplicity of graduated ideas (prototypes) ,
reaching down even to the earthly. To Theodorus
Studita the image was almost more important than
the correct dogmatic watch- word; for in the authen-
tic image one has the real Christ and the real holy
thing — only the material is different.

»<
>

i.:^ "

:(l

|! ; '

i -l:']

('lii'islian

Clnirch not
Content

with
System.

318 outlinf:s of the history of dogma.

CHAPTER XI.

CONCLUSION. — SKETCH OF TIIP: HISTORIC BECJIN-
NIN(iS OF THE ORTHODOX SYSTEM.

1. A Christian system upon the foundation of
the four principles: Clod, world, freedom and Holy
Scriptures, tending toward the doctrina publica,
and making use of the t(jtal yield of the r.)j.r,'Uti
Tzainsia^ Ovv^vw bequeathed; yet it was in many de-
tails heterodox and fis a science of the faith it was
intended to outbid faith itself. ^Moreover the idea of
the historical redemption through the true God, Jesus
Christ, was not the all-controlling one.

"I. The Church could not rest satislicd with the
system. It demanded, ( I) The identity of the expres-
sions of faith with the science of faith (especially
since Methodius), (•*) Such a restriction oi the use of
the ' l-y/^^ur, zac'hia that the realistic sentences of the
regula fide i and of the Bible should remain intact
(the opponents of Origen : Epiphanius, Apollinaris,
the monks, Theophilus, Jerome), (;>) The introduction
of the idea of the real and historical redemption
through the God-man as the central idea (Athanasius
and his followers) . These demands, thoroughly car-
ried out, broke down the system of Origen, which at
the bottom was a philosophical system. But break
it down, no one of the euUiuod Christians at lirst
either would or could ; for they estimated it as the

DEVELOPMENT OF DO(THi:^E OF TNVARNATION. 310

science frum which on(» daro not depart and which
the Christian faith needed for its defence.

;3. In conso(iuenco thereof, indistinctness and free-
dom ruled till the end of the 4th century in the Ori-
ental Church, into which, since Constantine, the old
world had gained an entrance. To he sure, through
Arius and Athanasius the idea of redemption had
become a critical lu'oblem, and later it obtained
recognition essentially in the conception \vhich the
Christian faith at that time demanded; but everv-
thing on the periphery was entirely insecure: A
wholly spiritualistic philosophical interpretation of
the Bible stood side by side with a coarse realistic
one, a massive anthropomorphism by the side of a
Christian-tinted Neo-PIatonism, the modified rule of
faith by the side of its letter. Between were innum-
erable shades ; steersman and rudder were wanting,
and the religion of the second order, thinly veiled
paganism, forced itself b}' its own power, not only
into the Church, but also into the Church doctrine.
Right well did the Cappadocians (Gregory of Nyssa)
maintain the scioni -o of Origen in the midst of at-
tacks right and left, and they lived in the conviction
that it was possible to reconcile ecclesiastical faith
with free science. Ecclesiastically inclined laymen
like Socrates acknowledged tliem to be in the right,
and at the same time Greek theohjgy penetrated into
the Occident and became there an important leaven.
But by the side of it there grew u}), especially after
the fall of Arianism, in close alliance with barbar-

Imliatiiu't-

iifss iind

FrtM'iloin

till too.

« i

H I

[I ; t

I''.'

Contt^Ht

AKiiinst

Bystom.

321) Ol TLINKS OF THK HISTORY OK DOCiMA.

ism a inoiikisli and communal orthodoxy, which was
very hostile to the independent ecclesiastical science,
and the latter surely neglected no means of warding
off the heterodox Hellenism. Were there not even
bishops (Synesius), who either gave a different in-
terpretation to the principal dogmas, or denied them?
4. Under such circumstances the situation nar-
rowed down to a contest against Origon. His name
signified a principle, the well-known use of the
'f^Xr^vcxTj rat'hia in ecclesiastical science. In Palestine
it was the passionate, learned and narrow Epipha-
nius, who disturbed the circles of the monkish ad-
mirers of Origen, together with bishop John of
Jerusalem. In Egypt the bishop Theophilus found
himself obliged, in order to retain his influence, to
surrender Origen to the monks and to condemn him.
This is one of the most consecjuential facts in the
history of theology. Of not less conseciuence was it,
that the greatest theologian of the Occident (Jerome),
living in the Orient, once an admirer of Origon,
made common cause with Theophilus, in order to
preserve his own ecclesiastical authority, and stamj^ed
Origen as a heretic. In the controversy into which
he on that account fell with his old friend Rufinus,
the Roman bishop took a part. Origen was also con-
demned in Rome (3U9) and Rufinus was censured.
However, it did not come as yet to general ecclesias-
tical action against Origen. The controversy was
lost sight of in the contest of Theophilus against
Chry SOS torn. Even in the 5tli and 6th century Ori-

DKVKI.Ol'MKNT oK DOCTKINK oV INCAUNATIOS, 321

gen liad nmnoroUH lulmirors amoiij^^ tlu' monks and
laymen in the Orient, and liis lictcrodoxios wore
partly hushed up l)y them, partly approved.

The great controversy ahout tlu' (Miristolo^ieal 'S'n'^^"

trnvt'fmii'iJ
ill tlu' .Mil
O'litury.

dogma in the .jth century next silenced all other con- in'ui.'Mi'i

tests. But the dill'erenco hetween the Alexandrians
and the Antiochians was also a general scientific one.
The former took their position upon tradition and
8i)ccuhition (concerning the ri'alistically conceived
idea of redemi)tit)n), counting still on some adherents
on the left wing who inclined toward the ( )rigen-
istic Nco-Platonic philosophy and who were tolerated
if thoy hid their heterodoxies Ix^hind th<' mysticism
of the cnlt ; the latter wore soher exegetes with a
critical tendency, favoring the philosophy of Aris-
totle, but rejecting the spiritualizing method of Ori-
gen. The heterodox element in the Alexandrians,
in so far as they had not fully thrown themselves into
the arms of traditionalism, pointed still in the direc-
tion of pantheism (re-interpretation of the rcfjnla) ;
in the Antiochians it lay in the conception of the
central dogmas. Forced to stand on guard against
the old heresies which had wholly withdrawn
to the East, the Antiochians remained the "anti-
gnostic " theologians and boasted that they carried
on the battles of the Lord. The last of them, Thco-
doret, appended to his compendium of heretical fables
a 5th Book: " ''^£.''wv l^oyftdztuj ircTnurj^^ which must bo
recognized as the first systcmjitic effort after Origen,

and which apparently had great influence upon John
31

Thfo-

(liir'ffs

C<'iii|"'"
diuiii.

• i

,!l

V '

• , I

Mystcri-

<)S()i)hy ;in(i

Scholfisti-

cisiii.

322 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

of Damascus. The "epitome" is of great iiiipoi-
tance. It unites the trinitariaii and Christological
dogmas with the whole circle of dogmas depending
upon the creed. It shows an attitude as obviously
Bii>lical, as it is ecclesiastical and reasonable. It
keeps everywhere to the "golden mean". It is al-
most complete and also pays especial regard once more
to the realistic escliatology. It admitted none of the
offensive doctrines of Origen, and yet Origen was
not treated as a heretic. A system this epitome is
not, but the uniform soberness and clearness in the
treatment of details rnd the careful Biblical proofs
give to the whole a unicpie stamp. It could not of
course satisfy; in the first place, on account of the
person of its author, and then l^ecause everythiig
mystical and Neo-Platonic is wanting in its doctrinal
content.

(j. After the Chalcedon creed all science came to
a stand-still in the orthodox Church : There were no
loiiger '' Antiocliians", or " Alexandrians " ; free iheo-
logical work died out almost completely. However,
tiie century preceding the 5tli council shows two
remarkable appearances. First, a mysteriosophy
gained mere and more ground in the Church, which
did not work at dogmas but stood with one foot upon
the ground of the religion of the second order (super-
stition, cult), with the other upon Neo-Platonisni
(the pseudo-Areopagite) ; second, a schohtsticis}))
grew up, which ]»rcsu])p()sed the dogma as given auJ
appropriated it by means of apprehensible distinc-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION, [i'lo

Coll-

li'iiiticd by

.-.til
Coiiucil.

tions (Leoiitius of Byzantium), in the spirit of both
tendencies Justinian carried ca his religious politics.
Re'ying thereon he cl(\-ed the school of Athens,
also the old ecclesiastical schools, the Origenistic and
Antiochian. Tlie 5th council sanctioned the con-
demnation of Origen (in 15 anathemas his heterodox
sentences were rejected) and the condemnation of the
" three chapters". Henceforth there was no longer a
theological science going back to first principles.
There existed only a mysticism of cult (truly, with a
In.lden heterodox trend) and scholasticism, both in
certain waj^s in closest connection (Maximus Con-
fessor). Thereby a condition was reached for which
the " conservatives " at all times had longed ; but
through the condemnation of Origen and the Anti-
ochians one was now defenceless against the massive
Biblicism and a superstitious realism, and that was
a result which originally men had not desired. In
the image-worship, on the one side, and the fussy
literal translation of Gen. 1-3, on the other, is re-
vealed the downfall of theological science.

7. As to the !i>'o'tr,<T'.<, the Capjuidocians (in addition ("appa<iooi.
to Athanasius and Cyril) above all were considered 'MaxhUus'
authoritative; as to the iiorrzayiDyia^ the Areopagite liruiciiry-
and Maximus; as to (f.Xonuifia Aristotle; as to the Auth..ri-

' ' ' •> •> ties.

n/t'.Xiu^ Chryjiostom. But the man who compreliended
all these, who transferred the scholastico-dialectic
method, which Leontius had apj)lied to the dogma
of the incarnatio'.i, to the wliole compass of "the di-
vine dogmas " as Tlieodoret had established them,

11' '

'':(

'}■;

i 1

'-''f '4

n ■ '■■r

.;•

John of
Dainiiscus
aii<l <ti-(M'k
OrtlHxlox

yysU'ui.

324 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Avas John of Damascus. Through him the Greek
Church gained its orthodox system, but not the Greek
Church alone. The work of John was none the less
important for the Occident. It became the founda-
tion of medifcval theology. John was above all a
scholastic. Each difficulty was to him only a chal-
lenge to artfully split the conceptions and to find a
new conception to which nothing in the world corre-
sponds, except just that difficulty which i^ to be
removed by the new conception. The fundamental
question also of the science of the Middle Ages was
already propounded by him : The question of nomi-
alism and realism ; ho solved it by a modified Aris-
totelianism. All doctrines had already been provided
for him; he finds them in the decrees of councils
and the works of the acknowledged fathers. He
considered it the duty of science to work them over.
Thereby the two principal dogmas were placed within
the circle of the teachings of the old anti-gnostically
interpreted symbol. Of the allegorical explanation
of the Holy Scriptures a very modest use is made.
The letter of Scripture dominates on the whole, at
any rate much more decidedly than with the Cappa-
docians. In consequence of this, the natural theol-
ogy is also closely concealed ; highly realistic Scrip-
ture narrations, which are piously received, twine
themselves around it. But what is most perplexing
— the strict connection which in Athanasius, Apol-
linaris and Cyril unites the trinity and the incarna-
tion, in general, the dogma which is associated with

U J!

■ .-.f/^fhU'iTM'- -■■'^^#i

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OK INCAKNATION. ;V^5

the lM?nefit of salvation, is entirely (liss(jlv(Hl. John
has innumerable dogmas, which must he believed;
but they stand no longer ckvir, under a consistent
scheme. The end to which the dogma once contrib-
uted as a means still remained, but the means are
chcinged; it is the cult, the mysteries, into which the
4th book also overflows. Conseciuently the system
lacks an inward, vital unity. In reality it is not an
explanation of faith, but an explanation of its pre-
suj)positions, and it has its unity in the form of treat-
ment, in the high cuifiipiity of the doctrines and in
the HoJfi Script ures. The dogmas have become the
sacred legacy of the classical antiquity of the Church ;
but they have sunk, so to speak, into the ground.
Image-irorship^ vrijsficism and scJiuhisticisni dom-
inate the Church.

Jolin Re-

tpiiivs
Faith in hi-
Fiiiiner.ihle

1 1

4 I

:;i '

BOOK II.

EXPANSION AND RECASTING OF THE DOGMA
INTO A DOCTRINE CONCERNING SIN, GRACE
AND THE MEANS OF GRACE UPON THE BASIS
OF THE CHURCH.

I ' i

' ii

CHAPTER L

HISTORICAL SURVEY

Baur, Vorl. ub. d. christl. DG.. 2. Bd., 1800. Bacli, Die
DG. des MA., 2 Bdc, 18753 scq. Scinvane, I)(^. der iiiiUl.
Zeit, 1882. Thomasius-Seeborj--. Die cliristl. !)(}., 2. Bd., 1.
Abtli., 1888.

Basal Eie- r M HE liistoiy of dogiiiJi in the Occident durin

nionts oi' I

History of J_ tlio tlioiisfind vcars between the migration of

DoKiuii 111 "^ ^

olc "eiit. ^j^^ nations and the Reformation was evolved from
the following elements : (1) From the distinctive pecu-
liarit}' of Occidental Christianity as represented by
TertuUian, C^'prian, Lactantiiis, etc., ('2) From the
Hellenic theology introduced by the theologians of
the -itli century, ('>) From Augustinianism, i.e. from
the Christianity of Augustine, (4) — in a secondary
degree — From the new needs of the Romano-Ger-
manic nations. The Roman bishop became in an
increasing measure the decisive .authority. The his-
tory of dogma in the Middle Ages is the history of

326

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 327

the dogma of the Roman Church, although tlicology
had its home, not in Italy, but in North Africa
and France.

2. The carrying out of spiritual monotheism, the
disclosure of individualism and the delineation of tlie
inward process of the Christian life (sin and grace)
indicate the importance of Augustine as a pui)il of
the Neo-Platonists and of Paul. But since he also
championed the old dogma and at the same time
brought forward new problems and aims for the
Church as the kingdom of God upon the earth, his
rich mind bore within itself all the tensions whose
living strength determined the history of dogma in
the Occident. Even the system of morality and the
sacramental superstition, which later almost absorbed
Augustinianism, were placed by Augustine among
the first principles of his doctrine of religion. As a
new element, Aristotelianism was added during the
later Middle Ages, and this strengthened the afore-
said sj'stem of morjility, but on the other hand it
beneficially limited the Neo-Platonic mysticism.

3. The piety of Augustine did not live in the old
dogma, but he respected it as authority and used it
as building-material for his doctrine of religion. Ac-
cordingly dogma in the Occident became, on the one
side. Church discipli)ie and law and, on the other,
far-reaching fransfonnaiions within theolog}/ it-
self. The consequence was that during the Mid-
dle Ages, in spite of all changes, men surrendered
themselves to the illusion of simply persisting in the

Aupis-
tiije's
Work.

Ecclesias-
tical Dis-
cipline and

11)11

TheoloKy.

Pietism,
Sacra-
ments, Sci-
entific
Theology.

Divisions
in History

of Dogma
of Sin. etc.

328

OUTLINES OF THK HISTOKV OF DOGMA.

dogma of the otli contuiy, becniiso the new was either
not recognized as such, or was reduced to a mere ad-
ministrative rule in the indeed still controverted au-
thority of the Roman bishop. The Reformation, i.e.
the Tridentine council, first put an end to this state
of affairs. Only since the IGth century, therefore,
can the history of dogma in the ]Middle Ages be sep-
arated from the history of theologij, and described.

4. Especially to be observed are, (1) The history of
pietism (Augustine, Bernard, Francis, so-called re-
formers before the Reformation) in its significance
for the recasting of dogma, (2) The doctrine of the sac-
raments, (3) Scientific theology (Augustine and Aris-
totle, fides et ratio) in its influence upon the free cul-
tivation of doctrine. Back of these developments
there lay in the later Middle Ages the question of j^er-
sonal surety of faith and of personal Christian
cliarac!ter, which was repressed by the active power
of the visible Church. The latter was the silent co-
efficient of all spiritual and theological movements
until it became plainly audible in the contest over
the right of the pope.

5. Division: (1) Occidental Christianit}'- and Oc-
cidental Theology before Augustine, (2) Augustine,
(3) Provisional Adjustment of Pra)-A';gustinian and
Augustinian Christianity until Gregory I., (4) The
Carolingian Revival, (5) The Clugnian-Bernardine
Epoch, (G) Epoch of the Mendicant Orders, of Scho-
lasticism and of the Reformers before the Reforma-
tion.

^ifTOpsN^/?»''?^»"'^<f^"f'r'f;''':5(r';

DEVELOl'.MENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. ^'^O

CHAPTER II.

OCCIDENTAL CHKISTL^ NITY AND OCCIDENTAL THEO-
LOCJIANS HE^X)RE AUGUSTINE.

Noldechen, Tertullian, 1890. O. Ritsclil, Cyprian, 1885.
Forster, Ambrosius, 1884. Reinkeus. IliUirius, 18(11. Zrickler,
HieronymuH, 186."). Volter, Douatisnius, 1882. Nitzscli,
Boetliiiis, 1800.

1. Occidental Christianity, in contradistinction T'Ttuiiiau,
to Oriental, was determined by iico pers()iiuliUi\^ — 'i'oIk's."
Tertullian tind Augustine — and, in addition, by the
policy, conscious of its aim in serving and ruling, of
the Roman Church and its bishops.

'Z. The Christianity of Tertullian was determined C'liristian-

'' ity of

through contrast by the old, enthusiastic and strict '^^'■^"""^°-
faith and the anti-gnostic rule of faith. In accord-
ance with his juristic training he endeavored to secure
everywhere in religion legal axioms and formulas,
and he conceived the relationship between God and
man as that of civil law. Furthermore his theology
bears a sijUogisfic-dialectical stamp ; it does not phil-
osophize, but it reasons, alternating between argu-
ments ex aiicforifafe and e raff-one. On the other
hand, Tertullian frequently strongly impresses one
by his psychological obserrafion and indeed by an
empirical psijcliologtj. Finall}- his writings man-
ifest aprocf/caZ, et'«/ify^//c'rt/ attitude, determined by
the fear of God as the Judge, and an insistance upon
will and action, which the speculative Greeks lacked.

, 1 -

I 1

fJSi

I.N:H>

■ li'^i

I ' 'b-

\ \ a

• m I

iff 1^

t I

,>»:

( !

I ,,-,

Natiinvl-
i/t'il ill

< l« ciLU'Ilt

riaii.

:yM) OUTLINES OF THE IIISTOUV OF DOGMA.

Ill all these points and in their mixture his Chris-
tianity became typical lor the Occident.

',). The Christianity of Tertullian, blunted in many
resi)ects and nK)rally shallow ('' de opere et eleemos-
Ijnis "}, yet clerically worked out (*' de unitate eccle-
s/«^"), became naturalized in the Occident through
Cyprian, the great authority of Latin Christendom;
side by side with it that Ciceronian theology v/itli
apocalyptical additions, represented by Minuciusand
Lactantius, maintained itself. Religion was "th(3
law", but after the Church had under compulsion de-
clared (dl sins pardonable (Novatian crisis), religion
was also the ecclesiastical penitential institute. No
theologian, liowever, before Augustine was able to
reallv adjust '•/e:t'" and "venia". In Rome jind
Carthage they labored at the strengthening of the
Cli\urch, at the composing of an ecclesiastical rule of
morals possible of fulfilment, and at the education of
the community through divine service and peniten-
tial rules. The mass-Christianity created the clergy
and the sacraments, the clergy sar .nified the mon-
grel religion for the laity. The formulas wee al-
most entirely TertuUianic, yet his spirit was being
crushed out,

4. The Occident and the Orient were already sep-
arated in the age of Constantine, but the Arian eon-
nasticism test brought them again together. The Occidental

from

Orient, orthodoxy supported the Oriental and received from
it two great gifts: Scientific (Origenistic) theology
and 7nonasticism. These were in reality a single

Occident

Receives

Origenistic

Theology

DEVKLOl'MKN'I OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. XM

Kle

gift, for moiiasticisni (tlio idoal of divinely iiisi)iiv(l
celibacy in close union with (jod) is the i)ractic;d ap-
plication of that ''science". Thus the Occidental
theology of the last half of the 1th century is re])re-
scnted by two lines which converge in Augustine:
The line of the Greek scholars (Hilary, N'ictor-
inus Rhetor, Rufinus, Jerome) and the line of the
genuine Latin scholars (0[)tatus, Pacian, Pruden-
tius). In both lines, however, must Ambrose be
named as theologicall}' the most imnortant fore-
runner of Augustine.

5. The Cireek scholars transplanted the scientific
(pneumatic) ex<'gesis of Philo and Origen and the
speculative orthodox theolog}' of the Cappadocians
into the Occident. With the first they silenced the
doubts in regard to the Old Testament and met the
onset of Manicliaeism, vv^th the second they, espe-
cially Ambrose, relaxed the tension which existc.
until after the year 08], between the orthodoxy of the
Orient and that of the Occident. Through three suc-
cessive contributions Greek speculation entered into
the theology of the Occident, (1) Through Ambrose,
Victorinus and Augustine, {'I) Through Boethius in
the Gth centur}' (here Aristotelian), (:>) Through the
Areopagite in the l>th century. In Victorinus is al-
ready found that combination of Neo-Platonism and
Paulinism, which forms the foundation of the Au-
gustinian theology; in Ambrose is already conspicu-
ous that union of speculation and religious individ-
ualism, which characterizes the great African.

Amhroso,

Vicfdi-.ims.

Aii^rustiiif;

lUictliiiis,

tlic Ai'fo-

I t

i;v

Prohh'iu of

Lutiii

Church.

Donntist

CVm-
troversy.

nna OTTLINKS or TIIK IIISTOUY OF IKKJMA.

0. Tlio real prohk'in of tlu; Latin Church was the
application of thi> Christian hiw, and the ecclesiasti-
cal treatment of sinners. In tlie Orient they laid
j^reater weight upon tiie effects of the cultus as a
single institution and upon silent self-education
through asceticism and prayer; in the Occident they
had a greater sense of standing in religious relations
to law, in which they were responsible to the Church,
but also might expect from it sacramental and pre-
catory assistance through individual appro})riation.
The sense of sin as open guilt was more strongly
developed. This reacted upon their conception of the
Church. As regards the development of the latter,
Optatus {de scJusniafe Don at isf a rum) was the fore-
runner of Augustine, as regards the stricter concep-
tion of sin, Ambrose.

The Donatist controversy, in which the ]\[ontanist
and N(^vatian controversies were continued under a
])eculiar limitation, had its roots in personal (juar-
r(»ls ; but it soon acquired an importance on principle.
The Donatist party (in the course of development it
became an African national party, assumed in oppo-
sition to the state, which oppressed it, a free, eccle-
siastical attitude and even cultivated a revolutionarj'-
enthusiasm) denied the validity of an ordination
administered by a traitor, and therefore also the
validity of the sacraments which a bishop, conse-
crated by a traitor, administered (consequently the
demand for re-baptism) . It was the last remnant of
the old demand that in the Church not only the in-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRTXE OF SIX, ETC. 'Xi^

I*'

stitution, but above all Ibo persons iDUst be lioly,
and the Donatists were able to appeal for tluMr tlieses
to the celebrated Cyprian. At least a minimum of
personal wortliiness in tlie elerj^y sbould still be
necessary, in order tliat tlie Cluu'cb niij^bl remain
the true Church. In opi)()sition to it the C\itholics
drew the conscipiences of the* "objective" Church
idea. Optatus above all asserted that the truth and <^ptaiuH
holiness of the Church resides in the sacraments, and
that therefore the j)ersonal (luality of the adminis-
trator is immaterial {"ccclcsin nna est, cuitifi sanc-
titas da sacranwnti.s colli(jiffn\ iion de sn])('rhia
persoitanun ponderatu)''') ; he furthermore showed,
that the Church, in contrast with the conventicle of
the Donatists, held the guarantee of its truth in its
Catholicitij. They also hit upon jui evangelical prin-
ciple in so far as they emphasized /« /7// at the side
and with the sacrament, in oppt)sition to personal
sanctity. Thus already prior to Augustine the found-
ation for the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Church
and the sacraments was laid by Optatus. But Am- Ambrosp.
broso especially had emphasized faith in connection
with a deeper conception of sin. Since Tertullian
the conception of sin as vitinni ori(/i)iis and as sin
against Godwim known in the Occident. Ambrose
extended the view in both directions and ai)preciated
accordingly the importance of the Pauline idea of
gratia, just ijicalio, and remissio pccrnfontm (" //-
lf(d, miln prodest, quod iion justijicanntr ex operi-
bus leyis . . . gloriahor in Cltvisiu; tiougloriabor,

I .

! i

3:34 OUTLINES OF TIIK HISTOKY OF IXXiMA.

quid icstns snnt^ .scd (jlorifthor, </ni(i rcdempttis
.s/n//"). It was of oiKx-lial significance that people
in the Occident l)ecani(' attentive to Pauline ideas of
sin and graci', law and gospel, at the very time
when they externalized the conception of th(* Church
and created a doctrine of the sacraments. Ambrose
himself, it is true, was strongly influenced hy the
common Catholic views respecting law, virtue and
merit.

.' '■i^

ivcuiiar- The more vital conception of God, the strong feel-
it it>s of ' ' *^

niHstiai!- '**l^ ^^ responsibility to the Judge, the consciousness
' ^' of God as a moral Power restrained or relaxed by no
speculations concerning nature, the conception of
Christ as the man whose work for us possesses in the
sight of God an infinite value, the placafio {satis-
f actio) Dc^i" through his death, the Church as a peda-
gogical institution securely relying ui)on the means
of salvation (the sacraments), the Holy Scripture as
lex Dei, the symbol as the sure content of doctrine,
the conceiving of the Christian life from the points of
view of guilt, atonement and merit, even if conceived
more ecclesiasticallj^ than religiously, — in these are
represented the peculiarities of Occidental Chris-

Aiisustino tianity prior to Augustine. He affirmed and yet

Altiniis

aii.i I raus- transformed them. Above all the soteriological ques-
Tiiem. tion awaited a solution. By the side of Maniclijiean,
Origenistic-Neo-Platonic and stoic-rationalistic con-
ceptions of evil and of redemption there dickered

-J .V'-?*''-**-"*'' ■^'" '■'

I)KVEL()PMKAT oK DOCTHTNK OF STN, ETC. ?>''U)

alsoiR'ar the yfar KM) lu>ro ami tlicn^ in the Occident
PiiulinL' conceptions, wliicli, jih a rule, covered moral
laxities, yet nevertheless in sonic represi-ntatives
wore exj)ressions fur evangelical convictions which
did not harnioni/e with the times and would thero-
t'oro of necessity he fatal to the (^-itholic; (*hurch (Jo-
vinian). If one considers in addition that ahout the
year 400 paganism was still a jtower, one can com-
prehend what a prol)h>m awaited Augustine! He
would not have been able to solve it lor the whole
Occidental Church, had the latter not been still a
lUiO; at that time. The Western Roman (>mpire
still exi.sted, and it almost seems as tliough its misi-r-
al)lo existence had only been prolonged to make the
world-historical work of Augustine possible.

CHAPTER HI.

THE WORLD-HISTORICAL POSITION OP AUGUSTINE
AS REFORMER OF CHRISTIAN PIETY.

Bindormann, dor li. Au^-, ^ Bdo., 1S44-09. B(")lirin^rr,
AuRUstiu, 2. And., ISTTf. R«Hik'r, AuKiust. Studicn, ISST.
llavnack, Au^'s Coiifcssiouen, 1888. Bigg, Tlie Christian
Platonists of Ak'x., 188v.

Onp] maj" seek to construct Augustinianism fi-om
the premises of the current Occidental Christianit}'
(see the Tirevious cha])ter) or from the course of the
training of Augustine (the pagan father, tlu^ ])ious
Christian mother, Cicero's Hovtcnsius, Manichansni,
Aristotelianism, Neo-Platonism with its mysticism

I'.lpriicnts
III AiiKW^-
(i'lianism.

t ; ,

It < ";

I Hi

AuRustine
Redis-
covered

Kelif,'ion.

United Re-
ligion and
Morality.

>[a(le Re-

lifjion a

Thine of

the Heart.

33G OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

aiiid skepticism, the influcTice of Ambrose and of
monasticism), but neither of these methods of proced-
ure, nor even both of them, will entirely accomn^^'^h
clic end in view. Augustine in religion discovered
religion ; he recognized his heart as the lowest, the
living God as the highest good; he possessed an en-
chanting abilitv and facility for expressing inward
observations: In this consist his individuality and
his greatness. In the love of God and in the sub-
dued grief of his soul he found that elation which
lifts man al)ove the world and makes him another
bciiigy while prior to him theologians had dreamed
that man must become another heincj in order to be
civile to be saved, or had contented themselves with
striving after virtue. He separated nature and grace,
but bound together religion and morality and gave to
the idea of the good a new meaning. He destroyed
the phantom of the popular antique psychology and
moralism; he discarded the intellectualism and
optimism of antiquit}', but allowed the former to re-
vive again in the pious thought of the man who foTind
in the loving God true existence; and in terminat-
ing Christian pessimism, he at the same time passed
beyond it through the surety of pardoning grace.
But more than all, he held before every soul its own
glory and responsibility — God and the soul, the soul
ar.d its God. He rescued religion from its com-
munal and cultus form and restored it to the heart
as a gift and as a gracious life. Love, unfeigned
humility and strength to overcome the world, these

DEVELOPME'^IT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 337

Prnp-An-

fiustinian

Piety.

are the elements of religion and its blessedness ; they
spring from the actual possession of the loving God.
" Happy are the men who consider Thee their
strength, who from their heart walk in Thy steps".
This message Augustine preached to the Christianity
of his time and of all times.

1. The Pra^-Angiistinian piety was a wavering be-
tween fear and hope. Zt Uccd not in the faith.
Knowing and doing good, it taught, brings salvation,
after that mari has received forgiveness for past sins
through baptism ; but man does not experience sal-
vation. Neither baptism nor asceticism freed from
fear; men did not fe(^l strong enough to trust in their
own virtue, nor guilty and Ix'lieving env)ugli to take
comfort in the grace of God in 'Christ. Fear and
hope remained ; they v;ere tremendous forces. They
shook the w^orld and built the Church; Imt they were
not able to create for the individual a blessed life.
Augustine advanced from sinsto.s'/yi and guitt^ from ^"''^,^,"*'
baptism to grace. The exclusiveness and firmness
with which he affiliated the guilty man and the liv-
ing God is the new teaching which distinguishes
him from all his predecessors. " Against Thee, Thee
only, have I sinned" — "Thou, O Lord, hast created
us in thy likeness, and our heart is restless till it
finds its rest in Thee" — '"da quod iiibes, et tube
quod vis " — " eo, quod quiaque novif, non fruitiir^
nisi et iddiligit, neque quis</uaiu in eOy quad per-
cipit, pcnnauet n isi dilectione'\ This is the mighty
concord which his ear caught from tlie Holy Scri})-

Fear nnd
HoiK".

_»

338 OUTLINES OP THE IIISTOKY OF DOGMA.

All Sin is

Sm
Against

(J 0(1.

Milii Ad-
liiiei'fM'e
Dt'o Bo-

nuni Est.

(xratia
(ir'iUis
l);itu.

tiires, from the deepest contempkition of the human
heart and from the speculation concerning the first
and hist things. In a spirit devoid of God r<// is sin;
that the Sjyirit exists is the onl}' good remaining.
Sin is the sphere and the form of the inner life of
every natural man. Furthermore, all sin is sin
against God; for a created spirit has only o?ic last-
ing relationship, njuncly that to (rod. Sin is the
disposition to be an independent being {.su2)crbia) ;
therefore is its form desire and unrest. In this un-
rest is revealed the never appeased lufit and fear.
The latter is evil, the former when striving after
bliss (blessedness) is good, but when striving after
perishable goods is evil. We iniisf strive to he happt/
{^' infelices esse nolumus sed nee velle possniiius^")
— this striving is the life bestowed upon us by God
which cannot be lost — but there is only one good, one
bliss and one rest: "" Jlihi adhaerere deo honum
est.^' Only in the atmosphere of God does the soul
live and rest. But the Lord who created us has re-
deemed us. Through grace and love which have
been revealed in Christ, he calls us ])ack h'om. dis-
traction to himself, makes c.r nolenfihus rolentes and
bestoAVS upon us thereby an in{'om})i'ehensiblc new
being which consists of faith cind love. These ong-
inate in God ; they are the means by which the living
God imparts himself to us. But faith is faith in the
'' gralict gratis datcC., and love is joy in God blended
with that humility which renounces all that is indi-
vidual. The soul regards these favors as a perpetual

Ing-

oing
I the
(led
lidi-

i;ui I'it'ty
Ktiunlai'il

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. o^O

gift and a holy mystery, in whicli it ac(iiiires every-
thing that God requires; for a heart endowed with
faith and love actjuires that justice which ])revails
before God and possesses that peace which exalts
above unrest and fear. It cannot indeed for a mo-
ment forget 1hat it is still entangled with the world
and in sin, 3'et it always associates grace with sin.
Sin and misery overcome by faith, humility and love
— that is Christian piety. In the absorbing thoughts
of faith which thus continually recur the soul is at
rest and yet it ever strives irrepressibly upward.

In this mode of feeling (uid thinking religion dis-
closed itself more deeply, and the Augustinian type
of piety became the authoritative standard in the Occident.
Occident till the Reformation, yes even till this day;
however a qniefistic^ one might almost say a nar-
cotic element is hidden therein which is not found
in the Gospel.

'i. In the foregoing the piety of Augustine is only „r'»""^i'f:
one-sidedly defined. There was also in his i)i(^ty a
CatiwUc spirit; yes, he first created that intermin-
gling of the freest, individual surrender to tlu^ Divine
with the constant, obedient submission totheCluu-ch
as an institution endowed with the means of grace,
so characteristic of Occidental Catholicism. In de-
tail the following points are esj^ecially to be empha-
sized, in which he affirmed the "(^itholic" element,
and even enhanced the sane: (I) Kirsi, h(» trans-
formed the authority of Uh' Cliiitch into a religious
power and gave to practical religion a doctrine con-

liis I'icly.

Miiliniiiy
Cliiiich.

1 I

M'i

I r

tlM

Cliiiirli

Orpan of

Grace.

G.id Ex-

lor (irace
:\ui\ Sacra-

lIliMltS.

340 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

cerning the Church. In this he was guided by two
considenitions, viz. : Skepticism and an appreciation
of the vahie of ecclesiastical communion as an histor-
ical power. In the first place, he was convinced that
the isolated individual could not by any means arrive
at a full and safe understanding of the truth of the
revealed teaching — it presents too many stumbling-
blocks; like as he therefore threw him.self into the
arms of the authority of the Church, so he taught in
general, that the Church stands for the truth of
the faith, tchere the individual is uot able to rec-
ognize the same, and that accordingly acts of faith
are at the same time acts of obedience. In the sec-
ond place, while breaking with moralism he recog-
nized that the gratia had had an historical effect and
had made the Church its organism. Insight into the
position of the Church in the tottering Roman em-
pire strengthened this view. But not only as skeptic
and historian did Augustine recognize the import-
ance of the Church, but also by virtue of his strong
piety. This piety wanted external authority as
every living religious faith has always wanted it and
will want it. Augustine found it in the testimony
of the Church. {2) Although he unequivocally ac-
knowledged in his Confessions: Religion is the pos-
sessing of the living God, yet in the interpretation
of his theology lie exchanged the living God for
the gratia, the latter for the sacraments, and thus
compressed, as it were, that which is most living
an;1 most free into a material benefit entrusted to the

DEVELOPMENT OF DDCTRINE OF SIN, ET(". :)1 1

Church. Misled by the burning conflicts of the time
(Donatist controvers}') he thus paid the heaviest
tribute to current ideas and founded the sacramental
Church of the Middle Ages. But wherever he goes
beyond the sacraments back to God himself, there
in subsequent times he has always been in da]ig(>r
of neutralizing the importance also of Christ and of
losing himself in the abyss '^^ the thought of the
sole-efficiency of God (doctrine of predestination).
(;j) Although he acknowledged v ith all his heart D(;^tnneof
the gratia gratis data and, consequently, the sover-
eignty of faith, yet he also united with it the old
scheme, that the ultimate destiny of the single indi-
vidual depends upon " merits " and upon these onl5\
He accordingly saw in the merit a resulting ii-om
the fides caritate fontiata, which indeed are Dei
munera, the aim of all Christian development, and
he thereby not only made it easy for futurity to re-
tain the old scheme under the cover of his words,
but he himself also failed to perceive the real essence
of faith {i.e. steadfast confidence in God, result-
ing from the assurance of the forgiveness of sin) as
the highest gift of God. His doctrine, however, of
instilled love was neutral as regards the historical
Christ. (4) Although Augustine was able to testify ^'^^JJ;;""//''
to the joy of that blessedness which the Christian ^'"" '^'^''"
already possesses in faith and in love, yet he was
not able to present a definite aim to the present life;
he shared in general the traditional Catholic disposi-
tion of mind, and the quietism of his piety imparted

:342 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

to Christian actloitij no new impulses. That it
shoukl receive such through the work " tie civitate
dei " was in reality not intended by Augustine.

Augustine's theology is to be understood upon the
basis of the peculiar form of his piety. His religious
theories are in part nothing else than theoretically
explained frames of mind and experiences. But
in these were also collected the manifold religious
experiences and moral reflections of the old world :
The psalms and Paul, Plato and the Necj-Platonists,
the moralists, Tertullian and Ambrose, — all are
found again in Augustine.

I v

AufTUstine
UiiilU's
C'huroJi

Duotriues.

His Doe
trine, how-
ever. Com-
plicated.

CHAPTER IV.

THE WORLD-HISTORTCxVL POSITION OP AUGUSTINE
AS TEACHER OF THE CHURCH.

The ancient Church expounded its theology from
the centres of Christology and the doctrine of
freedom (doctrine of morals) ; Augustine drew the
two centres together. TJie good became to him the
axis for the contemplation of all blessings. Moral
good and redemptive good should include eacli other
{ipsa virtus et praemium virtutis). He brought
dogmatics down from the heavens ; yet did not dis-
card the old conception but amalgamated it with
the new. In his interpretations of the symbol this
union is most clearly manifest. Through his prse-
Catholic development and conversion, then through

devp:lopment of doctrine of sin, etc. 'M')

his conflict witli Donatism and Polagianism, Cliris-
tianity appeared to him in a new forir , but inas-
much as ho considered the synib(3i as the essence of
doctrine, his conception of doctrine necessarily be-
came complicated — a union of the old Catholic theol-
ogy and of the old ecclesiastical scheme with his
new thoughts on the doctrine of faith compressed
into the ^rame of the symbol. This mixture of ele-
ments, which the Occidental Church has preserved
until this day, subsecpiently caused contradictions
and rendered the old dogma impressionless.

In detail the following discrepancies in the theol- (PilfH^^l^f^i^'a
ogy of Augustine are especially to be noted : (1) The "" '^^^'
discrepancies between symbol and Scripture. Those
who place Scripture above the symbol, as well as
those who prescribe the opposite order, can refer to
him. Augustine strengthened Biblicism and at the
same time also the position of those ecclesiastics who
with Tertullian refuted the Biblicists. {:>) The dis-
crepancy between the principle of Scripture and tiie
principle of salvation. Augustine taught, on the
one hand, that only the Huhstdiice {i.e. salvation) is
of importance in the Scriptures; yes, he advanced
as far sometimes as that spiritualism which skips
over the Scriptures ; on the other hand, he could not
rid himself of the thought that every word of the
Scriptures is absolute revelation. (3) The discrep-
ancy between his conceptions of the essence of relig-
ion; on the one hand, it is faith, love, hope; yet, on
the other, knowledge and super-terrestrial, immortal

.;')

^IN .■

:-ir.i

.r-1

344 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF J)OUMA.

life; it should aim to secure blessedness through
grace, and again through the amor infellectnalis.
Faitli as conceived by Paul and a non-cosmic mys-
ticism contend for the primacy. (4) The discrep-
ancy between the doctrine of pi -^destined grace ard
a doctrine of f.^rr'ce i> il. ' js.: :)i.itiall} an eci-*lesias-
tical and sacramen*^al il-vinio. (5) Discrepancies
within the principal line;, of ti* jjht. Thus in the
doctrine of grace the thought of the (jratia per
{propter) Christum not infrequently conflicts with
the conception of a grace flowing nidcpendontlj'' from
Christ out of the original being of God as the Hum-
mum honnm and summum esse. Thus, in his
ecclesiastical doctrine, the hierarchical-sacramental
basal element is not reconciled with a liberal, uni-
versal view, such as originated with the apologists.
^iKu-ufnl" ^^^ ^"^^^ distinguish three planes in the tlieology
loffir, uiui of Augustine: Tlie predestinarian, tlie soteriologic,

I'lock'sias-

tico-sacra- and tlic plauc of the authority and of the sacraments

mental '■ *^

Elements. ^^£ ^^iq Churcli ; but ouc would uot do him justice,
if one should describe these elevations separately, for
in his summary of the whole they are united. Just
because his rich spirit embraced all these discrepan-
cies and characteristically represented them as ex-
periences, has he become the father of the Church
of the Occident. He is the father of the Roman
Church and of the Reformation, of Biblicists and of
mystics; yes, even the Renaissance and modern
empirical philosophy (psychology) are indebted to
him. New dogmas, in the strict sense, he did not

/•

DF.VKLOPMENT OF DOCTRINK OF SIN, KTC. lUS

inti'oilneo. It wa.- lol't to u very inucli lator period
t ) foriniilatf strictly dofinitp 'lognias out of the trans-
formation wrought by hiiu in tlio old dogmatic
raaterial, i.e. the condenniation of Pclagianism and
the nev; aocirine of the sacraments.

I I

1. Augustine's Doctrine of ttie First and Tjisf

Things.

Siebeck, in d. Ztsclir. f. Phil. u. pliil. Kritik, 1888, J-', '"-l
ff. Gangauf, Motaphys. Psycliol. d. h. Aug., 1852. ■.^r-d.
Die Phil. d. h. Aug., ISS'i. Scipio, Dt'sAinvl. Aug. Mftupi^ .
188G. Kahl, Priiiuit d. Wilk'ns 1). Aug..l88G. Kiilme A. "h
Anschauuug V. d. Erlos. lu'dcutuugChristi, 1800.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: AiiKustint>

*^ ^ "Alter Ar-

With the life of prayer Augustine united an inward '^'"^'"''^=^"-
contemplation which led him, the j)upil of the Neo-
Platonists and of Paul, to a new psychology and
theology. He ])ecanie iha " ((tt( r Aristoteles" in
making tlu; inner life the starting-point for thoughts
concerning the world. He first absolutely put away
the naive-objective frame of mind and with it the
antique-classical, at the same time, howevi^r, the
remnants of the polytheistic view also. He was
the first monotheistic theologian (in tke strict
sense of the word) among the Church fathers,
since he lifted the Neo-Platonic philosophy above
himself. Not unfamiliar with the realm of knovvl- /J'' ^^'91'';'

Know Only

edge of the objective world, he yet wished to know tilesou/.
but two things, God and the soul; for his skepticit^m
had dissolved the world of external phenomena, but

fit

Desii'H for
Ilappiiu'ss.

Only l!u>

Good Will

is Free.

iih; OUTLINES OK TirR HISTOKY OF DOfJMA.

ill tlu! fliglit (tf IIm'so |>li(Mi()in('iiii Wm facts of the
inner lii'o had, after painful struggles, remained to
him as f<U'ts. Even if th(;re exists no evil and no
God, tli<n'o still exists nncjuestioiiably the fear of evil.
Out of this, i.e. through psychological analysis, one
can find the soul and CJod and sketch a picture of the
world. Hence the skeptic can arrive at the knowl-
edge of truth, for which the marrow of the soul
sighs.

The fund;nnoiital form of the life of the soul is the
desire for linp])iness [cnpido^ amor) as a desire for
blessedness. AH inclinations are only developments
of this fundamental form (as receptivity and as
activity) and they are valid for the sphere of the
spiritual life as well as for that of the sensuous.
The will is connected with these inclinations, never-
theless it is a power rising above sensuous nature
(Augustine is an indoterminist). In voncreto it is
indeed bound to the sensuous instincts, i.e. not free.
Theoretical freedom of election becomes real freedom
only when the cupiditas {(imor) honi huHhecome the
ruling motive for the will, i.e. only the good will is
free. Moral g(wdness and freedom of will coincide.
The truly free will has its freedom in the impulse of
the good {beata necessitas boiii). This bondage is
freedom, because it withdraws the will from the do-
minion of the lower instincts and realizes the destiny
and disposition of man to be filled with true exist-
ence and life. In attachment to the good, therefore,
is realized the higher aiypeiifas, the true instinct of

DKVKI.OI'MKNI (>!• DOCTIllNK Ol' SIN, KTC. :)\7

solf-pivsorvatioii in man; while lie gradually briiij^s
:ib(jut his uwii (U'slnu'tion, if lu' follows his lowor in-
stincts. Fui'tliosc lini'softhoUf^ht Augnstino claiincd
-itrit't validity, for ho know that uvory man, meditat-
ing about himself, must aniiin them. With thoni
Augustine united the results of the Neo-lMatonic cos- Xtni'ii-

tiillic ( 'n
llliilo^'ii't'l

Spi'ciila-
Adtiptfil,

Bt'iiij,'.

luological Hi)ecnlation ; but the ^^iniple greatness of
his living conceptic^n of Ood woiked powerfidly upon
them and coerced the artilicially gaincnl elemi'uts of
the doctrine of God again and again into the sim-
plest confession : "The Lord of heaven and earth is
love; he is the salvation of the soul; whom should ye
fear"?

Through the Neo- Platonic speculation (through '''"" '^j.',"',
proof of the nothingness of phenomena and through c)niy'Tni.
progressive elimination of the lower si)heres of the
sensuous and conceivable) Augustine arrived at the
conception of the one, unchangeable, eternal Being
{incorpori'd vci^itcis^ spiritalis .suhslnutia, lux in-
conunuf(ihilis). At the same time this snimnum
esse alone corresponds to the simplicity of the high-
est objc'ct of the soul's desire. This sioiinnnn esse
alone is in reality tJie Behig^ since every other being
has the quality of non-being, and can indeed not ex-
ist but really perishes. But, on tlie other hand, it can
also be conceived as the development of the sole Sub-
stance, as the radiant artistic expression of the latter,
and in this concepti(.)n the metaphysically dissolved
phenomena and the interest therein recur in an [es-
thetic form. Yet this natural feeling is still only

\A I,

'^vl

34.S <)UT[JNKS OK TIIK lirSTOKV OK DOOMA.

the (.'staMishiiig of tho Augustiniaii coiiccption. He
(luort not Hurroiulor himyelf to it, hut rather i>as9es
over at onct^ to tho ohscrvation, that the suul strives
for this higliest Being and seeks it in all lower good
with in(l<>struetihle, nohle concupiscence; yet nftcr
(ill il hcsildfcs to seize the same. Here a dreadful

MonsimuH paradox i)resented itself to him, which he designates
as " y//o//.s7/'/n// ", vi/,, flidt the will dees not acta-
allij icdut, trhaf it /ra/y/.s, or rdfher icltot it seems to
want. Together with the whole weight of man's in-
dividual responsihility Augustine conceived this state
of the case, which was ameliorated hy no iusthetic
consideration, yet at times was so smooth to him
(tho cosmos with light and shadow as the "jj!(/-
ehrinii^\ as tho simile of tho fulness of life of the

Metaphys- universal One). Hence nietapJu/sics icds trans-

ics '1 ItlllS- ' ^ "^

for tiled for him info ethics. Through the feeling
of rt^sponsihility, God (the sununum esse) ap])eared
to him as the summnm honnm; and tho selfish, in-
dividual life, which determines the will, a^ the evil.
This summuni bonum is not only the constant rest-
ing-place for tho restless thinker, and the intoxicat-
ing joy of life for the life-loving mortal, but it is also
an expression for the shall-be^ for that which shall
become the ruling fundamental motive of the will,
for that which shall give to the will its freedom and
therewith for the first time its power over the sphere
of the natural, for that which shall free the inde-
structible inclination of man toward the good from
the miser a necessitas pecccindi — expression of the

foniii'd

into
EthifS.

(

DKVKLOrMKNT OF DOCTUINK OF SIN, KTC. .W,)

KtliicM

Traiirt-

foriiiol

into

the

good. TliUH fur him all inferonoes of the iiitolloct
and all cudoinoiiistic wrappings droppod from tho
conception of tho good to tho ground. For this
lino of thought also ho clainiod general validity.

Ihit still another oxperieneo now followed and it >1''*'M'I'.v;*

I- tcs and

Hcorned all analysis. Yonder (/ikkI not oidy eon-
fronted him as tho "shall ho", hut he felt himself
Beized h}' it as lore and lifted out of the misery of
tho monstrous contradiction of existence. Accord-
ingly theconco])tion of God received an entirely new
meaning: The good which is ahlo to do this, the Al-
mighty, is Person, is Love. The suinnnnn esse is the
lioly good in Person, working upon the will as al-
mighty Love. Mcf ((})}{ !j,si(>< <(u<l ethics a re frcois-
fornted info ri'liyioti. Lvil is not only pvi ratio
,siil)sf((nti((('iiiu\t\n}rchnv not nmri} jjri ratio ' o)iiy
but godlessness [priratio Dei) ; the ontological defect
in the creature* existence and the moral defect in tho
good is a defect in the attitude of love toward God;
but to possess God is everything, is being, good being,
free-will and peace. Henceforth a streara of Divine
thought llowed forth freely from Augustine. It is
just as inhen itly natural to God to be gratia, im-
parting himself ill love, as tohiicausit cansatrix non
cauaataj inan koicerer lints f)i/ the qrace of lore. Man i>ivr^
That he — embarrassed by a monstrous existence,
which points back to a serious fall into sin — can live
only by grace, may still be ex})lained ; but that the
grace of love retdly exists is a transcendent fact.
Man does not arrive at freedoju through indepeu-

I '

If'

WHIi,

i I

n '

Cind is llie
<Hily Res.

TT.' is
lV>rsfpD.

;55() OUTLINES Or' THE HISTORY OF I)0(JMA.

denco as ivgards (irod, l)nt throug'li dopeudeiico upon
him: Only that love whicli has been bestowed ui)on
him l)y God renders man blessed and good.

In the detailed deductions of Augustine respecting
God and the soul the notes of metaphysics, ethics
and of the deepest Christian experience vibrate with-
in one another, (fod is iiie only " rt^s '\ which may
be enjoyed {fr:(i = (ilicni ret (diioi'c inJicterere
propter s<> ips((ni), other things may oidy be used.
Tliis sounds Neo-Platonic, but it is rrsolved in a
CUu'istian sense into the thought : Jidc, -qw ct cdritafe
colendnni dejiin. God is Person, whom one can trust
above all other things and v/hom one should love.
Tho fides (puie per dilcetiouciii opcrtffitr becomes
the :-overeign expression of religion. The aesthetically
grounded optimism, the subtile doctrine of emana-
tion, the idea of the sole agency of G(k1 (doctrine of
predestination), the representation of evil as the
"non-existent" which limits the good, do not indeed
entirely disappear, l)ut tliey are joineil in a peculiar
manner with the representation of God as the C-rea-
tor of mankind which lias through its own fault
become a hkisso perdih'oitis, a.nd of God as the Re-
deemer and ordiiKifor ]>ecc<ito)'f(iii. The striving
aisM after absolute knowledge and the conception of
the Christian riligion in accordance with the scheme
Au;:iisiin.- ,)f ([j^^ apologisls (rationalistic) never failed in Au-
Aliu'i('>3'st*s\ gustine, ;nid the love of God which he felt was secure
to him only uuvler the autlioi'ity of outward revelation,
to which he obediently submitted; but in his rCiig-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 351

ioiiH thinking, in which the appreciation of the im-
portance of history was indeed not so well develoj^ed
as the cai)acity for psychological observation, the
Christian spirit nevertheless ruled.

From his youth ui) Christ was the silent guiding Christ ins
principle of his soul. And the ai)parently purely J'''"^'p'''-
philosophical deductions were in many ways influ-
enced by the thought of him. All of xVugustine's
attempts to break through the iron plan of the im-
nmtcibility of God, and to discriminate between God,
the world and the eijo^ are to be explained by the
impression of hist or}' \\\Km him, i.e. of Christ. Thus
Christ appeared to him, the religious philosopher,
more and more plainly as the icmj., the potrer and
the author it I/. How often did he speak of revela-
tion in general and mean only him I How often did
he speak of Christ where his pr(xlecessors spoke of
revelation in general I The si)eculative re])resenta-
tion of the idea ot the good and of its ag(Micy as love
became a certaintv to him onlv through tlu> vision of
Christ and through the authoritative proclamation
of the Church res|)e('ting hini. The risi(fii of C lirisi \',V"P p*"

i ^ ■ Christ

was a new element, which he first (after Paul and froi'lrV'aui
Ignatius) again introduced. Just as his doctrine of
the trinity received a new form througli the convic-
tion, experienced through faith, of the unity of God,
although he adopted the (»ld formulas, so also did his
Chrlstology, in spite of all adlu'rencc to tradition
(rigid ctmibating of Apollinaris), I'eccivc a new con-
ent through the preaching (jf Ambrose and his own

ob'Z

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

experience. ( I) In the first place as regards Clirisst
am/'Tiil^ the representation of his sublimity in his humility
"ciirfst.' was of decisive importance to him, the actual veri-

]\Iedi{eval

Key-note, tying of tlio sentcuce, onnie bcniiun in Inuniiitale
jjcrjicitur (the incarnation also he represented from
this point of view) ; iji this he began to strike the
media3val key-notes of Christology, {'-l) He laid the
whole stress upon the possibility now won, that man,^
lying in the dust, can apprehend God since he has
come near us in our lowliness (the Greek waits for
an exaltation to be able to grasp God in Christ), (3)
He construed not infrequently the personality of
Christ also from the human soul of the Redeemer
and he saw in the endowments of the same the great
example of the gratia praere)iiens, which made the
man Jesus what he became, (4) He conceived the man
Jesus as Mediator, as Sacrifice and Priest, through
whom w^e have been reconciled to the Deity and re-
deemed, whose death, as the Church i)roclaims it, is
the surest foundation of our faith in redemption. In
all these respects Augustine introduced new ideas
into the old dogma, jcjining them thereto indeed only
insecurely and artificially. A new Christological
formula he did not create; to him Chi'ist became the
rock of faith, since he knew that the influence of
this Person had broken his pride and given him
strength to believe in the love of God and to let him-
self be found by it. Tlie living Christ is the truth,
and he who is proclaimed by the Church, is the way
and the authority.

.lesus Mt.'-

(liator,

Saci'iflc't\

and Priest.

'l\

DEVELOPMENT OF DOC'TKTNE OV SIX, ETC

353

l-al
le

The soul is giii(l<'(l hy iho f/f far j^cr (h'lectimio)) vitaBeuta
operatiw unto the vita bectta. This is the blessed
peace in the vision of God, Therefore hiu>irlv(hie
still remains the aim of man. It is not tl)(> will that
holds the primacy, but the intellect. Finally Augus-
tine retained the vuk'.ar Catholic form of thought
which confines man in the hereafter to an adoring
knowledge; in this life asceticism and contemplation
answers to it (lience Augustine's defence of monas-
ticism as against Jovinian). The kingdom of God,
so far as it is earthly, is also i)erislial)U\ The soul
must be freed from the world of appearances, of sim-
ilitudes and compulsory conduct. Nevertheless Au-
gustine exerted indirectly a powerful influence upon
the current eschatological ideas: (1) Virtue is not i>«'i«'n'i-

" ^ ' ciict' upon

the highest good, but dependence upon God (in the '^"'^"
representation of the decisive significance of the
nievifa thi^ point of view was indeed aband(nied),

{'I) The priestly ascetic life should be a spivitnal ^•('^"'.J.yf^

one; the magico-physical elements of Greek niys- ^""^"'

ticism recede entirely (no cultus mysticism), (3) In ir.irii.rtu

alisiii |)is-

the tlKuight, ^' ))n'hi adhaercve deo bonuiii c.s7 ", in-
tellectualism was broken down ; the will received its
due position, (4) Love remains even the same in eter-
nity as that which we possess in this life; therefort;
this world and the other are still closel}' united, (."))
If love remains also in the othe • world, then intellec-
tualism reappears in a modihed form, (<">) Xot the Krci.>sias-

ticisin

earthly life, but the earthly Church has a higher

meaning; the latter is, so to speak, the holy alxjve
33

foiinti'il.

Lnvi»

Alii'lcs.

Moilifii'd

Int.'ll.'ctu-

alisui.

' 'M

.'354 OUTLINES OK TIIK HISTOKV OF I^vMJMA

Fides,

Spt's. Cari-

tas.

all that is most holy, and it is a duty to build it up;
not a roligicjii of ;i second order supersedes the relig-
ion, but ecclesiasticisni, the service of the Church as
a moral agency iov reforming society, as an organism
of the sacramental powers of love, of the good and of
the right in which Christ works, (7) Higher than
all monasticism stand .//V/e6', .spe.s* and caritas; hence
the scheme of a dreary and egotistical contemplation
is bn)ken. To be sure, Augustine succeeded in unit-
ing in all directi<jns, although indeed with contradic-
tions, the new linos of thought with the old.

2. The Donatist Contest. The Work, " Z)e Civi-
fate Dei.'' The Doctrine of the Church cindof
the 3Iea)is of Grace.

Renter, a. a. O. Reinkiiis, Gesch. j)li!'. d. h. Anp.. \'^W).
Giiizel, L. Aug. v. d. Kirclie in d. Tiib. Tlieol. Quartalschr. ,
1849. Kostlin, D. Kathol. AutfasH. v. d. K. in d. deutsclien
Ztschr. f. christl. Wissenscli.. IS.m Nr. 1!. Selnnidt, Au<;. 's
Lehre V. d. K. ind. Yahrbl). f. deiitsclie Tlieol., 18(51. Seeberg,
B(>i;TilT d. christl. K. I. Th., 188.~). Ribbeck, Donatus u.
Aug., 1888.

Autrustino In the contest with ]\tanichffiisn> and Donatism

Adopts

iSn'neof Augustinc, followiug Oi)tatus, formulated his doc-
church. trine of the Church upon the basis of Cyprian's con-
cept!' u^, excluding, iiowever, the J.)oi.aiistic elements
of Cypi-rtii and moderating the hierarchical. In
describing tite Chiirch as aitthoritij, as an indestruc-
til)l i list /hit >'>ii of srdra'ion, he believed that he
was ii'civly dt>"i !i[)i]iga di . iiK^ly produced verit}''; in
I'eprc.iMitli'.g ii i!~ ■(> .niii.no sanctonnn, he followed

'ij

iic-

lio

I)P:VK[.0I'MENT of I)0(TR.\E of sin, etc. o'ib

his own religious experience. h\ the former lie op-
posed the critical "subjectivism " (*f the Maniclupans
and the puritanism of the Donatists who desired to
make the truth of tlie Church dependent upon the
purity of the priests; in the latter he used nis
doctrine of salvjition in defining his conception of
the Church. CN)nii)licated views were the conse-
quence. Not only does the Chiuvh ap])ear, now as
the goal (^f religion, now as the way to the goal, hut
the conception itself hecornes a complexity of divers
conceptions. Finally the doctrine of pnMlestination
presented itself to him as out-and-out (|uestional>le.

I. 1. The most imi)ortant characteristic of the ^'"'fy "f

^ Churcli.

Church is its imif!/ (in faith, hope and love, on tlie
o?ie side, in Catholicity on the other), which the same
Spirit ]n'oduces that holds the trinity together; this in
the midst of the disruption of humanity is a proof of
the divineness of the Church. Since unit}' iion-s
only from hire, the Church rests upon the gi)verni g
power of tlu> 1 i vine spirit of Lore; community of f; h
alone is not entirely suflicient. From this view tli' r'i5
follows: Carifif.s v]iri,st iaiid )ii.si iii inu'((ifeec< .cs-
i(ie uon ])()tcst ciisfodiri, cLsi hnjtfisiinnn ei fidem
f< iiediis, i.e. II II iff/ (Hill/ c/.s/.s' ifhcrc lore is and
lore oulij iriiere uiiitij is. The application of this
pli rase with its conse(piences declares : Heretics not
only do not belong to tlie Church (for they deny the
unity of the faith), but schismatics also stjitid .nt-
side of it; for their very sei)aration from thf unity
proves that they are wanting in love, i.e. in the

!l,'

OTTLINKS OF THE IIISTOHY OF DOGMA.

IIolilK'SS of

L'luircli.

operations of the Holy Spirit. Therefore only the
one great Church is the Cliureh, and outside of it
there can indeed exist faith, heroic ileeds, even
means of salvation, but no salvation.

•^. The second characteristic of the Church is its
holiiicss. The Chcrch is holy as tlie |)laco of the
activity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, and as the
possessor of those means which sanctify the indi-
vidual. That she does not succeed with all, cannot
rob her of her holiness; even a numerical superiority
of the niali et Jii/j)ocrif(ie doea not endanger this;
otherwise one unhol}' meml)cr would alread}' ren-
der her right questionable. The Church exorcises
disciiiline and excommunication not so much to pre-
serv(> her holiness as to educate. She herself is al-
ready secure against contamination with that which
is unholv, in view of the fact that she never sane-
tions it, and she demonstrates her holintsss, since in
her midst, and only within her, real saints are be-
gotten, and since she everywhere elevates and sanc-
tities the morals of men. In the strict sense only
the boiii et spirituaJcs belong to her, but in a wider
sense the unb.oly also, in so far as they are still able
to be spiritualized and remain und(^i the influence of
the sacraments (" t'oso in co}itnmeliai)i in damn
del " ; they are not the house of God, but " in domo " ;
the}' are not ''in confiiinnione sanctorum" but
" .sacra n) en toniui ^'). Thus the Church is a " cor-
pns })eriiii.rtuni ", and even heretics and schismatics
ultimately belong to her, in so far as they have ap-

I)KVKI,<)I'.MKNT OF DOCTKFNK oi' SIN, K I (

Lit

:^s

propriatcfl tlic nuvms of i^raco aiid iviiiain under the
discipliiit' of tlu' Church. Uut the lidincss of the
Church iuchidcs as its aim the pure coitnuuHio sane-
forum {connnnnio Jidch'inn), and all rcli^'ious predi-
cates of the Church are valid for this conuuunion.

;}. The third characteristic of the Church is its ^'',\';'",';'-
Cdfholicifn (universality as rcL-ards space). This
furnishes the strongest outward proof of the truth of
the Church; for it is a fact i)erceptil)U' to the senses
and at th(! same time a miracle with which the
Donatists have nothing comparahle. The great
church at Carthage evidences itself as the true
Church by its union with Rom.e, with th( -hi Orien-
tal churches, and with the churches of ihe whole
world (in oi)i)Osition the Donatists rightly said:
" QiKinium ad latins imnidi pert incf jxi tics, niodi-
ca pars est 'in compoisafione tot ins nnutdi, in (jna
Jidi's cJiristi(tNa noininatur'').

4. The fourth characteristic is its apostolii Hil ApostoUL--

-* '' ity of

which manifests itself, (1) in the i)ossession of the <^'''"''^"'»-
apostolical writings and doctrines, ('.*) in theahilit3'of
the Church to trace back its existence as far as the
apostolical churches by the line of episcopal succes-
sion (this point Cyprian em})hasized more strongly).
Among these churches the Roman is tlie most im-
portant on account of its first bisho]), Peter, He is
the representative of the apostles, of the Church, of
weak Christians and of the ecclesiastical function of
the bishops. The old theory that it is necessary to
be in union with the sedcs apostolica and cat lied ra

! i|

iJH,

P '

■|,

Inralliliil-

ity uf
Church.

3JS ULTMNI'IS OK TIHO HI^^TOItV OF 1>(>(;.MA.

Petri, August inc rctaiiKHl ; but as roganls Ww inftil-
liltility of the lloniau stv, ho ex'})i'o.ss('(l liimscU' just
as unduciilcdly and contradictorily as in regard to
tlio councils and the episcopate (naturally t(v him a
coiuicil stood higher than the Konian hishoji).

5. The iHjdUihilif!/ of the Church Augustine con-
sidered as linnly established; but he was able to re-
produce the arguments for it only as ri'lalively sound
and sufficient. In like manner he was convinced of
the iudispoisiihloirss of the Cluirch; l)ut he }»ro-
pounded ideas (regarding the doctrine of pred(>stin-
atiou and the immutability of the eternal working
of God), which annulled the same.

Church is (',. 'j'ho Church is the LiiKidom of God uixm earth.

^'' Eur'i'ii '" As a rule Augustine, indeed, in making use of this
conception had no reference t(j the Church, but to the
entire result of l.ho work of Cod in the world, in con-
trast with the woi'k of ti\e devil. But whenever he
identities Church and kingdom of Cod, he means
by the former the coniiiiniiio Jidelinni {corpus
rcniin). But since there is only one Church, he
could not but consider, in a given case, the corpus
perm i.vf inn. also as the kingdom of God; and since
with the abolition of all apocalyptic rej)resentations
he saw the millennimn now already realized in the
Church, in contrast with the perishing evil state of
the world, lie was driven almost involuntaiil}' to the
conse(p.ience that the visible Church with its ruling
priests and its regulations is the kingdom of God
(tie civitcite dei, XX. i.)-i;j). Thus the idea of the

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTKINE OF SIN, ETC. oo'.)

N'ariuiisly
Vjcnvi'd.

kingdom of (rod passes with liim tliroii^i;h all staj^cs,
from a historieo-theological con('»'i)tioii, wliicli is
nontral as regards the idea of the Cliureh (the king-
dom of God is ill heaven and has been organizing it-
self sinee Al)el upon tlie earth for heav(Mi), to tlic
Chureh of tlie priests, but it has its ci^ntre in the a'-
clesid ii» a hvciyvnly "' coininunio sanciornnt in fcr-
fis p<'tT(/rinan,'i^\ Parallel with this conception
goes that otiier of the .sucivlasoi tli(> godless and re-
probates (ineUiding the demons), which tinally i)asses
over into the idea of the earthly kingdom (the state)
as the nia(/)iHiii hitrociinain. In oppcjsition to this
communion originating in sin and condemned to eter-
nal strife, stands in general tlu> state of God as the
only rightful union of men. But the latter points of
this form of .statement which <>iids in a real theocracy
of the Church and in a condemnation of tlie state, Au-
gustine neither elaborated nor especially emphasized.
He had in mind almost throughout spiritual jtowiM-s
and spiritual strife; the })opes of the ]\Liddle Ages
first drew the theocratic consetiuences. He also gave ^^^\': s^"''-

1 ~ ()niiiiat«'ii

to his view respecting the state the turn, that, siiic«>
the jj«,r (errena is a good (even if a particular oni'),
a community (the state) wiiich protects it is also
good. But since the jm.r tcrrcnn can be brought
about only by justice, and inasmuch as the latter is
undoubtedly in possession of the Church alone (be-
cause as resting upon the nirilas it originates with
God), the state can obtain a relativ(> right only by
submission to the state of God, It is clear that this

tu Cliiurh.

3f;0 OUTLINES <)l<^ TIIK lUSTOKV Ol' IXXJ.MA.

Word ami
Sacrauu'iit .

viow also, by which Ihu curlhly statc^ rccoivoH a cor-
tiiiii iiulcpciidonco (bocaiiso it has an esjK'cial mis-
sion), can he easily intnuhicod into the theocratic
scheme. Augustine himself drew only a few con-
sequences, yet he drew these: That the state must
serve the Church by means of compulsory measures
against idolahy, heretics and schismatics, and that
the ('hurch must in general exercise an inlluence
upon the state's right of punishment.

II. 1. The Donatist contest also necessitated a
closer consideration of the sacraments (vid. Optatus).
In the first place, it was the greatest advance that
Augustine recognized the word as a means of grace.
The formula, " irord mid sdcrcunent ", originated
with him, yes, he esteemed the " word " so highly
that he even called the sacrament '^ rerhiuii visi-
hile'\ iirid with the sentence: ^' ci'edc of inandn-
casti " he opposed all working through mysteries and
ga\ e to the conception " sacrament " so wide a range
that every sensible sign with which a redemptive
word is joined may be so named {^' arced if verb ion
ad elenientum et fit sacrame}itum^'). An especial
doctrine of the sacraments is not to be drawn there-
from; Augustine indeed not seldom goes so far in
spiritualization, that the sensible sign and the aud-
ible word need only to bo considered as signa and
imago of the invisible act accompanying them (for-
giveness of sin, spirit of love) .
Baptism 2. But, on the other hand, the sacraments — Au-

aiul Lord's , « , . , . . ,

Supper, gustine has reference as a rule m this connection only

imi^SjS^^l

DFA'KLOI'MKNT OK DOCTUINK OK SIN, K.TC. 'M)]

Al-

iiy

1<) l»;iptisin and tlic l^ord's Supper — art' ;iltrr nil soine-
tliing liii^hor. Tlu\y arc sij^iis, instituted l>y (ind,
of a lii|^hor object, with wliit'li, hy virtue of tlie eon-
stituted ord«'r of" creation, they stand in a certain re-
hitionship, andthrou'jjh theni^ractMs rejdly imparted
to him who makes use of them (assurance of the
ini. sen' cor (I id Chn'sfi in the sacrament, hut on the
other hand, del us nicdicindlis). This conununica-
tion is dependent upori the administration (ohjectiv-
ity of tlie sacraments), ])ut it is redemptive only
when; the spirit of love (the true Church) exists.
Thereby arose the double contradiction, that the sac-
raments are effective everywhere and vet only in tlu'
Church, are independent of men and yet bound up
with the Church in their redemptiveness. Au<^nstine
resolved this contradiction by discriniinatin<^- between
the cJidi'dcfcr ^vhU'h the sacraments impart (stamp-
ing it, as it were) an»l the real comnnmication of
grace. The sjicraments " sancfa per sc ipsd"" can
be purloined from the Church ji'id yet retain their
efficacy, but only \vithin the Church do they tend
effectiyely to salvation ("' nou coiis/dcrdin'mn, qnis
det sed quid dcf,^' but on the other hand, "Jidhrrc^^
is not yet ^^ ufilifcr ind)ere'').

3. Only with ba])tism (ciiaracter: Inalienable re- i><>i;ti-iii.'of
lation to Clinst and his Church) and ordination '^TuimiV-d.'
(character: Inalienable preparation to offer . ac-
rifice and to administer the sacraments), however,
could this view be harmonized, not indeed with the
Lord's Supper; for in this the res sdcrdinenti is the

i>> '

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

^^.^t!?

.v^

1.0

■ 30

1^ 1^

1^ 12.2

-Bi I

I.I ?V- IIIM

1.8

1.25 1.4

1.6

6" —

►

c»

%%^

'^ ^>

vV^

/!^

Photographic

Sciences

Corporation

.<.W

iN^

... *

».

o'^

'^f-

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80

(716) 872-4503

f; i

■•SI .i h-

Idea of tlie

Clmrcli a

Colli ust'd

Pk'tiiif.

Mrl (tl'TMNKS <)'•' I UK IIISTOKV OK |)()f;MA.

iiivisil)l«' iiic<»rj)<)ra1i(>!i into the hotly of Clirist (con-
('cniiiij^llKi (elements Au^iistiiic taui;ht syin])oli('ally),
and tli(^ Lord's Supper is the sdcrijiciuni (■((rif((ffs;
thtu'olore the Catholic Church was (>vcr allied
with the Lord's Sup{)er {sttcrniui'ttfinii uiiifdfis)
and there could exist no "character", which was in-
<lependent of this Church. Augustine glided over
this dilliculty. His general doctrine of the sacra-
ments was obtained from l)ai)tism, and he discrim-
inated therein thus artificially, in ordi'r that he
might, (1) place the Donatists in the wrong, {'!)
maintain the characteristic of the sanctity of the
Church, {'.)) give to faith a firm support, u})on which
it could rely — inde]iendent of men. Afterward the
discrimination was made the most of, es])ecially in
the hierarchical sense. But Augustine's emphasis
upon the "word" and his spiritualism have given
sinudtaneously offence in ant)tlier direction {fo Lu-
ther (hid fo fhc rrd-lh'fonncrs).

Augustine's ideas in regard to the Church are full
of contradictions. The true Church should also be
visible, and yet to the visible Church belongs also
evil men and hj^pocrites, nay even heretics. The e.v-
tvrnn societas sacramenfonoii, which iHConiinuuio
fkleliuin et sdnctoi'iini and finally also the nnme-
rus praedefitinatonnn are one and the same Church !
The " in ecclesia esse " has in trnth a triple sense.
"In eeelesia" are only the ijrdedestinafi, including

I)KVKI,<>l'Mi:N'r OK IK)( IIJINK OK SIN, K'Yr. :\^V.\

tliost' still imcoiivciicd ; "' /// ccilisitt " mic the Ix'-
lievers, iiicludiiiL;' those who will rrlapse; " in ccclc-
sta" arc all those who have part in the sacraments!
The C'hureh is properly in heaven nnd yet visible ;is
cirifiis u\H)U earth I It is from the lu^jj^inninu' and
yet tirst institntcd by Christ I It is I'onmU-d upon
j)redestination, n<rt npon faith, lov( , hope, nornpon
the sacraments! l^»nt while taking account of these
divers importan* ]K)ints whicli arc contradictory if
there is to })e oidy one Church, onc^ must not forget
that Augustine lived as an huml'le Christian with
the thought tlwit the Church is the coninniiiin Jidc-
linin cf suncioruhi^ that faith, ho))e and love are its
foundation, and that it " in fern's shd per rciiii.ssio-
nent jx'ccdforinn in cdrihifc'' The pnulestinarian
idea of the Churcli (in realit}' the dissolution of the
C*hurch) l)elongs to the theologian and the theoso-
phist, the empirical idea to the Catholic })olemic. It
is not to 1)0 overlooked also, that Augustine first
rescued the sacraments from the magical as])ect
under which they win-e to counterbalance a moralistic
mode of thinking, and coiu'dinatt'd and subordinated
them to faith. Ho first rendered the doctrine of the
sacraments reformable.

3. The P('l<i(/i((n Contest. Doeivine of (rntee (Did

of Silt.

Renter, a. a. (). Jacohi, Leliif d. I'daKius. 1S4'1 Worter,
Der Pelagianisnuis, isCiO. Klascii, l)ii' imieic Hntw. »l.
Pelugianisinus, 1M82. Wig;;eis. Aii.i^nstini.sinuii and IVla-

t !

ri'it

.'JO-t (trTLINKS OF THE IIISTOlM' OF POCMA.

Kiaiiisimis, 2 Bdd., ls;;i f. |)i(..kli,,ir. A.'s I>«'liro v. d.
(Jna(l«' (M<'ckl. Tlu'(>l. Ztschr. , I. , ISdO;. Lullianlt, L. v. fr.
Willon. is(i:j.

l)o<-trint' of

Kill uuil

Uraff.

I !

Pelajjiaii-
isni is Ka-
tionalistic
Monasti-
I'isiii and
Reileiiip-
tiou.

Aupjustino had not formulatcMl liis doctrino rejj^ard-
ing gracc^ and sin wlicn ho permitted liimself to l)i'
Ijaptized into the Catholic Cluirch (see his anti-
Maniehiean \vritinf:fs), however he had done so be-
fore he entered into tlie Pelagian contest. Pelagins
also did not formulate his doctrine first during the
contest, but he held it when he took offence at
the Augustinian expression, "" (hi quod jnhes ct
jube quod ris'\ The two great modes of thought
— whether grace is to be reduced to nature or whether
it sets nature free — rose in arms against each other.
The Occident, prepared through Ambrose, accepted
Augustinianism with incredible alacrity. Augus-
tine, the religious man and the virtuoso, encountered
in Pelagius an earnest ascetic monk, in Cailestius a
eunuch, in Julian a gay man of the world who was
also a resolute, determined rationalist and an inexor-
able dialectician.

Pelagianism is Christian rationalism, consistently
developtMl under the imluence of Hellenic monas-
ticism; it is stoic and Aristotelian popularized Occi-
dental philosophy, which made the attempt to subor-
dinate to itself the traditional doctrine of redemption.
The influence of the Antiochian theology can be
shown. The sources are the writings and letters of
Cailestius, Pelagius and Julian (mostly in Augustine
and Jerome), the works of Augustine, Jerome, Oro-

DEVELOPMKNT OV Dot'TIMNK OK SIN, ETC. 3(55

Bius, Mariiis MiTCfitoi', tin* \>i\\>i\\ letters and synodal
decrees. Pelagius iiiinsclt' was more cautious, less
aggressive and less truthful than C'a'lestius and
Julian. The latter iirst completed tlu^ doctrine
(without him, Augustine says, " rvhujiitni <l<u/in((-
tt\s nuichimi siitc (ucliihrht nm'.ssario rcDKUisis-
set"). Formally August inianism and Telagianism KU-m.-nts
arc herein related and opposed to the previous mode of ia//is,',TViii(i
thought, (1) Each is founded upon tlie desire to unify ' ism!
the religious, ethical knowledge, (•.') Eacii expelled
from tradition the dramatico-eschatological element,
{',]) Each was not culto-nn'stically interested, but kei)t
the problem within the sphere of the spirit, and (4)
Neither })uts the highest emphasis upon traditiomd
proof (Augustine often confesses that the proof is
difficult to deduce from the extant writings of the
fathers). Pelagius was anxious to show that in the
whole controversy' it was not a (piestion of dogma,
but a practical (piestion; Augustine carried on tho
contest with the conviction that the essence and
pnver of the Christian religion nuist stand or fall
with his doctrine of grace; Cjelestius was especially
int4?rested in overthrowing the doctrine of hereditary
sin; Julian was consciousl}' defending the cause of
reason ;uid freedom against a " stupid and impious
dogma" through which the Church was ))eing
plunged into barbarism and the educated minority
given over to the masses who do not understand
Aristotle.

I. Pelagius appeared in Rome and proclaimed to ' ilom^. '"

I •!

■ , t

II'

•mi

1 i

■'I

li':'

Ijiilh

I i : 21^ a} ■ I

3GG OLTLINKS OK THIO HISTOKY OK DOUMA.

tho cominoii C'liristiaiiH monasticisin niul tlio ability
of every man tn rise in his own strength unto virtue,
avoided tlieoloi^ical iMilcniics l)ut eontended against
the (luictisni of llic Au^^iistiniaii confessions. His
<>i.stius Jl, ,1)1. 121 friend CieN'stius seconded him. Both went

Si '('I Mills

T.M.'miiK. to Nortli /vfrica, from which Pelagius liowevor soon
(li'partcd. (*;elt'stius aji])licd at Cai'thage for a })res-
byter's ofhcc. }>ut he was complained of (-tl'^'or 11 1)
by tho Milanese deacon, l^mlinus, at a synod at
Carthage, because he considered mortality as some-
thing natural (to Adam and to all men), denied the
universal c()ns(> |uences of Adam's sin, tauglit the
perfect innocence of the new-born babe, esteemed the
benefit of the resurrection of Christ as not necessarily
attril)ut:d)le to all, misunderstood the difference be-
tween law and gospel, si)oke of sinless men befon'
the api)ear[ince of Christ and thought in general
superficiall}' of sinlessness and the fullilment of tho
commandments of Christ, if only one has good in-
tentions. In spite of his assertion that he acknowl-
edged the baptism of children (but not unto tiie for-
giveness of sin) and was therefore orthodox, he was

cii. stills (»xconununicated. He went to E})hesus and Constan-

l-Acnin-

nuiiiicat.Hi. tii>,)j)le. Pi>lagius was in Palestine and sought to
maintain peace with Augustine and Jerome. His
keen friend with his polemic against the tnulux pec-
cnti iiw^X the baptism of infants /// rcniissi())ic))t pvc-
cdtonnu was uncongenial to him; more valuable were
his more recent friends in the Orient, especially John
of Jerusalem. He and others pronounced him in-

^ ;< i)y

M '

DEVKLOr.MKNT OT DOCTHINK OK SIN, KT<

ijor

nocent (at the svnods at JcrusaU'in and Diospolis '■'' ''','-'I'''i

\ ^ I I M't III! * tl

415), vvliil'.' the Augustiiiiaii disciples, Orosius and aisvi'i.'M'i'.i
Jerome, accused linn ot niisundiTstanding the Divme n:..
{^race. Butoidy with a mental reservation did IVla-
gius «^ive u]) the incriminating tenets of Cielestius,
which accord inj^ly remained condemned in the Orient
also. In his literary labors he became sim[)ly more
cautious, but did not give in. The Nortli African
churclies (synods of Carthage and ]\Iileve, IIH) as
well as Augustine a]i|)li(>d to Iimocent I. in Home for iimonnt i
the condemnation of the two luM'etics. The pope,
glad t:) have been a))]»roaclied by North Africa, com-
plied (417), yet kei)t a, pathway of retreat oi>en for
liimself. Altiiough Zosinuis, his successor, induced Zosi'ims.
through a cunning confession of faith by Pelagins
and won over by Cfrlcstius who now also grew more
cautious, reinstated them and at first remained deaf
to the representations of the North Africans; yet a
general synod at Carthage (I 1m) and an imperial
edict, which expelled both heretics with their fol-
lowers from Rome, made an impression also upon the
pope, who in an cplsfuJn fracforid assented to the
condemnation and recpiired tiie Occidental bisho])S
to sign the same (I IS). Still this imputation strength-
ened the o])position pai'ty. Eighteen bishops de-
clined. Their leader was Julian of Eklanum. This ;'.''''"" "^

I'.klamiin.

Jurenis conJhU'ntissiiiius now took up his sharp
})en. He wrote daring letters to Zosinuis and Rufiis
of Thessalonica, which Augustine answered (I'io).
Therewith began a ten years' literary feud between

■■' I

1' , I

I If

i'l I

Wit •

;ti«

■.*■

ri v:

' ■ (

li ! '

3f;S OL'TLINKS OF TMK IIISTOKV OF I)0(;.MA.

tli(* two (fnij^nuMits of llic Julian writings in Anrf.
(Ic nnpfiis el concnpi.sc., lihri scv c. Jul. and opus
i'niprrf. r. Jul.). During the same Au^aistino was
often (IriviMi into a close' corner by Julian; but tlio
feud took place />o.s7 Jest Kin: Auj^ustino wa.s already
victor; Julian wrote like one wlio lias notliin^' nioro
to lose. Hi> evolved tberefore iiis natundisni and
moralisiM out of his n>yal reason willi threat license,
casting aside all monkery, yet without any compre-
hension of the needs and right of n ligion. He was
tinally forced to flee with hi's com})anions into the
Orient .and he there found protection with Theodore
^'ro.v"'' of Mopsuestia. The Ephesian council, i'.c. Cyril,
(vmmii of '^itl the Roman bishop the favor of condemning tho
431. ' Pelagians (431). In the Orient men had no compre-
licnsion of the contest ; indeed at the bottom they were
inclined toward Pelagianism as regards the freedom
of the will ; but in the Occident also men were agreed
only on the points, that every baptism is in rem is-
.sionein peccatonim, that there exists since the fall
of Adam a iradu.v peceata which delivers the chil-
dren (^f Adam over to death and condemnation, and
that the grace of God as a power for good is neces-
sary imto the salvation of every man.

II. Pelagius cared nothing for new dogmas and a
system ; Julian's stoical system with its Aristotelian
dialectics, Christian etiquette and tendency toward
naturalism belongs to the history of theology. Yet
it is im}K)rtant to note the principles of the Pelagian
doctrine ; for it has made its appearance in a subtle

Doctrines.

-ijl ::

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 3G9

id a
ian
ird

et
ian

tie

form a^ain and a^aiii. Tho monastic tendency was
not an essential thing with Pelaj^ins, hut suhordinato
to the aim of the sixjntaneous development of g<x)d
character, and to the ancient idea of moderation.
Just on that account one may class IVlagius and
Julian together. Courageous faith in man's ahility
to do that which is good, and the want of clearness
of thought on religio-ethical (luestions nnite them.

Because there is righteonsness, there is a (Jod.
God is the kind Creator and the just Leader. Every-
thing that he has created is good, therefore also the
creature, the law and free-will. If nature is good, it
is then not convertible; accordingly there can exist
no iwcccita naturalia, only i)eccata per accidcus. ^'^/^jl'j"'"
Human nature can Ix; modificated only incidentall}'.
The most important and best endcnvment of this
nature is free-will {'^ inofu.s (Oiinii cof/oitc iiullo'") \
reason is comprised within the latter. Both bring
it to pass that man does not live under the condi-
tio necessitatis and does not need help. It is the
glorious gratia prima of God, the Creator, that we
may do both and can do either. The jtossihilitas i^"ss;h'i'.-

*' ^ tus Hon I

honi comes from God, the voliodas and a(fi<t is ^v.',iuntiis '
our concern. Evil is a momentary, false .self-tie- ours.
termination without consetiuence to the nature,
originating in the sensuous faculties. According to
Pelagius these are bad in themselves, but can be
subdued; according to Julian they are not bad in
themselves, only so " in excess u'\ Were it other-
wise, then must bai)tism abolish concupiscence; and
34

irrr u

i []

■V

370 orTF.INES OF Tin: IflSToltY OF DOOM A.

H I

I --m

■iV'

if concupiHceiico is had, Ihcii iIk* Creator Uod is ii«)t
f^ood. Man is al)l(' to resist evei'v sin, therefore ho
nnist <h) so- there have indeed l>een sinless men.
Aceordinj^ to Pelaj^ius everyhody ptes to hdl who
acts contrary to Ids hetter al)iHiy. The attemjil to
adjust these teacliin^s to the Scriptures and ecclesi-
astieal tradition was fraught with dinirulties. It was
admitted that A(hini, en(h)wed with freedom of
choice, fell; yet natural death, sin('(> it is natural,
was not the consi^fiueuee of his sin, hut yj)iritual
death. Inasmuch as death has not descended from
liim, much less has not sin; for the acceptance of a
tvddux pcvcdt i (orii^inal sin) leads to the ahsurd as-
sumption of soul-^(Mieration and to ManichaMsm (e\ il
nature), aholishes the Divine justice, causes matri-
mony to appear unholy, tlierefore unlawful, and de-
stroys all possihility of {i nHlemption (for how can a
Sin is an redem])tive messaijre or a law influence nature?) . Sin

Atrair cf ^

the Will, always remains an affair of the will and each is
punished only for his own sin. All men stand in
the condition of Adam hefore his fall {'"Ifhcttnn
arhitriinu cf post peccafd fanf })/<'iniiii est quani
fuif ante pecnifd "); onl}' a sinful ha])it kec^ps them
down, the power of which is certainly to he acknowl-
edfjfcd. On that account grace also must he acknowl-
edged as afJJnforifun. According to the degree of
convenience, the Pelagians declared grace as simj)ly
necessary, as alleviating, as suiHM'fiuous. Tliey con-
sidered it in truth only a cMmfortahle crutch for
Christians; for the sentence, "Jioiim lihcro arltilrio

DKVKLnl'MKNT oV IhK'TIJINK ^)l' SIN, KT(

•.m

thoni

t)\V

[>\V

•1-

•CO (>

con-
Ill for
tilrio

ciunuvijKii nn csl II />cf/ '*, excludes {^r.'U-c in priiici-
|»Ic. Tlicro oxi.sts mIso in truth only o//f j^mcc. tlic **o,',','' '"
cnlij^litonin^, deterring, rcwMrd-olVcrin;^ law •, hut <nic
may also distin^iiisli, ( I) ci-cational ^racf (ciidow-
ni<'!it), {•>') tln' law [ilhini i luil in el (Inch'iim), (."•)
f/rufiu ])(>)' Chrisfmn: (a) liis c.\anii>l(\ (h) tlic fruit
of his work applied hy haptistn to our hciicfit as for-
giveness of sin. On this point the i'clagiaiis were
not permitted to wav(>r; hut they di.-clainied the
qratia pvncroiicns, did not see in tiiehapti>ni of
infants a baptism /// rciiiis.sioncnt p^ccdhtinm and
did not acknowledi^e the ahsolute necessity of for-
giveness. Children dyiiij^; unha|»ti/.ed are also saved,
hut are not a<]mitted into the rcf/iimn c(i('lin'ii)ii.
Th(3 thesis of tlie Pt'laj'ians, that Christian L;raee is nra.-..rnn-
conferred only sccnndiim iiicrihi, a!)olishes j^race "">i,'."ij. '"
just as mneh as the other thesis, that it works es-
sentially in the same maimer as the law. While
judging Auguslinianism, now as an innovation, now
as Manicha,»ism, now as inward contradiction, they
themselves brought forth the greatest contradictions
(dialectically concealed), and were innovators in so
far as they really held fast to the old ecclesiastical
doctrine of frecMlom but not to the o})j)()site l>ole, the
mystical doctrine of redemi)tion, and they accord-
ingly sold religion to an irrational rationality and to
a prtjfoundly immoral tli(M)rv of moi'ality.

HI. Augustine did not start from the lihcrnni Aot'iis
(irhifrimn, hut from CJod and the soul which feels '"""""-
its guilt in his presence and yet has exi>erienced his

'*«n

372 OLTMNKS OK TIIK IIISTOKV (H' I)()(i.MA.

' I

\l h

^\••.\('^\ III siM'kiii^ t(i <'.i'/iliiin tlicicfroiii nnturr, Iho
history nf the world and tln' history ol' thf individual,
ho fell into many contradictions and into assnniptions
too easily ^ainsai<l. Hut there are theses wliicii are,
outwardly considered, entirely untrue, hut, inwardly
considered, true. 'IMuis is Auj^ustine's doctrine of
gract? ;nid sin to he jud^(Ml. As an expression of
psycholojjjical religious (>xperienc{^ it is true; hut
projected into history it is false. Besides it is in
itself also not consistent ; for it is dominated hy tho
thought that "God in Chri.st creates faith ", iw well
as hy tho other thought that " God is the only Causal-
ity ", and these are brought only seemingly into con-
sonance hy the definition of grace as (jnitis (httd.
^il'!.'.'."l\?»!J" Besides Manicluean elements are visihle; th(5 letter
of Scripture (generally misunderstood) had also an
obscuring effect, and the religious view is accom-
panied by a moralistic {merita) which finally
mjikes the decision.

Humanity is, according to experience, a massa
peccati, i.e. void of God; but the God-man, Christ,
— ho alone — by his death brought the i)owcr to re-
plenish emi)ty humanity with Divino love: that
is tho (jrafia (jrafi.s data, the beginning, middle
and end of our salvation. Its aim is that out of the
massa perditionis there shall bo saved a cerius nii-
merns electorum. Such will be saved because God
has predestined (Augustine is an infra-lapsarian),
elected, called, justified, sanctified and preserved
them by virtuo of his eternal decree. This takes

(iialia
(Srutis
JJata.

;:#lilii

assa
irist,
3 re-
that
ddlo
the
Hit-
God

ll'tl-Nistilll-

DKVKLOJ'MKNT (>K IKJCTIMNK ol' HlN, KTC :iT:l

place ill th(» Clmrcli tliroii^h i^iacc, wliicli, (1) isftnir- \\lJ,ll',y,.n.
venicH.s, i.i'. withdraws man rnun iiisroiiditioii nf sin
and creates the good will ( ^ rocafio^ hut this and
all further acts of grace take place in those also wlu>
finally an? not saved, hecause they are not elected),
(t*) {•(KtjK'rans — this is developi'd in a series of gra-
dations as far as thoentirean<l actual regeneration of
man, which makes it j)()ssihle for him, when tilled
with love, to earn nierita. Out of the lovatit) UA-
lows the y/(/f ^; this is gradually augmented, since it
is doveloi)ed upon the stages of helief, ohedience,
fubicia and love. Parallel with it goes the actual
(visihle) working of grace in the Church, which he-
gins with the vemissio peccatonim^ i.e. witii hap-
tism, which removes the redtusoi hereditary sin and
blots out past sins. It terminates in ilm J it.siijicatio,
which is not a judgment upon the sinner, but the
comi)leting of the process by virtue of which he has
actually passed from an impious to a just state.
This takes phice through the infusion of the spirit of
love into the heart of the believer (and through the
Lord's Supper), whereby, admitted into the unity of
the conmiunion with Christ (Church), ho receives
as sanctus and ,s])irifalt's a new disj)osition and
desire {'^ mihi adhaerere deo bonum est^') and now
has the capacity for good works {''fides impt'trat,
quod lex imperat^'). Justification depends upon Justiflca-
i\\Q fides and is sub specie aeternitatis a concluded \^^]'^i^
act; empirically considered, it is a process never ''*^*"
completed in this world. The being filled with faith,

; i

t!«l

lit

11) >

t> ■

r.n. Fall
und Origin-
al State.

Privatio
Boni.

1,1

374 OUTLINES OK TIIK HISTOKV OF THXiMA.

liopi', and love is ovidonccd ))y tlic dcinonstration of
love and by withdrawal from the world (asceticism).
This is in turn evidenced in good works, which now
iiave merit before God {incrita), although they are
his gifts since they are begotten of his grace. Not to
every one are perfect works granted {roiisilid cran-
(/clic(t) ; but eveiy justified person has works of faith,
1. )pe and love, (o) the highest and best gift of the
(jtdtia is iliQ pcr.Hevcvdntia which is irrcsi.stihilis in
the elect. The vocati {ct sciiiciijUaii ?) who do not
have this will be lost. Wh}- some only receive it,
since it is not bestowed secdndnnt lucrifa, is God's
mystery. But certain is it — in spite <jf predestina-
tion and sovereign grace — thnt at the final judgment
not the " adliaerere Dei " but the monil Jmbitus will
be decisive. He only who can show nierita (but
such are Dei munera) w^ill be saved. The signifi-
cance of the forgiveness of sin {uid of faith is how-
ev< r misconceived. Augustine's thesis is : " Where
love is, there also is bliss corresponding to the mea-
sure of love".

On this basis Augustine formed his doctrine con-
cerning sin, the fall and the original state. Sin is
privatio honi (lack of being and of true being),
turning of man unto himself (pride) and concu-
piscence (sensualit}^) : " misera nccessitas von posse
71011 peccancW", although formal freedom exists —
dominion of the devil (therefore redemption from
without is necessary). Augustine desires to retain
the "(f/y^or 6u/" as the principal conception of sin,

i'-

DEVELOI'MENT OF DOCTUINK OF SIN, ETC. '<\75

(but

Natura
Vitiutti.

Tradux
P»Hrcati ;
Vitiam

but \u ivality lu' lauks concnpiscoiicp abovo it. Tbo
latter niaiiitosts itsclt above all in sexual lust. Siueo
this acts spontaneously (independent of the will), it
proves, that the nature is vitiated {natiird titiatd).
For that reason it propagates sin : The act of genera-
tion, consummated with lust, is a testimony that
humanity has become a niassd pevcdti. Since Au-
gustine hesitated to teach traducianism as regards
the origin of the soul, the body — contrary to the orig-
inal deposition — becomes the bearei' of sin which
infects the soul. The trdda.v pvccdti runs as vitidin
originis through humanity. This hereditary sin is oVitjinis.
sin, punishment for sin and guilt; it destn^ystlie true
life and surrenders man to the non posse mm mori
(unbaptized children also — however ^' niittissima
poena "), after it has defiled all his acts {"^ splendida
vifid "). Thus testify Scripture, the practice of the
Church (infant baptism) and the conscience of the
sinner. Since Adam this hereditary sin exists as
natura vitiafa. His fall was terrible, a complexity
of all heinous sins (i)ride and concupiscence) ; it was
the more terrible, since Adam had not only been
created good, but also possessed as adjutorium the
Divine grace (for without this there exists no spon-
taneous goodness) . This grace he forfeited, and so
great was its loss, that " in him " the whole human
race was corrupted (not only because all were that
Adam, but also because from him the evil contagion
spread), and even baptism ^snot able to eradicate he-
reditary sin (human lust), but can only remove its

Race

Siuned

iu Adam.

<' ll

[

• 1 I

;^ri'

''Si^ii

' N '1*

!; !^

Augus-
tine's En-
chiridiou.

370 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DO(JMA.

reatiis. Augustine's idea of the original state ( jJOAse
nonpeccare and adjufoi'iiim) Hiiuulii in flagrant con-
tradiction with his doctrine of grace ; for gratia as ad-
jutorium in the original state is the grace of redemp-
tion, in so far as, totally unlike, it leaves the will free
and really has no effect, but is merely a condition of
the free decision for good, therefore not irresisfibilis.
This adjnton'um is in truth conceived in a Pelagian
way (his doctrine of the original state and of the stand-
ard of the final judgment is not compatible with his
doctrine of grace) and the natura vitiata{\yhen taken
as human lust) gives no longer a place for holy mat-
rimony, and is therefore Manichasan. But all these
grave offences cannot dim the greatness of the truth
that God works the " willing and doing ", that we
possess nothing which we have not received, and that
to adhere to God is good and our good.

4. Augustine's Exposition of the Symbol.
New Doctrine of Religion.

The

In order to understand how Augustine transformed
the traditional doctrine of religion (the dogma) , and
to know which of his thoughts have passed into ec-
clesiastical possession, it is necessary to study his ex-
planations of the symbol, especiall> his Enchiridion.
In the first place the common Catholic trend of his
teaching is here revealed. Conformably with the old
symbol, the doctrine of the trinity and of the double-
nature is explained ; the importance of the Catholic

,f\

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OK SIN, ETC. 377

^Ifi'

The

Bli88.

Oliurch is strictly maintained. Baptism is placed in ^^l^l^^i"l
the foreground as the most important mystery, and >lyst"ry.
is referred back to the death of Christ, by which the
dominion of the devil, after he has received his du(^s,
is broken. Faith often appears as something prelim-
inary; eternal life is granted only to those meriting
it; these continue in works of love, lastly however
in asceticism. But all are not obliged to live thus;
one must distinguish between man data and con.siiia.
His treatment of alms is broad; it constitutes
penance. Within the Church there is forgiveness
of all sins, under the assumption of the sat isf actio
congrita. There are degrees in sin, ranging from ^yKud°'
crimes to insignificant every-day sins; in the same
manner there are also degrees of good and of bad men ;
even the best {sancti^ iJcrfecti) are not free from light
sins. There is a gradation of bliss (according to the
merita) . The departed, but not perfected good souls
are benefited by the sacrifice of the mass, alms and
prayers; they are in a purifying hre of punishment.
The common, superstitious views were in many ways
farther intensified by Augustine ; thus in regard to
purgatory, to the temp ^vavy amelioration of the pun-
ishment of the condemned, to the angels who aid the
Church of this world, to the completing by the re-
deemed of the heavenly Church which was deci-
mated through the fall of the angels, to the virginity
of Mary in partu and to her singular purity and
conception, to the mild beginnings toward the calcu-
lation of the value of the sacrificial death of Christ,

Common
SuixTsti-

tiuus
Views Em-
phasized.

:)7S Ol'TLINES OF THE TITSTOHV OF DOGMA.

.^=.iii!.

New Elf-
uieiits Add-
ed to
Church
Doctrines.

God and
Sin.

filially — to Wh) c'()nc'('})ti()ii of salvation as cisio et
fruifio Dei, wliicli again and again comes to the
surface, and to tlu; joining of the spiritual powers to
mysteriously operating sacraments.

But, on the other side, the doctrine of religion in
the Enchiridion is new. To the old s^'mhol material
was added which could be united with it only very
loosely and which at the same time modifies the orig-
inal elements. In all three articles the treatment of
sin, forgiveness of sin and perfection in love is the
main thing (Ench. 10 seq. "^5 soq. 41 seq. 04-08).
Everything is represented as an inward process, to
which the very briefly treated old dogmatic material
appears as subordinate. Therefore the od article
is treated the most explicitly. Already in the brief
sketch the new appears : Everything depends upon
faith, hope, love; so truly inward is religion (3-8).
In the 1st article no cosmology is given; indeed
physics as the content of dogmatics is expressly put
aside (0, 10 seq.). Hence the various Logos-doctrines
are also all wanting. The trinity, handed down as
dogma, is compressed into a unity : It is the Creator.
In reality it is one person (the persons are moments
in God and have no longer any cosmological mean-
ing) . Everything in religion is related to God, as the
sole source of all good, and to sin; the latter is dis-
tinguished from error Thus was a break made with
the old intellectualism. Whenever there is a refer-
ence to sin, there is also one to the gratia gratis
data, the predestining grace, which alone frees the

I)i:vi:l()I'Mi:.\t ok doctuink of sin, i/ic.

" * <

;:>

shackled will. With a rcfcTC'iu'c to the inisrn\-<H(l/<(
pracrcK iciis iind. sHhs('(in<'ii.s tluu-xposition oi" tiic 1st
article closes. How diU'ereiitly would its words liave
sounded, had Aui^iistiiie been able to treat it unre-
strainedly I — In the '.M article is touched (^uite brietl}'
that which the symbol reall}" contains (the return of
C*lirist, without chiliasm). But the followiuL^ conu?
to the front: The unity of Christ's personality as
the homo with whose soul the Word iniited itself,
the predestininj^ grace which brought this Jionio into
unit}" of i)erson with the Divinity, although he pos-
sessed no deserts, the close connection between tho
death of Christ and the redemption from tho devil,
the atonement and baptism, on tho one side, the
thought of the appearance and history of Christ as
exaltation in humility and as the prototype of the
I'ita CJin'sficoia, on the other. The redemptive im-
portance of Christ was to Augustine as strongly ex-
pressed in this humility in exaltation and in the
prototype (vid. Bernard and Francis) as in Christ's
death. The incarnation as such recedes, i.e. is placed
in a light which was entirely foreign to the Greeks.
Accordingly the '^d article was quite changed; the
old dogmatic material is only the building mate-
rial. — In the 3d article the unrestrainedness and as-
surance with which an ever-enduring forgiveness of
sins within the Church is taught is the princij)al
and the new point. Among the masses the growing
laxity had called forth the inexhaustible sacrament
of atonement; but with Augustine the new knowl-

Chris-

toldjxy nf

AuKUStiiif.

EmphasiH

oil

Hfdeinp-

tiuu.

il' •

!■ ; I

«^p

r:-

Paul,

:J80 OUTLINES OK THK HISTORY OK IXXJMA.

t'(lj^(; lijul IxH'ii given through an intensifying of the
('()nsciousnesB of sin and a burrowing into the grace
AiiKustiue, of God, as Paul has taught it. True, the (luestion of
tlie personal assurance of salvation had as yet not
touched his soul — he stands between the ancient
Church and Luther — ; the question. How can I be rid
of my sins and bo filled with the power of God? was
his fundamental question. In following the vulgar
Catholic teaching he looks about for good works ; but
he conceived them as the product of grace and of the
will which is dependent upon grace ; he accordingly
warned men against relying upon outward acts. Cul-
tus and even alms he put aside; he knows that it is
a question of inward transformation, of a pure heart
and a new spirit. At the same time he is sure that
ForRive- after baptism the way also to forgiveness of sins
ever stands open to the penitent, and that he who
does not believe in this commits the sin against the
Holy Spirit. This is an entirely new interpretation
of the Gospel passage. Very explicitly was the con-
clusion of the symbol {resurrectio carnis) explained.
But the main point here, after a short explanation
of the real theme, is : The new doctrine of predesti-
nation as the strength of his theology ; furthermore
the idea, essentially new as a doctrine (it stands in
place of Origen's doctrine regarding the apokatas-
tasis), of a purification of souls in the hereafter, to-
ward which the prayers and sacrifices of survivors
are able to contribute.
Piety. Piety: Faith and love in place of fear and hope;

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 381

religion: Something higher than all that is called
doctrine, a new life in the strength of love; the doc-
trine of Scripture : The thimjs (the Gospel, faith, love,
hope — God) ; the trinity : The Due living God ; Chris-
tology : The one Mediator, the man Jesus, with whoso
soul the Divinity has been united, without the former
having deserved it; redemption: Death for the l)en-
efit of enemies and hiunility in exaltation; grace:
The new creative, changeless power of love; the sac-
raments : The Word along with the sign ; bliss : The
hedta necessitas of the good; the good. Dependence
upon God; history: God does everything nccordiiKj
to hiii pleasure. Compare with this the Greek dog-
matics! True, the old dogma grew the more rigid,
the farther they were pushed into the backgroimd
(not abolished) ; the)'' became ecclesiastical law and
order. The new doctrines remained still fluid; they
had not as yet received the form and value of dog-
mas. Through Augustine Church doctrine became
more indefinite as regards extent and importance.
On the one hand it was traced back to the Gospel, on
the other it defined its limits less sharply in relation
to theology, since a definite formulation was lack-
ing. Around the old dogma, which maintained
themselves in rigid validity, a large indefinito circle
of doctrines was formed, in which the most impor-
tant thoughts concerning faith lived, and which not-
withstanding could be surveyed and firmly fixed by
no one. That was the condition of the dogma dur-
ing the Middle Ages. By the side of the rigidity

Ileligion.

Doctrine.

Trinity

Chris
toloj;y.

Rtvl«Mnp-
tioii.

(Jraco.

Sacra-
ments.

The Good.
History.

' ♦■

(

■f

■if*

5 ■<■■

* ■■ ■

P-

».},-.

It -

■s ' :

(•

III)

C'afhf.lic
Cliiircli

SlICCI'filR to

West l;(>-

iiiaii
Knipiro.

Tli.>
Franks.

3.^'^ OITLINKS OF Tin-: HfSTOin' OF DOCiMA.

tlicro had alivady hoyiin lli(3 process of inward dis-
.solutiou.

CHAITEIl V.

IlISTOKV OK IXXJMA IN Till: ()(( IDENT TIM. TIIK
BE(;iNMNti OF TliH MIODI.F A(iKS (loU-OOt).

^Toiler, Scinipclajjjianisimis R. E.'^ Wi^^'^crs, i. Z. f. li. Th.,
lS,")Jf. , aiul clsowliuro. Lau, (ircgor tl. (ir., 1845.

Tin: AVostcni Roman ompire collapsed. The
Catholic Chnrcli steppe 1 in as the heir of the empire,
the Roman bishop as the heir of the emperor (Leo I.
and his successors in tlie Tjth century). But the
l)apjc< V, scarcely put at the head, ex])erienced in the
time of Justinian a severe reverse, from which Gre-
gory alone succored it. During the 5th and Oth cen-
turies the Roman church was not as yet able to disci-
pline the barbarian nations; for the}' were Arian
and Rome was not free but chained to the Orient
from the 0th centur}' on. The Franks alone became
Catholic, yet they at first remained independent of
Rome. Nevertheless just at this time the claim of
the Roman bishoi), that everything valid of Peter
(especially Mt. 10:17 secj.) was also valid of him, ob-
tained recognition. Dogmatic efforts were limited
to the rece])tion and toning down of Augustinianism
in the sense of gluing it on to the common Catho-
lic teaciiing. As regards the old Roman sym-
bol, it obtained in Caul at that time its jn'es-
ent form, in which esi)ecially the new expression

DEVELOPMKNT OF DOfTHIXE OF STX, ETC. :]S3

*' comnnniio .sfoiclnrnm '' (Faustiis of Roji) is of
iniportaiK'c. ,

I. (U)ni('st hcl n'coi Semi- r<'I(i(/i((ni.sin (Uid

Gniti'fiil estoom for AinMisliiu', n'.octioii of W^- rro'i'^^tinft-
lagiaiiisin, recognition of (lie imivorsal horoditarv rlsistlhiilfl.
peccability and of the necessity of grace (as (tdiuht-
riiim) did not as yet mean tli(» recognition of predes-
tination and of the (fraiia irrcsist ibiliK. Justifi-
cation by works, for which Augustine himself left a
concealed place, and a correct instinct of ecclesiasti-
cal self-preservation reacted against these doctrines.
During Augustine's life-time they had already called
forth uneasiness and doubt among the monks of
Hadrumet {A}fa. do (/raiitt cf lihcro nrhiirio and de
corrupfioiic cf (frdtin) . A year or two later (4 v'S- 1 •*•»)
his devoted friends reported to him that in the south
of Gaul (monks at Massilia and other p! s) there ^'•^"K^."*'
was an opposition to the doctrine of i)redcstination
and of the inability of the will, because it paralyzed
the Christian preaching. Augustine by his writings
de praedest . sand, and dc dono perscrcranfiae con-
firmed his friends, but rather goaded his opjxments.
After his death the ''servi r/c/" in southern Gaul
advanced more daringly, yet not quite openly
for Augustine possessed gn^at authority. Tin;
CoiiiniOiu'foriinit of Vincent, wliicli fornndates the
sli'ii'tl}' ecclesiastic traditional {)oint of view (see
above, p. 221), is aimed, at least indirectly, against

.i,ii

11 :

fl ^

:JS4 OL'TMNKS of TlIK HISTORY OF DOOMA.

John

catwian. *^® TunvnoHs of Augustiiio's (loftrino; JdIiii Cassi-
an, tho fathor of tho south (iallic monks, gavo in
his "cotldfioiics^' expression to sei)ii-J\'l(uiiituism^
althougli ho had learned mueh from Augustine. Tho

T'oints (.f decisive points of somi-Pehigianism are the aclual

St'riii-I'cla-

Kianisin. universality of grace, tho accountahility (responsi-
hility) of man — herein is it evangelical — and tho
importance of good works. Accordingly the (/rati a
praeveniens is in general admitted only as outward
grace. God created the conditions, opportunity and
possibility of our salvation ; but inward (sanctifying)
grace concurs with the free will, which is accord-
ingly a co-ordinate factor. Therefore the one as well
as the other may lead the way, and a gratia irre-
sistihilis is as much excluded as a predestination in-
dependent of tho Divine prescience (of free actions).
The latter involves an ingens sacrilegium {i.e. fatal-
ism), even if the reservation must stand that God's
Hiiarius ways are incomprehensible (like Hilarius of Aries,
"Prn.'dos- and more decidedly, but at the same time given to

tinatus."

lying, the unknown author of the " Praedestinahis ",
tho origin of which is still a riddle — the representa-
tion is fairly in keeping with that of Jerome, as
general doctrine it is more hesitating than that of
Augustine, as an expression of Christian self -judg-
ment it is a desertion of the truth). The defenders
of Augustine, Prosper and the unknown author of
the lihri II. de vocatione gentium (milder than
Augustinianism), did not produce a decisive effect,
although pope Colestius reprimanded their opponents

Hi.

■li jl

les,
to

tof

dg-

ers

■lan

DKVKLOPMENT OF DOrTHINK <)K SIN, KTf. 385

as over-curiouH people. During the luHt <leca(l»^s of
the 5tli century scmi-Pelajrianism obtained an excel-
lent representative in tlu^ renowned teaeluT of south-

Gaul, F

)f R

em UaiU, l^austus ot k<mi, an aniiahit? and nui(

il)U

1(1

IH.

Fftiist
of H.'Ji.

M»'ritiim
1).' Coil
jfrun ft
CundiKno.

ahhot and hishop, who turned as well aj^ainst I'e-
lagius "y)r^s7//cr ", as against the grave error of pro-
destination (in his writing, de (jrcffia cJci cf Innnantie
nicnfislihrro arhifrio), and who induced the strictly
Augustinian preshytcM' Lucidus to recant, after that
the doctrine of predtvstination had been condemned
at the synod of Aries (1*5). Faustus in his doctrine
is still luoix^ nioiihisli than Cassianand h^ss inlluenced
by Augustine. He already brought forward iniplic-
itl}' the doctrine of nicrifnm dc ('(nu/riio cf coiid/ffno.
In the Jidc.s as knowledge and in the endeavors of
the will to reform its(>lf there lies a mcvitum^ l)orn
of the grafid prinui, which participates in the re-
deeming grace that now works in union with the
will, so that jierfect meritd are produced.

Like as Pelagijuiisni and Nestorianism, which are
inwardly imited, were once drawn into a common
fate, so also was scmi-Pelagianism entangled in the
Christological controvers}' and found therein its pro-
visional end. The f/<co7)06*c////e Scythian monks in S^^^'^"
Constantinople (see above, p. SO?), who in their ^'"uoS""
Christology especially emphasized the Divine factor,
denounced the Occidental theologians (Faustus) as
enemies of the correct Christology and as opponents
of grace, taking their stand with Augustine. The

pope gave an evasive decision, but the monks found
35

•";; III

\Hi

hMf

FtllK<''>tiUH
of HUH|K'.

CH?8arius
of Aries.

Cbaptera.

Bouiface
II.

Gratia

Praeveni-

ens.

380 OITTLINRS OF THE IIISTOKY OF IHKSMA.

nllioH nmoiig tlio hisliops who had \)oon hanished
from North Africa into Sardinia. Ful{^'i»ntius of
Ruspo wroto ahont r)20 wvcral important letters
against the authority of Faustus, in which comploto
Augustinianism is set forth (particularity of grace,
pravih'Hibiatio ad poeiuun) . These and the reading
of Augustino's sermons had its effect also in south-
ern Oaul. The age saw hut the one dilennna, either
Augustine is a luu'etic, or a hely teacher. The groat
Gallic preacher, who had obtained his education en-
tirely fn)m Augustine, Cjcsarius of Aries (f 54'^),
averted the South-Gallic opposition, which had be-
come boisterous at the synod of Valence ; supported
by the pope ho gained the victt)ry at tlio small synod
of Orange {'rlh) with the ^5 " Chapters", which the
popo had extracted from the writings of Augustine
and Prosper and sent to the southern Gauls as the
doctrine of the earl}' fathers. A few only in south-
ern Gaul supported Cfosarius (Avitus of Vienne, f
523) ; but most of the bishops were perhaps no longer
capable of following the point under controversy.
The approval of pope Boniface II. strengthened the
authority of the decrees of Orange, which were later
tolerantly considered by the Tvidentine council. The
" Chapters" are Augustinian, but predestination is
wanting; and the inward process of grace upon
which for Augustine the principal emphasis lay is
not desorvinglj' appreciated. The grat ia jyraeveniens
is taught unequivocally, because the strict conception
of hereditary sin and with it the doctrine of gracQ

DKVKI.OI'MKNT OK IXX'TUINR OK SIN, KT(\ HH?

ished
18 of
otters
npleto
^rjico,
jidin^
south-
either
» great
on eii-
\ 542),
ijul he-
) ported
I synod
ich the
iustino
as the
sonth-
?nne, f
longer
oversy.
led the
re later
The
ition is
e upon
lay is
wniens
ception
f gracQ

were emphasized hy the inntikish vi(Hvs regardinj^
the impurity of matrimony. Ihit otherwise the d<M*-
trine is in reahty an Augwstiiiianism witliout Augus-
tine, or eould easily he understood as such; i.e. the
vulgar Catholic views concerning outward grace and
works could and would maintain tliemselves along-
side of it.

2. UrvijiH'd tliv Ureal (.VJ()-G04).

Rome finally advanced the formidas of Augustin- <ir.«K">ryi.
ianism to victory, although its hishops in tlu^ Oth
century withdrew far from the same, (jlregory 1., a
pope highly iniluential through liis personality (a
monk), his letters, writings (rcffnla ^>f<.s7orn//.s', flid-
logi, expos, in Job sen inoralici, honiil. in Kzcvk.)
and liturgical reforms, under the cover of Augus-
tinian language strengthened the vulgar (\itholic
type, hy means of superstitious elements, then gave
expression to it again, and ))rought forward into
prominence the old Occidental conception of religion
as legalistic organization. Tlie miraculous hecMUK; Mirju-niouy
characteristic of religion. The latter lived among
angels, devils, sacraments, sacrifices, penitential
rites, punishment of sins, fear and lio})e, hut not in
sure confidence in God through Christ and in love.
Even if Gregory personally indulged in Augustinian
thoughts and manifested in his own way justice,
gentleness and freedom, yet the variegated form
of his theology testifies that even the hest men at
that time were not ahle to withdraw from the relig-

ion.

Grep:ory

Domiuates

in DoKHia

Half a Mil-

IcDnium.

Repro-
duces
Auj?ustin<"i
with Semi-
Pelagian
Modifica-

tiODS.

Sacriflc<> of

Christ Rc-

ppati'd in

Ijord "8

Supper.

388 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

ions barbarism into which aiiti(iiiity liad dissolved.
Gregory was in after time more read and lauded
than Augustine. For nearly half a millennium he
dominated without a rival tlie history of dogma in
the Occident, and he really dominates Catholicism
even now. He indeed created nothing new; but by
the manner in which ho accentuated the various
doctrines and Church customs and introduced a sec-
ond-rate religion into theology, ho created the vulgar
type of Roman Catholicism. Espi.'cially wcjrth}^ of
mention are the following : ( 1 ) He reproduced the
most valuable series of Augustine's thoughls con-
cerning the inner effect and a])prop»*iation of grace,
in part even independent of the latter, attributing
also to the Word {vertyiim jidei) great importance;
but he gave to all phases of the Augustiman ordo
salntis a semi-Pelagian cast, since he conceived the
Uberum arhitriuni as a factor coordinate with grace
{"^ nosmet ipsos liherare diclmiu\ quia liberanti
nos domino consent imus'')', {-l) He felt the impor-
tance of the death of Christ, perhaps more intensely
than Augustine, but among the different points of
view under which he placed it the apocryphal pre-
dominates: Through Christ's death t]io ("!;'vil was
overcome, after he had been chctited; in the Lord's
Supper the sacrifice of Christ is actually repeated
(here Gregory's doctrine has become especially the
standard), and thus an imaginary sacrifice takes the
place of the historical ; l)ut otherwise also the his-
torical Christ appears supplanted, viz. by his own

^t^bm*

Ived.
Luded
m he
aia in
icism
)ut by
[irioiis
a sec-
^'iilgar
thy of
I'd the
s con-
grace,
biiting
rtancc;
11 or do
v-ed the
1 grace
Kiranti
impor-
tenselj'
)iiits of
al pre-
il was
Lord's
jpeated
illy the
kes the
he his-
itt own

DEVELOPMENT OF DOPTRIXE OF SIN, ETC. 380

merituniy which as the resuU of a sinless life and
holy death is separated fi'oiii him, an actual good
necessar}' to every one in order to api)ease the angry
God, but in its value to the individual (luite an un-
certain treasure; {'■)) With this conception of the in-
tercession of the iiicritiun CJin'sti, Gregory united interce*-

' ^ "^ sion of

the hitherto uncertain thoughts regarding the inter- suiuts, etc.
cession of the saints and the service of the angels,
and exalted them to the lofty i>lane of "theology".
He legitimized the pagan superstition which had
need of demi-gods and graded deities, had re-
course to the holy bodies of martyrs and joined the
service of Christ closely with that of the saints,
classifying and commending the archangels and
guardian-angels, and fortifj^iug the evil practice by
his doctrine; (4) Hierarch more in practice than in
doctrine, he brought out strongly the similarity of
the Church and the ciiitas Dei, for he lived at a
time when nothing of value existed save the Church.
He extolled the latter as the coityregah'o .saiictonun,
but in reality it was to him an educational institu-
tion, repelling the evil and dispensing grace ; a higher
idea the men of that day dare not set before them-
selves. To him the Roman bishop was the mast( r
only of the sinning bishops (the laity no longer play
any part at all), liut sinners were they all (''.s/ ([ua
culpa in e2)isco2)iH invenitur, nescio ([in's Petri
successor! suhiectns non sit: ciun rero chIjki non
exigit, omnes secundum rationeni huinilitatis (te-
quales sunt'') ', (T)) Gregory still knows what inner

Church

and ("i%i-

tiis Dei.

»r

•i I

390 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

'I i M

^sfaui'tlS'" g^^^^ of grace and virtue are, but the exterminated
propriateci. Romaii pag;inism had notwithstanding transmitted
to him also its inventory and its religious mode of
thought in such a perfect way that he encased all
religious duties and virtues in statutory, firmly out-
lined ceremonies, which were in part adopted old
Roman customs; here also he created in reality lit-
tle that was new, but he elevated to ecclesiastical
ordinances of salvation of the first rank the Roman
" reZ/V/Zo" together with the remnants of the mj'steries
which long since had obtained civic rights in the
^"seif''^' Church; (G) Gregory had a feeling for true hum il-
Deniai. -^^^ ^^^^ ^iq strengthened the trend which this virtue
had taken tow^ard monastic " humilitas''\ self-denial
and spiritual self-deception: With the simple sense
of truth the sense of truthfulness died out — it became
night; and the world of the inner life also, which
Augustine had enlightened, grew dark again; (7)
Gregory's deductions concerning penitence became
the most consequential ; in these his theology lived
and from them one could wholly construe it. The
inscrutable God is the Requiter and leaves no sin
unpunished ; in baptism he has overlooked inherited
sin, but it is our concern to gain blessedness through
penance and good works by the aid of the hand of
grace. Of the three parts of penitence {conversio
mentis, con fessio oris, v indict a peccati) the penalty
to be paid for sin becomes in reality the most impor-
tant. By Gregory" the fatal transposition was first
carried out that the ^* satisfactiones", which origin-

Penance.

lated
litted
de of
}d all
f out-
d old
ty lit-
Lstical
loman
steries
in the
lumil-
virtue
denial
3 sense
>ecame
which

)ecame
lived
The
no sin
lerited
irough
and of
versio
)enalty
impor-
is first
origin-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 391

ally were considered a sure attestation of repentance,
are the satisfying penalties for sin, to which one
submits in order to avoid eternal punishment. The
merit of Christ and the power of the Church seem to
consist in the very fact that eternal punishment is
changed into tempered; these temi)oral i)enalties,
however, are again diminished, abbreviated, or pre-
vented by the intercession of Christ and the saints,
by masses for the soul, relics, amulets, etc. The
fact which has always been observable in the history
of religion, that wherever religion takes its aim from
morals it becomes immoral, is exemplified here also.
In the main principle the severe idea of retribution
dominates, in the subordinate all possible means of
salvation come into play, in part not even with Chris-
tian etiquette, and in the final instance casuistry and
fear rule. Long before this view sufficed no longer
for this life and for time, and yet men had not dared
to reach over into eternity — for who could then be
considered saved? — but Gregory was the first to se-
curely introduce purgatory into theology, thereby
conquering an immense province for the Church, to
remove hell farther awa}*, and tlius to procure for
uncertainty a new comfort, but no rest.

Satisfac-
tions, In-
terces-
sions,
Masses, etc.

Hi.b

yi 1

604

OUTLINES OF THE IIISTOKY OK DOmiA.

. (

' '■' .1

(-■•r

i( :

'ii-i

;:li .• ;i

1 I;.

11 ■ '■*

Clovis.

Pepin and
Charle-
magne.

CHAPTER VI.

HISTORY OF DOGMA IN THE TIME OF THE
CARLOVINGIAN RENAISSANCE.

Bath, D(i. des MA., 3 Bdd., 1873 f. Renter, Gescli. d re-
lig. Aufkliirimg ini MA., 2 Bdd., 187o f. Ilauck, KGesch.
Deutscldands, 2 Bdd., 18H7 f . Schwune, DG. d. mittlereii
Zt. , 1882. Spiess, Gesch. d. Unterriditsweseu i. Deutscld. bis
z. Mitte d. 13. Jahrh., 1885. Hatch, The Growth of Church
Institutions, 1887.

Clovis' conversion to Christianity and Gregory's
missionary efforts among the Anglo-Saxons laid the
foundation for the history of the Roman Catholic
Church among the Germans. In the 7th century
Arianism died out ; in the 8th Rome Was forced to
transfer the centre of gravity of its politics to the
Romano- Germanic empire. Newly converted Eng-
land and Germany became at once Roman. Pepin
and Charles the Great made advances to the pope.
At first the new kingdom of the Franks gained more
than the pope ; but it soon became apparent that the
latter obtained the highest benefit from the confeder-
ation, not because the idea in itself of the Christian
conqueror signified less than that of the successor of
Peter, but because it demanded the foundation of an
actual world-empire, which, however, could be only
temporarily created.

Spiritual life and theology had, prior to the time
of Charles the Great, no progressive history; the

DEVELOPMENT OK DOCTFUNE OK SIN, ETC. iJO!)

Ctirloviiij^iaii o[)(X'li was a jjjivat a Jul, in many respcfls,
abortive attom})t at a revival of anti(iuity and likewise
also of the theology of the fathers. Whatever of
theology was at hand prior to about the j'ear SOO is
compendiinn and excerpt (Isidore of Seville, ±Jede,
later Kabanus), is in a certain measure "institu-
tion'', like the whole of religion. Through IJedeand
Alciiin, Augustine was revived. It was a great ad-
vance when men began to really luiderstand him
again — in some respects better than did Gregory (Al-
cuin, Agobard and others) — ; still as an independent
thinker Scotus Erigen.a ak)ne can be named, whose
mystical pantheism, derived from the Areopagite
and Augustine {"" de divisione naturae''), remained
however wholly witlnmt effect. The effort at cul-
ture in the Oth century was a very respectable one
(see the manuscripts preserved to us). Starting in
England (Theodore of Tarsus, Bede, Alcuin) it swept
over the continent and was strengthened by the cul-
ture of Italy, which had never been entirely extin-
guished. But during the great convulsions after the
third quarter of the 0th century everything seemed
again to be engulfed. The dogmatic controversies
of the age originated, in part, in the hitherto hidden
but now strictly draw^n consequences of Augustinian-
ism, and, in part, in the relationshij) then sustained
toward the Orient. The farther development of the
mass and of penance, in practice and in theory, de-
serves especial attention.

Tlieodore

of Tarsus.

BihIc,

Aleuin.

Scotus
Erigeua.

I' 'I

I i :

394 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

1 A. Tlie Adoption Controveistj.
Ilauck, a. a. O. II. ; (ianis, Kirchongeschiclite Spaniens II.

'.f

I. 1''

■j

Christol-

oj/y of Sth

Ccnincil

Dominant

in
Occident,

ElipanduB
of Toledo.

Felix of
Naples.

L .

In the Occident after severe contests the Christol-
ogy of the 5th council gained the victory, and in
spite of the Gth council this mystical view, under
the guise of monophysitisni, supplanted the strict
Chalcedon, since the superstitious ideas about the
Lord's Supper favored it. Spain was less influenced
by this development. In the jMuzarabic liturgy stood
the Augustinian formula of the pasfiio jilii adop-
tirri. Elipandus, the tyrannical bishop of Toledo,
full of national pride, brought into notice about the
year 780 the old doctrine that Christ as regards his
human nature infUus del adopt' vus^ the redeemed
therefore in the fullest sense brethren of the man
Jesus. Very likely he desired a formula different
from that of Rome as an expression of the orthodoxy
which was to be found only in Spain. From inward
conviction and with high regard for the human per-
son Jesus, Felix, bishop of Naples, who occupied
a chair in the empire of Charles, championed the
same (reading of Antiochian scriptures is probable).
After that Beatus and Eterius had defended the op-
position doctrine in Spain, the Franconian theolo-
gians, especially Alcuin, interfered. Monophysites
and Nestorians faced each other under new helmets ;
but to Charles the opportiniity of proving himself
the guardian of orthodoxy and the master of the

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 305

Church was welcome. Adoptioiiism was condciniicd fj,',','''^,'""
at the synods of Rcgeiisbiirg {VJ'l), Frankfurt (TOl), ''''""''**•
and Aachen (709), Felix was repeatedly forced to
recant, and Frankish Spain was recalled through
theology and gentle pressure (wheel of torture) to
the unity of the mystical faith. The doctrine of
John of Damascus, which conceived the human na-
ture in Christ as impersonal and placed it as the as-
sumed nature of the Logos in complete unity with
him, gained the victory in the Occident also. Yet
in spite of the realistic doctrine concerning the Lord's
Supper which crowded out the historical Christ and
demanded a fine monophj'sitism, Augustinian-adop-
tion ideas were preserved through the later theolo-
gians of the Middle Ages.

\'\

ill!

i fi

I I

1 B. The Predestination Contnn'ersy.

Wiggers, i. d. Z. f. h. Th., 1859. Woizsiickor, i. d. Jli. f.
d. Th. , 1859. Monogiai)hs on Hinkimir, by von Noorden
u. Schrors.

The dominating ecclesiastical system was semi-
Pelagian; but in the 9th century Augustine was
again diligently studied. That during the crisis
which arose Auguptinianism was after all not rein-
stated, notwithstanding all the good Augustinian
phrases, is a proof of the power of ecclesiasticism.
The monk Gottschalk of Orbais maintained the doc-
trine of predestination with the power of Augustine,
likewise as the chief and original doctrine, finding
in it the key to the riddle of his own life. He pro-

Semi-Pela-
Douiinant.

Gottschalk
of Orbais.

Itf

1300 OUTLINES OF THE IIFSTOllY OF DOGMA.

cljiimcd tli(^ j>r«rr/('.s7///r^//o (jcnn'na {rnf rifam ctad
iuorlein), yotvvas of the opinion tliat God predestined
only the good and that he merely had a fore-knowl-
edge of the evil. Not what ho said (Fulgentius and
Isidore had taught nothing different) but the man-
iier in whieh ho presented it to the Church aroused
enemies against him. Ho was condemned at May-
ga^anus, enco (848) by Rabanus, at Chiersey (8H») by Hincmar
and taken into custody as a " tii iserahilis nionachiis",
from which he never escaped, since he persistently re-
fused to recant. But the most eminent theologians
went over to his side, not so much because they were
in earnest about Augustinianism, as to make difficul-
ties for Hincmar and to preserve as traditionalists
the Augustinian " language". From the kingdom of
Lothar especially came the opposition to the Raban-
Hincmar thesis, that predestination should be deduced
from the prescience and be limited to the saints. Hinc-
mar tried to defend himself at the synod of Chiersey
(853) against the herd of Alcuin disciples (Prudentius
of Troycs, Ratramnus, Lupus of Ferrieres, Servatus
Lupus, Remigius of Lyon, the provincial bishops)
by making in the " Chapters" large concessions to
Augustinianism, yet retaining in his doctrine of
one predestination, God's purpose of universal salva-
tion, etc. In these objective and subjective untrue
" Chapters" the point under consideration was no
longer clearly expressed. Those who by word of
mouth acknowledged the whole of Augustinianism
meant at that time onl}^ the half, and those who, like

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. .V.l?

Hiiicmar, rejected a part did in truth not want
any at all. In the archbishopric of Sens and in
the south of France the resohitions of Chiersey did
not give satisfaction. At Valence, 855, the grniina
pvaedt'Htinatia was proclaimed and Augustinianisni
in general announ('i>d. At the great synods of the
three empires at Savonieres (S5!») and Toucy (SCiO) a
unificjition was not so nnich secured as a paralyza-
tion of the controversy through agreement. Hinc-
mar's conception of tlio doctrine, i.e. Gregory the
First's, was in reality victorious. The doctrine of
God's purpose of universal salvation, of the quick
and sure efficacy of the sacraments and of the con-
currence of free-will continued in force; the doctrine
of predestination reappeared as a decorative element
in theology. Only in this form was it compatible
with empirical ecclesiasticism.

rrat'dfsli-
natio.

2. The ControverHij cihoiit the Filioque and about

Jnuu/es.

i:ll

Hcfeic, C-ncil. Gosch., Bd. III. Pichler. Gcsch. d. kirchl.
Trennuug zwischeu dcm Oriout imdOccideut. 2I5do., 1864 f.

The Augustinian-Spanish formula "'filioqne'^ (see AnKustin-
I. p. 271) had been accepted in France (see the FiVin'',ul:'.
synod of Gcntilly, 7G7) and was defended by the theo-
logians of Charlemagne {libri Carolini: Alcuin, de
2irocess. s. s.). At Aachen, 800, the Frankish church
resolved that the fdioquc belonged to the symbol.
This resolution was provoked by a grave injustice

.l;l;l

\.M

' !

Homo r)l<l
Not Adopt
it till lotli

Century.

Imape-
Worsiiip.

Libri
Carolini.

'6'.iH OUTfJNKH OF TIIK HISTORY OF DOCJMA.

whicli tlio Wostorn pilgrims were called upon to en-
dure in Jerusalem. Although the pope approved the
Spanish-Frankish doctrine, ho novorthelesa refused
admittance to the watch- word in the symbol. Not
until the 10th century does Rome appear to have ac-
cepted it. If Charlemagne widened the opening
breach between the Orient and Occident by the ^'Jili-
oqne" and had therefor only a half-ally in the pope, ho
alienated himself still more from the orthodoxy of the
Orient by his rejection of image- worship, whicli
the pope also still approved. The barbaric tradition
of the Frankish church and an Augustinian element
(with Charlemagne perhaps also an enlightening
one) determined the attitude of the Occidentals. At
Frankfurt, 7{K^ the decrees of the 7th council were laid
aside, j'ot the resolutions of the synod of 754 were
also rejected. The self-confidence of the Frankish
church accepted the first six councils as an expres-
sion of ecclesiastical antiquity, refused, however, to
be dictated to by Byzantium at the modern councils.
The ^^ libri Carolini" retain the old ecclesiastical
standpoint: We will neither worship images, nor
attack them, but treat them piously. This attitude
was still taken by Louis the Pious (synod of Paris,
825) and Hincmar. The pope preserved a discreet
silence, and the 7th council, which was favorable
to images, graduall}' obtained through Rome's influ-
ence recognition in the Occident also.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, KTC. ;?!>0

3. The Devi'lophient, in Prdcticc lutil in Tlnoni,
of the MasH {Ikxpnn of ilie Knvh<tri,st) and of
Penance.

Biicli, a. a. O. I. Uiickort. i. IlilKenfoUrs Ztohr.. IH.W.
UoutiT. a. a. O. I. Choisy, PascluiHo, IHHS. UtKcliichte d.
Abondinahlslehro v. I)i(»ckhotr, Ebrard, Kahuis. Stoitit, D.
rum. Busssacramt'iit, 1854.

The thoucrlit of iinaL;-c-rei)rosentati()n was kept aloof Minu-io

•^ ^ * * and Sftcra-

iii an increasing nu^asure fioni the Lord's Supper; aominuto!
men lived in a world of miracle and of sacraments,
so nuich did the tendcnuy necessarily increase to por-
tray the content of the highest sacrament in an ex-
travagant manner, in order to give it prominence
among the multitude of holy things; the Christology
which allowed the historical Christ ti) disappear bo-
hind the unity of the two " ;/r;/;//'r.s'" tended towjird
an ever-present Christological nii/sferiiun, which
could be felt and enjoyed ; the mass was considered Th.- Mass.
the chief characteristic and compendium of religinn;
the idea of the attri])utes of God was more and more
cor.centrated in the one, that he is the almighty,
wonder-working Will — all these forces worked to-
gether to bring about the following result: The Jiia-
torical body of Jesus Christ is present in the oucha-
rist, since the elements are transformed into it. The Docetism
identification of the sacramental and the real (histor-
ical) body of Christ could the more easily be carried
out, since men considered it from the moment of in-
canuition a pneumatic (mysterious) body assumed

W I

I 1' I

• I

100 OUTMNKS OF THK IIISTOKY OK DOGMA.

by tlio Diviiiity, and licld docc^tic views in regard to

it, as is proven, t'.r/., by tin* controversy in regard to

the Ijirtli of Jesns out of Maria cldHso utcro. Tho

Dootrinrof now doctrinci of tho eiicharist would have been for-

EuchiiriHt.

niulatod without difncnlty during tho Carlovingian
ago, boeauso it ah'(!a<]y actually existed, had not tlio
thon- revived study of tho Augustinian con('ei)tion
of sacrament and his s[)i ritualistic doctrino of tho
I'ftschnsius oucharist had a restraining inllucnco. Paschasius
Radbortus, aljbot of Corbie, who wrote tlio first mon-
ograph on tho Lord's Supper (dc corporc et smifjuine
dovu'iu', <S;}1), was, on tho one side, an Augustinian
and reproduced without inward S3'mpathy or real
comprohonsion tlu^ Augustinian doctrine, that tho
act belongs to faith and represents ;i, spiritnal eat-
ing; but, on tins other side, ho carried it on to tlu^
realistic, popular doctrine, that in every mass by a
miracle of tho Almighty the elements are transformed
inicardlii but actuall}'' into the body wiiich was born
of Mary, and aro now brought to God as a sacrifice.
Outwardly as a rule no change takes place, in order
that tho bod}' of Christ may not be bitten by the
teeth. God performs this miracle, which Paschasius
conceives as a miracle of creation ; the priest simply
directs his supplications to God. But even if the
holy food is in reality now the real body of Christ
himself (tho obvious appearance of tho elements is
tho s^'mbol), the fact still remains that only be-
lievers partake of the spiritual food unto inmiortal-
ity — not, however, unbelievers. Paschasius drew

Miracu-
lous Traus-
formation

of
Elements.

lid to
ird to
Tlio
11 for-
iij^iaii
)t tho
'ptioii
)f the
[lasius
moii-
(juine
,tiuiaii
If real
at tho
a I cat-
to tho
by a
urmcd
IS born
ifice.
order
)y the
liasius
simply
if the
Christ
ents is
ly be-
iiortal-
drew

cri

DKVKLor.MKNT OK TXM lUINK oK SIN, KTC. lUl

noitlier all th«' hierarchical, nor "ohjcctivo" coiiso-
oueiu't's of tiio doctrine of tran^^nhstantiation, but at-
tempted to adjnst the miracle to /'(/////. Ho was not
a theologian primarily of the mass, hut wished to
bo a theologian in the sense of Augustine and the
Greek inystii-.s. Nevertheless lie encountered an un-
exjK3cted contradiction. Kahanuse\press(»d himself,
in a letter to Eigel, in opi)()sition to this doctrine,
and Ratramnus, a monk of Corbie, found in his writ- itAtrnm-

nu8.

ings to Charles tho Bald (f/c corjtnrc vt sttntjuine
doinitii) that Paschasius had not done justice to the
".s7>//-////r//c " of Augustine. But his own explana-
tions sutler from old ecclesiastical cloudiness. Ap-
parently he desires, as in the controv'i>rsy about tho
uterus cldiisus, like a good Augustinian to set aside
the unwieldy miracle of almightiiiess con ho n<itu-
ram and to i)lace, in the interest of faith, the wliolo
stress upon tho "' spirit uallter (jcri^'-, but since ho
likewise does not doubt tho presence of the carims
domini after tho consecration, ho is compelled to dis-
tinguish between the real body and tho body. Tho
born, crucified body is not in tho sacrament — that
was tho old churchly idea — but in tho sacrament
there is the power of the body of Christ as an inris- invisibiiis
ibilis suhstantid and, in so far, the pneumatic hody,
receivable only by the mind of tho faithful. More-
over Ratramnus in a few deductions made .-till far-
ther advances toward Paschasius; nevertheless tho
plainest conception is that of the '' 2)()t('nt ialitrr ^^[Ij""'

creari in nnjfitcj-io'' ; but even this conception was Mysteriu!
20

II'

11: ■ t

•hi

■' It

402 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

iio longer clear to their superstitious contemporaries ;
men wanted more than faith reality and soul nour-
ishment. Paschasius had spoken the deciding word.
The awe inspired by every mass seemed to confirm it
and the same was even heightened by the power of
uonTi^d *^^® definite formulation uf tlie doctrine. Incarnation

Crucifixion ■, -n • ^ •£? i. i j.

Rehearsea and cruciuxional sacrince were repeated at every
mass. What then could even approximate this? It
was not necessary to chciiigo the old wording of the
])ra3'ers of the mass, whicli, if they treated of sacri-
fice, emphasized the sacrifice of praise; for who
gave heed to the \vords? The mass, however, as a
cacrificial act, in which the God-man was offered up
to God, had its culmination long since no more in
real enjoyment, but in the consummation of the blot-
ting out of sin and removal of evil. It had been
adopted into the great institution of atonement, and
Masses ii .isses witliout communion (rc(iuiems) were multi-

Mui^ipfkd. plied TO pacify God. The primitive commemorative
elejr,cint of the celebration had become independent,
especially since the day^; of Gregory I., and the
o /nimunion was changed, as it were, into a second
clebri^tion. The first celebration, the mass, belonged
■ the laity only in so far as it represented an espe-
cially efficacious form of the Church's intercession
for the lightening of the punishment of sins. This
was the only apparent effect of the act — an insignifi-
cant o)ie, important only through its summarizing
of an immense mystery !
The mass was subordinated to the institution of

anes ;

nour-

word.

irm it

rver of

aation

every

s? It

of the
sacri-

ir who

ir, as a

3red up

norc in

iie blot-

i(\ been

nt, and
inulti-
orative
endent,
nd the
second
elonged
111 espe-
cession
, This
isigniti-
liarizing

lition of

Church

and StaU<

Blended.

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP STN, ETC. 403

penance; in the latter was reflected the rehgious Hfe. JSnauuo
Punishment ruled the world and the conscience. ^*^"'^^'«'
The conception of God as almighty Will, as Retri-
bution and Indulgence (a Christian modification of
the old Roman idea) was the ruling one. The con-
sequence thereof was the idea that merits and satis-
factions were needed to compensate for the breaches
of contract occasioned by sin and oft repeated. Thus
had Gregory I. taught; moreover this view blended
in the German nations with their national ideas of
law and with their legal restrictions. Since, how-
ever, the Occidental Church did not, like the Oriental,
relinquish the administration of law and questions of
molality entirely to the state, but rather interposed
to discipline and punish, there was devekped, parallel
to the state institution of law, the Church institu-
tion of penance. The detailed development of this
institution was a consequence of the transfer and
application of the discipline of penance within the
cloisters to the secular clergy and to the laity, and
it originated with the Irish-Scottish, i.e. with the
Anglo-Saxon church.* But through the fear of the
punishment of sin, of hell and purgatory, the laity
favored the practice and established the influence of
the Church in its entire range, even over private life
itself. A certain deepening of the conception of sin
was the consequence : The people had recourse to tho
Church, not only in the case of grave sins, but also

* Wassersohleben, Die irische Kiiiioiicu.saiiiiiiliiiiL,'. L', Aufl., 1885. Brun-
ner, Deutsche Rechtsgesohichte ?., IH8.H

Fear of
Punish-
ment.
Kell, I'nr-
gatory.

!• '

! 1

^1-:,^

Satisfac-
tions.

I ,- 1

404 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

on account of tlio " roots of sin" and the hidden
faults (ghittony, Koxual hist, avarice, anger, humor,
anxiety, heartfelt a^'orsion, arrogance, pride), which
they now considered also deadly sins ; however, this
deepening was counterbalanced by the stupefying
readiness with which men acknowledged themselves
ever as sinners, and by the thought that intercession
and satisfaction possess the power to cancel the mer-
ited punishment. In truth men bestowed more
thought upon punishment and the remission of the
same than upon sin. During the Carlovingian age
the hierarchical side of the institution of penance
was as yet little develojied, and the dogmatic theory
still lagged behind ; but the sa f is/a ct ia ns experienced
a new development in connectio]i with the exercise
Prayers, of penaucc ill the form of voluntary confession : (1 )

^/^T^^and" To the old, more or less, arbitrary rule>s in regard to
CcdeE. the choice and duration of the compensating })anisli-
ment (prayers, alms, lamentations, temporary exclu-
sion) were added, in increasing measure, rules from
the Old Testament and fi^om tlie (lerman code. The
consequence was that the measure of the compensa-
tory punishment itself appeared in tlie light of a

o?Deat1io'f Divinc Ordinance, (•^) The compensatory means were
looked upon as things pleasing to God, which there-
fore, if nothing I^tI been omitted, in themselves es-
tablish merits; the sacrificitd dealh of Christ must
be considered as the most efficacious; therefore tlie
rehearsal of this death {pii <ii copiofiifas i)i//sfen'i
passionis) was the efficacious and convenient means

(;'

' I
* 1

; 1

■^^.via0i»»imim&»illt% i

■i'

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 405

ill:

idden

Limor,

^vhicli

r, this

sfyiiig

iselves

session

e mer-

. more

of the

an age

(Ciiance

; theory

ricnced

exercise

on: (1)
uard to
punish-
exclu-
les from
D. The
npensa-
\t of a
IS were
there-
Ivos es-
st must
fovo the
iiisferii
[ means

(masses for he dead); l)esides, one should gain the
good will of the saints for their intercessions ought
to he efficacious, since God can demand nothing from
them, while they are ahle to hring him vahiahle gifts,
(;5) Since the exercises of penance have a material
value hefore God, they can he exchanged, i.e. lessened
hy a repentant disposition ; here especially the Church
steps in, since it institutes such exchanges; thus
originated a '.vliole system of indulgences, exchanges,
and remissions, to the estahlishing of which the
Germanic law contrihuted (origin of indulgences;
remissions are of primitive anticpiity), (I) In addi-
tion to exchanges, however, suhstitution is also pos-
sihle ; here the Germanic law had a still stronger in-
fluence ; yet the idea has also an ecclesiastical root
in the conception of Christ and the saints as substi-
tutes, (5) The consecpience of the wdiole conception
was that in the doing of penance men sought not so
much to reconcile God, the Father, as much more to
escape from God, the Judge ! This soul-killing prac-
tice entirely inverted Augustinianism ; it had influ-
enced Christology in the time of Gregory I., and it
operated decisively during the classic times of the
Middle Ages upon all dogmas of ancient standing
and created new ones.

Ex-
changes,

Iiuli'lgen-
oes, Ke-

missious.

Substitu-
tion.

Augustin-
ianism
Inverted.

I i

'- '^ HI

i I

!'|:

406 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Advance
Movement
of Church.

I !

:'!

CHAPTER VII.

history of dogma in the time op clugny,
anselm and bernard to the end of the
12th century.

Reuter a. a. O. v. Eicken, Gesch. u. System d. MAIichen,
Weltanschauung, 1887.

Through the institution of penance the Church
became the decisive power in men's lives in Occi-
dental Christendom. An advance movement of the
Church, therefore, must of necessity benefit the whole
of Occidental Christendom. This advance took place
at the end of the 1 0th centurj'' and continued until
the 13th century, during which time the supremacy
of the Church and the mediaeval ecclesiastical con-
ception of the world attained their perfection. If
chriatmn- one regards Christianity as doctriney the Middle
^r'^Life? Ages appear almost like a supplement to the history
of the ancient Church ; if one regards it as Z^/e, then
ancient Christianity only attained its full develop-
ment in the mediaeval Occidental Church. In the
ancient ago the motives, standards and ideas of
ancient life confronted the Church as barriers. It
was never able to overcome these barriers, as is
shown by the Greek Church : Monasticism stands by
the side of the Church ; the earthly Church is the old
world supplemented by Christian etiquette. But the
Occidental Church of the Middle Ages was able to
carry out much more securely its peculiar standards

Monasti-
cism.

Mil

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 407

of inoukitili asceticism and of the domination of this
life by the one beyond, because it did not have an
old cultus alongside of it. Gradually it gathered
strength so as to be a])le finally to enlist into its ser-
vice even the old enemy, Aristotelian science, and to
transform the same into an instrument of power. It
made all the elements of life and knowledge subject
to itself. The inner strength of its activity was the
Augustinian-ascetic piety, which broke forth in ever
new creations of rnonasticism; the outer power was
the Roman pope, who, as the successor of Peter,
secured for himself both Christ's right and that of
the Roman Caesars.

1. The Revival of Piety.

Harnack, Das Monchthuni, 3. Aufl., 1886. Neander, d. h.
Bernard (hrsg. v. Deutsch, 1889). Iliiffer, d. h. Bernard I.,
1886. Ritschl, i. d. Stud. u. Krit. 1870, S. 817 f.

From Quedlinburg (Matilda) and Clugny the re-
vival of piety had its rise. The Gregorian popes,
the " new congregations" and Bernard enforced it ;
the laity received it more readily than the worldly
clergy, upon whom it made greater demands. It is
most plainly represented by the crusade enthusiasm
and by the founding of innumerable convents.
Strict discipline in the convents, monkish regula-
tion of the secular clergy, the domination of the
monkish-regulated Church over the laity, princes
and nations — these were its aims. Upon this found-

i m

Quedlin-

burg and

Clugny.

I I

!•:.«

i..

11'

i ,■'

Flight

from the

World.

Picture of
Christ.

408 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOHY^ OF DOrjMA.

atiun alono it ai)i)eare(l possible to croato a truly
Christian, i.e. an unworldly life. The whole tem-
poral life should serve the life hereafter: Supremo
effort of the world dominion of the Church to gain
the most perfect victory over the world, i.e. escape
from the world. Freedom from the world appeared
possible only under the condition of universal do-
minion. Many monks also permitted themselves to
be blinded by this dialectics, who felt the contradic-
tion between the aim and the means, and preferred
for themselves the direct way of popularizing flight
from the world by fleeing from the world. But the
Church was indeed also God's state and not simply
the bestower of individual bliss! Therefore did it
incite the courageous to battle against Simonistic
princes and worldly clericals. To perfectly exemplify
the difficult trait of a renunciation of the world,
the German and the Romance peoples were still too
youthful. The violent disposition toward the con-
quest of the world united with this and produced
that strange frame of mind, in which the conscious-
ness of strength alternated like a flash with humility,
longing after enjoyment with resignation, cruelty
with sentimentality. Men desired nothing from
this world, they desired only heaven, and yet they
wis^^ed to own this beautiful earth.

At first religious individualism was not as yet
kindled (yet take note of the heresies which found
access in the 11th century, partly imported from the
Orient — Bogomils — partly springing up spontane-

DRVELOPMP^.NT OV DOf'TRINE OF SIN, KTC. tO!)

ously), still r/.s'/o//.s- wore brought back from tliu Holy
Land cnisado for which indulgences had been
granted. The jj/c^i^re of Christ was recovered and
piety was enlivened by the most vivid representa-
tions of the suffering and dying Redeemer: We
should follow him in every step of his passion jour-
ney. Accordingly in place of the defunct " adoption-
ism", the man Jesus camo again to the front and
negative asceticism received a i)ositive form and a
new, fixed aim. The cords of Christie-mysticism,
which Augustine had struck only with uncertainty
grew into a rapturous melody. By the side of the
sacramental Christ stepped — penance formed the
medium — the image of the historical Christ sublime
in his humility, innocent, suffering punishment, life
in death. It is impossible to estimate the effects
which this piety, newly induced through the " Ecce
homo", had, and in how many forms it has developed.
St. Bernard first gave it a strong and effective
form; he was the religious genius of the 12th cen-
tury, and therefore also the leader of the epoch —
Aucjustinus recUvivus, at the same time however
the most powerful ecclesiastic. In so far as Bernard
offers a system of thought and portrays the gradual
progress of love {caritas and hnmilitas) even to ex-
cess, he revived Augustine. His language is deter-
mined by that of the " Confessions". But in passion-
ate love for Christ he went beyond Augustine. " Ven-
eration for that which is beneath us ', for suffering
and humility (devotion), dawned upon him as never

ChHstlc-
Mysticism.

Bernard
Relipious
Ot'Dius of
12th Cen-
tury.

1 !

■ ;

'"i
1

1 ■ 1

' ' I

i ■

"1;..

=1; ^'

; ' ,

- s

410 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

iii 1

K:M

M'-:',

Song of

Songs and

Crusadt'.

Christie
Mysticism
and Lyric-
ism.

Bernard

Revered

as Prophet.

before upon any Christian. Pie venerated the rross,
shame and death as the form of the Divine appearing
upon earth. The study of the Song of Songs and
the crusade enthusiasm conducted him before the
image of the crucified Redeemer, the Bridegroom of
the soul. Into his image ho sunk himself; from it
there beamed for him true love and shone the living
truth. To him the sensuousncss of the contemplation
of Christ's wounds melted into spiritual exaltation,
which, however, always rested upon the foundation
of the ecclesiastical system of penance. Bernard
united the Neo-Platonic exercises of ascent unto God
with the contemplation of the crucified Redeemer
and unfettered the subjectiveness of the Christic-inys-
ticism and Christie-lyricism. This contemplation
led him in his sermons on the Song of Songs to a
self- judgment, which not infrequently gains the
height of Paulino and Lutheran faith unto salvation
{"non modi Justus sed et beat as, cut non imputabit
deus peccatnnr). But, on the other side, he also
had to pay the tribute of all mysticism, not only in
so far as the feeling of especial exaltation alternated
with that of cd)andonment, but also in his not being
able to ward off a pantheistic tendency. Like Origen,
Bernard also taught that it was necessary to rise
from the Christ in the flesh to the Christ ^ara
Tzveufia, that the historical is a step. This trait has
clung to all mysticism since his time; mysticism has
learned from Bernard, whom men reverenced as a
prophet and apostle, the Christ-contemplation; but

■til

Auffiis-
tinc's View

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 411

at tho same time it has adopted his pantheistic^
trend. The ^^excede re et cum CIrrisfo r.s.sY^" means,
that in the arms of the Bridegroom tho soul ceases
to be an individual self. But where the soul is merged
in the Divinity, the Divinity is dissolved into tho
All-in-One.

Immeasurable for Christology has the significance
of the new vision of Christ been. The scheme of the i'*-'^"-'*^'''-
two natures was indeed retained, yet there was in
truth by the side of the sacramental Christ a second
Christ, the man Jesus^ whose sent inient, sufferings^
and deeds portrayed and propagated Divine life.
He is prototype and power ; his death sacrifice, also,
is the Pacrifice of the man, in whom God was. Thus
the Augustinian conception, already inaugurated by
Ambrose, attained here its perfection. In the second
half of the 12th century this new piety (love, suffer-
ing, humility) was a mighty power in the Church.
But as Bernard represented in himself the contrast
between the world of pious Christian sentiment
and the hierarchical policy of the world-dominat
ing Church, so also most believers, naively attached
to the Church, considered the ideals of worldly
power and of humility reconcilable. As yet the
great beggar of Assisi had not stepped forth, whose
appearance was destined to create a crisis in the tur-
bulence of flight from the world and dominion over
the world; still at the end of the 12th century there
already hovered about the Church angry curses of
" heretics" who recognized in its secular rule and in

Love, Suf-
fering, Hu-
mility.

-:!!■

! J

Ih;^!

•ti:.i

. 1

iii

ill

'ni\ i

412 orTUNES OF TTIR IIISTOIIY ()V DOr.MA.

the HiiUi 1)1* its (lispoiisatioiiH of graco tho traits of the
oM ])jil)('l, and Bernard himself warned tho poj)es.

m <

' , i

I «

Isidori'im
Decrt'tals.

Clugny,

Gregory

VII.

2. On (lie Tlislor// of Krclcsidstical Law.

V. Scliultc, (icsch (1. (^Mclliii (1. KirclK'iu'c'clits I. n II.
Iliiiscliius, Kiitliol. Kirchcniccht. Dcnillc, Univers. d. MA.,
ISS."). Kuul'iuiiiin, (u'sch. tl. dcutchcn L'liiv. I., 1^88.

All that had over been claimed by popes appeared
gatliered together in th(5 great I'alsilication of Pseudo-
Isidore and was rei)resented as aneient i)apal latr: The
independence of tho Church and its organs as regards
tho laity, and the papal supremacy over the bishops
and the national churches. Upon tho foundation of
Pseudo-Isidore the popes of later times built. To
them it was not a (juestion of theology, but, as Ro-
mans, of the perfection of the Imr, which they had
obtained for themselves as a Divine law. In the
contest between emperor and pope tho question was
as to which should be the real rector of the state of
God, and as to whom the bishops should be subject.
The reformed papacy was developed under the im-
pulse of Clugny and Gregory VII. into an autocratic
power in the Church and formulated its legislation
accordingly through numberless decretals, after hav-
ing freed itself in Rome from the last remnants of
older constitutional conditions. Allied with the
best men of the times the popes of the 12th century,
having obtained the investiture, began to design a
new ecclesiastical law. The decretals took their

Kumuti'd.

DKVKhOPMKNT Ol'' IKX'TIMNK OK SIN, KTC. 113

|)la('0 by tho side of tlio old cmioiis, oven hy tlio sido
of tho docToes of the old coiiiicils. Still, strictly
taken, tlu'ir authority as yet rcniaiiu'd uiicortaiii.

Tho i)a[)a('y whilo dcvolopin^' into a jurisdictional ]*|i^v";'„'"i|!
supremo court would never have been able to g.iiu
tho mouarchial leadership as regards fjiith ajid mor-
als in tho Church, which is in(1c(>d coimnuniou of
faith and cult, had not in this period the amalgama-
tion of doffiiia and /a//* become perfect. In Itome it-
self the form of tho dogmatic retreated completely
behind that of tho law (/cc </c/), and the (lermano-
Romance nations at first were defenc(,'U;ss ; for tho
Church had onco come to them as lioman law and
order. The great popes wow moidvs and jurists.
The juristic-scientific treatment of all functions of
the Church bocamo the highest aim. Tho study of
law exercised an inunense influence upon the
thoughtful contemplation of tlu; Church in all its
length and breadth. That which formerly had
been evolved under constraining influences, viz., tho
Church as a legal institute, now became strength-
ened or developed by thought. Tlio spirit of juris-
prudence, which s[)read over the fa th of the Church,
began also to subordinate to itself the traditional
dogmas. Here scholasticism had a strong root; but Auctoritas

o " ' aiKl Ratio.

one must not forget that since Tertullian the Occi-
dental dogmas were prepared for a juristic; treatment,
out of which they partly origijiated. Ujxni ((uctor-
itas and ratio the dialectics of the jurists is founded.
It also belongs to the great contrasts of the Middle

Pnpw,

Monks and

Jurists.

1, : !,

^lli

''■:»l

V:\\

414 OUTMNKS OK TIIK Ifl ;T()KY OK I)0(iMA.

Agos, — Bornardiiio piotyand Roman jiiriHtio think-
ing. In this way tlio (.hiirch was to lx)como a
court of law, a niorchant houst) and a robbers' den.
But in this epoch it still stood at the begiuniug of
the devolopmeut.

ScholiiKti-
ciam.

3. The Revival of Science.

Ilislorios of Philosophy l)y tlborweg, Enlmann, Stockl.
Gesch. (lor Logik v. Pmntl, Bd. II. -IV. Router a. a. O.
NitZHch, i. d. RE^ XIII. S.. OoO IT. Donillo a. a. (). Kauf-
mauu, a. a. O. Lowe, Kainpf Zwi'ischcii d. Nomiual. u.
Realism. 1H70. Doutsch, P. Aholard. 1883.

Scholasticism was the science of the Middle Ages.
In it there were strikingly displayed the power of the
thinking faculties and an energy capable of reduc-
ing everything real and valuable to thought, such
as perhaps no other age offers, l^ut scholasticism is
in truth thinking " from the very centre outward ",
for while the scholastics always went back to first
principles, these were not gained from experience
and real history, though in the course of the develop-
ment of modia3val science increasing regard was paid
Diaiec- to experience. Auctoritas und >'«//o(dialectical-de-
Deductive ductivc method) dominate scholasticism, which dif-

Method. ' _ '

ered from the old theology, in that the authority of
the dogma and the practice of the Church were more
firmly adjusted, and in that men no longer lived in
the philosophy (the antique) which went with it, but
added the same from without. Its principal presup-
position was drawn — at least until the time of its

DEVKhoPMKNT OK DOCTKINE OF SIN, KTC. 115

dissolution — from tho thesis, that all tiling's must }m>
underHtood from thcoloyi/ ami t)»at thorcforo also all
things must bo traced back to llicohx/!/. Tiiis thesis
presupposes that tlu* thinker himself is sensible? of
his full dependence upon God. Piety therefore
is the presupposition of m(»dian-al science. Hut in
tho nature of tho mi'diieval piety itself lies tho
foundation for that contemplation which leads to
this science; for piety is the advancing knowledge
obtained by constant retU^ction upon the relation of
tho soul to God. Tlivrcfinc scjiohisf ici.siu, since if
deduces all th/n(/s from (tod niul (((/((in eontjtrisefi
them in luin, is piehi become coitseions oud mani-
fest. On that account it does not dill'er in its root
from mysticism; the diU'erenco consists only lierein,
that in scholasticism the knowledge' of tiie world in
its relation to God gains a more independi'iit, objec-
tive interest and the theological doctrines are, if pos-
sible, to be proven; while in mysticism the retlectivo
trend of the process of knowledge (for the increase
of one's own l)iety) comes out more strongly,
In the former, as a rule, more use is made of dia-
lectics, in the latter of intuition and inward experi-
ence. But the theology of Thomas, for example, can
also according to its end and aim unhesitatingly be
designated as mysticism and, vice versa, there are
theologians, who from custom are cfdled mystics,
but who in the strength of their desire to know
the world and to understand correctly the doctrine
of the Church do not lag behind the so-called scho-

I'irty Ou"

I'l'l-HllplXH

Hitimi of

Ki'llolHHti-

cituu.

Scholatiti-

(ism is

S.'lf-

C< nwjioiiH

IMoty.

Tlioology
of Tliouias
is Mystical.

il!

■i']

1 1

1 1:!..

Mysticism

is tliP
Practic<; of
Scholasti-
cism.

Inlieri-

tancd of

the 3Iiddle

Ages.

John of
Damascuts.

Boethins

and
Isidore.

4J0 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

lastics. The aim not only is tiie same (mysticism is
the practice of scholasticism), but the means are
also the same (the authoritative dogma ot the Church,
spiritual experience, the traditional philosophy,).
The difficulties which at first made their appearance
in medieval science were therefore r(»moved, after
men had learned the art of subordinating the dia-
lectic metliud to the traditional dogma and to the
thirst for piety.

The Middle Ages received from the old Church
the Holy Scriptures, the essentially com])leted dogma,
the theology which led to this dogma, and a treasure
of classical literature loosely connected -with this
theology and th"' philosophico-metliodical doctrines.
With these additions to the dogma elements wjre
transmitted, which were hostile to the dogma, or at
kv^st threatened to become so (yco-Platonism and
Aristotelianism). In the theology of J .'lu of Damas-
cus the attempt was made to reconcile scientifically
everything that was contradictory, but the Occident
could not thereby be spared the work of adjustment.
During the Carlovingian age the strength of the Oc-
cident was still too weak to work independently upon
the capital it had inherited. A few theologians
made themselves at home with Augustine, still this
undertaking was already followed, as we have seen,
by a partial crisis, — others clothed themselves in the
foreign garment of the classical authors; in the
schools they loarned from the writings of Boetliius an'l
Isidore ^\\q rudiments of the dialectical method and a

' ''

)giaiis
I this

seen,
in tlie
in the
IS ;in<l

and a

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 417

Scotus
Erigena.

Gerbert
of Rheims.

mild use of the ratio. No theologian except Scotus
Erigena was independent. As soon a-o they became
more self-conscious, they rejected the kncnvledge of
nature, the devil's mistress, and antiquity. Indeed
as a formal means of culture they could not do with-
out these, and dialecticism, that is, that method
which first exposes contradictions in order to recon-
cile them, made an increasing impression. From
the Carlovingian age there runs through the learned
schools a chain of scientific tradition as far down as
into the 11 th century. But Gerbertof Rheims did
not as yet bring it to an epochal climax ; the theo-
logical dialecticians did so first after the middle of
that century. Already at that time the principal
philosophico-theological question of the future was
considered, viz. wl^ether the conceptions of iipecies
exist respecting things or within things, c>r whether
the same are merely abstractions (Boethius in Por-
phyry, realism and nominalism). The ecclesiastical
instinct of self-preservation turned toward realism,
which mysticism demanded. When Roscellin in Rosceiun
consequence of his nominalism arrived at the con-
sequent tritheism, both he and his way of tiiinking
were rejected as heretical (lO!)'.^). In the 1 1th cen-
tury the dialecticians were viewed with grpat dis-
trust. Indeed they frequently not only attacked the
coarse superstition in religion and the barbarian way
of thinking, but they also jeopardized orthodoxy, or
rathei what was thought to be orthodoxy. But "en-
lighteners" they were not. Lc»ukiiig at tlieni more

i '

i
i

I f

:, !

hi \A
I ^'1

; ^'

lit

■it

I ' •

',!

-f--

■ ;■ , ,

^ ;

[ ■'-•

i "'

': ''ti

i !;!.:•

iJiiy;'

;i^

Scicrif*.
Om-n.lK
Faith.

418 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

closely, oven the boldest of them stood upon the basis
of the Church, or, at any rate, were bound to the
same by a hundred ties. True, every science, even
the most trammelled, will always find within itself
an element offensive to that faith which longs for
peace; it will display a freshness and joyfulness,
which to devotion will jippear like boldness ; it will
never be able, even when it agrees with the Church
in end and aim, to disclaim a negative tendency, be-
cause it will always rightl}' find, that the principles
of the Church in the concrete expression of life have
deteriorated and have been marred by superstition
and. inclination. Thus was it also at that time; but
as the revival of science was a consequence of the
revival of the Church, so the Church also finally
recognized in theology its own life.

B}' the elevation of science tlii'ee results were ob-
tained: (1) A deeper insight into the Neo-Platonic-
Augustinian principles of theology as a w^liole, {'Z)
A higher virtuosity in the art of dialectical analj^sis
and rational demonstration, (•'>) An increasing occu-
pation with the Church fathers and the ancient
philosophers. The danger of this deeper insight
was a non-cosmicomystical pantheism, and the more
naively men devoted themselves to realism, the
Dangers, greater was the danger. The danger of dialecticism
consisted in the dissolution of the dogma instead of
the proof of them ; the danger of the intercourse with
the ancient philosoi)hers lay in the reduction of his-
torical Christianity to cosmopolitanism, to a mere

Revival of

Science ;

Three

Ilesults.

basis
o the

even

itself
;s for
ilness,
it will
Iliurch
:y, be-
iciples
e have
■stition
le; but

of the

finally

ere ob-

itonic-

ole, i'Z)

nalysis

occu-
ancient
insiglit
le more
m, the
cticism
tcacl of
se with

of his-
a mere

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. Ill)

general philosophy of religion upon the soil of the
neutralized history. Till the end of the l-3th century
there was as yet no real philosophy alongside of theo-
logy; in so far as anything of the kind existed, it
was feared, and thus it happe?ied that the danger al-
luded to under " (•>.')" (Berengar and his friends) was
first felt. The danger alluded to under "(1)" was
the least noticed, since Ansehn, the greatest theo-
logian before Thomas, whose orthodoxy was above
question, moved about most unconcernedly among
the Neo-Platonic-Augistinian prniciples. Perhaps
he would ha^^e soon brought the dialectical science,
which he knew how to use with authority, to full
honors, and have made credible the reconcilableness
of mysticism {meditailo) with reason, of authorita-
tive faith with ratio {credo, nt inteUujaui, on the
one side, rationahili necessitate intelligere esse
oportere omnia ilia, quae nobis Jides catholica de
Christo credere praecipit, on the other side), had
not some of his pupils, like Willi, von Champeaux,
drawn some of the dangerous consequences of Pla-
tonic realism (the one passive substance, the natural
phenomena as mere semblance), and had not in
Abelard a bold scientific t;d<.^jit appeared, which could
not but terrify the churchmen. In Abehird the trait
of the "enlightener" is not entirely wanting; but he
was more bolc^ than consequential, and his " ration-
alism" had its limitativ)ns in the acknowledgment of
revelation. Nevertheless he oi)p()sed faith in mere
authority, yet by no means at all points ; he wanted

Wilh. von
Cham
peaux.

Abolanl.

!l \

420 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

i: 1

l;l'-

^l:-'.'

Sic et Non.

to know what ho believed, and ho wanted to show
how unsafe and contradictory was the uncontrolled
orthodoxy and the tradition which pretended to
be infallible {"Sic et iS'o/i"). Thus he looked
upon the foundations of faith just as he looked upon
the theological points represented in the dogma. His
opponents, above all Bernard, considered his doctrine
of the trinity and the whole method of his science
(which indeed with him and his pupils often degen-
erated into a formalistic art of disputation and was
coupled with unbearable arrogance) foreign and
heretical; they therefore condemned him. They did
not at all observe that the questionable sentences of
the bold innovator originated in part from theClmrch
fathers and in part were the conso(|uences of that mys-
tical doctrine of God, which they themselves shared
(thus his conception of histor}^ which seems to neu-
tralize historical Christianity in favor of Greek phil-
osophy ; compare Justin) . It is still more paradoxical
that Abelard, even while on the one side drav/ing
these consequences, on tlie other introduced a kind of
" conceptualism" in the place of realism, granted to
sober thought a material inliuonce upon the contem-
plation of fundamental principles, rejected the pan-
theistic deductions of the current orthodoxy and thus
laid the foundation for the classical expression of
Ecvit'sias- nicdiceval conservative theoloqii. The ecclesiastical
^mamitS*^' ^^^^o^i^^^ demanded realism, but was not able to be re-
tea igm. |.^j^(^j jj-^ fliought under the complete dominion of
the mystical, Neo- Platonic theology. A lowering of

ring
nd of
1 to
;om-
paii-
thus
iiof
ticLil
■36 re-
)ii of
ng of

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 421

the Platonic celestial flight was needed, therefore of
" Aristotelisni", as the latter was understood and
used at that time, namely, that view of tilings ac-
cording to which whatever apj^ears and is creature-
like is not the transitory form of the Divine, but the
supernatural God as creator has, in the real sense of
the word, called f(jrtli the creature and endowed the
same with independence. With this view Ahelard
began anew", and much of that which at his time pro-
voked opposition afterward became orthodox. Yet it
was his own faidt, the fault of his character, the want
of clearness in the positions which he assumed, and
the fault of his many heterodoxies, that he did not
break through. With Bernard and the mystics ho
brought science into such discredit that the next gen-
eration of theologians had a difficult footing. The
" sentences" of Peter Lombard, v.diich with a certain
scientific freedom gather together the patristic tradi-
tion, oi^inion and contrary opinion, and which give
a judicious review of doctrine in the spirit of the
Church, came near being condemned (1104, 1170).
Walther of St. Victor zealously opposed him and
Abelard as well. But the task of theology, to fur-
nish a review of the whole territory of dogmatics and
to think everything out, once undertaken, could no
longer be put aside, and in the carrying out of this
task the followers of Abelard and of Bernard drew
nearer to each other. Moreover, the intercourse
with Jews and Mohammedans demanded an intel-
ligent apologetics. Hugo St. Victor, however.

Al)t>Iard's
Dotects.

Peter
Lombard.

Ill

ITiiK" St.
Victor.

422 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

who liad Lilreudy intluencecl the followers of Lom-
bard, contributed most toward miiting the tenden-
^^wanelf^^ cies. Tlio iiow picty, even with its latest require-
ments, exercises, and means of devotion, died out
gradually, though not entirely, during the second
half of the 12th century, together with the dialectical
science. Yonder implicit faith, here boldness were
rejected, with which, hovv'ever, many a fresh truth
was lost. This occurred under the overwhelming im-
pressions made by the Church, radiant in its victor-
ies. Her lauj in life and doctrine became the most
worthy object of investigation and exposition. With
this aim was blended another — that of referring all
things back to God, and of construing knowledge of
Patristi- the world as theology. However, it was only in the
""^etc!'^'"' course of the loth century that patristicism, ecclesi-
asticism, mystic theology and Aristotelianism be-
came consolidated into powerful systems. The dog-
matical works of the 12tli century — except, perhaps,
the works of Hugo — still bear the stamp of aggrega-
tion. Thought, if it wished to be more than repro-
duction and meditation, was still looked upon with
suspicion.

4. Work upon the Dogma.

Among the number of theological disputes and
separate condemnations, the controversy with Ber-
engar concerning the eucharist and Anselm's new
conception of the doctrine of atonement acquired
prominence. These alone mark a progress in the

Berengar

ana
ADselm.

v.Tsy.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC". 4:23

hiBtoiy of dogma, which during this period was
otherwise not onric^^.ed.

A. The Beremjar Controrcrsfj.

Bacli, a. .1. O. I. Router a. a. O. Siulendorf, I3oro:,gai"ius,
1800. Sc'hwahc, Stud. z. (Jcsch, d. "J. Abemlmahlsstrcits,
1887. Schnitzler, B. v. Tours. 189(».

The second controversy regarding the eucharist i"ii<iiiuis
has, aside from the theological, also a philosophical
and ecclesiastico-political interest. The latter may
rest here. Berengar, a pupil of Fidbert of Chartres,
was the first dialectician, who, full of confidence in
the art which he thought to be identical witli reason,
turned against an ecclesiastical superstition which
had very nearly become a dogma. A criticism of
the dogma of the eucharist, however, was, in consid-
eration of the prominent standing of this doctrine, a
criticism of the ruling ecclesiastical doctrine in gen-
eral. Not as a negative "enlightener", but to op-
pose a bad custom by true tradition, and at the same
time also to let his light shine, Berengar wrote (sum-
ming up in the v/ork, dc sacrci coeiia adr. Lanfrdu-
ciim, 1073) and founded a school. He saw in the
ruling doctrine of transubstantiation a want of rea-
son, and he revived the Augustinian doctrine of the
eucharist (like Ratramnus, whose book, however, was
considered as belonging to Scotus Erigena, fmd as such
was condemned at Vercelli, 1050), in order to restore
the ^oY'.xij Xarpeia and to combat the barbarous passion
for mysteries. Berengar opened the controversy with

ami
Lanfrauc.

{ I

;ltl !'

: !l

,.'ii;>!

i;;

ii!!:i''!i!!.

Con-
demued.

424 OUTLINES OF THK HISTORY OF DOGMA

a letter to Laiifrane and showed tliat the aeceptaiice
of a bodily traiisubstaiitiatit)n was absurd and that
therefore the words of Christ must bo understood
figuratively. A purely Hynil)olic conception he did
Sitrnuni et uot toach, rather like the fathers, siifuuni cf sacra-

Sucra-

zueutuni. y/^t^// //<?//, in tlio sacred act: Some lu^ly but invisible
element is added by the " co)ny'ni()'\ which menus
however the ti hole ('hrisi; bread and wine are only
relaticelij changed. He taught that the opposite
doctrine strives ag.'iinst reason, wherein the Divine
image lies enclosed; he who favors '^ iucpiia'" casts

^Dotifhie"^ aside the Divine part. 7>erengar s doc;trine was con-
demned at Rome and Vercelli (lOoO) during his ab-
sence; he himself was forced to recant at Rom.e
(1050) and he condescended to sign a confession,
composed by Cardinal Humbert, wliich showed that
Bereiigar had not exaggerated the ruling doctrine ; for
in the confession it was stated, that the elements
after the consecration are not only sacrament, but
the very bod}^ of Christ {sensualiter, non solnm
Sacramento), which ihen is also masticated by
the teeth of the believers. Berenf'.ar, protected in
the following years by influential Roman friends
(Hildebrand), restrained himself for some time, but
afterward began anew the literary oontrovers3\
Now the principal writings were first iss'.ied (Lan-
franc, de carp, et sang, doniini adv. B.C. 10C9).
Gregory VU, was in no hastv^ to make heretics; yet
in order not to prejudice his own authority, he fin-
ally forced Berengar for the second time to submit.

Contro-
versy Re-
newed.

1 m

m u

DRVRT.OPMKNT OF POCTHINR OF SrN, KTr. 425

The loiirncd sclioliiv \va^ broken <l(»\vii aiwl liis causo
perished. Paschasius' doctriiK* of traiisiihsiaiiiiation
was further developed l>y the o))poiients of l'>erengar
{ni(Hi(h(c(iti<> ittjUlvliuin : coarse realism); still
even in these circles one commenced to a])ply " sci-
ence" to the dogma in the interest of the Church.
The coarse representations were disregarded, the en-
tire Christ (not simply bloody pieces of his body) was
acknowledged in the act (in ever}' particular), the dif-
ference between si(/inn}i and s(icnt)nentiun was taken
into account in order to distinguish betA'een nmn-
daiio iufuJeUiiiu mu} jUh'lium (especially im})ortant
is (iuitnmiid of Aversa, (/c vari). cf s(m</. Christ i
veritate ill eacha rial i(t). The "scientific" concep-
tions also concerning substance and attributes were
already set forth, whereby the conrae ''' scnsufiJ iter"
corrected itself, while a few, it is true, believed in
an incorruptibility of the attributes of the converted
substances. Furthermore there were already begin-
nings of the speculation about tlie ubicpiity of the
substance of the body of Christ. The expression
" transsHbstu)itiati(/' can be traced first to Hildebert
of Tours (beginning of the ISth centur}') ; as the
final argument there remained always the ahnight}'-
sovereign will of God. As a dogma the doctrine of
transubstantiation was expressed in the new confes-
sion of faith at the Lateran council (I'ilo), which
prior to the pi'ofessio Jidei Trident, was, next to the
Nicene, the most influential symbol. The doctrine of
the eucharist was here joined directly to the trinity

niiitnmiui
of AviTsa.

IIil(h'bf>rt

of Tours;

Trunsub-

stauti-

atioD.

Dootrino of

Kiu'luirist

.Joiiit'd to

Trinity

and Chris-

tology.

■I'

ill

II • >

Boldest
A<'t i.f
Middle
Akcs.

420 OUTLINES OF TTTR TfTSTORY OF POCSWA.

and to Cliristolo^y, TJicrcK'ifh fr((s (d.so cvifrcssi'd
in the sipulxd flxfl /he sunic is one irifh flirsc dor-
frines, aiul indeed in the form of the d(x*trino of tran-
substantiation {" trdn.sfiiiOsfdntidti.s jnDie et vino")
and with strict hierarchical trend. Joined thereto
was a statement regarding baptism and penance
{"per veram p()e)iiteutiani semper protest repa-
rarT). Therewith indeed this development ended,
and with it the allied one, flidf erenj Clin'stian must
confess ]ns sins before the pdrochiis (c. 21). The
innovation in the si/nibol (combination of the doc-
trine of the encharist with the trinity and Christol-
ogy) is the most peculiar and the boldest act of the
Middle Ages, having much greater weight than the
''^ Jilio(pie'\ On the other side, however, the new
symbol shows still very plainly that only the old
dogma were truly dogma, and not the Augustinian
sentences concerning sin, hereditary sin, grace, etc.
Catholic Christianity is constituted, aside from the
old Church dogmas, by the doctrines of the three
sacraments (baptism, penance and the eucharist).
The rest are dogma of the second order, that means,
no dogma at all. This condition was for the future
(till the Reformation) of the greatest importance.

(

■

ill*

1 1

DKVKT.OPMRNT OK DOfTRINR OF HIN, ETC. 427

B. Aufielnrs Doctrine nf Sdlisjac/ion <(ii<l the
Doctrines o/ Atonement of the Theolo(/i<(ns of
the ]'Uh Cent nr II.

Gt'sc'h. (1. VerHohnungHlchro v. liiiur n. Ritscljl. IlaHHO,
AiiHolin, 2 Bde., 1852 f. Cremer, i. d. Stud. u. Kiit., 1880 S.
7tf.

I ■

Ansplm;

V\\y Dt'iiH

lloiiio?

His Pro.

siipposi-

tioii.

Anselm in his work " Cnr dens homo " attempted
to prove the strict necessity (reasonableness) of the
death of a God-man for the redemption of sinful
humanity (even in Augustine are found doubts of
this necessity), and thereby raised the fundamental
principle of the practice of })enance {ndtisf actio
congrua) to the standard of religion in general.
Herein consists his epochal importance. His ])re-
supposition is that sin is guilt, and indeed guilt
against God, that the blotting out of this guilt is
the main point in the irork of Christ, that the cross
of Christ is the redemption, and that therefore the
grace of God is nothing else than the irorkof Christ
(Augustine here still manifested uncertainty). In
these momentous thoughts lies the evangelical truth
of Anselm's deductions. Yet they suffer from grave Grave im
imperfections; for s^ince they take into consideration
only the ''objective", they do not contain the proof of
the reality of redemption, but primarily only the
proof of its conditions (they contain no doctrine of
atonement). Furthermore they are based upon a
contradictory view of the honor of God, they place
the Divine attributes at an intolerable variance, they

perfec-
tions.

42H orTLINF.S OF THE ITISTORV Op DOOM A.

I i i, r'

inak'r (j|(»(l appcjir not as tho iMayter and as almighty
Love, l)ut as a powtu'ful privato citizen who is man's
partner, Ihey miseoneeive tho inviolableness of the
sacrcMl moral law and therefore the sutfering of pun-
ishment, and finally they allow mankind to bo re-
deemed ])y human saerifice (!) without making it
plain how in man himself a change of heart is to bo
brought about. The great Augustinian and dialecti-
He Did Not ciau Auselm really did not know wliat faith is, and

Know '' ^ '

^'"^is'*^'"' '*c therefore fancied himself able to formul.ite a doc-
trine of redemption in strictly necessary categories
(for the conversion (jf ,Jt>ws and heathen), without
troubling himself about tho establishing of religion
in tho heart, that is, about the awakening of faith.
That, however, means a purposing to treat religion
without religion; for the creating of faith is religion.
Tho old splitting of the problem into " objective" re-
demption and " subjective" adoption had its effect
hero also, oven more than formerly; for Anselm
grappled with the ])rincipal problem energetically.
So much tho worse wore the consequences, which pre-
vail to this da}" ; for if tho problem must be divided
into tho " objective" (dramatic management of God)
and the " subjective", >then has God even in Chris-
tianity proved by the death of Christ only a general
possibility of the true religion; the religion itself,
however, every individual must procure for himself,
be it alone or by means of numerous little assistants
and expedients (the Church). He who shares this
view thinks Catholicly, even if he calls himself a

Snndora

l'lo))lt'tll

into "OI>-

j<'ctivt>"

ami "Sul)-

jective. "

DKVKLOPMKNT OK DOCTKINK OF SIN, KT(

I'O

Lutheran Christian. Ansclin in llir most impor- pX'i'rv'ui
taitt prohh'tUy trliich if n-ns his merit ht phtcc at i),Mii'i'n.'..r

(loil llllil of

the iicdd, JirsI hrnKf/lif to fnll rtcic the Jal.sc ('(itlt- UfiiKion.
olic i<lc<i (tf (ioil (Hid tlic j\(lsi- (ltd Catlndic con-
ccption of rcfif/ioH trliiclt, had tomj since found
expression in the pnicticc of jwrnincc. In this
sonso ho is a ro-founder of tho Catlmlic (Inircli,
although his theory in detail has in many respects
been abandoned — in favor of a still more convenient
practice of the Church. Anselm in difYerent writings
{"' Monologiiinr, ''Prologium" — concerning the con-
ception of God; ontological proof) gave expression
to the conviction, that one shoidd believe lirst upon
authority, and then one would be able to prove faith
to be II necessity of tliought. However, only in tho
dialogically composed writing " Cur dens Jionio''^
has ho comprised the wliole of the Christian religion
under one head and treated it uniformly and logi-
cally. After a very remarkable introduction, in TimnlS''
which especially the old idea about redem])tion as a boii of nis
satisfaction of the lawful claims of tho devil is re-
flected, he lays down the principle that the creature,
endowed with reason, has through sin robbed God
of the honor due to him in no longer rendering to
him that which this honor demands, namely, obedi-
ent subjection. Since God cannot lose his honor, and
since freedo*^^ from punishment would besides bring
about a general disorder in the kingdom of God,
either restitution (sdfisfocfio), or punishment is the H.'stitmion
only thing po^ssible. The latter indeed in itself ment.

I '

Il '.

' !l

t I

%f ■• \\,

i ' ■

^! i

Guilt of

Sin
Infinite.

God-Man

Alono
Sufficient.

Acceptio

iMor'is

Infinite

Good to

God !

430 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOfvy OF DOGMA.

woiill bo suitable, but sinco it could result only in
destruction and thus in the ruin of one of the iP'^^t
precious works of God (the rationabilis creatura),
the honor of God does not permit it. Therefore the
satisf actio alone remains, which must be a restitution
f),s well as the pri'^e of punishment. Man, however,
cannot render it ; for everything that he could give
t(» God, he would be compelled from duty to give to
him; moreover the guilt of sin is infinitely great,
since already the slightest disobedience results in
endless sin (" nondum considerasti quant i ponder is
sit peccatinn^'). How then shall man restore
" iotiim quod deo abstiilif\. " ntsicnt dens per ilium
perdidit, ita per ilium recuperet"'^ This the God-
man alone is able to do, for only God can offer "c?e
s?to, quod nuijus est quaw oninequodpraeterdeuni
esV\ and the )no,n must bring it. Therefore a per-
sonality is required who has two natures and who of
/?/■>' own free trill can and does offer to God his
Diviirvhuman life (sinlessness) . It must be his iife^
for that alone he is not in duty bound to sacrifice to
God ; everything else he also, the sinless one, is hound
to give up. But in thi;' sacrifice full satisfaction is
rendered {^^nidlatenus seipsuni potest homo magis
dare deo, quam cum se niorti tradit ad lumorem
illius'-), indeed its value is infinite. While the least
injury of this life has an infinite negative value, tht-
free surrender of it ha;^ an infinite positive value.
Tlu^ accept io mortis of such a God-man is an infinite
good to God (!), which far exccedis iiis loss through

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 431

sin. Christ has done all this; his voluntary death
can have resulted only " in honovcm deV\ for
another purpose cannot be discovered. For us this
death lias a three-fold result: (1) The hitherto crush-
ing guilt of sin has been removed, (2) We can take
to ourselves heartily the example of this voluntary
death, and, (3) God, in acknowledging the rendering
of the satisfadio as a mc'-itnni also of the God-
man, gives us the benefit of this merit urn, since he
can indeed give nothing to Christ. Onl}' by reason
of this benefit are we able to become imitators of
Christ. This last turn is a genial attempt of
Anselm's to transmit into the hearts of men the
power of the dramatic scheme of redemption ; but ho
suffers from a want of clearness which then prevailed
in the practice of penance. In themselves satis-
factio and meritfuii are irreconcilable, for one and
the same action can be only the one or the other (the
latter, if there was no occasion for an action greater
tlian was obligator}-) . But from the practice of pen-
ance one was accustomed to see " merits" in actions
in excess of duty, even if they served as com])en-
sation. Thus did Anselm also placed the satis-
factio Christ i under the point of view of merit,
which continues, even after the conclusion of the real
transaction, to pacify and appease God. Anselm
could do this so nuich the easier, since he considered
the service of Christ far greater than the weight of
sin. But lu> joined to the thought of nieritum,
though rather by intimation, the subjective effect of

C'lirist's
nrath llHS
'Jlir fold

Kc'sult.

Satisfac-
tion of
Christ
Viewed as
Merit.

, 'i

432

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

h'\ :?i

m.t i

Ahelarri
lj;nor»'(l
Anselni's
Satisfac-
tion
Theory.

Denied the
Claims of
tho Devil.

the action ; in the framing of the conception of sat-
isfactio he did not find a point whore he could pass
over to the "subjective". Nevertlieless, he ended
with the strong cons(dousness of liaving reasonably
proved ^^ per luiius qnaestionis solid ioneni quicquid
ill novo veteriqne Icstaniento contlnetur'".

Anselni's satisfaction theory in subsequent times
was accepted only with modifications. Abelard made
no use of it, but went back, whenever he treated of
redemption through Christ (Comm. on Romans), to
the New Testament and patristic tradition, bringing
into prominence the important thought that we must
be led back to God (no change in God's attitude is
necessary). Primarily he ref(3rs redemption to the
elect and therefore teaches that tho death of the God-
man must be conceived only as an act of love, which
inflames our cold hearts ; however he also gives the
matter the turn, that the merit of Christ as head
of the coiiuniuiit tj hcnefits its members; this merit
however is no aggregation of certain good deeds, but
the fulness of tho love of God dwelling in Christ.
Christ's merit is the merit of his love which con-
tinues in constant intercession ; the atonomcnt is tho
personal communion Avitli Christ, Of the claims of
the devil on us, Abelard ^vould also recognize none,
and, together with the idea of the necessity of a
bloody sacrifice to appease God, he repudiated the idea
of the logical necessity of the death on the cross.
The righteousness of the idea of the suffering of pun-
ishment remained hidden to liim as well as to Anselm.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 4.;33

Bernard's thoughts concorning the atonement hig
behhid those for Abelard ; still he knew how to ex-
press his love for Christ more edifyingly than the
latter. The conception of the inej'it of Chn'.sf (ac-
cording to Anselm) became in after-times the de-
cisive one. Whenever men meditated about the
satisf actio, the strict categories of Anselm were
loosened at many points. Indeed even in the disci-
pline of penance all necessity and "quantit}"" was
uncertain ! Moreover the Lombard contented himself
with recounting all the possible views in which, ac-
cor^ling to tradition, one can look at the death of
Christ, even that of the purchasing of the devil,
together with the deception, and of the value of pun-
ishment, bu^ not of the doctrine of satisfaction, be-
cause it has no tradition in its favor. At the bottom,
however, he was a follower of Abelard (merit, awak-
ening of reciprocal love) . After him the haggling
and bargaining began about the value of sin and the
value of the merit of Christ.

Rprnanl

Less

Advauced.

Peter
Lombard
Kecoimts

All
Theories.

■ I

CHAPTER VIII.

HISTORV OF DOCniA IN THE TIME OF THE MEN-
DICANT ORDERS TILL THE BEGINNING OF THE
IGTH CENTURY.

The conditions under which dogma was placed
during this period made it as (t, .stjstrni of law more
and more stable — for which reason also the Reforma-
tion halted before the old dogma — but caused more

! i

I 1

! I

I •

! :i

St.

Francis:

Humilitj',

Lovo,
Obedienci'.

Classical

Expi't'ssion

of Catliolic

Piety.

A Call to
Repent-
ance.

43-4 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

and more an inner dissolution, since it no longer
satisfied the individual piety, or held its ground in
the presence of the now knowledge.

1. On the Histo)'!/ of Piety.

Hase, Franciskus, ISoO. INIuller, Aufiingo des Minoriten-
ordens, 1885. Tliode, Franciskns, 1885. Muller, die Wal
denser, 188G. lu addition the works on the Joacliiniites
Spiritualists, German Mystics (Preger), Unitas Fratres, Hus
sites and heretics of the JMiddle Ag(>s. Dollinger, Beitr. z
Sectengeseh. d. MA., 1800. Archiv. f. J^iit. u. K. -Gesch
des M. A. 1 ir (especially the works of Denitle).

The Bernardine piety of immersing uneself en-
tirely in the sufferings of Christ was developed by
St. Francis into a i)iety of the imitation of Christ in
'' hninilitale, caritdte, obedienficr. IbnnUitas is
complete jwrertf/, and in the form in which he
represented it b}' his life and joined it with an ex-
ceeding love for Christ, Francis held before men an
inexhausti})ly rich and high ideal of Christianity, ca-
pable of the most widely different individual phases,
and breaking its way througli, because first in
it did Catholic pieiij receire its classical expres-
sion. Francis Avas at the same time animated by a
truly apostolic missionary spirit and a most fervent
zeal to enkindle men's hearts and to serve Christian-
it}^ in love. His preaching was aimed at the indi-
indtial soul and at the restoration of apostolic life.
In wider circles it was to work as a thrilling peni-
tentiid scnuon, and witli lliis in view Francis re-
ferred believers to the Church, whose most faithful

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF 8IN, ETC. 435

son he was, although her bishops and priests did not
serve, but ruled. This contradiction Jw overlooked,
but others who had preceded him did not (Walden-
sians, humiliates), and in their endeavor to restore
apostolic life they suspected the ruling Church and
withdrew from it. The mendicant orders have the jiondicant

Orders

merit of having kept a great stream of awakened and
active Christian life within the boundaries of the
Church ; not a little of its waters already flowed out-
tide, took a hostile direction, stirred up a .ew the old
apocalyptical thoughts and saw in the Church the
great babel, reserving the approaching judgment at
one time for God, at another for the emperor. A
small part of the Franciscans made common cause
with them. They spread over Italy, France, and
Germany as far as Bohemia and Brandenburg,
fostering here and there confused heretical ideas,
sharpening however as a rule only the consciences,
awakening religious imrest or independence in the
form of individual, ascetic religiousness, and relax-
ing or combating the authority of the Church. A
lay Christ ianif/i devel<)/)ed its('lf trithin and Jni Lay <":hris-

^ 'J J- J ./ tianity

the side of the Church, in which the trend toward ^^^^lop^^i-
religious independence became strong ; but since as-
ceticism is at last always aimless and can create no
blessedness, it stands in need of the Church, of its
authority and of its sacraments. B}* a secret but
very firm tie all "heretics", who writer tlie ascetic-
evangelical ideal of life u]>on tlieir standards, remain
bound to the (/hurch from wliose o})pression, rule

V waken

Kt'lijjious

Unrest.

•t

; \

' n

V, .

I :

!
'' '

i I

i^ij

Tho

"Rocts"Not
Enduring.

Doctrine
Little In-
tlnencecl
by Waklen-
sians and
Mendi-
cants.

430 OUTLINES OF THE IIISTOIJV OP^ TKXJMA.

and worldlincss they wish to escape. From the sects
of Biblicists, Ap(K'alyptics, Waldensians and Hus-
sites no lasting result was gained. They were truiy
*' heretical", for they still belonged to the Church
from which thej' wished to escape. The numerous
pious ])rotherhoo(ls, which grew up and remained
(although with many sighs) within the pale of the
Church, had still elasticity enough to make room for
"poverty" and evangelical life, and to receive the
mendicant orders into membership. She soon en-
ervated them and they became her best supports.
To the individual piety of the laity, firmly chained to
the confessional, sacraments, priest and pope, a sub-
ordinate existence was accorded in the Church of the
priests. Thus the mediaeval Church wearily fought
its way through the l-ltli and 15th centuries. For
whatever sacrifices the minorites were forced to
iiiake to the hierarchy, they in a manner indemnified
themselves by the unheard-of energy with which
they served the purp(jses of the universal Church
through the laity. The universal, historical impor-
tance of the movements caused by the Waldensians
and mendicant orders cannot l)o reckoned in new
doctrines and institutions, although these were not en-
tirely wanting, but consists in the religious awaken-
ing and in an unrest leading to a religious indi-
vidualism, which they caused. In so far as the
mendicant orders laid tlie " aute-Reformation"
movements induced the individual to meditate upon
the truths of salvation, they were the first advance

DEVELOF'MENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 437

toward tlie liefonnatinii. I Jut tlio nioro religiuii was
cuirriod into the circles of tlic third rank an 1 of the
hiity in general, the greater was the watchfulness
touching the inviolability of the old dogma, and the
great majority of the laity indeed desired to respect
in the dogma their firm standpoint amidst the un-
certainty concerning the standard of the practical
problems and concerning the correct state of the em-
pirical Church.

To enter into particulars, especial attention must
be paid, for the puri)oso of the history of dogma, to
the union of the mendicant orders with inijsticism
during this inner religious awakening. Mysticism
is a conscious, reflecting, Catholic piety, which de-
sires to grow by this very reflection and contempla-
tion : Catholicism knew only this or the fides impli-
cit a. The model originated from a combination of
Augustine and the Areopagite, enlivened by the
Bernardine devotion to Christ. Mysticism has many
forms; but national, or confessional the difference
among them is slight. As its starting-point his-
torically is pantheistic, so is its aim pantheistic (non-
cosmical). In the degree in which it holds more or
less strongly to the historical Christ and the rules of
the Church, this aim comes more or less clearly to
light ; but even in the most churchly stamp of mys-
ticism the dominating thought is never wholly want-
ing, which points beyond the historical Christ : God
and the soul, the soul and its God; Christ the
brother; the birth of Christ in every believer (the

Old Dopiiia
liiviuluble.

Mendicant
< )r(lt'rs
Unite

with Mys-
ticism.

Augustine
and Areop-

ajcite
Cunibiued.

43R orTLTNKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

1 \

Mystk'isiii

Says l{i'li>^-

ion is lA\'t'

iiiiil Love.

Soul Must
Return to
Uo(l hy
Purifica-
tion, Illu-
mination
and Uoioa.

Thi> Sen-
suous is
Sign and
PledRi' of

tilt'
Eternal.

latttT coiicfivcd now fiiiitastictilly, now spiritiuiUy).
Mysticism taii^lii that nsligion is h'/c and love, and
from this lofty idoa it uiidort(X)k to throw light upon
all dogma to the vory depths of the trinity, and even
to remodel tho same ; i err.- od individual religious
liio, and the myLtictj ''l il; • Tuei'dicant orders were
its greatest virtuosos, t'tt ]j<:'i'anso it did not recog-
nizee the rock of faith, it was able i.nly to give direc-
tions for a ])ro(fre.sfius infinifns (to God), but did
not allow the steadfast feeling cf a safe possession to
thrive.

The admonitions of mysticism move within the
circle, that the soul, alienated from God, must return
to God hy j)i(rificafi()ti, ilhuiiination and substan-
tial nniou; it must be "developed", "cultivated"
and "'highly-refined". With the rich and certain
intuition of past experience, the mystics talked of a
turning in upon the soul, of the contemplation of the
outer world as the work of God, of poverty and
humility, with which the soul must accord. In all
stages many mystics understood how to draw upon
the whole ecclesiastical apparatus of the means of
salvation (sacraments, sacramental influences); for,
as with the Neo-Platonists, so also with the mystics,
the most inner spiritual piety did not stand opposed
to the worship of idols : The sensuous, upon wdiich
rests the sheen of a holy tradition, is the sign and
pledge of the eternal. The penance sacrament es-
pecially played, as a rule, a great role in the " puri-
fication". In the '' illiiiniuatiou" the Bernardino

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. \:V.)

c > toinplatio'is .iro v»^r\ proinimnt. By tho side of
hij.'hly (.louljti'ul <nre('ti(nis n^g'ardinj^ tlu' imitution of
C) rist, +hcre aiv also found evangelical tlioughta —
faithful eontideiice in (lirist. l>uside,s, there is em-
phasizeii here the entire immersing in love, from
which WIS developed a great increase of inuer life,
in which latter the Renaissance and Reformation
seem to have been prei)ared for. In tho '' suhst a a- ''^ntheisuc
Hal union^'' there finally appeared the metaphysical
thoughts (God as the all, tho individual as nothings
God the "abysmal substance", the "peaceful pas-
sivity", etc.). Even tho normal dogmatist Thor is
here countenanced pantheistic ideas, which gave uifc
impulse to "extravagant" piety. In recent times it
has been shown by Denitle that jVIastor Eckhart, the
great mystic who was censured by the Church, was
entirely dependent upon Thomas. But however dan-
gerous these speculations have been- their intention
was nevertheless the highest spiritual freedom (see
for example the "German theology"), which, by en-
tire withdrawal from the world, shoidd be attained
through the feeling of the Supernatural. In this
sense especially the German mystics since Eckhart
have wrought. While the Romance i)eoples above all
tried to a rouse violent emotions by penitential ser-
mons, they undertook the positive task of bringing
the highest ideas of the piety of the times into the
po})ular language and within the ranks of the laity
(Tauler, Sense, etc.), and to render, through self-
discipline, the mind at home in the world of love.

Mastpr
Eckhart.

Tauler,
Seusi', t'tc.

M T. '

if: '

! I.

Vi8ion of

Oixl

Voiic'h-

Hiifed Hj.to.

Thomistic

and

Scotistic

Mysticisui.

German
Mysticism
Influential.

440 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOCJMA

Tlicy tauj^ht (followiiiLf Thomas) thai the* soul ran
ovoii hero upon carlli so rcccivo God within itself
as to enjoy in the fullest sense the vision of his
Being and dwell in heaven itself. Indeed the idea
of full surrender to the Divine verged toward the
other thought, that the soul bears the Divine within
itself and is able to develop it as spiritual freedom
and superiority beyond everything existing and con-
ceivable. The directions for it are sometimes more
intellectually precise, at others more quiotistic. The
Thomistic mysticism possesses the Augustinian as-
surance of gaining freedom through knowdedgo and
of rising to God ; the Scotistic no longer possessed
this assurance, and it sought the highest moods
through disciplining the will: Union of will ii'ith
Gody resignation, tranquillity. Herein indeed lay
a progress in the recognition of evangelical piety,
which was full of import for the Reformation ; but
even the nominalists (Scotists) had lost a clear and
definite apprehension of the Divine will. The way
seemed open here for the question concerning the
certitudo salutis, but this remained unanswered so
long as the conception of God was not pushed beyond
the line of the arbitrary Will.

The importance of mysticism, especially of German
mysticism, is not to be underrated even in the direc-
tion of the positive equipment of asceticism as active,
brotherly love. The old monkish instructions were
enlivened by the energetic admonition to the service
of one's neighbor. TIk^ simple relation of man to

Dr^VEI.OPMRXT OP nOf'TRINE OF SIN, KTC. Ill

mmi, ma(l<' sMcn-d hy tli(> (Miristijui coiiiDmndiiu'iit
of love iiiid l)y the pcaco of (lod, is iioticoiil)!^ in all
tlio persistent organizations and castes of the Middle
Ages, and was preparing to burst th(3ni. llei-e also
the beginning of a new era can be perceived: 'i'lie
monks became more active, more worldly — frecpiently
in truth nmwild therein — and the laity became more
alive and active. In the free unions, half secular,
half ecclesiastical, the i)ulseof a life of piety throbbed.
The old religious orders were in j)art k(*pt alive sim-
ply artificially and lost their authority. Among the
Anglo-Saxons and Czechs, hitherto o])pressed and
kept in poverty b}' foreign nations, the now piety
allied itself with a politico-national program (Wiclif WicUf anj
and Huss movements). This had a most energizing
effect upon Germany, but it never bnnight about
in patient and divided Germany a national reform
movement. Everything socially revolutionary or
anti-liierarchical remained isolated, and even when
the world-dominating Church had prostituted itself V^'^^^'^j'

O ^ tloll of

in Avignon and when at. the reform councils the cry of Avigilou.^
the Romance nations for reform and insurance against
the shameless financial dominance of the curia had
become loud, the Gorman peoples, with few excep-
tions, still kept their patience. An immense revolu-
tion, again and again retarded, was prepared during
the 15th century, but it appeared to threaten merely
the political and ecclesiastical institutions. Piety jj^jf AtSi!-k
seldom attacked the old dogma, which through do^I''
nominalism had become wholly a sacred relic. It

".-1

nua.

■ i

I ■)

Tiomiis i1

44^ ol'TMNKS OF THK IIISTOliV OK IKXJMA.

tuniud, it is triu*, ayainst tlir new doctrint's deduci'd
from vicious Church piacticeH ; but as for itself it
desired to ho nothing ciso tlian tho old etclosiastical
pioty, and indeed it was nothing else. In the 15th
century niysticisni I'larilied itself in (ierniany. Tho
"Imitation of (-hrist" by Tlionias a Kempis is its
purest expression; but anytliing like reform in the
strictest sense is not proclaimed in tho little book.
The reformation part consists only in its individual-
ism and in the power with which it addresses itself
to every soul.

Oodo of
(i rat inn

2. On fJir Ilisiorfj of Ecclesiastical Law. The
Doctrine of the Church.

In the time from Gratian to Innocent III. the papal
system secured the supremacy. The whole decretal
legislation from 1159 to 1320 rests upon the code of
Gratian, and scholastic theology became subject to
it. Citations from tho Church fathers, in groat part,
were transmitted by the law-books. The Church,
which in dogmatics should ever be the communion
of believers (of the predestined), was in truth a
Episoopus hierarchy, the pope was the episcopus universalis.
saiis. Within ecclesiastical limits the German kings per-
mitted this development, and are responsible for it.

The leading thoughts in regard to the Church,

which were only later finally established, were the

iiiorarchv following: (l) The hierarchical organization is es-

sential to the Church, and the Christianity of the

T)RVKI/)PMKNT OF !)()( TIUNK OP SIN, ETC. 1 III

The

riiiiciioiiH

icsta,

C'laircli.

laity is in m'cry ivspect bouinl to tin' iiitrrmcdiation
of tlio priests {rile <n-<lin(ifi), who aloiR' fan inTlorni
tho Church functions; ('.') The sacramental and juris- JJ"J;'
dictional powers of the i)riests are iiuh^pendent of
1 heir personal wortiiint^ss; (:{) The Church isa visihln
connuunion endowed with a constitution originating
with Christ (and as such c<u'pns Chrisfi); it lias a
twofold i)()f<'sl<ts, namely si^irifnah's cf tcniuor- Tw..f..i.i

* ' *' ' -• I'owcr of

((lis. Througii hoth it, which shall endure to tlio
end of the world, is sui)erior to and i)laced ahovt' tho
perishable states. Therefore all states and all indi-
viduals must bo obedient to it {da ncces.'iihde .salii-
tis); oven over lieretiey and heathens the power of
tho Church extends (final decision by Boniface VIII. ) ;
(4) In the p< pe, tho re])resentativo of Christ and
successor of Peter, a strictly m< niarchical constitution
is given to the Church. Whatever is valid of the
hierarchy is above all valid of hin:i; the remaining
members of the hierarchy <are ai)i)ointed only " 171
partem sollicitudinis". He is the episcopufi nni-
versalis; to him therefore belong the two swords;
and since the Christian can attain unto sanctifica-
tion only withii the Church, since however the
Church is the hierarchy and the hierarchy the pope,
all the world must de necessitate salutis be subject
to the pope (bull " unani sanctam"). By a chain of
falsifications, which arose especially within the re-
awakened polemics against the Greeks (13th century),
these maxims were dated back into ecclesiastical
antiquity, yet were strictly formulated (Thomas

I'ono
Wi.'ltls

Two
SwordH.

F'Use
Decrt tdis.

Ijll

r r

. 1

'D i" Ik' ' '

iiil'!''

f f f

' 1

1 ^ \ '
1

'. i. I

ii!i:l;w'

fal

444 orruxEs of ttir history of dogma.

A(iuiiias) only af'tor tbcy had lung boon admitted in
practice. Tho new law followed the new custom,
which was slrengthened by tho mendicant orders;
for the lattcT, thoroughly unsettled ])y the special
privikiges ^vhi<*ll they received, and the aristo-
cratic, provincial and local powers completed the
victory of the pa])al autocracy. The doctrine of

I'^'BlJ"- ])ai)al infal]il)ility Avas tho necessary result of this
development. This also was formulated by Thomas,
but not as yet carried through; for on this last point
both the historical and the provincial ecclesiastical
conscience reacted (the university of Paris; the re-
buke of John XXII. as an heretic). About i;5()0 the
extravagant exaltation of the papacy in literature
reached its height ( Augustinus Triumphus, Alvarus
Pelagius), but after about looO it grew weak, to grow
strong again only after l"-20 years (Torquemada).
In the interval the latest development of the papacy
was combated violently, but not successfully, first in
the ghibelline literature, to which for a time the
minorite (Occam) was allied, later from the stand-
point of the sui)remacy of the councils. Only tem-
porarily was Munich the seat of the opposition and
did German authors take part in it. The real land
of opposition was France, it.s king and bishops, yes
the French nation. The latter alone preserved the

praRmatic freedom obtained at the councils (pragmatic sanc-

Sanctiou. _ -^ ^

tion at Bourges, lloO) ; but in the concordat of 1517
the king also sacrificed it to share with the pope,
after the example of other princes, the established

Violently
Couibateil

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 445

Church of the country. By about 1 -")()() the old
tyranny had Ijeen re-cstablislied ahnost everywhere.
The Lateran council, at the beginning of the KUh
century, defied the wishes of the nations as though
there never had been sessions at Constance and Bale.

The new development of the idea of the Church, {J^i^n*.
up to the middle of the 1 iJth century, was brought \)ur'ispVu-^
about not by theology but by jurisprudence. This
is explained, (1) By the lack of interest in theology
at Rome, {'i) By the fact that the theologians, when-
ever they meditated about the Church, always re-
peated the dissertations of Augustine concerning the
Church as societati Jidc/tKiit {iiniiicrus electonan),
for which reason also the later " heretical" opinions
concerning the Church are found in the great scholas-
tics. Only after the middle of the 1 ;)th century did
theology take an interest in the hiorarchial, papal
Church idea of the iurists (forerunner: Hugo of St. "uK? ^^■

-} ^ o Victor.

Victor). The controversy with the Greeks, espe-
cially after the council of Lyons, r-2T4, furnished
the op])ortunity. The importance of Thomas con-
sists in the fact that lie first developed strictly
the papal conception, o/ tJie Chnrch vitJu'n doff-
matics, but at tlw same time united it artfu/lf/
with the Awjustinian, idea fro)n which he started.
Thomas adheres to it tliat the Church is the num])er p^Saent

ui)on

of the elect; but he shows that the Church is author- aukusi
ity in doctrinal law, and as a priestly sacramental
institution is the cjcclusire organ through which the
h.;ad of the Church j)rocures members. Tluishe was

me.

til

i n

< I'l

) HI

-J. t»

;!„ n

Opposition

to Roman

Idea

Futile,

Common
Orouiid of
Defenders
and Op-
ponents.

440 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

able to join the new to the old. Nevertheless till the
Reformation and beyond it the whole hierarchical
and papal theory obtained no sure position in dog-
matics; it remained Roman decretal right, was util-
ized in practice and ruled over the hearts of men
through the doctrine of the sacraments. All that
could bo expected in the interest of the hierarchy
from a formulation of the Church idea had indeed
already been acquired as a secure possession.

Because it was an opposition from the centre every
opposition against the Roman idea of the Church
which became clamorous in the latter half of the
Middle Ages remained ineffectual. The signifi-
cance of faith to the Church idea no one clearly
recognized, and the final trend of the whole religious
system tow\ard the visio ef fruitio dei no one cor-
rected. The common ground of the defenders of the
hierarchical Church idea imd their opponents was the
following: (1) The Church is the communion of
those who shall attain unto the vision of God, of
the predestined; (:2) Sinco no one knows whether he
belongs to this communion, he must make diligent
use of the means of salvation of the Church; (o)
These means of salvation, the sacraments, are be-
stowed upon the empirical Church and attached to
the priests; (1) They have .i double purpose, first, to
j)repare for the life beyond by incorporation in the
body of C^hrist, and then, since they are powers of
faith and love, to produce here on earth the "/^e/^r'
vivere*\ i.e. to cause the fulfihnent of the law of

developmp:nt of doctrine ok sin, etc. 147

Christ; (5) Since even upon the earth the fultihnent
of the law of Christ (in povert}', humility and obedi-
ence) is the highest duty, therefore the temporal life,
also the state, is subordiuato to this aim and thus
also to the sacrnments and in every sense to the
Church. X^\)OTii\\\>i comnio)! (jronnd iwoyqA all the
controversies regarding the Church and her n^form.
The papists drew the further consecjuences, that the Hierarchy
hierarchical order, invested with tlu; administration '"^o:'/'^'
of the sacraments and with the authority of the
Church to subordinate to itself the temporal life, was
de necessitate salufis; still tliej' permitted the moral
duty of really fulfilling the law of Christ entirely to
recede behind the mechanically and irierarchically
carried out administration of the sacraments, where-
by the}" degraded the Church idea, as the number of the
predestined (religious) and as the communion of those
living according to the law ( )f Christ (moral) , to a mere
phrase, and sought the guarantee for the legitimacy
of the Church in the strictest conception of the ob-
jective system ciilin/inttiiiy in the jwpe, endon-
gering however themselves the finished building
in one point — the re-ordinations. The op{)onents, ^,^1,''.^!,'';^}*
how«wer, hit upon "heretical" ideas, either, (1) By ''^pp^'^''''^^-
contending against the hierarchical order, since be-
yond the bishop's office the same is neither supported
by the Scriptures, nor by tradition, or, (•>) IJy allow-
ing the religious and moral i<liNi contained in the
thought of predestination and in the con(\^ption of
the Church as the conununii ii of imitators of (Christ,

t ..

i' .

; I

Real

448 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF l)0(JMA.

to supersede the i(lc£i of the empirical Church as an
institution of sacraments and of law, and (3) By
measuring, therefore, the priests and witli them the
Church authorities by the law of (rod (in a Donatis-
tic way), before they conceded to tliem the right to
administer the keys, ''to loose and to bind''. The
opposition of all so-called *' prie-reformatory" sects
and men had its root in these theses. Fnnn them
one could develop the seemingly most radical anti-
theses to the ruling Church, and has developed tliem
(devil's Church, babel, anti-Christ, etc.) ; j'et this
must not blind us to the fact that the opponents stood
upon common ground. Men placed the inoral char-
acteristics (jf the Church above the juristic and "ob-
jective" — certainly this was a blc;-ised })rogress — but
the fundamental ideas (Church as sacramental insti-
tution, necessity of priesthood, />'^^/^/o (/c/ as aim,
lack of esteem for civil life) remained the same, and
under the title of the •sociela.'^ Jideliuni in truth
only a legalibtic mordl Church idea was established.
The Church is the sum total of those who carry out
the apostolic life according to tlio law of Christ.
Faith was considered only as oik- characteristic
under the conception of the law, and ni the j)lace of
tiiO commandments of the pi'It-r.-ts stepped the Fran-
cit;' iTi nile, or a Biblicism, .igainst whose apocalyp-
tic oi Vv'ild excrescences one had to take refuge in
Ibe iiu (loi,in:i a vid in ecclesiastical tradition. Neither
a t'0«ii')iti!ii(.M of believers, nor an invisil)le Chnrch,
as \6 iali-c\3 believed, did the Reformers have in

as an
(3) By
em the
oiiatis-
ii^iit to
Tlio
sects

them
il anti-
1 them
^'t this
s stood
/ char-
tl "ob-
5S — but
1 insti-
s aim,
le, luul
I truth
lished.
fry out
Christ,
toristic
lace of

Fraii-
)calyi)-
iige in
Neither
hurch.
ive in

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 440

view, but their object was to improve the old Church
of priests and sacraments by dissolving her hierarchic
monarchical constitution, by abolishing her assumed
political pov/ers and by carefully sifting hev priests
according to the standard of the law of Christ, or of
the Bible. On these conditions she was also es-
teemed by the Reftjrmors as the visible, holy Church,
through which God realizes his predestinations.
They did not recognize that the carrying out of this
Donatistic thesis was an impossibility and that this
reformed Church must again become hierarchical.

The Waldensians neither contested the Catholic
worship, nor the sacraments and hierarchial consti-
tution in themselves, but considered it a deadly sin
that the Catholic ecclesiastics should exercise the
rights of successors of the apostles, without taking
upon themselves the apostolic life, and they protested
against the extensive governing power of the pope
and the bishops. The Joachimites and a part of the ^f^
minorites united tho apocalyptic with the legal ele-
ment. Here also it was not the question of a sacra-
mental institution and priesthood, but only of the
right of hierarchical divisions of rank, of the Divine
investiture of the pope and of the ecclesiastical gov-
erning power, which was denied to the Church under
the authority of the Franciscan theory. The hand-
ing over of the whole legal sphere to the state was
with many merely an expression of their contempt
for this sphere. The pyofessors of Purls and their
national-liberal coterie attacked the pseudo-Isidorian

\ 1 1

Waldon-

siaus.

■Mrr:-
and
■rites.

Profpfisors
ut l^iris
Vttack

•-t'Uili)-Isi-
(li)riati.

()rt"<oriaii

Devolop-

lueut.

^i!

;i|:;

' i l;l:

-I

i5() OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

WiL-lif and
Huss.

and Gregorian (lovolopment of the i)apacy and of the
conytitntion at the root, and yet they only intended
primarily to paralyze the papal finance system and
to heal the injury to the Church through an episco-
palianism, which, in view of what the Church
already was as a Roman power, must he desig-
nated Utopian. Wiclif and Huss — the latter a
p )werful agitator in the spirit of Wiclif hut with-
out theological independence — represent the ripest
})hase of the reform movements of the Middle Ages:
(1) They showed that the cultus and sacramental
practices everywhere wore hampered and vitiated
by human tenets (indulgences, confessions, absolute
pardoning power of the priests, iiKddluc.atio injidel-
inniy saints-, image-, relic-worship, special masses,
sacramentals, Wiclif also against transubstantiation) ;
they demanded plainness, intelligibleness (language
of the country) and spirituality of worship; {'I) They
demanded a reform of the hierarchy and of the secu-
larized mendicant orders ; these all, the pope at the
head, must return to an apostolic luinisiry; the pope
is only the first servant of Christ, not his represen-
tative; all governing must cease; (;>) Tliej'-, like
Thomas, brought to the front the Augustinian pre-
destination Church idea, yet while Thomas in join-
ing to it the empirical idea disposes of everything
moral only through the medium of the sacraments,
they, without robbing the sacraments (^f their im-
portance, raised to llif> c(»ntrjd place the idea that
the empiri(;al CUiurch nuist be the kingdom in which

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 451

True Nota
Ik'clrsiat'.

Faith Not

Eiuplia

Kized.

the Imc of Christ govorns, Tlioy taught that tho ^'Xns/
law of Christ is tho true uofd crclcsiae; thtuvfcjro in
accordance with this fuiKlamental principle the right
also of the priesthood and the manner of adniinistca'ing
the sacraments nnist 1h' determined. Wiclif thei-ehy
contested the iii(/('/)eii</('ii/ right of the ch'rgy lo he
representatives of the Chnrch and achninistrators of
tho means of grace and made it dependent irpon the
ohserving of the lev Chrisfi. '"Faith" was also
passed over hy Wiclif and Hnss. In tnrning with all
their might against the hierarchy and against the
objective, legal idea of the Chnrch system, they
placed the legal Church idea in opposition in tho
judicial. Tho "y/r/cs- (((rifafc fni-tiiafa^\ t.'.at is,
the observance of the law, alone gives legitimjicy to
the Church. Thus much they did for the in-
wardness of the contemplaticjn of the Church — the
hierarchical conception of the Church had still in op-
position to their own an element of truth, though a
perverted one: That God builds his Church upon
earth by his grace in the midst of sin, and that holi-
ness in a religious sense is no mark that can be
recognized by a legal standard (on the Church idea of
Thomas ;md the Prio-Reformers, see Gottschick i.
d. Ztschr. f. KGesch. Bd. VIII).

>,. I

452 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

3. On iJio JJistorff of Ecclesinstical Science.

Historios of philosoplij' by Erdmann, Uber\vo«]j-neinze,
Windolband, Stockl, Baur, Voiles ill). D(l. 3. Ud. Worner,
Scholastik d. spateren MA. a Bde, 18«1 IF. Kitschl, Jldca
implicita, 1890.

i '

CanspR of

Revival of

Science.

Mendicant

Orders and

Aristotle,

Authority
of Churcli

Over
Science.

The groat revival of science after the beginning of
the I'Mh century was occasioned, (1) By the mighty
triumph of the Church and the papac}- under Inno-
cent III., (2) By the exaltation of piety since St.
Francis, (3) By the enlargement and enrichment of the
general culture and by the discovery of the genuine
Arl-.totle (contact with the Orient; transmission of
Greek philosophy through Arabs and Jews; the
supernaturalistic Avicenna. f 1037, the pantheistic
Averrhoes, f HOB; Maimonides' influence u};on
Thomas and oilers). The two new great powers,
the mendicant orders and Aristotle, were obliged to
secure their place in science by fighting for it; the
latter conquered, since it was plain that he had ren-
dered the best service in opposition to an eccentric
realism, which leads to pantheism. A moderated
realism now developed, which recognized the uni-
versal " in re", but knew how to add them accord-
ing to need, either ^' ante^\ or "j;o,s'f rei)i'\

The new science like the older sought to ex-
plain all things through reference to God; but this
reference meant the same as the submission of all
knowledge to the authority of the Church. In a
certain sense men were more fettered in the 13th

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 453

century than formerly; for not only the old doyma
{art icnli fide ('), but the whole territory of ecclesias-
tical activity was considered absolute authority, and
the pre-supposition that every authority in single
questions is of e(iual weight with the ratio was
now first fully expressed. The theologians of the
mendicant orders justifi(!d "scientificall}'" the whole
constitution of the Cliurch, with its latest institu-
tions and doctrines, upon the same plane with the
" credo'''' and the " intelli<j<)'\ Anselm had striven to
erect a rational structure upon the foundation of
authoritative revelation ; with the later theologians
the jumbling of authorities in a most unconcerned
manner was a principle. Although they adhered to
the theory that theology is a speculative science
which culminates in the visio dei, yet so great was
their confidence in the Church that they continually
added to the speculative structure the tenets of her
authority. Hence originated the theory that there
exist a natural and a revealed theology; still they
conceived these as being in closest harmony, the one
as the supplement and complement of the other; and
they were confident that the whole was tenable even
before the bar of reason. The abundance of the
material to be mastered w^as unbounded, as well in
regard to revelation (the whole Bible, the doctrine
and practice of the Church), as in regard to reason
(Aristotle). Nevertheless they advanced from the
" Sentences" to a system (" summa") : That which
the Church retains in life, the dominion over the

Anst'lm's
Aim.

Natural

and
Revealed
The(jl()f,'y.

454 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

;: I

Thn)l(i(:y

t'oiiiprt'-

hciids All

Knowl-

KnowledKe
of Church
Doctrine is
Kuovsiedge
or God.

The

Sumnia of

Thomas.

world, is also to bo reflected in its theology. The
new doLcniatism was the dialectic-systematical treat-
ment of ecclesiastical dogma and of the acts of the
Chiircli, for the purpose of developing the same into
a single system comi)reh(>nding everything in the
highest sense worthy of knowledge, and of proving it,
and then of rendering serviceable tt) the Church all the
forces of th(3 mind and the whol(> knowledge of the
world. To this purpose, however, was the other sub-
jective one united of rising to God and rejoicing in his
presence. But both j)urp()ses now coincided : Knowl-
edge of the Church doctrines is knowledge of God,
for the Church is the present Christ, Therein
were these scholastics not servile workers for the
Church — on the contrary : Consciously they sought
knowledge only for the benefit of their souls, yet
they breathed only within the Church. The struc-
ture which they raised c(jlkipsed, but their work in-
deed was a progress in the history of science.

What has been said above, has reference to the
prie-Scotistic scholasticism, above all to Thomas.
His ''sumnia" is characterized, (I) By i;he conviction
that religion and theology are essentially of a specu-
lative (not practical) nature, that therefore they
must be acquired b}^ thinking, and that finally no
contradiction can arise between reason and revela-
tion; ("2) By a firm adherence to the Augustinian
doctrine of God, of predestination, sin and grace
(only upon the conception of God did the Aristotelian
philosoph}" have an influence; the strict elevation of

DEVELOI'MKNT oF DOCTKINK Ol' SIN, KTC

•;>

. I

I'llC WOllci-llistorical Tlmums

I hitcH
Aii;,'iisiint*

ami
Aristotle,

(lit» Holy St'ri[)tiin's as ili(» only sal'o rrvt'hitiuii
Thomas also a('('t'[)tt'tl trmii Augustiiu') ; {'■'>) By a
(looply punotratinj^' kuowlotlgo of Aristotle and by an
oxtonsivo use of his philosophy, as fai" as Augustin-
ianisni would permit; (1) By a bold Justilicatioii of
the highest claims of the Church upon a genial
theory of the state and a wonderfully careful obser-
vation of the empirical tendencies of tlie pai)al sys-
tem of Church and slate,

importance of Thomas consists in his uniting of
Augustine and Aristotle. As a pupil of Augustine
he is a speculative thinker, full of coniideiice and yet
in him are already found the germs of tl i' destruction
of the absolute theology. For theology as a whole
he still sought to maintain the impression of absolute
validity; in detail arbitrary and relative ideas al-
ready took the place of the necessar3', while ho no
longer deduced purely rationally the ariivuU Jidei^
like Anselm.*

But the strictly necessary was also not in every <^'i.""<'h i^-

'f -J J sists upon

respect serviceable to the Church. She demanded ^Jnissiou!^"

* The delineation of the sunima a;,'recs with the fuinhiiiuMit.ii iilea of
God; Tlirougli (Jod to Ciod. TJir fust pai-t (ll'.t (juaf -i ) treats' f (lod and
the issue of all tlun^^s from (Jod; th(> second pact, si ^ 1st (III qiiaest.)
of general morality; the sei .ml part, see. ;.M (IS'.» (piaest. ) of spceial
morality under the point of vii-w of the return of tlie rational creature to
God ; the third part, which Thomas \v."t no. able to finish, of Christ, the sac-
ramenta and esehatoloKy. The proceeding? in every separate question is hy
tlio method of contradiction. All reasons which ^peak fr;/a('»,s^ the correct
conception of the doctrines are j,'i\«n expression {"(lij]icHlt(tt>'s"). In
general the governing principle is tiiat the whole system must he based
upon the authority of revelation; "ittihn- tatncn srirni tlnrtihid ctidm ni-
tione humana, iion qiiklcm (td probandaiii .//V/toi (i^riA per uoc tom.kuetl'r
MKRjTm FiDEi), sed ad mani/estandnni (diqna alia, quae traduntnr hi hue
doctrina. Cum enim yratia iion tollat naturain, scd perficiut, oportet
quod naturalis ratio subserviat jklti".

■ 'i

I '1
If

; i

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

^ >^^

:/.

1.0

I.I

1^ Uk

lii 12.2

2.0

1.8

II
II

!.25

1.4

6" -

^■

Photographic

Sciences

Corporation

23 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580

(716) 873-4503

V
^

ThPolo-
^ians

450 OUTLINES OF THE IIISTOllY OF DOCJMA.

here also that th(? deal should 1)0 a <U'U.r niditts;
Sho vvanit'd a theology which proved the speculative
necessity of her system and one which taught
blind submission. Thomas' theology alone could not
satisfy. With all its ecclesiastical bent it could not
deny the fundamental thought, that God and the
soul, the sold and God are everything. From this
Augustinian- Areopagite attitude that " secondary-
mysticism" will always be developed in which the
individual endeavors to go his own way. Where
there is inward conviction, there is also indepen-
dence. It was of benefit to the Church that theology
soon took another turn. It grew skeptical in regard
"'■"Teal!*'''' to the " general", the " idea", which should be the
"substance". Under the continuous study of Aris-
totle causalitfj became the principal idea in place of
immanence. The scientific sense grew stronger;
details in their concrete expression gained in interest :
Will ruled the world, the w411 of God and the will
of the individual, not an unintelligible substance, or
a constructed universal intellect. Reason recognized
the series of causalities and ended in the discernment
of arbitrariness and mere contingencies. Duns
Scotus, the most penetrating thinker of the Middle
Ages, marks this immense change ; but it was first
consummated since Occam.

The consequence of this change was not however the
protest against the Church doctrine with its absolute
tenets, nor the attempt to try these by the principles
upon which they were based, but the increasing

Authority
of Church
Increased.

I)Evkl()PMp:nt of doctiune of sin, etc. J 57

■f ■' n

Nominal-
isiii Iltul
(irt'iit Ad-
viintugi'S.

authoi'Hij of the (^hurcJi. At her cl(M)r was laid t^„J!j;"i'J'j|"t„
what ratio and auctoritas onco had unitedly ^"^'"""'^y
borne, not in an act of despair but as a self-evident
act of obedience. Socinianism first protested. Pro-
testantism exaniincjd into the foundations of the
doctrine — post-Tridentine Catholicism pursued the
direction indicated further: In this icdi/, tchilc noni-
inalisuL lH'</(tu to rule, the (jronnd ints soon iron
fur the later triuitarian derelopnient of doc-
trine.

Nominalism had great advantages: It began to
see clearly that religion is something else than
knowledge and philosophy, while Thomas was want-
ing in clearness; it knew the importance of the
concrete in opposition to the hollowness of the ab-
stract (laying the foundation for a new psychology);
it recognized the will, laid stress upon this property
also in God, strongly emphasized the personality of
God and thereby first put an end to the Neo-Platonic
theosophy which mixed up God and the world; it
grasped the positiveness of historical religion more
firmly, — but it forfeited, together with confidence
in an absolute knowledge, also confidence in the
majesty of the moral law and thereby emptied the
conception of God and exposed him to arbitrariness,
including in the " positive", to which it submitted,
the Church with its whole apparatus — the commands
of the religious and moral law are arbitrary, but
the commands of the Church are absolute. It estab- lisiieu
lished in dogmatics the sovereign right of casuis- casuistry.

« ii , i

J ;

11.
t

1 1

458 orTIJNES OF THE IIISTOHY OF DOOMA.

Fides Im-

plifiUi
Sufficient.

Absurdity
tho Stump

of
Religion.

Ausrustin-

iaiiisiii
Gradually
Cast Off.

try, alivady anticiiuitcd by tho (liscipliiic of pen-
aii('(! not only, but als(> l)y ibo dialectics of the
Tlioniists: Kvcrythinj^ in revelation depends upon
the Divine will which is arbitrary; therefore intel-
locl is able to prove at most only the ^^ conveniens''
of tilings ordained. In so far however as it has its
own knowledge there exists a double trnfh, the re-
ligions and the natural; to the former one submits
and in this very submission cimsists the merit of
the faith. In gii'ater measure (not recoiling even
at the frivolous) nominalism acknowledged the suffi-
cienc}' of the " //V/c.s ini))]irif(('\: true, it here found
an example in the papal d(?cretals. Had not Inno-
cent IV. expressly taught that it was sufficient for
the laity to believe in a requiting God, as for the
rest to submit to the Church doctrine? Absurdity
and authority now became the stamp of religious
truth. While freeing themselves from the load of
speculative monstrosities and the deceptive " neces-
sity of thinking", men took upon themselves the
dreadful load of a faith the content of which they
themselves declared to bo arbitrary and opaque, and
which they therefore were able to wear only as a
uniform.

Closely allied with this development was another,
the gradual casting oft' of Augustinianism and the
reinstatement of Roman moralism, now confirmed
by Aristotle. The weight of guilt and the power of
grace became relative magnitudes. From Aristotle
they learned that man by his freedom stands inde-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF 8TN, ETC. '0)9

IK3ntlent boforo (lod, and siiicc they liad cast <»1V
Augustine's doctrine concernin}^ thc"lirst and last
things", they also, under ct)ver of his words,
stripped off his doctrine of grace. Everything in
religion and ethics became only probable, redenij)- I'r.i.aiity
tion itself through Christ was placed among the most
uncertain categories. The fundamental principles of
a universal religious and moral dii)lomacy were ap-
plied to objective religion and to subjective religious-
ness. The holiness of God was extinguished : lie is nniin<'ss.)f
not entirely severe, not entirely holy. Faith need ^^i"^*^*"''-
not be a full surrender, penance not i)erfect repent-
ance, love not perfect love. Everywhere a " certain
standard " (Aristotle) is sufficient and whatever is
wanting is supplied by the sacraments and l)y adher-
ence to the Church; for the religion of revelation
was given to make the way to heaven easy, Jind the
Church alone is able to announce what " standard"
and what accidental merits will satisfy God. This
is the " Aristotelianism" or the " reasoning" of the
nominalistic scholastics w4iich Luther hated and
which the Jesuits in the post-Tridentine times fully
introduced into the Church.

At the end of the Middle Ages, and even in the H.iiction
14th century, this nominalism, which renders relig- ^"('".jl"*''
ion void, called forth great reactions, yvi notwith-
standing it remained in vogue at the universities.
Not only the theologians of the Dominican order
contradicted it again and again, but outside of the
order also an Augustinian reaction broke forth in

isin.

,1. >l

' n

■,)■

-* t:

r : !i

■\CA) OITI.INKS OK IHK IIISIOKV OF DfXiMA.

n>\]

1> rail wjird ilia, Wiclift', Jlu.ss, Wcsel, Wossel ami
others. They stood up against Pelagianism, al-
though they allowed wide play to the sacraments,

7tevivJd" lhey/(/('.s' /////>//(,' //a and Church authority. A power-
ful ally against noiuinalism, which by its hollow
forinalistic and dialectic principles in the lAth cen-
tury made itself outright desi)icablo, was gained by
an Augustinian reaction in favor of Plato who at
that time was being brought to light again. A new
spirit emanated from him and from the rediscovered
anticpiit}^: It sought knowledge from the liriruj^
and reached out toward those ideals which set the
individual free and elevate him above the common
world. Through violent disturbances the new spirit
announced itself and in the beginning it seemed to
threaten Christianity with paganism ; yet those who

Nicholas of represented the renaissance most brilliantly (Nich-

Kus,

Erasiuua. oJas of Kus, Erasmus and others) only wished to
do away with unspiritual ecclesiasticism and its
empty science, but not really to jeopardize the Church
and the dogma. The restored confidence in the rec-
ognizable unity of all things, the bold soaring of the
fantasy inspired by anticpiity and the discovery of
new worlds, these founded the new science. Nomin-
alistic science did not become by purification an
exact science, but a new spirit moved among the
withered foliage of scholasticism, and gained confi-
dence and strength to extract the secrets from nat-
ure also, as well as from the vivid speculations of
Plato which inspire the whole man, and from inter-

lel anil

"^m, ul-

imunts,

powur-

hoUow

•th cen-

ined by

who at

A now

covered

set the
lommon
w spirit
?med to
3se who
(Nich-
shed to
and its
Church
the rec-
^ of the
very of
Nomin-
tion an
mg the
\ confi-
)m nat-
;ions of
1 inter-

ticism.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. IGl

course with the living. But ihcolof/f/ did not at first
profit by it. It was sinii)ly pushed asido. The |f,'|JI",',"n'js"s
Christian humanists also wore no theologians, but ^An'^rusUa*
only learned patristic scholars with IMatonic-Fran-
cisCf'in ideals, — at best only August inians. No one
really had any longer any confidence in ecclesiasti-
cal doctrine, but through a sense for the orifft'nal
teaching, which th(* renaissance bad awakened, a
new theology wjis prepared.

4. The Reniinfinff of Dogmatics inio S('h<tl(isfics.

In the scholasticism of the 1 :5th century the (^cci- rrosuppo-
dental Church obtained a homogeneous, systematic "'^ ^••"•'a»»-
representation of its faith. The pre-sui)positions
were, (I) The Holy Scriptures and the dogmas of the
councils, (2) Augustinianism, (o) The development
of ecclesiasticism since the 0th century, (1) The
Aristotelian philosophy. Individual bliss in the
hereafter is still the Jim's tJieolorjiae, but in so far as
the sacraments, which serve this purpose, restore the
kingdom of Christ upon earth also as a power of lovo
(already since Augustine), a second aim was intro-
duced into theologj": It is not on\y food for the soul
but also ecclesiasticism. But the difference be-
tween these two ideas has never been adjusted in
Catholicism. In them grace and merit are the two
centres of the parabola of the mediaeval concei)tion
of Christianity.

Only the old art icid i fidei were dogmas in a strict

v \

' ill

\ '

• \ I

" i

402 OrTIJXKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

^•',

Articuli

Fii'.ri Only

I{<al

I)<))<niaH.

TlirtT-fold

Task of

Soholasti

cisiii.

sense; but siiicc tlio tninsuhHtantiation was consid-
ered as conferred together with the incarnation, the
whole sacramental system was in reality raised to
the heij^ht of an absolute doctrine of faith. The
boundary between dogma and the<»logical j)recei)t
was entirely uncertain in details. No one could any
longer state what the Church really did teach, and
the latter itself always took care to map out the
province of the necessary faith.

The task of scholasticism was a triple one: (I)
To treat the old (wliculi Jhlci scientifically and to
place them vrithin the line drawn about the sacra-
ments and the merits; (5) To give a form to the doc-
trine of the sacraments, (3) To adjust the difference
between principles of ecclesiastical action and Au-
gustinianism. These tasks it carried out in a mag-
nificent manner, yet in doing so it soon found itself
at variance with piety, which could no longer find
its true expression (Augustinian reactions) in the
official theolog}' (the nominalistic) and therefore
pushed it aside.

S'.

The Working Over of the Traditional
Articuli Fidei.

Remould-
inj^ of

Doctrint? of
Gotl.

1. In the beginning the Augustinian- Areopagite
conception of God governed the theology of the Mid-
dle Ages (conception of the necessary going forth of
the one Being; the Substance determining every-
thing; the virtual existence of God in the world;

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. <C3

ontological proof of Aiisoliii) ; hut later tlio danj^cr
from pantheism was feh (Amah'ich of P>aiia, J)avi<l
of Diiianto). Thomas cmlcavorcd to unite tlio
Au^ustiniai) and the Aristotelian ('on(H'})ti()n of (iod : j^'^Y^mI,'!
(iod is ahsolutc^ suhstaneo, 8<'lf-cons('i(Mis thinkiiiL,', ' i"m";ni'.'i''

. ' Ari^t.itil-

(/(■///.s ?>>/;v/.s'; h(3 IS diiierent from the world (e(»sm(»- iiMCmi-

rcplidllH.

logical proof) . Yet Thomas also still had the most
lively interest in emj)hasiziug the ahsolute suf-
ficiency and necessity of (Iod (in (lod's own personal
end tlio world is included); for only the necessary
can 1)0 recognized with certainty; hliss however
depends upon certain knowledge. Vet Duns con-
tested the concei)tion of a necessary outgoing«Being,
overthrew all proofs of (iod, denied also that the
divine Will could be measured l>y our ethical "modes
of thought", and conceived of Ood merely as a Free-
Will with unfathomable motives, i.e. without these
(arbitrariness). ()i*cam (juestioned also the conception
of the pn'mnni niorciis iitimohilo and [)ronounced
monotheism onU' jjnfhahilior than polytheism. The
contradiction betwei^n Thomists and Scotists is ^ivTwwn^
found in their dilferent conceptions of the relation
of man to God. The former looked ui)on this
as dependence and recognized in the (jood the
essence of God (God wills a thing because it is
good) ; the latter separated frod and the creature,
conceived the latter as indejwndent but in duty
bound to the Divine com mauds which originate in
the pleasure of God (a thing is good because God
wills it). Yonder predestination, here arbitrariness.

Thomists

and
ScolistA.

p.-

I i ill

t 1

'Ij:

F!:^ -

i fl-

D«vtrlni' of
Trinity.

Panthoism
of Tiiomos.

4G4 OUTLINES OF THK HISTOKY oK DOfSMA.

Theology indeed uttered the Hentence ''jxih-r in Jilio
rercldfiis^' with tlie lips, hut heeded it not.

2. The eonstruclion of the doctrine of the trinity
helonginl entirely to scientific lahor, ;iftcr tritheistic
(Ro.sc(^llin) and niodalistic (Al)clard) attempts had
been repuls(Ml. Thoniism necessarily retained an
inclination to modalism (even the Jjonihard was ac-
cused of substantializing the (J i rind csscnfid and
hence of "(juaternity"), while the Scotistic school
kept the Persons sharply separated. In the subtile
researches the trinity became a scliool problem.
The treatment of it proved that the faith of the
Occident did not live; in this transmitted doctrine.

15. With Thomas are still found remnants of the
pantheistic way of thinking (creation as .'ictualiza-
tion of the Divine ideas; everything which is exists
only imrUcipaiione dei; diviud, honitds est jinis
rernm onuiinniy therefore not an independent aim
in the world) ; yet he by introducing the Aristo-
telian idea had already essentially completed the sep-
aration of God from the creature, and he endeavored
to restore the pure idea of creation. The contrasts
were reflected in the contest about the beginning of
the world. In the Scotistic school God's own pur-
pose and that of the creatures were sharply separated.
The innumerable host of questions concerning the
government of the world, the theodicy, etc., which
scholasticism again propounded, belongs to the his-
tory of theology. Thomas assumed that God directs
all thincfs " inmtediate'' and also effects the cor-

'Iw.

Niitiins;

.lollll

l)ftiimH-

C(>I1U8.

DKVKLOPMKXT OK DOCTKINK OK SIN, KTC. 105

rupiiitnes rcrnin '^iKdsi per dcridoifi'' (Origon,
Augustine) ; the Scotists would acknowlodgo only an
indirect direction and contested the Noo-Platonic
doctrine of a liidlniu in the interest of God and of
the independence uf man.

4. Together with a " /m/rt" against the "nihil- nootrm.. ..r
ism" of the Lombard who denied that God through
the incarnation has become something, the doctrine
of the two natures was transmitted to the great
scholastics. The conception of John Damascenus
was the prescribed one ; but the hypostatical imion
was treated as a school problem. The Thomists con-
ceived the human as i)assive and accidental and
really continued in the monophysitic conception.
Duns endeavored to save the humanity of Christ,
to place certain limits to the human knowledge of
Christ and to attribute existence also to the liuman in-
dividual nature of Christ. Still within this territory
Thomism remained victorious. Practically indeed
men made use of the Christological dogma only in
the dogma of the eucharist, and the latest scholasti-
cism explained the same as necessary and reasonable
(Occam. ) (God might also have assumed the natura
asinina and still have been able to save us). The
doctrine of the work of Christ did not have its root
in the doctrine of the two natures, but in the thought
of the merit of the sinless man Jesus, whose life had
a divine value. {Ch v i stun passu s est seennclem car-
nem). The idea of the sat isf actio (Halesius, Al- ^tTon^Sf'

bertus) was also brought up again. Thomas treated
30

Christ.

If ;

(■ «•

!■ 11

W'f

Hit;

OITMNKS OK Tin: IIISTOKV Ol' |m»(;MA.

II:.

SacTill-

cluiii Ai'-

coptissi-

Ullllll.

Ansolm's

DfX'trino

Extended,

it, but explained tlie n'tlfinptioii tiinm^'ii {\u) deatii of
Ciirist as l>eiii;< siinpiy tlie most jUI iiuj way. lie-
cauHo in it is represented tlie sum of all imaj^iiiary
HufTerin^, this death, whieli hrinj^s before our mind
tlio love of (iod, iH'Comes an example for us, recalls us
from sin and a\vak<»ns as a motiveour love in return.
Alon;^side the snhjcci i >'(> Thomas also emphasized
t\m ohjrcf ire: Tf (iod had jcdeemed \\h .sola vol ini-
((iff, l;e would not have been able to gain so much
for us; (MuMsl's death has obtained for us uot only
frec.'dom from guilt, but also the (/nitut Jiisf ijirans
and Ihi! (/loria hcafihuhnis. I^foreover all possible
j»oints of view wesn* (juoted, from which thi^ death of
(Mn-ist maybe regarded. As s<(l isf((cti(> it insiiprr-
(ihididdiis, since as regards all satisfaction the rulo
holds good, that tho ofYended one loves the gift
tendered by himself more than he liat(»s the ofTenco
{sdcvificiuni acccpiissinnint). This ai)j)arently cor-
rect and worthy idea became fatal; it is plain that
Thoniits also misjudges Ihe siiffcviwii of juniishmeiit
and with it the full gravity of sin. In the doctrine
regarding merit the ri'ality (not the possibility only)
of our reconciliation through the death of Christ
was to bo expresi^ed. Setting aside the doctrine of
the two natures the idea of Anselm was further car-
ried out, that the merit gained through tho voluntary
suffering dc^scends from tho head to the members:
'"'' capui ct incnibra sunt (pntsi inia persona nn/stica,
et iih'o sat isf actio CIn-isli ad onuics FIDELES
pertinety sicut ad sua nieiitbra'\ But the idea of

nKVKI.or.MKNT OK TXX TKINi: (>K SIN, KTC. I'u

ThnniiiH
Wiivtrf'l

fiuii Arhi-

tnirv Act

uf Utxl.

fiiitli is instantly ri'placcd hy tliat of lovi : " liilrs^
ppv <in<tin (I ix'crdfo iiinii<ln)uiii\ ii<tn est Jidrs in-
/orm/.s, qtKir pvtttv.st v.ssr itiani cuiii pvvrttfo^ svd
esf Jidi'sfornHtfd per cttrihth'in". Thomas wavered
botwooii tlio liypotlietical and tho necessary, between ,,i,j.vtiv.-
tlie()bjo('tiv(> (i»()ssil)le) and sul)je('tivo (real), between j,vt'iN.''"i{r.

ilflllplloU.

tho rational and irrational re<lenij)tioii. Duns drew
thcconsoiinenees (jf tho satisfaction theory in tracing
ovorything back to the arbitrary " ((cccpfdl la" of (i(kI.
Tho arbitrary estimation of tho lieceiver gives tho
value to tho satisfaction, as it also alone determines
tho extent of th(^ ofTenc(». TluMleath of (Mu'ist was Duns Mudo

Iti'di'iiij)-

of as much value as God allowed it to ])e; at any
rate tho idea of " inlinitc^" is to be rejuidiated; for
neither the sin nor tho death of a ilnite man can havo
infinite weight; besides an infinite merit is wholly
unnecessary, since the sovereign will of (jlod decrees
what is good and meritorious in his sight. There-
fore ^purnn lioino would also have been able to re-
deem us; for there was needinl oidy a first impulse,
tho rest in any event the self-suflicient man must
accomplish. Duns indeed endeavored to show also
that tho death of Christ was "appropriate"; but
this point was no longer of real importance: Christ
died, because God so willed it. Everything "neces-
sary" and "infinite", which is here only an expres-
sion for the Divine, was cleared away. Tlu^ j)redes-
tinating arbitrariness of G(^d and justification by
works ruled dogmatics. Duns in truth had already
destroyed the doctrine of redemption and annulled

Jiistifloa-
liuri by
Works.

•: i

; I

■ '1

(

SJFi!

mM »

Fclth and
Theolopy
Lived m
the Sacra-
ments.

S-4r-

408 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

the Divinity of Christ. Only tho authority of the
Church kept up its validity ; should tho former fail,
Socinianism would bo established. Acknowledging
this authority noniinalistic theologians advanced in
their dialectics to the frivolous and blasphemous.
However, in the ir)tli century there reappeared in
cc inaction with Augustinianism. a more serious con-
ception in Gerson, Wcssel, even in Biel and others,
and the Bernardino view of the suffering Christ was
never lost during the Middle Ages.

B. The Scholastic Doctrine of the Sacra-
ments.

Hahn, L. v. d. Sacramenten, 1864,

The scholastic uncertainties and liberties touching
the doctrine of the work of Christ are explained by
the certainty with which scholasticism regarded tho
benefit of salvation in the sacraments as a present one.
Faith and theology lived in the sacraments. Tho
Augustinian doctrine was bore developed materially
and formally ; the " verbnm'' however was evermore
disregarded in favor of the " sacramentum" ', for
since by the side of the awakening of faith and love
as means of grace the old definition still retained
its value : " gratia nihil est aliud quam participata
similitudo divinae NATURAE", no other form
of grace could really bo thought of than the magic-
sacramental form.

The doctrine of the sacraments was for a long time

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 469

developed inider the embarrassment, that there was ^"jJ^J.ra-*''
nothing settled regarding the number of the sacra- ™wriain.''
ments. Besides baptism and the eucharist there were
an indefinite number of holy acts (compare oven Ber-
nard). Abelard and Hugo St. Victor laid stress upon
confirmation, extreme unction and marriage (five in
number), Robert Pullus upon confirmation, con-
fession and ordination. Out of a combination per-
haps in the contest with the catharists originated
the number seven (Roland's book of tenets), which
the Lombard brought forward as an "opinion".
Even at the councils of 1179 and 1215 the number
was not settled. The great scholastics first brought
the same to honorable recognition and at Florence, council of

° ' Florence,

1439, there took place a decided ecclesiastical decla- dS ^n
ration (Eugene IV., hull ex ultate deo). However,
a full equalizing of the seven sacraments was not
intended (baptism and especially the eucharist re-
mained prominent). The " conveniens " of the num-
ber seven and the organism of the sacraments, en-
riching the whole life of the individual and of the
Church, were explained in detail. Indeed the very
creation of these seven sacraments was a master-
piece of a perhaps unconscious politics.

Hugo began the teciniical treatment of the doc-
trine, retaining the Augustinian distinction between
sacramentum and 7'es sacramenti and the strong
emphasis upon the physico-spiritual gift, which really
is included. Following him, the Lombard (IV. 1.
B.) defined: " Saaximentiini proprie dicitur, quod

Hugo and
Peter.

I
Hi

If f' t

i f..

:!ii

470 OUTTJNES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ii !•

I^Ji

it<i .si(/ii/iiu csf (jrafidc dci vt invisihilis gratiae
foniKf, ill i luiKjiuciii ipsius gerat et causa existat.
Nou ergo signijiaindl tantnni gratia sacramenta
instifuta snnf, scd ctiaiu saudijicandi'^ {msigniji-
candi gratia the Old Testament ordinances were hit
upon). Still he did not say that the sacraments con-
tain the grace (Hugo), but that they make it efficient;
he also demanded only a signuiii as a foundation, not
Thomas, like Hugo a corporate clement um. Thomas also
moderated the 'U'oul incut ^' oi Hugo, he even went
further : God indeed does not work " adhibit is sac-
rament is^^ (Bernard), tliej' confer grace only "per
aliquem modum'". God himself confers it; the
sacraments are causae instrumentales^ they trans-
mit the effect a prima morente. They are also
causa et signet; thus the phrase " efficiunt quod figu-
rant " must be understood. Still there is contained
in the sacraments a virtus ad inducendum scicra-
mentcdem ejfectum.. Later on the relation between
the sacraments and grace was entirely relaxed.
The latter only accompanies the former, for the mere
arbitrariness of God combined them (Duns) by vir-
tue of a ^^ pactum cum ecclesia initum'\ Thus the
Nominaiis- nouiinalistic conception appears less magical and it
Pre^ m-"s P^'^P'^ired the way by its protest against the " conti-
zwingfrs. uenV for the sacramental doctrine of the forerunners
of the Reformation and of Zwingli. But this change
did not originate in the interest of the " word" and
faith, but, as remarked, in the peculiar conception of
God. The official doctrine remained as in Thomas,

n-'

'll

Kacra-
uionts.

DEVELOPMENT OV DOCTRINE OF SIN, I:T('. 471

i.(\ returned to the '\fh/ifran(, voidiucut cf confer-
unV (FlorentiiK^ council). It thereby holds {^ood that
the sacranienis, ditlering from those of the Old Testa-
ment in which faith {opn.s oprrdudi) was necessary,
work " c.r opere opeyatd' (thus already the Lom-
bard) ; that is, the effect flows from the administra-
tion as such. The attempt of the Scotists to place
the sacraments of the ( )ld Testament on an equality
with those of the New was repudiated.

In detail, the following points of the Thomistic jS^Hm^of
doctrine are still especiall}- important: (1) In cjenere
the sacraments are altogether necessary to salvation,
in specie this is in the strictest sense valid only of
baptism (otherwise the rule holds good; '^ non de-
fectiis sed contempt nn danuidt'"). (•*) hi genere the
sacraments must hrive a three-fold elfect, a signifi-
cant {sacrament lun), a preparative (sacramentuni
et res), and a redemptive {res sctcramenti) ; in specie,
howev^er, the preparative effect, the character, can be
proved only in baptism, confirmation and the ordo.
Through these the "character of Christ", as capacity
for the receptio et fraditio cnltus dei, is implanted
in the potency of the soul indelebiliter, and is there-
fore not capable of repetition (stamping it, as it
were) ; (:>) In the definite discussion of the question, Form Must
^^ quid sit sacranientunr , it was determined that oiJ^rved
the same is not only a holy but also a sanctifying
sign; moreover that the cause of sanctification is
the suffering of Christ, the form consisting in the
communicated grace and virtues, and the aim being

Thro(»-fol(l
Effect.

, :ti

h 1:.

;. 1,1

1 !

i \

472 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

jll^lil

I' 'Vi

Necessity
of Sacra-
ments
Proven.

Duplica-
tion of
Salvation.

eternal life. The Sixci-ament must always be a res
sensibilis a deo determinata (material of the sacra-
ment), and it is "very becoming", that "words" also
go with it, ^^ quibus verba incarnato quodammodo
confonnantt(r'\ These verba a deo determinata
(form of sacrament) must be strictly observed, an
unintentional lapsus linguae even does not allow the
sacrament to become perfect ; of course it is rendered
void as soon as one does not intend to do what the
Church does; (4) The necessity of the sacraments
is proved by " quodammodo applicant passionem
Christi hominibus", in so far as they " co7igrua
gratiae praesentialiter demonstrandae sunt "; (5)
By the effect (character and gratia) it is argued that
in the sacrament to the general gratia virtutem et
donoriim is still added " quoddam divinum auxilium
ad consequendum sacramenti finem" ; that as well
in verbis as in rebus there is contained an instru-
mentalis virtus ad inducemdam gratiam. By de-
termining the relationship between sacramental grace
and the passio Christi it is plainly discernible that
the Catholic doctrine of the sacraments is nothing
else than a doubling of the salvation through Christ.
Since they conceived grace physically, yet were un-
able to join this physical grace directly to the death
of Christ, i.e. deduce it from the latter, another in-
strumentum separatum (the sacraments), in addition
to the instrumentum conjunctum (Jesus), had still
to be ascribed to God the Redeemer. But if one can
obtain such an understanding of the life and death

Oml th(>

Author, the

I'rifst th«

Instru-

iiient.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 473

of Christ, that it of itself Jippears as grace and sac-
rament, then the doubling is useless and harmful ; (0)
By determining the causa sacramentorum it follows
that God is the Author, but the priest, as minister,
the "causa instrument alis'\ Everything which is
de necessitate sacrament l (therefore not the prayers
of the priests, etc.) must have been instituted hy
Christ himself (appeal to tradition, while Hugo and
the Lombard still deduced some sacraments from the
apostles ; with some this latter continued until the IGth
century; the apostles cannot have been institutores
sacramenti in the strict sense of the word ; even to
Christ as man was due only the potestas ministerii
principalis sen excelentiae; he works meritorie et
efficienter and could have transferred this extraordi-
nary potestas ministerii^ which however he did
not do) ; bad priests also can validly administer the
sacraments ; they need to have the intentio only, not
the fides; but they incur a mortal sin . Even heretics
can transmit the sacramentum^ but not the res sac-
ramenti.

These doctrines of Thomas are lacking in duo re-
gard for faith and pass lightly over the question re- phasized
garding the conditions of the salutary reception.
With the nominalists this question, together with that
of the relation of grace and sacrament (see above) and
that of the minister, became most important in the
case of each separate sacrament, and they came to the
decision to alloiv the factor of merit to encroach up-
on that of the sacraments and of grace, at the same

Opus Oper-
atum Em-

(: I

' 'I

"£ I

'i ii

1 It

-S F

.!! '

474 orTl.INES OF the niSTOIlY OF IXXJMA.

Question of tliG sjicninients

time, hovvover, tlioy coiici'ivj'd of the conditions of the
merit in a looser way and emphasized more strongly
the oi)iis ()}u'V(ifiint. On t lie whole they dissolved
the whole of Thoniism. They desired here also to
apprehend the doctrine more spiritually and ethically ;
in truth they fell into a disgraceful casuistry and
favored justification by works and likewise the magic

That some disposition was nec-
'*tioa' ossary to a saint urn reception all assumed, but the
question was wherein it consisted and what value
it sliould have. Some saw in it no positive condi-
tioning of sacramental grace, but merely a conditio
sine qua iiou ; they did not think of it as worthiness
and, therefore, declared roundly that the sacraments
were effective only ex opere ope rat o (the disposition
is necessary, but has no causal importance). Others
— they were not numerous — declared that the sacra-
ments can pre jure grace only when inward repent-
ance and faith exist; these, however, are caused
by God as inteviores niotus, so that no justification
ex opere operant e qiiw be assumed; the sacraments
only announce the inward work of God (preparing
the way for the Reformation point of view). Others
still, who gained the upper hand, taught that re-
demptive grace is a product of the sacraments and of
penitent faith, so that the sacrament itself only ele-
vates above the death-j)oint, in order to co-operate at
once with the inner disposition. Here the question
first became important, what then the disposition
sliould bo (repentance and faith), in order to allow

Duns'
Vitiat«Hl
Concep-
tion.

DEVKT-OPMEXT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, KTC. 475

the sacrament to have its full ciVect. First oC all ^;ll'^'y-,.,y
they answered witli Augustine, that the roceive-r Konl^rd.
must not ^^obiccni coniraride axj it (it ion is ttppo-
nere^\ Therefrom the older theologians had inferred
that a 1)0)1 us ntotns /y/^^/'/o/' must exist ; indeed they
also conceived this already as a merit; for a niiiti-
niniu of merit (against Augustine) certainly always
must exist, if grace is to he imparted. Duns and
his pupils however taught — ^a vicious corruption of a
correct idea — that tlie glory of the New Testament
sacraments consists in not recjuiring, like the eai'lier,
a bonus mot us as a pre-supposition, hut rather v»nly
the absence of a nujtus coutrarius niaius (contempt
of the sacraments, positive unbelief). "Without the
sacraments grace can be effective onl}-^ where there-
exists some worthiness ; sacramental grace, however,
is also effective wdiere there is tabula rasa (as if
such a thing exists!); yonder is a meritum de con-
gruo requisite, here "sotum requiritur oj^us exte-
riiis cum amotions iuterioris impeclimenti'\ But
where this appears mere obedient submission to the
consummation of the sacrament becomes for the re-
ceiver a meritum de congruo, and therewith the
process of salvation begins, which, while the sacra-
mental collations increase, can finally be finished
without the subjects ever overstepping the limits of
the meritum de congruo, that is, of a certain merit
which may exist without ?'e«/ inner faith and love.
Sacramental grace transforms ex opere operato the
attritio into contritio and thereby furnishes a

Meritum
Congruo.

( 1

5,' i

1 ■

'^ I i

! .1 I

,'T V\ .1

I J;

111; *

470 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

I ft

.^'

Baptism.

Hiipplotnciit to tlio incoinploto merits, romlering thorn
complctu. Upon tho stops of inner emotions, which
are constantly supplomented bj' the sacraments and
are wholly vain, oven irreligious (fear of punish-
ment, drofid of hell, powerless dissatisfaction with
one's self), the soul rises to Clod: "attritio supcr-
veniente sacriDticnio virtute vlaviiim efficitur suf-
ficieiis". Hero the doctrine of the sacraments is
subordinated to the worst form of a Pelagian doc-
trine of justification (see below).

The Separate Sacrainenta. 1. Baptism (mate-
rial: Water; form: Institutional words). This has
reference to hereditary sin. Baptism blots out such
guili md that of all hitherto committed sins, remits
the punishment (not however earthly punishments)
and regulates the concupiscence; that is, the idea
of an innocent concupiscence is allowed (not a re-
ligious view) and it is declared that baptism ren-
ders a man able to keep his concupiscence within
bounds. The positive effect of baptism was placed
under the head of ^' regeneratio" without ridding
this conception of the obscurity and lack of meaning
which it has in the Church fathers. In theory it
■was asserted that the positive grace of baptism was
perfectissima, and children also received it (sacra-
ment of justification in the full sense) ; but in fact
it was only conceived as a sacrament of initiation,
and only in this sense could the perfectness of infant
baptism (belief of the Church, or of good parents as
substitutes) be sustained: Baptism establishes the

ig tliom
vvliich
nts and
pimiHli-
n with
s}( per-
il r suf-
ents is
an doc-

(mate-
his has
lit such

remits
ments)
le idea
t a re-
m ren-
within
placed
idding
eaning
Bory it
m was
[sacra-
in fact
iation,
infant
snts as
3s the

Conflrma-
tiuD.

DEVELOPMENT OF !)()( TKINR OK SIN, ITC. »7T

process of justification only /;/ hahitu, not in actu.
In case of necessity a deacon also, yes a layman,
may baptize. Detailed explanations concerning sac-
ramental observances were made based upon a com-
parison witli baptism.

2. Confirmation (material: The clirisma conse-
crated by the bishop; form: Consiffno to, etc.). The
effect of this sacrament, which like baptism cannot
be repeated, was to give power for growth, strength
to fight, the gratia gratum faciens in the process of
justification. Only the bishop could administer it;
it gained its significance as a sacrament of the epis-
copal liierarchu alongside of the onlo; still on the
whole its significance resided only in the " character".
Doubts regarding the sacrament never died out in the
Middle Ages (Wiclif)'. Beginning with Thomas it
was brought very close to the powder of the pope, since
it had special reference to the mystical body of Christ
(the Church ; not to the sacramental body) and ac
cordingly the power of jurisdiction came into consid-
eration.

3. Eucharist (mB,iQV\9X: The elements ; form : The Eucharist
institutional words). The Thomist doctrine hero
gained a complete victory as against the attempt of

the nominalist to shake the doctrine of transubstan-
tiation; but the "heretical" opposition to this doc-
trine did not cease in the Middle Ages after the
Lateran council (vid. p. 42G). Realism is the presup-
position of the orthodox theory ; without this it col-
lapses. Everything that is sublime was said about

i 1 1

iii

i' '

478 OUTLINKH OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

i.ii h'i ii

Tliomas'
Doctrine.

Duns.
Occam.

tho oucliarist; but faitli, which sooks surety, went
empty-handed, and yet tho saeranient of penanco as
sacrament and as Hacrifico was fhially far superior
to tho oucliarist: Masses are trifling means, and tho
sjnritual food blots out no mortal sins. The great
theological problem was transubstantiation itself, and
by reason of its greatness they ovei-looked the insig-
nificance of its efl'ect. Thomas gave form to the doc-
trine regarding the mode of tho presence of the body
of Christ in the sacrament (no now creation, no (is-
ftinnpfio eleniPnfonnn so that they become body, no
consubstantiality) ; the sul)stanco of the elements
disappears entirely, but not j)cv annihikitionem^
yei per convert io}i('m; the existence of tho remain-
ing unsubstantial accidents of the elements is made
possible by the direct working of God; tho body of
Christ enters lofiiH in fofo; in each of tho elements
is tho whole Christ, to wit: per coiiconiitantiam as
regard his body and soul as well as regards his Di-
vinity from the moment of pronouncing the insti-
tutional words (therefore also e.vira nsuni) ; the pres-
ence of Christ in the elements has no dimensions,
but how this was to bo conceived became a primary
problem for which Thomas and tho nominalistic
writers summoned absurd and ingenious theories
of space. They therol)y approached very closely
either to the idea of the annihilation of the primary
substance (Duns), or to consid)stautiality and " im-
panation " (Occam) ; they hit upon the latter be-
cause their metaphysics in general only admitted

(|iifnct'H of
P'ormiila-

tiiiii of
Uxciriur.

DKVELOPMKNT OF POCTHINK OF SIN, ETC. 470

the idea tliat tin* Divine and tlu* created (icctnniKint/
each other by virtue of Divine adjustmeiit (siinilarly
Wesol, and with other motives Luther). The con-
Boquonces of the formuhition of the doctrin(> of tr.ii-
Huhstantiation were, (1) Cessation of iidant connnu!i-
ion (this had also other causes), (-2) Increasi' of the
authority of the priests, {'>)) Witli(h'awal of the chali( o
(determined upon at Constance), (I ) Adoration of the
elevated host (feast of Corpus ('liri.s/i, l-iCl, 1:511).
Against the last two results there arose in the 1 4th and
15tli centuries considerable opposition. — In ^e<^'u•d to u«'p«'tition

^ * " of Sacri-

tho representation of the eucharist as a sacrifice, tl;e "^■•'•
Lombard was still influ(^nced by the old ecclesiastical
motive of iha recorddtio; however, the idea of the
repetition of the sacrificial death of C*hrist, contirmi d
by Gregory' L, crept in more and more (Hugo, Al-
bertus; Thomas really justifies the theory only by
the practice of the Church) and modified also the
canon of the mass (Lateran council, r215). The
priest was considered the saccrdos corporis ( 'hrisii.
The attacks of VViclif and others upon this entirely
unbiblical conception died away; during t.ie 14(li
and 15th centuries one really fought only against the
abuses.

4. Penance (great controversy over the material. Penance,
since no res corpornlis exists) is on the whole the
chief sacrament, because it alone restores th(^ lost
baptismal grace. The theory remained yet for a long
time shy of the hierarchical practice, Avhich had l)een
expressed in the pseudo- A ugustinian writing, "c/e

4HU OL TLINES OK THE III^TOKV OV DOGMA.

it! :;.t

Tjaternn
Couucli.

Thomns'
Doctrine.

Halesius,

Bonaven-

tura.

vet'd et fdlsd iHtvnHciiiiiC\ Tlic LoinlMird .still con-
sidcrod tho truo poiiitenco of a ChriHtiau in itself
sacramental, and the priestly abaolution merely de-
clarative (ficc/es? as ^/crt/ (tvf) ; for God alone pardons
sin. Hujjjo and the Lat(»ran council, 1215, ju'epared
the way for Thomas. The latter recognized the ma-
terial of th(> sacramcMit in the visible act of th(i pen-
itent, the form in the priest's words of absolution,
declared that the priests as aidhovizcd ministers are
dispensers in the fullest sense, and gave as a reason
for the necessity of sacramental i)onance (before
the priest) the perverse sentence: ^^ Ex quo aliqnis
peccatuiu (mortal sin) nicurrif, cdritas^ fides et
misericordianon liherant honu'neni a peccato sine
paenife)iti(r. However, he added that the sacra-
mental absolution did not at once take away the
reatns totins jyoenae together with the guilt of the
mortal sin, but that it only disapi)eared " compleiis
omnibi(s paenitenfiae actihus". The three pa?'^e5
paenitentiae — already formulated by the Lombard
as contritio cordis, coiifessio oris, satisfactio
operis — were originally not considered of equal value.
The inner perfect penitence was considered res and
sacrament iim, and still dominated with the Lombard
and Thomas the whole representation. Yet already
Alexander Halesius and Bonaventura were of the
opinion that God precisely by the sacrament had
facilitated the way to salvation, and they discrim-
inated between contritio and nttritio (timor ser-
vilis) , declaring the latter sufficient for admission to

•I"

aiicc.

I'dtlft'HHiO

Oi-ih:
Tlmtiuw.

DEVKLOPMKNT OK DOCTKINK OK SIN, V/TC. tHl

tho sacrament, In sj)it() nf its si lout reject ion l>y
Thomas tluH view gained more ami more ground:
The Hacramcnl itst'lf will perfect the half-penitence
by the in fust a (iiuitinr. The dtfrifio, gallows- (iaiiowg.
repentance, iH'came the haiie of the Church (hx'triiu'
in the 1 Hh and l.'dh centuries (.jnhann von ralllz,
Petrusde Palude and others; DieckhotT, I)er Ablass-
Btreit, ISSd) ; the Tridentino council sanctioned it
only conditionally. Tt was w(^ll known that tlie at-
iritio often springs from ininioniJ motives and yet
they built out of it and the sacraments steps up to
heaven. — Thomas is the theologian of the coiifcssin
oris; lie placed the obligation thereto under the.y'//.s
diviitinn, stated for the first time exactly the extent
of the new ordinance and deduced the sole right of tho
ecclesiastic to hear confessions from the winister-
iiun snj)er corj^xs Christi rernm (in case of need one
should confess to a hiyman, such confession, however,
is, according to Thomas, no longer sacramental).
Tho Scotists essentially accepted all this. — The sole
right of the priest to gntiit absolution was also first ^['[','^,1""
strictly brought to an issue by Thomas. However,
upon this sacrament the iwwer of jurisdiction exerted
an influence (reservance of cases for the pope). Ac-
cording to the Scotists tho priest by absolution sim-
ply induces God to fulfil his contract ; according to
Thomas he acts independently through the trans-
mitted potestas ministevii. — By imposing a sdtis-
/rifc//(> the priest acts as invdicus pvritus et judex

aequHs. The practice is an old one, the " mcchaniz-
31

Tbumu8.

Medicus
reritus.

(

482 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

''11^

J '' •*

' n

ing" and the theoretical rating (alongside the con-
tritio as a part of the penance) is comparatively
now. The idea is that the satisfaction as a constit-
uent part of the sacrament, is the necessary manifes-
tation of repentance in such works as are fitted to give
a certain satisfaction to an offended God, and which
become the motive for the shortening of temporal
punishment. In baptism God pardons without any
satisfaction, but of those baptized he demands a cer-
tain satisfaction, wliich then as merit reverts to him
who renders it. Moreover the baptized is really
able to render it ; it also contributes to his reforma-
Menton^ tion and protects him against sin. ]\Ieritorious arc
only such acts as are done in a state of grace [in
caritate^ hence after absolution), but the works
(prayer, fasting, alms) of those who are not ui cari-
tate also have a certain merit. Thus finally «f^r?7/o
and imperfect meritorious works dominate the whole
territory of penance, that is of ecclesiastical life.

But the scholastics admitted also in practice the
idea of the personal exchange of satisfactions and of
personal substitution. This led to the doctrine of
indulgences (Bratke, Luther's 05 Theses, 1884.
Schneider, Die Ablilsse, 7. Aufl., 1881). The indul-
gence joins on to the satisfaction i.e. also to the
attritio. In theory it has nothing to do with the
reatus culpae et poenae aeternae; still in practice
it was not seldom joined with the latter (even the
Tridentine council here complained of abuses) . The
indulgence rests upon the idea of connnutation and

Indnl-
K«nccs.

i: I

HcH.

Thomas'
Effort.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 183

its purpose was to ameliorate, i.e. to abolish the tem-
poral punishment of sin, above all the punishment
of purgatory. Through absolution hell was closed ; ^'{^".Ijilg^"'
but the Jioiiiines ailriii in reality neither believe in
hell nor in the power of grace, for only a confritus
knows anything of such things. But they are afraid
of severe punishment, and they believe in the possi-
bility of removing it by various " doings", and are
even ready for some sacrifice for this end. Thus pur-
gatory was hell to them and the indulgence became
a sacrament. To these feelings the Church in real-
ity yielded; attritio, opera and indidfjent i a hcciuno
in truth parts of the sacrament of penance. Thomas
still endeavored throughout to bring about a com-
promise between the earnest tlieory and the evil
practice, which he was unable to uproot (" ah omnibus
conceditur indulgentias aliqnid valere, quia im-
pinm esset dicere, qnod ecclesiae aliquid vane
facereV^). With him the indulgences had not yet
become a mockery of Christianity as the religion of
redemption, because ho really conceives them only as
an annex to the sacrament. Yet he abandoned the
old idea that the indulgence has reference only to
the ecclesiastical punishment imposed by the priest ;
and it was he who handed down the theory of in-
dulgences. The latter is composed of two ideas: (1) '^'jj,'^,^f,_"*'
Pardoned sin also continues to have an effect through
its temporal consequences, still it cannot remain " in-
ordinata ", and therefore the temporal punishment
must be expiated ; (2) Christ by his passion has ac-

gences.

' h\

i ;

'I 1

: I I

^^f -ii

484 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

, 'f

Theory of
Surplus
Merits.

null Uni-
geuitus.

complished greater things than the blotting out of
eternal guilt and punishment ; this alone is effective
within the sacrament, i.e. in the absolution; but
outside of it there is a suri)lus. This surplus merit
{thesaurus opernm stqjererogatoriorum) must of
necessity benefit the bod}' of Christ, the Church,
since it cannot benefit Christ and the saints.

But it can no longer find any t)thcr occupation than
that of shortening and blotting out the temporal
punishment of sin. It can be turned only to the
benefit of those absolved, who must regularly offer
in return a minimum (a small performance) ; it is
administered by the head of the Church, the pope,
who however can transfer to others a ])artial admin-
istration. This theory of surplus merits, which had
along prior history (Persians, Jews), became espe-
cially pernicious when no decisive weight was placed
upon the condition of repentant faith, or when dark-
ness was intentionally permitted to rest upon the
question as to what it reall}' was that was blotted
out by the indulgence, or when the question, as to
whether the indulgence would not also be of benefit
to committers of mortal sin ad reqiiirendam giri-
tiam, was answered in the affirmative as was like-
wise the question whether therefore it could not be
granted in advance, in order that one might make
use of it for an occasional disposition (Scotistic prac-
tice). The theorj'of indulgences is comprised in the
bull, " Unigenitns", Clement IV., of the year 1340;
here it is also stated that the indulgence has refer-

1 liiii

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 485

li- ih

ence only to the ^^vere pacnifmfes ct confess r.
Wiciif above all (lisputtnl the practice and theory;
he called the indulgences arbitrary and blasphemous,
paralyzing obedience to the laws of God, a nefa-
rious innovation. But indulgence was not yet un-
hinged, when one proved it to be unbiblical, the
usurpation of the hierarchy and a moral corrup-
tion. One must show how a dormant conscience is
to be awakened, a disturbed one to be comforted.
But neither Wiciif nor the other energetic contestors
of indulgences (Huss, Wesel, etc.) were able to do
this. Wessel alone attacked indulgences at the root,
for he not only taught that the keys were given alone
to the pious (not to the pope and the priests), and
also pointed out that forgiveness does not depend up-
on arbitrariness, but upon true penitence ; moreover,
that the temporal punishments for sin serve for
man's education and therefore cannot be exchanged.
He also doubted the satisf actio operum: Satisfac-
tio has no place anyhow where God has infused
his love; it would detract from the work of Christ
(the gratia gratis data). And yet indulgences,
which had also been approved at Constance, pre-
vailed about loOO more than ever; people knew them
to be "' abusus quaestorum'*\ and yet made use of
them.

5. Extreme unction (material: Consecrated oil;
form: A deprecatory word of prayer). Thomas as-
serted its institution by Christ, its promulgation by
James (Epist. 5 : U). The purpose of this sacrament,

't\

Wiciif.

IIuss,

Wessel.

Extreme
Unction.

f Ji

!..

Ordination
of Priests.

Thomas'
Doctrine.

Ill

480 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

which admits of ropctitioii, is tho remi.ssio pecca-
torum, yet 011I3' of tho venial. As this sacrament
was evolved only hecause of the need of the dying,
it was also left to practice. Theory had little in-
terest in it.

0. Ordination of priests (from the impossibil-
ity of proving a perceptible material by the side
of the form : " Accij^fe j^otestateni, Qtc.''\ — however,
one also thought of vessels of worship or of the lay-
ing on of hands and symbols, — Tiiomas Iniew how to
make capital: ^' Hoc quod confertiir in cdiis sacra-
meniis derivatur tanfmn (i deo, non a ministro,
qui sacranientuni dispensat^ sed illud quod in hoc
Sacramento traditur, scil. spiritualis potestas,
derivatur etiani ah eo, qni sacrament inn dat, siciit
potestas imperfecta a perfectaj et ideo efficacia
aliornm sacramentorum principcditer consist it
in materia, quae virtutem divinani et significat
et continet. . , . , sed efficacia hiijus sacramenti
principcditer residet penes eum, qui sacramentum
disponsat"). The bishop alone is the dispenser.
Points in Controversies arose, (1 ) Regardini? the seven ordina-

Contro- ' \ / o »

versy. tions and their relation to each other, (2) Regarding
the relationship between the priest's and the bishop's
ordination, (3) Regarding the validity of ordina-
tions conferred by schismatical or heretical bishops
(question of reordination ; the Lombard was in favor
of the stri(^ter practice, which however jeopardized
Character. *^® entire existence of the priesthood). Character
was really the chief effect of this sacrament. The

: in

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 487

cpiscupato conld, on account of tlio olil tnulitii)ii, no
longer bo counted as a special ordo; but there was
an endeavor to vindicate its higher position as being
especially instituted by Christ (on the ground of
jurisdictional power) ; Duns, taking into considera-
tion the real circumstances, desired to acknowledge
a separate sacrament in the consecration of a bii^hop.

7. Matrimonu (material and form: The consent of
those about to be married). As with the former
sacrament, so also witli this, every provable redemp-
tive effect was wanting ; but it was here still more
difficult to carry out at all the general doctrine of
the sacraments. The treating of marriage as a sac-
rament was already with Thomjis a chain of difficul-
ties; in reality ecclesiastical law was alone concerned
with it. There were painful deductions concerning
the import of the copula carnuUs for the sacrament;
the priestly benediction was considered only "quod
dam sacrament ale^\

In the doctrine of the sacraments Thomas was the
authoritative doctor ; his doctrines were confirmed by
Eugene IV. ; but in so far as they were subordinated
to the doctrine of merits, a different spirit, the Scotis-
tic, gradually entered into all dogmatics. Thomas
himself even was obliged to emphasize the vulgar
Catholic elements of Augustinianism, since he fol-
lowed the practice of the Church in his Sit m ma.
Later theologians went even much farther. The
dissolving of Augustinianism into dogmatics did
not really take place from without ; it was largely

Mutri-
inuiiy.

Thomas'
Doctriii*' of

tlie Sticra-
nicntsCon-

firiiit'd by
EuKeue IV.

Augustin-
ianisin Dis-
solved
into
Dogmatics.

■ it

•'I

y
1?

488 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the result of an inward devolopniont. Tho throo
elements, which Augustinu porniittcd to stand in and
by the side of his doctrine of grace, nin'if, the (jratia
infusa and the h ierarcJi iced priest li/ element, con-
tinued to work until they had completely trans-
formed the Augustinian mode of thought.

C. The Revising of Augcstinianism in the
Direction of the Doctrine of Merits.

, \

Lombard
llepeats
Augus-
tine's

Teaching.

Anselm,
Bernard,
Abelard.

Religious
View Sup-
planted by
Empirical.

No ecclesiastical theologian had directly denied
that grace is the foundation of the Christian religion,
but since the idea, " grace", is in itself ambiguous —
God himself in Christ, a mysterious quality, love ( ?)
— it could also be made subservient to different
views. The Lombard, in regard to grace, predestina-
tion and justification, exactly repeated the Augus-
tinian sentences, but concerning free-will he ex-
pressed himself no longer in an Augustinian, but in
a semi-Pelagian fashion, because he also had merit
in mind. With Anselm, Bernard and above all
Abelard a contradiction between the doctrine of
grace and of freedom can be verified, since all were
governed by the thought which the Lombard formu-
lated thus: ^^ nullum wer it urn est in homine, quod
non fit per liberuni arhitriiim'\ Therefore the
ratio and the power of the will for good must have
remained unto man after the fall. The religious
view of Augustine is replaced by the empirical, and
even Bernard failed to mark Augustine's discrimi-

!fl

Habitual
Virtue.

DRVELOPMKNT OF DOCTRINK OK SIN, KTO. 4)^!>

nation between formal and material freedom. Nota-
ble is the attempt of the Lombard to identify saneti-
fying grace with the Holy S})irit. However, this
had no consecjuences ; they did not want God him-
self, but Divine attributes, which can become human
virtues.

From God to God through grace was the funda-
mental thought of Thomas, and yet finally it is li((h-
itual virtue at which he aims. The fundamental
fault lay alread^'in the Augustinian discrimination
between (jvnii(( operans and coopcrans. The latter
alone procures bliss, but it cooperates with the will
arul together tliey cause mm' I. Merits, however,
are the essential point, since the theologian can have
no other conception than that God values a reforma-
tion only when indicated by the habit ms. But this
is not the stand])oint of religion ; faith thus becomes J^'^'^'' ^**-

^ " comes an

merely an act of initiation, and God does not appear '^*tution""

as the alnii(iht(i Love and therefore as the Rock of

Salvation, but as the Partner and Judge; he does

not appear as the personal Good, which as Father

is alone able to lead the soul to trust, but as the

Giver of material, perhaps very exalted blessings

(communication of his nature). These theologians,

if they thought of God, did not look upon the heart

of the almighty Father, but upon an unfathomable Theolo-
gians Lose

Being, who, having created the world out of noth- pj^gon**Jf
ing, likewise also causes superctbunchtuf powers of ^° "
knowledge, reformation and snhstaiitial transfor-
mation to go forth. And when they thought of them-

I i\

I :i

400 orTT.INES OF THE HISTORY OF'" DOOMA.

♦\ ',(!

r»

.*!

I ^

Thomas

Makes Law

and Orace

Basal.

selves, they did not tliiiik of the eeiitri' of tlie liuiium
ego, the spirit, which is so free and exalted that it
gains a hold only npon a divine Person and not
upon the most glorious gifts; they taught: God (Uid
the ())'<di(i instead of j)('rsoii(d coin muni on iriflt
God, who is the (jndid. In the heginning indeed
God and the (jnitid (i)ower of love) lay xcry chjse
together in their minds, but in the carrying out of
the thought the (jrotia was more and more with-
drawn from God, until one finds it in magic-working
idols. The double thought, " nofura dii'ina" and
^'bonuni e8se^\ was the ruling one: Physics and
morality, but not religion.

Thomas made law and grace, as the outer princi-
ples of moral conduct, his basis. The former, even
as new law, wah; not sufficient. The necessity of
grace therefore was proved, partly by Aristotelian
means. At the same time the intellectualism of
Thomas comes out strongly : Grace is the communi-
cation of supernatural knowledge. The lumen gra-
tiae, however, is also the lumen superadditum, that
is, it is not necessarj' for the accomplishing of the
aim of man, but for the reaching over and beyond
this : therefore it furnishes the reason also with a

Lun.en
Oratiae
is also
Lumen

supernatural worth, i.e. a merit. Man in the state
of integrity possesses accordingly the capability cf
'^drtuin!^' doing by his own strength the honuni suae naturae
pi'oporfionafum, yet he needs the Divine aid in
order to acquire a meritorious honum super excedens.
After the fall, however, grace was necessary for both ;

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 101

Ktt'rnal

Lift' to bo

I'jiriH'd.

accordingly a two-fold grace is now ncodcd. 'J'horeby
the difference between (jnitia operans el coopcrans
was already established, and at the same time there
was taken into view as the end of man a supernatural
state, which one may reach only by the aid of the
second grace, which creates merits. " 17/rt aetenui
est finis excedois proporiionein )iattir(ic liu-
maiiae"f but with the help of grace one can and
must earn eternal life. Yet Thomas, as a strict
Augustinian, did not admit the idea that a man can
prepare himself for the first grace. He recognized
grace alone for the beginning, not the nicritd de
congrito. The essence of grace he depicted in such
a manner, that, as a gift, it produces a peculiar
quality of the soul, i.e. besides the auxiliuin, by
which God especially induces the soul to good actions,
he infuses into the soul a sujiernatural quality.
Grace is to be distinguished, first, as the grace of ,9'*^'"'"
salvation {gratuni faciens) and as the grace of the et^cooi^^r
priestly office, second, as oj)erans {praeveniens) and
cooperans (subsequens) ; in the former the soul is
mota non movens; in the latter Diota movens. The
source of grace, which is deifica, is God himself, who
also creates the preparation for it in man, in order
to render the materia (the soul) ^' disposita". No
one, however, is able to know whether God is car-
rying on the supernatural work within him. This
sentence {"nvUus potest scire, se habere gratiam^
certitudinaliter ") and the superfluous speculation
about the materia disposita (inspired by Aristotle)

uus.

.lij

' . 1

V ,\\

\^\

402 orXLFNKS OF Till-: IIISTOIIV oF |K)(!MA.

i'iv

;K-,|

't' i

i
,V,;

■*:■■ J

IT?'

f ■

i i

KITi'cf of

(Jiuci'TvvK-

K<tl(l ; JiiH-

tilicatioi),

Merits.

Confusion

in
Doctriuf.

Natural
JIan Can
Earn No
Merit, Jus-
tified Man
Can.

Itcc.'inic fatal, 'riiiM'lVcct of gniC(M.s two-fold ; first,
jiistilication, sucoiid, inciits, i.r. tlic real justilication
does not yet take i)lae{^ by the rcini.ssio pcccatorinn,
but Olio may say simply, because of the end in view,
that forgiveness of sin is already ju«tification. But
the (jrdfid iii/KSd is necessary for the forgiveness of
sin and therefore a inofn.s li'herl arhitvii is hero
re(iuired. Thus the (/rdtid jtrdeveniens in truth
consists in an indefinablo act, since every effect al-
ready presupposes c(")operation. Looking closer, there
pnwails with Thomas a great confusion regarding
the process of justification, because the locating of
the moment of the forgiveness of sin causes difficul-
ties; it ought to bo in the beginning and yet it must
be placed later because the infusion of grace, the
turning to God in love and the turning from sin,
should precede it. By the '' opus nuignum et niira-
ciilosuni" of the Jnstijicatio impii the effects are
weighed, which through grace more and more fall to
the lot of the one already justified. They all come
under the head of merit. All progress must be so
regarded that, in so far as it is the work of grace, it
is gained ex condif/no, but, in so far as the free
will of the justified is concerned in it, it takes place
ex congruo. Therefore the opinion of Thomas was,
that the natural man after the fall can earn no merit,
but the justified man can do so ex congruo ("con-
gruumesf, uthomini operanti secundum sudin vir-
futem deus recompenset secundum excellentiam
suae virtutis") ; whereas in regard to eternal salva-

':ijj

'^\'^^

DF-VRI.OPMENT OK DOCTKINK OF SIN, KTC. W)'.]

I'crsovcr-
fttict' Not

MtTittMl.

tion there exists for man '' propter nutxintam i}i(iv-
qualitatcfn projx^rh'onis"' im) nicrituin dc cniKh'f/no.
This is reserved to the efficacy of grace. The meri-
torious principle is always love; this deserves the
anfjnicufnm (/I'fifidr cr coiK/if/no. On the con-
trary perseverance in grace can in no sense l»e
merited: " Pcrscrcrdnfia riar non ((idif snh nicrito,
quia dependvt .solum cr niofioiic diri no, (/noc est
lirincipiiu)! oiinii.s nicrifi, scdd ens (jrofis perse-
veroulioe ho)nnii lor(phn\ enieiDcipie ilhid l(fr</i-
tur^\ Herehy pure Augustinianism was restored,
which Thomas also admitted unabridged into his
doctrine of predestination, while not only the inde-
fatigably repeated definition of God as priniUDi ino-
vens, but also the whole special doctrine of morals
shows the influence of Aristotle. In the latter is car-
ried out the thought thiit virtue, by the right ordering
of efforts and instincts, comes through the reason and
later is supernaturally perfected by the gifts of grace.
Virtue culminates in the fulfilment of the consilia virtupcui-

niinatcs in

evamjelica (poverty, chastity, obedience). These ('hnsuty;
form tho conclusion of the doctrine of the new law ; dieuce.
but, on the other side, the doctrine of grace also cul-
minates in them, so that they, properly speaking,
form the apex of the whole scheme. " Praecepfa
imporiant necessitafem, con.siliuiu in optione pon-
itur ejus, eui d(itnr'\ Through " counsels" man at-
tains his aim " y»r7/7^s' ef e.rpeih'fiiis^' ] for the pre-
cepts still admit of a certain inclination to the goods
of this world, the counsels wholly discard the same,

/ ;i

/ !<■!

404 OUTLINES OF TMK iriSTOHY OF IXKJMA.

I' !

HO tliat in following tho latter tho nhortost way in
given to etuinal life. By this discrimination bo-
twoon precvpfd and consilid li^lit is onro more

^'hiu^^ thrown npon tlio original state. Tlio original en-
ruimIIvxIV- downiont of man was in itself not sulficient to attain
Nuturum. mito tlio t'lfa (K'tvnKt; tnei latter was a bonnni
8K2>er(\V('e<h'Hs nufnram; but in tho (fddifional en-
dowiuant of tho Jush'tia oriyindlis man possesses a
Bupernatiiral gift, which enables him to really attain
unto eternal life. Thus one may say that after tho
appearance of sin {material iter = concupiscent iuy
fornialitcr = (Icfectns oritjinalis Jnstitiae) tho
precepta correspond to tho restoring of the natural
state of man, tho consilia to the doniini superaddi-
tuni of tho Just it ia oriijinalis.

Thomas' doctrine of grace has a double aspect ; it
looks backward toward Augustine and forward
toward the dissolution of the doctrine in the 14 \. cen-
tury. Thomas wanted to bo an Augustinian, and
his explanations wero already an Augustinian re-
action against the assertions of Halesius, Bona-
ventura and others; but ho allowed much wider
play to the idea of merit than did Augustine; ho
removed still farther than tho latter the doctrine of
grace from tho person of Christ (the latter is dis-
cussed he fore Christology !), and ho permitted faith
and tho forgiveness of sin to recede still farther.
^^Lon*er"° Faith is either fides infornris, therefore not yet

i-aith. fr^ith, or fides formata^ therefore no longer faith.
In fact faith as fiducia can find no place, if the

Tlioinas'

Doc'trino

Doiihlo-

Faced.

DEVELOPMENT OF 1)0< TKINE OF SIN, ETC. 405

ofTocts t)f grac- arc a new nature and a moral rcj'nr-
mat ion. In tlio ainbigiiuuM sontcacc, "'(((ritds
meretiir ritmu (wternanr, tlio mischief of the timo
to romo lay already concealed.

Tho setting aside of tho Augnstinian doctrine of
grace and sin can bo followed np in every point: (1 )
HalesiuH already taught that Adani in paradise?
by good works c.r coiKjriio mcM'ited the (jratia
(jvatuin favicns. The Scotists followed in his steps,
at the same timo discriminating between tho justi
tia oviginatis and such grace, and reckoning tho
latter to tho perfection of human nature itself. Al-
though this was an advantage^ yet it was neutrali/x'd
by the fact that tho merit e,v conffnio had been
j>laccd //'o/ji the I)e(/iinu'ii(/ alongside of the "only
efllcacious grace". (•^) Thomas no longer s(|uarely
admitted tho sentence in regard to hereditary sin :
" Natjiralia I)(t)ia earvupta suuf', in so far as ho
defined tho concupiscence, which in itself is not evil,
simply as Idiu/uoi' ef foines, emphasize(l stronger
than Augustine tho negative side of sin and, because
the ratio remained, assumed a continued ineliuatio
ad bonuni. Duns, on the whol(\ separated the (ques-
tion of concupiscence from that of hereditary sin;
tho former no Linger appeared to him the forniale
of tho latter, but merely the mater idle. Thus as
regards hereditary sin there remained oidy tho pH-
vatiooi tho supernsitural good, which indeed brought
about a disturbance of tho nature of man, however
without any of the natural good really being lost.

Sli'|i< it)
l>i >sii|iitii I

c'l' \ll>.'IIS-

liiit'',«,

I)lK.'(litK'.

Thoiiitus.

I" 'I

I ' 1

» i

Duns,

Occam.

496 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Even the first sin was very loosely conceived of by
Duns (against Augustine) : Adam only indirectly
transgressed the commandment to love Cod and
the commandment to love his neighbor, and only
in so far as by compliance he overstepped the right
measure. Besides it was not at all a (question of an
offence against moral laws, but of not obeying a com-
mandment imposed for the sake of probation. With
Occam everything is entirely dissolved. As in the
case of redemption, the reckoning of the fall of
man appeared to him as an arbitrary act of God,
which became known to us by "revelation". Small
sins were even possible in the original state (thus al-
ready Duns) . The renouncing of everything ideal,
^.e., the Neo-Platonic knowledge of the world, led
the nominalists to decompose the conception of guilt
an«^ sin ; here also they made tabula rasa and fell
back upon the practice of the Church viewed
as a rt! relation, because they were still blind to
historj and concrete relations. (3) Duns and his
Hereditary Suc.': issors considered the guilt of hereditary sin as

Sin.

finl'..3. (4) Duns saw the confagium of hereditary
sin .dimply in the flesh, and argued against the
ThoT-oibtic assumption of a vulneratio naturae; the
religious view of sin as guilt, jeopardized already by
Augustine and Thomas, fully disappeared. (5) The
Lii.crium Uberium arhitriuni possessed the widest scope, since
the fundamental thesis had been sacrificed, that good
exists only in dependence upon Cod. With Duns
and the leading theologians after him free-will is the

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 41)7

d of by
directly
Jiod and
Li^d only
he right
on of an
^ a com-
With
in the
fall of
)f God,
Small
thus al-
ig ideal,
ivld, led
of guilt
and fell
viewed
jlind to
and his
y sin as
reditary
nst the
'cie; the
eady by
(5) The
)e, since

I at good
h Duns

II is the

second great power by the side of God, and what-
ever they correctly established in the sphere of em-
pirical psychology, they gave to it also a material
and positive religious significance. It is the inher-
ited fate of mediaeval dogmatics, that in the amal-
gamation of a knowledge of the world and religion a
relatively more correct knowledge of the world be-
came finally more dangerous to faith than an incor-
rect knowledge. Against Pelagianism, which ever-
more unhesitatingly made use of Augustinianism
simply as an "art language", Bradwardina now Bradwar-
first took a strong stand, and after that the reaction
did not any more wane, but graduall}' increrycd dur-
ing the IStli century until Wesel, Wessel, Staupitz,
Caietan and Contarini ap])eared. (tJ) In the doctrine Justifica-

*' _ ^ ^ ^ ^ t'on and

of justification and of the meritorious earning of eter- oJg*^^^orks

nal life the dissolution manifested itself strongl}' : (a)

The gratia praeveniens became a phrase, the (jra-

tia cooper ans was the sole comprehensible grace; (b)

That which with Thomas was meritum de coiigruo

became meritum de condigtio; merita de congruOy

however, were acknowledged in such affections as

Thomas had not placed at all under the merit point

of view; (c) Together w ith the meritoriousness of the

attritio the fides inforinis, the mere obedience of

faith, was also valued more highly. At this point

the perversion became greatest. Mere subiection to subjection

the faith of the Church and the attritio became, in \Xl"^,yr"!

a measure, the fundamental principles of dogmatics.

According to Duns the natural sinful man can still
32

inent.

}

I :

498 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

\ k

.^i

Ift

t if'

; '

■,''.1.

(

Jl 11

,\^

H :.

Occam
Takes Ref-
uge in
Arbitra-
riness.
of God.

Necessity

of Super-

natiirul

Habitus

Based on

Authority

of Church.

prepare himself for grace; ho can begin to love God.
Therefore he must do so. In truth, therefore, merit
always precedes grace; first the nieritiuu de con-
gruo, then after accjuiring the first grace the mer-
itum de condigno. Thereby the first and second
grace were reduced to the rank of mere expedients.
Indeed the Divine factor appears only in the accepta-
tio. The latter, however — here the conception veers
around, — does not in the strictest sense at all admit
of merit. The noDiinalisiic doctrine teas only in so
far not simple moralism as ii was less, i.e. its
doctrine of God does not admit in any way of a
strict moralism. This is plainest in Occam, who in
general affords the paradoxical spectacle of a strongly
develoi)ed religious sense taking refuge solely in the
arbitrariness of God. Reliance upon the latter, as
the Church defined its content, alone saved him from
nihilism. Faith, in order to maintain itself, found
no other safety against the inroad of the flood of
science than the plank of the arbitrariness of the
God whom it sought. It no longer understood him,
but it submitted to him. Thus Church dogma and
Church practice remained standing, just because
th'> philosophy of religion and absolute morality were
washed away. According to Occam the necessity
of a supernatural /,.-/; 'tiis (therefore of grace in gen-
eral) to gain eternal life cannot bo proved by argu-
ments founded upon reason, since a heathen jUso
through reason can arrive at a love of God. The
necessity is established solely by the authority of

R!)

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 4!)!)

the Church. ( )ccaiii £incl his friends were as yet no
moralists or rationalists ; they only appear so to us.
The Socinians were the first, for they first raised the
hypothetical tenets of the nominalists concerning
natural theology to categorical rank. But thereby
they again gained a mighty reliance upon the clear-
ness and pov/er of morality, which the nominalists
had forfeited together with their inward confidence
in religion. If in tiie 15th century men bewailed the
destruction of theology in religion, they had in mind
the tenets which were put into practice, viz., that good
works are the cansae for receiving eternal life, that
even the most trifling works done will ever bo re-
garded as merits, and because they considered sub-
mission to the ordinances of the Church a bonus
motuSj which, supplemented by the sacraments, im-
parts ^he worthiness necessary for eternal life.

Socinians
First Rft-
tionalists.

i 'M

'■;^i

The lax conception of hereditary sin showed itself ^gf^ s(*j^[y

' t

in the development of the dogma concerning Mary.
Anselm, Bernard, Bonaventura and Thomas still as-
cribed hereditary sin to Mary, even if they admitted
an especial reservation regarding it ; but by the year
1140 at Lyons a feast of the immaculate conception
of Mary was celebrated, and Duns taught that tho
immaculate conception was prol)able (retro-acting
power of the death of Christ). The controversy be-
tween the Franciscans and Dominicans which then
arose was not adjusted in the iMiddle Ages, but was

Ascribed
to Mary,

600 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

'^eant^'^" forbidden by bixtus IV. The Dominicans did not
of^irgin! otherwisG take a subordinate place in the extrava-
gant glorification of the virgin. Thomas indeed
taught that to her belongs not only ^' dulia'\ as to
the saints, but " hyperduUa^\ She also was credited
with a certain part in the work of redemption (queen
of heaven, inventrix gratiae, via, janua, scala,
domina, mediatrix). The assumption of the Scot-
ists, that she had cooperated not only passively but
also actively at the incarnation, was a natural con-
sequence of the adoration, especially as Bernard
taught it.

, )

W^j

■4'

BOOK III.

THE THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF THE HISTORY

OF DOGMA.

CHAPTER I.

HISTORICAL SURVEY.

THE elements of the Augustinian theology be-
came more prominent during the Middle Ages,
but they were gradually more widely sundered from
one another. True, Thomas undertook once again
to solve the enormous problem of satisfying within
the bounds of one system all the claims made by
ecclesiastical antiquity as expressed in its body of
dogma, by the Holy Scriptures, by the idea of the
Church as an ever-present, living Christ, by the
legal organization of the Roman Church, by Augus-
tine's doctrine of grace, by the science of Aristotle
and the Bcinardine-Franciscan piety ; but this new
Augustine was not able to create a satisfactory unity.
His undertaking had in part the opposite conse-
quence, as it were. The nominalist's criticism of
the reason and the mysticism of Eckhart went to
school to Thomas; the curialists learned from him

and so did the "Reformers". In the 15th century

501

Thomas
Attempts

to Solve

the Prob-

lem.

(1' '! : 1

r* v''.

hi;

■I # : -'

1 1,^

i '''

W/i,

, '

• *•>

^".•■;

]

:ibl

y, i '

!«

11. , I

('urialism

UsiiKes of

Cluircli

Diviue

Truth.

502 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

thec)l(jgic'al dortriiio seemod to be settled. But there
Mppeared at that time two plain tendencies: Curial-
isni and the opposition thereto.

Curialism taught that the usages of the Romish
Church are Divine truth. It treated Church affairs
and religion as an outward dominion and sought to
maintain them by means of power, bureaucracy and
an oppressive toll-system. After the unlucky course
of the great councils a general lassitude succeeded.
The princes who were striving for absolutism found
their match when they bargained with the curia to
share with it in the shearing of the sheep. They
gave back to the curia in ecclesiastical matters the
absolute power, in order to share in the division
of the resultant mixture (the bulls, " ExecrabiHs"
of Pius II. in the year 1450, and " Pastor aeternus"

p^emeover of Lco X. in the year 151G, proclaim the suprem-
acy of the pope over the councils). The opinion
that papal decisions are as holy as the decrees of
councils, and that the right of exposition in all
things belongs only to the Church, i.e. Rome, grad-

Decrees of ually established itself. The curia, however, was

CV)iincils

Miuic Code very careful to compile from these decisions a book

)t liiiws. •^ ^

of laws, a closed dogmatic canon. Its infallibility
and sovereignty were secure only when it still had
a free hand and when men were obliged to accede in
every case to its judicial utterance. The old dogma
was esteemed as formerly; but the questions which
it treated in actual life lay no more within its own
province. They were handled by theology. The

THREE-FOLD ISSUINtJ OF HISTORY OF DO(JMA. e503

latter, however, during the 150 years subseciiieiit to
Thomas, canio to the ccjiivictioii of the irration-
ality of the revealed doctrine and therefore gave out
the watchword, that one must blindly submit to the
authority of the Church. This development favored
curialisni ; long since in Rome men had taught that
submission to the authority of the Church {Jiclcs im-
pllcita) would secure ])lessedness, if only one believed
besides in the Divine recompense. In the humanis-
tic circles of the curia men did not in truth wholly
accept this ; yet on the other hand pious sentiment
revered the Divine in the irrational and arbitrary.
That this entire handling of the matter was a way
of burying the old dogma is clear. The end toward
which from the beginning the matter was directed
in the Occident now revealed itself with astounding
clearness: Dogma is institution, is a code of laws.
The curia itself respected the same only formally;
practically there lay beneath, as in the case of all codes
in the hands of an absolute master, tho politics of the
curia. The " tolerari potesV and the ^'' probabile^^
indicate a still worse secularization of the dogma
and of the Church than the ^Uiuathemci sif\ Yet
there lay a truth in curialistic ecclesiasticism itself
as contrasted with those tendencies which would
found the Church upon the sanctity of Christians.
Against the Hussites and the mystics did Rome pre-
serve the right of the conviction, that the Church of
Christ is the domination of the Gospel over sinful
men.

Dogma is
Institution.

W l!

i* f- i

■P

i ;

( >iti){isition

to
(Jurialism.

Reforma-
tion
Crippled
from Be-
ginning.

Practical

Piety :
Erasmus,
Staupitz.

504 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Tlie opposition to ciirialism was hold together by a
negative thought, that the usages of the Romish
Church were become tyrannical and that they had
the testimony of ecclesiastical antiquity against
them. Here political, social, religious and scientific
motives met together. Men reasoned accordingly that
papal decisions do not have the significance of articles
of faith, that Rome is not the only one authorized to
interpret the Scriptures and the fathers, that the coun-
cil should reform the Church in its hierarchy and in
its members, and that the Church, over against the
dogmatic, cultish and ecclesiastico-legalistic innova-
tions of Rome, must return to its original principles
and to its original attitude. Men believed them-
selves able to set aside the evolution of the preceding
centuries and planted themselves in thesi upon the
Holy Scriptures and ecclesiastical antiquity ; but in
praxi the reformatory aim was either wholly obscure
or contained so many elements of the post-Augustin-
ian development that the opposition was crippled from
the start. Men knew not whether they were to re-
form usages or misusages^ and they knew not what
they should do with the pope, whom they acknowl-
edged and rejected, blessed and cursed with the same
breath (cf. Luther's own attitude, 1517-1520, toward
the pope). But this highly inconsistent opposition
was still a power, save within the realm of doctrine;
for the latter was discredited also within the circles
of the anti-curialists. "Practical piety" was the
watchword of humanists like Erasmus and of Au-

i>'''':

li.l

THllEE-FOLD lSSUIN(i OF HISTORY OF DO(JMA. 505

Sociniau-
iem.

gustiiiiaiis like Staui)it/. Men were surfeited with
that theology wliich reaHoiied over-mueh within tlio
safe haven of authority and rendered the truly pious
life more difficult. If the Church doctrine were only
"science", then was it given for the sake of the lat-
ter ; it ought to step aside and make way for a new
mode of thought (see Socinianism). But since the
old dogma was more, it remained — yet here also
as a legal code. With the exception of a few bold
leaders the opposition parties respected the dogma
with the instinct of self-preservation. They felt
it still ever, even if obscurely, as the foundation
of their exist*^nce. But they wished no doctrinal
controveroies : Scholastic (juibblings were as distaste-
ful to them as monkish quarrels, still they wished to
free themselves from scholasticism. What a contra-
diction ! The ultimate ground lay in the enormous
breach which existed between the old dogma and the
Christian conceptions whose expressed form was the
life of the day. Dogma was the soil and the title-
deed for the existence of the Church — but which old
Church dogma had then still for piel;y, as it then
existed, a directly comprehensible sense? Neither
the doctrine of the trinity, nor of the two natures.
Men thought no more after the manner of the Greeks.
Piety, as it developed itself in the 15tli century, lived
in Aucrustine, Bernard and Francis. Under the Men

° ^ Thought to

shell of an old faith a new piety had been forming 5u'"[°tin'^
during the past thousand years and therefore also a '*°''*"''
new faith. Men here and there thought to assist by

What Con-
tradic-
tions !

•'

500 OUTLINES OF THK IIISTOliV OK DOOM A,

f-.

Criticism
Deneflcial.

a icturn to puro Aiigustiiiiauisin. Yot tlio criwis
at that time, tho l)reac'li botvvooii the dogmatic legal
regulations m the Church and tho obscure aim of
piety, sprang (nit of the soil of Augustinianism it-
self. Tho defects lay germinally already in their
premises. This, it is true, no forerunner of the Ref-
ormation perceived; but the fact of tiio impossibility
of a reformation by the means transmitted by
Augustine is thoroughly apparent. Tlie disinteg-
rated AiKjastinianifnit i.s still Au(jnstinianismj
how then shall one permaiteiithj help out the same
with the genuine?

Still the criticism which applied the revived Au-
gustinianism to the disintegrated had in the 15th
century a beneficial influence, without whose prepa-
ratory W(n'k the Reformation and the Tridentine
council were inconceivable. The immoral, irrelig-
ious, yea, heathenish mechanism of the dominant
Church was discredited by this Augustinianism;
yes even more, the latter unfettered the sense of
freedom in religion and therewith the striving
after real religion. It worked in union with all the
forces which in the loth century recognized the right
of the individual and of subjectivity, and sought to
break the spell of the Middle Ages. It created un-
rest, an unrest which went beyond itself — How can
one be a free and at the same time a blessed man?
But no one was able to formulate this question,
because no one felt as yet its full force.

With the close of the loth centurj^ various issu-

THREE-FOLD ISSriN(} OK HISTORY OF DOGMA. AO?

ingH of the crisis seemed possible: A complete tri-
umph of curialism, u triumph of revivified xVugiis-
tiiiianism, a sundering of the Churcli into diverse
groups of the most rigid ciirialism and of a ceremon-
ial religion verging toward a rationalistic and fanat-
ical Biblical Christianity which should discard the
old dogma, finally a now reformation of religion as a
whole, i.e. an evangelical reformation, which should
root up and discard the old dogma, because the now
point of view — God is gracious for the sake of
Christ, and the right and freedom which have come
through him — could permit that only to remain in
theology which belonged to him.

In reality, however, the issuiugs were different.
They all remained burdened with contradictions:
Tridentine Catholicism, Socinianisni and the
Evangelical Reformation. In the first curialism
prevailed, the monarchical institutional dispenser of
blessedness with its sacraments and its "merits";
but it found itself compelled to make a compact with
Augustinianism and to reckon with the same on the
basis of the codification of the new dogmas which
had been extorted from it. In bocinianism the
nominalistic criticism of the understanding and the
humanistic spirit of the new era prevailed; but it
remained entangled in the old Biblicism, and in
setting aside the old dogmas it created for itself new
ones in opposition to the old. Finally in the evan-
gelical Reformation the infallible organization of the
Church, the infallible doctrinal traditions of the

Various
|ssiiiii>;s
St'i'iiicd
I'lisslhlt'.

Tri<it*ntine

CatJioli-

cisui.

Sooinian-
ism.

Evanpt'lic-
al Kcfor-
uiatiou.

1 II

lii

! i.

608 OUTLINES OF THE IIIHTOKY OF DOGMA.

U H

?i^\':

Dogma is
Phllo-

Boptiical
Knowledpw
of God and
the World.

Euchar-
ist ic Con-
troveisy;
Augsburg

Coufes-
8iou.

C^liurch and tlii^ inralliblo canon of Scripturo woiv in
prin('i})l<^ H(>t asido and a wholly now standpoint
secured ; but sagacity and courage did not hold out
to apply in (»ach particular instance that wliich had
been secured in general. On the assumption that
the thing itself (the Gospel) — not the authority —
demanded it, men retained the old dogma as the es-
sential content of the Gospel and under the title
"word of God" they returned to Biblicism. Over
against the new doctrine of the hierarcliical, cultish,
Pelagianistic and monkish Christendom men saw in
the old dogma only the expression of faith in God
who is merciful in Christ, and failed to see that
dogma at the same time is something entirely differ-
ent, viz. : Philosophical cosmo-theistic knowledge
and rule of faith. But that which men admitted
under a new title vindicated itself, when once it had
been allowed, by a logic of its own. Men exalted
the true theology, the theologia crucifi, and placed
it upon the lamp-stand ; but in doing this under the
old ecclesiastical forms they obtained in the bargain
the accompanying k)ioicled<je and ride of faith;
and the doctrinal controversies of the evangelical
parties appeared like a continuation of the scholastic
school-controversies, oidy with infinitely higher sig-
nificance; for now they had to do with the exist-
ence of the new Church. Thus arose at the very
beginning — at least with the eucharistic controversy
and the Augsburg Confession, which now began to
pour the new wine into the old wine-skins — in the

THUEK-FOLI) ISHUINC* OF IIISTOFIY OF DOOMA. r.O'.l

roHt-Tri-

dfiitirit'.

Catlinli-

cisin.

roformod conception of (loctiiiio u liighly compli-
cated, contradictory picture. Only in the principles
of Luther, and not in all oC them, did tho new spirit
display itself; outside of these it contained nothing
new, and ho who to-day, in the 1 0th century, (Iocs
not take this spirit as his monitor, hut rests ([uietly
beneath tho stunning blow which it gave itself at
the end of the lOtli century, deceives himself in re-
gard to his own position: He is not evangelical, hut
belongs to a Catholic sub-speci(»s where he is free, in
accordance with the principles of present-day l*rotes
tantism, to select tho BiblicM' dogmatii.al, m3-stical
or hierarchical elements.

However, the rcstdlanfs o/ (he Jiistonj of the
dogma are clearly represented in the three following
creations : Post-Tridentino Catholicism finally com-
pleted the neutralizing of the old dogma in an arbi- sooinian
trary papal legal organization; Socinianism a[)pre-
ciably disintegrated and came to an end; tho
Reformation, in that it both sot the dogma aside and
preserved them outright, looked away from them,
backward to the Gospel, forward to a new formida-
tion of the Gospel confession which s-liall be free
from dogma and bo reconciled with truthfulness and
truth. In this sense the history of dogma sh(juld ^^J"^||^^
set forth the issuings of dogma. In the Reforma-
tion it has only to describe the Christianity of Luther,
in order to make the subsequent development com-
prehensible. The latter belongs either as a whole to
the history of dogma (up to the present time) , or not

t»

^ff'

if ■

,.'

IS f

H ;; *

Curia and
Princes.

510 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

at all. It is more correct, however, to exclude it
entirely, for the old dogma claimed to bo Infallible.
This claim the Reformation, so to speak, disclaimed
for its own productions — there was silence as to
the old dogmas. Therefore he who still seeks for
a middle conception between reformable and infal-
lible w^ould perpetuate forever the confusions of the
epigonoi, if he should recognize dogmas in the
expositions of Protestantism in the IGth century.

CHAPTER II.

THE ISSUING OF THE DOGMA IN ROMAN
CATHOLICISM.

1. The Codification of the Mediaeval Doctrines in
Opposition to rrotestantism {Canons and
Decrees of Trent) .

Edition of the decrees, lo84. Earher works in Kollner,
Pymbolik, 1844, later in Ilerzog, RE-. sub verb. Tndentinum.

In Rome they wished only to condemn strange
doctrines, not to codify their own ; they also wanted
no council. But one was required of the curia by the
princes. In the coming together it became clear that
the mediaeval spirit h.'id acquired strength from the
Reformation, humanism and Augustinianism, but
that this spirit itself remained the stronger power.
The curia accomplisliod the masterful work of ap-
propriating the new, of condemning the Reformation,
of justifying itself and yet of setting aside thereby
the most glaring abuses. In opposing the Luther

I-

THREE-FOLD ISSriN(J OF HISTORY OF I)0(JMA. 511

movement, they wore obliged to trans':orin many
medioBval doctrines into dogmas — 1.iio decrees of ^^T,vMt ^^
Trent are the shadows of the Fetcjrmatioi;. AVliat 'u^lorma"

tiou,

originally to the mind of the curia ap])eared to be
a misfortune — the necessity of formulating and the
compulsory return to Augustinianism, — proved itself
later to be an advantage: They had a iiow lulc of
faith, which could be applied with ver})al strictness,
whenever it seemed expedient, and which was, on
the other hand, so amhiijuous and elastic as to leave
free play for the arbitrary decisions of the curia.
The latter reserved the right of interpretation and
the council conceded this, auvl thus already did infal-
libility accrue in principL.' to the pope. The curia ^.'hangw?,"
itself was accordingly unchanged, i.e. it came fortli iniproved.
from the purgatory of the council with r '1 its cus-
toms, practices, assumptions and sins ; but the inner
condition of the Church as a whole was nevertheless
improved. By reason of its inner untruthfulness and
because the doctrines of the Church of to-dav have
been consistently developed in not a few points (re-
cent rejection of Augustinianism, decision of the
question, undecided at Trent, whether the po})e be
the universal bishop and infallible), the Tridentine
decrees are no longer an unobscured source of Cath-
olicism. Even at Trent were the dogma transformed
into a dogma-politics, and tlie laity debarred from
faith and do<4ma : Evervthing that has been handed
down is most holy as regard its verbal meaning, but
in theology it resolves itself into an array of more or

■I!

r^;

^ ?t

iS'

) I'

;-r

Re-Baptis,n
and Prot-
estants De-
nounced.

Tradition.

513 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

less probable meanings, which, in the case of any
controversy, are decided by the pope.

They agreed in the rejection of " re-baptism" and
Protestants. After reiterating the Constantinopoli-
tan creed, they declared in the 4th session, in order
to guard the ^^jjun'tasevangeUl", that the apocrypha
are of like rank with the Old Testament, that the
vulgato is to be considered as authentic, and that
the Church alone is permitted to interpret the Scrip-
tures. By the side of the latter, however, they placed
the " traditiones sine scripto, quae ah ipsiiis
Chn'sti ore ah apostolis acceptae ant ah ipsius
apostoUs^ spiritu sancfo (lidanie^ (jnasi per
manus traditae ad nos nsqiie perreneriinf (in an-
other place the definition expresses the idea some-
what differently). In the 5th and Gtli sessions the
decrees in regard to original sin and justification
were formulated. Here under the spell of the re-
awakened Augustinianism and of the Reformation
they did not commit themselves to the nominalistic
doctrine, but approached ver}- near to Thomas ; in-
deed their doctrine of justification, although it was
born of politics, is a very respectable prodiact,
in which an evangelical element is not wanting.
But (1) lines were drawn here and there which led
^senii- to a Scotistic (semi-Pelagian) understanding of the

Pelapian- ^ o ' o

doctrine, (3) it made verj' little difference what was
said in the chief sentence about sin and grace, when
in the subordinate sentences the thesis was allowed,
that the practices of the Roman Church are the chief

isui;
Roman
Church

Laws.

[A.

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 513

3 of any

sm" and
tinopoli-
in order
•ocrypha
that the
md that
le Scrip-
y placed

ipsiiis
• ipsius
si per

(in an-
i some-
ons the
fication
the re-
•mation
nalistic
las; in-

it was
rodiact,
anting,
ich led

of the
lat was
, when
llowed,
e chief

tion.

law. By the first sin, it was admitted, Adam lost
holiness and righteousness " i)i qua coxstifxtus
fu('raV\ became changed "indefcrius'' in body and
soul, and perpetuated his sin ''^ pvopacjaiione' . Y(^t
they [dso taught that free will was not destroyed, but Free vvm.
^' viribns a it eiuiatus^\ and that baptism reall}' blots
out the )rafus orUjinalispeccafl^ but the conmipis-
centia (fonies), which is not to bo looked upon as
sin, remains (therefore the religious view was aban-
doned). As regards justification it was explained •^"fM^'^'^
that it is the act by which man p{^;sses from an un-
righteous to r righteous state (through baptism, i.e.
the sacrament of penance) ; it arises, however, not
simph" through the forgiveness of sin, but also
through the sanctifying and renewing of the inner
man by a free acceptance of grace, although the
man is incapable of freeing himself from the domin-
ion of sin i)c^' ^'2"* naturae, or jxt litteram Icy is
Moijsis. On the one hand, justification appears as
the translatio from one condition to another, viz.
to that of adoption, and faith was looked upon as the
determining power alongside of grace {'^Christum
proposuit deus propitiatorem ter ftdem in san-
gvine ijjsius jjro peccatis nostris^') ; on the oth(»r
hand, it appears as a sanctifying process through
the inpouring of grace ("' Christi sanctissiniae
jmssiouis imrito per spirltum sanctum caritas
dei diffnuditur in coidibus'\ so that man in justifi-
cation receives at the same time with the forgiveness

of sin an inflow of faith, love and liope; with-
83

■|''i

Two
Views.

I' :;il''

li i|

Gratia

Pra<^v('n-

iens.

5U OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

out the last tw(), man is neither perfectly united to
Christ, nor is his faith a living one). The latter
view is the docisivc, and accordingly the stadia of
the process of justification (inception et seq.) are
set forth in a general way. The gratia pnicvemens
exhausts itself in the vocatio {nnllis existentihus
meritis) ; but therein is the inception not exhaust-
ed, much more does there belong to it the illii-
minatio spiritus Sanctis which enables man to turn
toward the /«sf?7m and gives him therewith a dis-
position and a free surrender to God. In that now
justijicatio first ensues, the thought of the gratia
gratis data is vitiated. Only in ahstracto is the
forgiveness of sin inherently peculiar, and the same
is true of justification ; in concreto it is a gradual pro-
cess of sanctification which is completed in the mor-
tificatio meinbrornni carnis and made manifest
through manifold grace in an obedience to the com-
mands of God and the Church. Unto an assurance
of the acquired grace can one not attain in this life ;
but the lack of this can be repaired through penance;
the process also does not need to be begun anew, in
so far as faith lias remained in spite of the loss of
the justifying grace. The goal of the process in this
Opera the lif^ is the houa, opera, which God by virtue of his
grace receives as pleasing to himself and as meri-
torious. Accordingly one must view these on the
one hand as gifts of God and on the other as real
means to blessedness, — The most important thing
is, that (in opposition to the Thomas-Augustinian

Forgiv(^-
ness of Sin
a i'rccess.

Bona

J I

V. i'*

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 515

nited to
e latter
adia of
q.) are
veniens
entibus
xhaust-
le ilhi-
to turn
1 a dis-
at now
gratia
I is the
le same
lal pro-
le mor-
lanifest
le com-
airance
lis life ;
mance ;
lew, in

loss of
in this
of his
3 merl-
on the
[IS real

thing
■itinian

tradition) the gratia prima does not justify, but
only disposes. Therefore justification arises out of Justifu-a-
a cooperation. No Augustinian phraseology can fp,'„'f'(':„.
co.ceal this. Of the oo anathemas, 20 are directed ^''^''■"' "'"•
against Protestantism. In the condemnation of the
sentence, "Jidem jn.'ifijicateni tiiliiJ aJiud essr
qiiam fiducinm divinae miserirordiae peaida
remittentis propter Christum, ret eani fiducian
solam esse, cpia justifieami(r'\ something more
was implicitly condemned, viz. rigid Augustinian-
ism, — therein does the artfulness of the decree
consist.

In the 7th and following sessions the doctrine of Doctrinoof

Sacni-

the sacraments was formulated and the Church was nmnn.
declared a sacramental institution {'^ per sticraineiita
omnis vera justitia vel incijnt vel eoepta augetur
vel amissa reparatur'") ; concerning the word and
faith there was accordingly silence. Instead of a doc-
trine of the sacraments in gen ere V,\ anathemas were
formulated, which contain the real i)rotest against
Protestantism. The institution by Christ of all of
the seven sacraments was affirmed, as well as the
impossibility of being justified per solam fid em,
without the sacraments. These " coiiti)ient gratia m^^
and accordingly possess a mysterious jiower, which
they bestow ex opere operato upon those ''^ qui
ohicem non pomoiV. In other respects also the
Thomistic doctrine (character, intention, etc.) is
everywhere preserved, yet the theological subtleties
are laid aside, and the trcUisition to the Scotistic fcrm

'■':li

510 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

t ' 1

\\i,

1 1

Depart-
ul•t^s
frotn
Usa{,'es of
Church
Con-
demned.

Transub-

stantia-

ticu.

Canones.

of statomont remaiiiw possible. At tlio close of the
anathemas every departure from the once established
usages of tlie Church was condemned. For the treat-
ment of the individual sacraments the bull of Eugene
IV., Exult ate domino (143!)), served as a prototype.
The declarations in regard to baptism and confirma'
tion are instructive only in that by the former those
persons are condemned who teach that all subsecpient
sins"6'o/rt rccordatione ct jUlc snsccpti tKiptiHmV
can be forgiven, and ])y the latter that the bishop
alone is prochdmed as minister .sdcninienii. Touch-
ing the eucharist the Thomistic theologumena were
transformed into a dogma. In virtue of tlie tvansvd^-
stantiation the entire Christ is present in each par-
ticle of each of the elements, and such is the case
before their reception ; hence the host is to bo wor-
shipped ("I'/t eiicliaristia ipse sanctitatis ciuctor
ante usnm est"). All usages were here designated
as apostolic. The effect of the sacrament remains
highly insignificant ; those were expressly condemned
who held forgiveness to be the principal fruit.
At the most contested point, the mass, the sum
total of tradition was sanctioned, a few supersti-
tious misusages only being discountenanced. Low
and high mass {'' sdcrifieiinn pvopiti'iioriuni pro
vivis et defunetis nonduni ad plenum purgatis'')
were as much justified — notwithstanding all scru-
ples of princes — as the withholding of the cup and
the Latin language. The eanones place all refor-
matory movements vmdor the ban and thereby

TfllJKE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOr.MA. 517

rigidly oxcIluIo the Cliunli cf llu> word from llio
Clmrcliof thepjigau niass-oli'eriiig. The doctrine of
penance is much more thoroughly handled than
that of the eucharist abonc which the theologians
alone contended. Even unto the materia and quasi

iter

tli(

>ct t(

Attritio
Ktjuals

materia was tlie entire scholastic labor in respect to
penance receiv^ed as dogma. Hence a more extended
examination (see above, j). 47!)) is unnecessar}'. Yet
it is worthy of remark that the attritio is very cir- ^ ""[,','1'^'*'
cumspectly handled, and is eveI■y^\llere looked upon J''^'''^^*-
as contritio imperfecta. So much the more cate-
gorically wav the confessio of every mortal sin be-
fore the priest encouraged and ihv) Judicial character
of the priest emphasized. The sat i sf act i ones were,
as with Thomas, considered just as necessary for the
temporalis poena peccati 'ci'!^ the indulgences. Yet ^"'^"e?"
men spoke very reservedly about the matter. The
scholastic theory is not alluded to, the abuse is per-
mitted ; yet touching the /// iiaj itself absolutely noth-
ing is conceded (whoever declares indulgences not to
be salutary is to be condemned) . In regard to the last
anointing, the orders and marriage they rtished to
the conclusion that the septem ordines were rdready
given o/> ipso initio ecclesiae. The old contested
question regarding the relation of the bishops to the
priests was not decided, vet the former acquired a
superiority. Regarding raarriage they discoursed -^'firriaKe
only homiletically and ecclesiastically, yet they con-
demned those who denied that it conferred a gratia.
On the questions respecting ptu-gatory, saints, relics

II I pi;
I' W'^-

I t

' Kil

51 S OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOOMA.

and imagoH thoy spoko regretfully of the fibuses, yet
strongly maintained the tradition, indulging the
spirit of the times in cautious language. Thus did
the Church, in its specific secuhirization as a sacrifi-
cial, priestly and sacramental institution, round itself
out by the Tr /dentine decrees and never once sur-
render its idols (See on the practice of benedictions,
sacraments and IndMlgences, Gihr, d. h, Messopfer,
1887; Schneider, die Ablasse, 1881). The decrees
rooted die Churdi firmly in the soil of tlie Middle
Ages and of scholasticism : Sacraments, obedience^
merit.

Curialism
or Episco-
pacy?

2. The Post-Tridentine Development as a Prep-
aration for the Vatican Decrees.

Deiiziuger, Enchiridion, 5. Aufl., 1874.

The questions not wholly decided at Trent: Curi-
alism or episcopacy, Augustinianism or Jesuitic
Pelagianism, moral law or probability, continued
to agitate the three following centuries. The first
question Ijecame a double one : Pope or council, papal
decision or tradition. The Vatican council decided
in favor of curialism and therewith also for Jesuit-
ism.
1 . (a) At Trent the Ofjposition between the curial-
Romanus. ists and the champions of episcopacy, touching the
article respecting rhe powei' of the pope, was not
permitted to come io a decision at all ; but the pro-
fessio Jidei Tridentivo.c had already smuggled the

Cate-
chisnius

THREE-FOLD ISSUINCJ f)F HISTORY OF DOOMA. 519

Rornisii Cliuivli and thi' pope into its credo, and tlio
Thomistic* Catechi.snnis JiotNanns Uiuy;\ii papal au-
tocracy as an article of faith (" uecessitritini fnit hoc
visihile caput ad nnltatciu ccch\siac constitueiidam
et conservandattr). Yet there arose a vigorous op-
position, viz., in the France of Henry IV. and Louis
XIV. Men reverted there (Bossu(»t) to Gallicanism ouHifan-
(in other respects also the Tridentine decrees were not ^oasuet.
unconditionally accepted), partly in the interest of
the king, partly in that of the nation and its bishops
(residence of the bishops di vino jure). As to the
meaning of the primacy, which was allowed to pass,
they were as little able to arrive at clearness and
unanimity as in the 15th century; but it remained
settled that the king and the bishops should rule the
French church, that the pope has nothing to say about
temporal things, and that in spiritual things also he
is bound by the decisions of the councils (Constance),
his decisions consecpiently being unalterable only by
the concurrence of the Church (Gallican propositions
of 1G82). The popes rejected these propositions, but
did not break with France. At the end of his life Louis xiv.
the great king himself discounted them, without
formally withdrawing them. They were in the 18th
century still ever a power until the monarch who
elevated them to constitutional law (1810) handed
them over to the curia — Napoleon I. The way in Napoleon
which he, ivith the consent of the popes, shattered
the Church and ecclesiastical organization which
were overturned by the revolution, in order to rebuild

if'H;

520 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF r)0(}M\.

Romanti-
cists.

Ems' Pro-
grauiuu'.

Peace of
Vienna.

Professio
Fidei Tri-
di'utiuae.

Jesuits.

tliL'iii ill conjinivliun, tn'f/i flic l(iUet\ was by a
surrender uf the Fronch chiircli to tho popes. The
emperor did not intend it as sucli, Init such it was.
The romanticists (de Maistre, Bonald, Chateau-
l)riand et al.) completed the work in union with tlie
restoration. Gallicanism was exterminated. In so
far as France is Catholic to-day, it is papal; however
the official politics also watches over the interests
of ultramontanism in foreign lands. In Germany
Fehronius (ITOU) made a vigorous attack ui)on
curialism ; but since the one wanted an arch-episco-
pal national church (Ems' "programme", 178G), the
other state churches (Joseph II. et al.), nothing actu-
ally came of it. The old Church organization and
the new plan for restoring it went down in the
whirlpool of the Napoleonic epoch. In the peace of
Vienna a new Church emerged, which the Curia
directed, and in which the latter with the help of the
princes, the ultramontane romanticists, trustful lib-
erals and Metternich diplomatists crushed out the
remnant of episcopacy and of national churchdom.

1. (b) T\\Q professio fidei Tridentinae\\ai(\.ai\vQ&.dLY
given tradition a far wider range than the Tridentine
decrees themselves {''' apostolicas et ecclesiasticas
traditiones reliquasque eitisdem ecclesiae ohser-
vationes et const it uti ones firmissime admitto et
amplector ") and had raised it above the Scriptures.
The Jesuits subordinated the latter more and more
to tradition and took particular pains on that account
to formulate the inspiration of the Scriptures in as

TIIHEE-FOLI) ISSUIN(! OF IIISTOIIV OF l)0(i\l.\. 5.! I

loose a way a;4 possible, so that indood llir X'iitican
decrees seem lo liave done away with tiie eontradie-
tion. Modem Catliolieisin, however, deinaiids both,
— the holdinjjf of Scriptural tradition as inviolably
sacred, and at the same time the puttingof the linger
cautiously upon its insufficiency and its defects.
More important was the develoi)ment of the id(*a of
tradition. In theory the stjitement was lirml}' main- Tradition,
tained that there are no new revelations in the
Church; in reality the gnostic (secret traditi<ni) and
enthusiastic tradition-p.'inci])le, nyainst which lu)W-
ever the C.Vitholic Church once arrayed itself, was
ever most boldly contended for. Bellarmine was as B'-nar-
yet timid ; but Cornelius Mussus, a member of the muhsus.
Tridentine council, had already put forth the asser-
tion that in matters of faith ho believed one jiope
more than a fhon.sdnd Augustines and Jeromes. The
quite new article, that all practices of the Roman
Church are tradition, the Jesuits enlarged by the
very newest, that every doctrinal decision of the i)ope
is tradition. Here and there in truth they spoke
disparagingly in regard to councils and pr(jof from
tradition, or declared the best attested decrees as forg-
eries, in order tovanciuish history by the dogma con-
cerning the pope. The Church itself is the Hving ^^^^^ '^
tradition, the Church however is the pope; there-
fore the pope is the tradition (Pius IX.). And he
exercised this attribute in 1S.")4 by the proclamation
of the immaculate conception of the virgin Mary,
thus solving an old contested question (seep. 449).

53-i OUTLINES OF TIIK HISTOllY OF DOfSMA.

:,^i

iri:

Au^ruHtln-

iiu'iHin
liUid Auidc.

Domlni-

caiiH aud

Jesuits.

Molina

Htnivt^s

St'iiii-Pela-

tiiuuisui.

Tliat which could not ho accoinpliwhctl hy force at
Tivni, propter <iH(jii.s(i(is tcniporunt, rules to-ihiy, —
an liorotical principle wiicii nicasiii-cd hy Catholic
aiiti(piity.

{'i) 111 tho Catcchi.siHKs Kodkihuh (150(5), which
the Jesuits ghidly adopted, Augustiuiauismohtaiiicd
its last official monument. Thenceforth they sought
to prove that the doctrine of gvaco received its sanc-
tion through tli(^ worhl-shaping })ractice of the con-
fessional. Already in the year 1507 it came to pass
that Pius V, rejected the 70 articles of the Lyons
professor, Hajus, which in tho main set forth the
most stringent Augustinianism, although intermin-
gled with foreign elements and otherwise unfavora-
ble to the Reformation. A long and heated contro-
versy arose between the Dominicans and the Jesuits.
The former resisted the Jesuit educational system,
condemned the most objectionable articles of the
Jesuits (Lessius and Hamel) and sought to maintain
the Thomistic teaching in regard to the gravity of
the first sin, in regard to concupiscence and the
gratia praeveriiens. The latter laid particular stress
upon free-will and the "disposition". Among them
Molina made the greatest sensation by his work:
" Liberi arhitrii cum gratiae donisy divina prae-
scientia . . . praedestinat ione . . . concordia"
(1588). He attempted to read semi-Pelagianism
into Augustinianism ; in reality he gave the latter

away altogether. In order to allay the stormy con-
troversy recourse was had to Rome. She had no in-

TIIKKE-FOI.I) ISSriNO OF IIISTOKY OF' FXKIMA. r>*)3

Jans«>nist

Com-
trovtTHy.

torest in tin* tiling' itself, but only in the (»i)p«»rtuiiity ;
the controversy lioW(>ver was not about Aii^ustino
and Pelagius, but about Doininieans ami Jesuits.
Polities reciuired that neither party should be wholly
saeritieed. The '' cotu/rcudfio dc (iu,n'liis'\ which eotiK'n^a.
Bat from 150S to HJOT (the pope during the same time (t^.j^S'
being intimidated by the Jesuits), was finally dis-
solved without its arriving at a decision {'''fore ut
sua Sanch'fits dcchirdfionciN cf (h'tcriuiudtioneniy
quae exspectahdtui^ opportune proinnhjarer) . The
failure to decide was in fact a vi(;tory for the Jesuits.
The Jansenist contest was still worse. In Catho-
lic France, which had expelled the Reformation after
fearful struggles, an earnest piety gradually worked
itself out alongside the frivolous court and state
Catholicism and the lax Jesuitism. The posthumous
work of Bishop Janseu of Ypres, '* Augustinus"
(IG-tO), brought the same to an historical and theo-
logical halt. This piety rose right up in order to free
the Church from the Church, the faith from tradi-
tional Christianity, and morality from the refined
and lax morality. The confessional of the Jesuits
seemed to it to be the ^'eal enemy (Pascal's Letters : ■'^p^^^,^
" Ecce patres, qui lollunt peccata niandi ! ") . The
order of Jesus was able to hold out against this form-
idable attack only by assuming the offensive and
by branding the pure Augustinianism of Jansen and
his friends as heresy ("Jansenism"). The popes
allowed themselves to gain the day. Urban VIII.
("/n eminenti"), but above all Innocence X. (" Cum

Confes-
Hioriul

!»

lif

a&k

lam

TirW"*

fj9

i ■

> I

I M

m ^

I ;

524 OUTLINES OF THE IIISTORV OF DOGMA.

occasione'') and Alexaiuki' Vll. (".!(/ sancti b.
Petri sedeiii^^) forbade, i.e. condemned Jaiisen's b<^'^^'.
Innocent indicated besides five articles of Jansen's
as objectionable. Then arose a violent ojiposition :
Tlie " Jansenists" refused to acknowledge the incrim-
inating articles ^s Janscrx's and to condemn them.
Alexander But Alexander VII. reciuired it, and the crown suj-

vn.,Clem- ^ ' ^

eut XI. jK^rted him. After a tem])()rary compromise {silc7i-
tium obseqiiiosuhi, lOOS, Clement IX.), Clement
XI. renewed (1705) the sharp bull of his predecessors.
Port Royal was destroyed. Augustinianism, how-
ever, received a still harder blow by the constitution

upigen- '' 6>/r/e?i«Y;;,6''' of Clemem XL (i:i3). In this 101

it/US*

articles from a devotional work on the New Testa-
ment by Paschasius Quesr.el, which the Jesuits had
extracted, were proscribed. Among them ^vere not
only many pure Augustinian, but also Pauline ideas
(" Nidlae daniav (jratiae nisi per fidem''^ — ^^ fides est
prima gratia et fans oinniuin aharum^^ — ''^ prima
(J rat it, qiiaui dens concedit pwecatori, est pecca-
torum remissio^^ — "jjeccator non est liber nisi ad
malum sine gratia liberatoris''\ etc.) . Again a storm
oppositiou arose in France. Thos? receiving and those opposing

iu France

^/i"^ the bull were arrayed against each othev. But as

Nether- •' ^

lands. ^^,^^. • j^ Catholicism — the one finally surrendered with
a sullied conscience, the other went under in ecstasy
and fanaticism. Only in the Netherlands had there
arisen, through the Jausenian contest, a schismatic
old Cath')lic Church. The bull TTnigenitus, con-
firmed by several popes, is the victory of Jesuitical

THREE-FOLD ISSUING C>F HISTORY OF DOGMA. 525

i b(v^^'.

dogmatics over Augustinian, and hence is the final
word of the Catholic history of dogma (in the sense
of a doctrino of faith). As in the lltth century the
last remnant of Gallicanism has been destroyed, so
also has that of Jansenism, or the "after-mysticism",
which was necessaril}' evolved out of Augustinianism
and quietism and is assuredly a peril to the Catholic
Church. The proclamation < I the immaculate con-
ception of the virgin iVIary by Pius IX. marks the
conclusion. As in a formal way (see sub 1) it marks
the definite exaltation of the pa})acy, so in a material
way it marks the expulsion of Augustinianism.
The indestructible imi)ulse toward inwardness, con-
templativeness and Christian independence Jesuitical
Catholicism now employed with sensuous media of
every kind, with toys and mirjicles, witli fraternities,
disciplinary exercises and scheduled prayers, and
thereby kept it harnessed to the Church.

(3) Already in the ^Middle Ages had the juristic-
casuistic spirit of the Kumish Church perniciously
influenced the confessional, ethics and dogmatics.
The nominalistic theology had one of its strong roots
in this juristic casuistry {i.e. in jn'ohabil/ffj). The
Jesuits took it up and in a manner cultivated it, —
this, which several times had jeopardized the pope
himself and even tlie members of their own order
(Dollinger and Reuscli, Gesch. der Moralstreitigk.
seit d. in. Jahrh. 18,^!)), The Dominican Bartholo-
maus de Medina was the first t(^ expound "probabil-
ity" " scientifically" ( 1 oTi) . The formula runs thus :

DiiKiiia of

IlllIIIJlOU-

latt' Con-
ception.

Jesuitical
Casuistry.

I '

Proba-
bility Dom-
inates.

520 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

"Si est opinio prohahilis, licitum est earn scqui,
licet opposita sit p)rohabiliof\ Seldom haw a word
so sot things on fire. It was the freeing of morality
from morality, of religion from religion. Already
abont IGOO probability was evidenced as the domi-
nating view, but was especially cultivated by the
Jesuits. Within the realm of faith it exhibited
itself, (1) As laxity (in respect of the granting of
absolution) , (2) As attritionism (fear of punishment).
A great array of sub-species was deduced : Lax, pure,
and rigijrous probability, aequi -probability, greater
probability, lax and stringent prudence. The differ-
ences among the first six are fundamentally very
slight; the last — which alone is ethical — was ex-
pressly rejected by Alexander VIII. in 1(590. The
Doctrine is wliolc svstem is Talmudic I very likely from the

Talmud ic. '' t j j

Middle Ages on there has been an actual connec-
tion between the two. Jansenism, above all Pascal,
rose in opposition to the destruction of morality. It
brought it to pass that " probabilism" was repressed
after the middle of the 17th century. Several popes
forbade the laxest moral-theological books ; Innocent
XI. condemned, in IHTO, 05 articles of the"proba-
bilists", among which were true knavish tricks (see
Denzinger, Enchiridion, pp. 213 seq. 217, 218 seq.).
The worse seemed to be warded off at the time
when, in the Jesuit order itself, Tliyrsus Gonzales
again revived the doctrine (in 1 087 ho became the gen-
oral). Still Jansenism and anti-])rob{ibilism were
blended. As the former fell the latter was neces-

Thyrsus
Gouzales.

THKEE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 52T

no'?

aomi-

sarily weakened. The popes h?d as regards "attri-
tionism" also reduced it to a mere neutrality. Out of
this fountain probabilism burst forth anew in the
18th century. The founder of the "order of redemp-
tionists", Alphons Lipruori (beatified ISIG, canonized Aipimns
1831), doctor of the Church 1871), became through his
books the most influential teacher in the Church.
He succeeded in modern Catholicism to the jduce
once occupied by Augustine. He was, however,
an aequi-probabilist, i.e. probabilist, and no Pascal
came forth any more.

3. The Vatican Decrees.

The Church which had destroyed episcopacy and
Augustinianism within itself built up probabilism
and the Church which, in union with the jjolitical re-
action and romanticism, had exalted the pope to
lopdship over herself and proclaimed him as the liv-
ing tradition was finally ripe for the dogma of the
infallibility of the pope. The bishops acknowledged
through the Vatican council (1800-70), that the
primacy is real and direct, that the i)oj)e possesses
the potestas ordinaria et immediata im plena et su-
prenia over the whole Church, and that this power is
episcopal in the fullest sense. Of this universal bishop
they confessed on Die isth of July, 1870: " Docenius
et diri)iitus rerelatuin do(/ina ■?sse dejinimus: Ro-
niannm Poutiflceni., qnuin cv cathedra lof/idtirr id
estquu)n omnium Christianorum pustoris et doc-

Infalli-

l)ility of

I'ope.

July IStli,
1870.

528 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Protest
i'eeble.

toris munere fiujens pro suprema sua apostolica
auctoritate doctriuaiti de fide vel moribufi ab iini-
versa ecdesia toiendcuii definit, per assistcntiani
divinam^ ipsi in b. Petro promissani, ea infcdli-
bilitate pollere, qua divinus redemptor ecclesiam
suam in definienda doctrina de fide rcl inoribtis
instructam esse voluif, ideoqiie eiusmodi Romani
pontificis definitiones ex sese, non aufem ex con-
sensu ecclesiae, irreforniabiles esse. Si quis au-
tem liuic nostrae definitioni contradicere, quod
dens avertat ., praesumpser il ., anathema siV (Fried-
rich, Gesch. d. vatic. Concils, 3 Bde. J 877 seq.).
Thobisliops wliObpoke in opposition soon submitted.
The number of those who refused to accept the new
dogma was and is small (see Schulte, Der Altkatho-
licismus, 1887) - The new doctrine is in reality the
cap-stone of the building. Others may follow, e.g.
the temporal dominion of the pope as an article of
faith ; but it can have no effect. The Romish Church
has revealed itself as the autocratic dominion of the
ponfifex maxinius — the old Roman empire taking
possession of the memory of Jesus Christ, founded
upon his word and sacraments, exercising accord-
ing to need an elastic or iron dogmatic legal disci-
pline, encompassing purgatory and heaven in ad-
dition to the earth.

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 529

ism.

CHAPTER III.

THE ISSUING OF THE DOGMA IN ANTI-TRINITARIAN-
ISM AND SOCINIANISM.

1. Historical Introduction.

Erbkam, Gesch. d. protest. Secten, 1848. Carriere, die
philos. Weltanschauung d. Ref-Zt. 3. Aufl., 1887. Trechsel,
die protest. Antitrinitarior, 3 Bde. , 1839 f .

SozziNi was an epigone like Calvin. So inianism, ^odnian.
viewed from the standpoint of the history of the
Church and of dogma, had for its presuppositions the
great anti-ecclesii^stical agitations of the Middle
Ages ; but the Reformation also influenced it. It
was evolved out of these agitations; it explained
them and reduced them to a unity. A Scotistic-
Pelagian element and a critico-humanistic are blend-
ed in it; besides one perceives also an anabaptis-
tic element (pantheistic, enthusiastic, mystic, social-
istic elements are wanting) . In it the critical and
rationalistic thought of the ecclesiastical theologians
of the l-4th and 15tli centuries also have a freer de-
velopment ; at the same time, however, it is also the
result of the impulses of the new age (renaissance).
The characteristic thing in the anti-trinitarian and
Socinian agitations of the IGth century is that they
repres'^nt the very same destruction of Catholicism,
which it were possible to effect upon the ba.sis of the
results of scholasticism and the renaissance, without

ever deepening and reviving rcliijion. In this sense
34

Scotiatic,
PelaKian,
Critical
and Hu-
manistic
Elements.

530 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

\\..i

Scholasti-
cism and
lienais-
sance
Blended.

Anti-Trini-
tarian and
Anabaptist
Groups.

Schwenk-
feld, Gior-
dano
Bruno.

is Socinianism also an issue of the history of dogma.
Therein the middle age and the modern strike hands
across the Reformation. The apparently unrecon-
cilable, the union of scholasticism and the renais-
sance, is here actually accomplished. On that very
account there is also not wanting therein a prophetic-
al element. In these agitations a great deal was
anticipated with marvellous certainty which in the
evangelical Churches, following transient articles,
seems entirely suppressed, since in them the interest
in I'eli (J ion nndev n concheiovm. absorbed everything
for the space of a hundred and fifty years. Anti-
trinitarianismand Socinianism are more enlightened
and free (aufgeklilrt) tliaii ecclesiastical Protest-
antism, but less capable of development and poorer.

Only a hasty review will here be given. Common
to all the anti-trinitarian and anabaptist groups of
Churches is tlie vi(jlent break with history, the re-
nunciation of the Church as it then existed and the
conviction of the right of the individual. From the
most diverse starting-points they not seldom arrive
at the same results, since the spirit which animated
them has been the same. The first group allied
itself with the pantheistic mysticism and the new
creation of the renaissance : Not notions but facts,
not formulas but life, not Aristotle but Plato, not the
letter but the spirit. The inner light was placed
alongside the Bible, free conviction above the formal
statement. The Church dogmas were either modified
or allowed to lapse. Freed from the burden of the

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DO(JMA. 5'M

siana.

past and guided by the Gospel, many swung out into ^^raru'jf"
the free kingdom of the Spirit, while otheis were Thuuiei''/
caught in the meshes of their own fancies. To these
belong Schwenkfeld, V. Woigel, Giordano Bruno,
and above all Sebastian Franck and Theobald
Thamer. A second aroiip that cannot be overlooked Minorites,

... . . Waldcn-

had its strength in its opposition to political and
sacramental Catholicism and over against the same
it carried on a new social-political world and church
sy.^tem (apocalyptic and chiliastic). Within this the
enthusiastic minorite, Waldensian, etc., churches
continued to flourish. Their badge was rebaptism.
Carried forward in many respects by means of Ref-
ormation principles, this baptismal Christianity
played a very important role until the catastrophe at
Miinster and even afterward.

Romance (Italian) group, the consequent development
of nominalistic scholasticism was carried forward
under the influence of humanism ; submission to tho
Church ceased; moralism, interpreted humanisti-
cally and in part evangelically, survived. The old
dogma and sacramentarianism were cast aside; but
an historical element was admitted : Return to the
primitive sources, to the philological sense, to re-
spect for the classical in everything that is called
antiquity. The religious motive in the deepest sense
was wanting in these Italians; and thoy did not
carry the movement forward to a national agitation.
This and the first group stand in many respects in
strong contrast, in so far as the former did liomage

In, a fllircL really a Italian Hu-
manists.

632 OUTLINES OP^ THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Ii > '/,

f : :

Michael
Servetus.

Attitude

Toward

Catholic

Authority

and

Trinity,

Bible
Made
Founda-
tion.

to speculative mysticism ;iiul the latter to rational
thought. Still the Inmiaiiistic interests not only
united them by a conmion bond, but out of the specu-
lative mysticism a pure mode of thought was devel-
oped through experience, upon which slresswas laid;
and, on t'>:o other hand, tho^viip f ,L I alian ^iiink-
ers under the influence of th( n v., v i , ^tripped off the
crudities of that fanciful mythv.logy * ^ which the
earlier nominalism had paraded. This combination
is most significantly represented by the Spaniard,
Michael Servetus. In his theology is united the
best of all that came to maturity in the 1 Oth century,
if one speaks only of that which lay outside of the
evangelical Reformation.

With reference to all these groups the history of
dogma should keep two main points in view : Their
relation, (1) To the formal authorities of Catholicism,
(2) To the doctrine of the trinity and Christology.
Concerning the first point they did away with the
authority of the Church, the present and the future,
as a teacher and a judge. The attitude toward the
Scriptures remained obscure. Men plaj^ed them off
against tradition and stood with unheard-of steadfast-
ness by the letter; on the other hand, the authorit}' of
the Scriptures was derived from that of the inner reve-
lation, yes, they were also wholly set aside. Still as
a rule their unique value remained imsliaken ; Socin-
ianism planted itself firmly upon the Scriptures.
Against these rocks also the Reformers of the IGth
century — certain remarkable men excepted v/ho

lal

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF nO(;MA. 533

really irdcrstood what tlio frct'doin of a Christian
man is lid not d-iro to p:oi seriously jostled. The
contradi' tif>n in which Protestantism had bocomo
involve' is f iind, it is true, in mo«t of the Re-
formeio: A comprehensive collection of Scriptures
set up as an dbsc/iute norm, but the right understand-
ing of the same left t(j the painful efforts of each in-
dividual. — As rej'ards anti-trinitarianism the devel- Anti-Trini-

" tarianism.

opment was ctirried forward in all four groups, but
in different ways. In the first group it was not
aggressive, but latitudinarian (as with the earlier
mystics who also indeed recognized only " modi" in
the trinity, considered the incarnation as a special
instance and saw in the dogma in any event only
veiled truth). In the second, anabaptist group
anti-trinitarianism is as a rule a relatively subordi-
nate element, although it is perhaps nowhere entirely
wanting. It is scarcely to be found in the impor-
tant reformer Denck, on the other hand it is clearer
in Hatzer, plainer still in Campanus, D. Joris and
Melchior Hoffmann, who moreover all constructed
their owti doctrine of the trinity. The doctrine of
the trinity was in reality grappled with at its root,
i.e. at the Divinity of Christ, only by the Italians
(Pietro Menelfi), that is to say, within the third
group. The union of hiunanism and the nominal-
istic-Pelagian theological deposit produced in Italy
as a real fact'jr in the historical movement an anti-
trinitarianism in the sense of adoptionism or Arian-
ism. The setting aside of the doctrine of the Di-

Ana-
baptists.

534 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Calvin.

Divinity of viiiiU' of CliHst and of tlio trinity was considered
H«<,i.'Lt«d. ]i(^m as the most important purification and emanci-
pation of religion. In its place stepped the created
Christ and the one God: in support of the same,
Scripture proofs were sought for and found (cf. the
Roman Theodotians of antiquity). A whole herd of
learned and for the most part very respectable anti-
trinitarians drove Italy in the middle of the 10th
century beyond its own bounds: Camillo Renato,
BlandratM, GentiliH, Occhino, the two Sozzini, etc.
In Switzerland the contest about the right of anti-
trinitarianism in the evangelical churches was
fought out. Calvin decided against it and burnt
Servetus. In Poland and Transylvania the doctrine
found freedom. There anti-trinitarian churches arose,
indeed in Transylvania it was permitted to Blan-
drata to secure for his confession a formal recogni-
tion. Within this anarchy freedom of conscience
Unitarian- also found a placc of abode. Unitarianism, as Blan-
drata taught it, saw in Christ a man chosen by God
and exalted to God. A split soon made its appear-
ance. The left wing rejected the miraculous birth
also and the worship of Jesus (non-adorationism) .
Its chief champion was Franz Davidis. For the pur-
pose of counteracting this tendency, Fausto Sozzini
(Socinius) went m 1578 to Transylvania and actually
suppressed it. There and in Poland he constructed
out of the anabaptist, socialistic, chiliastic, liber-
tinistic and non-adoration congregations a church
upon the basis of a comprehensive Biblical dogmatics.

ism.

Fausto
Sozzini.

THRKK-FOLD IHSUlN(i OK HISTOKV OK IKKJMA. i)'.]5

After u history rich in dramatic ('i)is(Hlcs Poland
unitarianism in union with Nctherland Armenian-
ism found in England and America an ahode and
brought forth remarkable men. Nevertheless it was
inspired there more and more by the evangelical
spirit.

2. 'Ill a Socinidu Doctrine.
Fock, (l(>r Socinianismus, 1847.

Socinian Christianity is seen best in the Racovian ^Racovian
Catechism (loOK). Religion is the complete and
correct knowledge of the doctrine of salvation. This
is to be obtained from the Holy Scriptures as an
outer, statutory revelation, more particularly from
the New Testament. The Christian religion is the
fheologu of the Neir Testament^ but it is at the
same time a rational rcliijion. The Boole and the
reason are the stamina of the Socinian doctrine.
Hence the proof of the eertitudo saerariun litter-
arum is a i)rincipal problem of this supernatural s»ppraat-
rationalism. It succeeds to the place formerly occu- tionaiism.
pied by the proof from tradition. The claims of the
New Testament (the Old Testament was only passed
along) should be demonstrated to the reason, not to
piety. The New Testament however is sufficient, g^Qdai^
since faith which works through love is comprised
"qjiaiituni sat is'^ \yit\nn it. This faith however is
faith in the existence of God and in his rewards (cf.
nominalism) ; love is the moral law. The Scriptures
however are also plain, if one considers them with

li . A'
It ,. ■ '..«

01(1
f'athollc
Elemt'iit.

Notitia
Dei.

631) OUTI.INKS OF Till-: IIISTOllY OK IXHJMA.

tlio undcrstaiKliii^ (" HtKinc nint sticnts I iHi-nis
sajjlcvri' (til .sdluletn (Itcitnns, rcctani rdfinncm iiou
taiituni non excludunuti, .scd ( mini no includiniiis'^).
Tho way of salvation man cannot of himself find,
since he is mortal (old Catholic element). God's
image witliin him consists solely in his dominion
over the heasts of the Held. Not temporal, hut eter-
nal death came into the world through sin. Finally,
however, man is not ahle to discover the way of sal-
vation, because he "ex solo dei arhifn'o ac concilio
pependiV ; therefore must it be given through an
outer revelation (cf. nominalism). With fear, love
and trust we have nothing to do, but only with noti-
tia del and the law of the holy life, which must have
been revealed. The notitia dei is the knowledge of
God as the supreme Lord over all things, who "pro
arhitrio leges ponere ei praeniia ac poenas statuere
potest" (ci. nominalism). The most important thing
Knowledge is to apprehend God's unity; hut " nihil j^f'oJiihetf
luiportant' Quoniiuus Hie unus deus iniperium potestatenoiiie
cum aliis conimimicare possit et coniniunicaveriV
(cf . the old subordinationists and Arians) . The at-
tributes of God are developed, without reference to
faith in salvation, out of the conception of the " su-
pi^enius doniinus" and the " sunune Justus" (cf.
nominalism). Very necessary to salvation, if not
absolutely necessary, is the perception of the value-
lessness of the doctrine of the trinity. Ante legem
et per legem did men already apprehend the creation
of the world through God, the providence of God de

TIIKKK-FOLO lSHl'IN(i OK IIISTOUV l)F lJ()(iMA. 537

Notitia
ChrlHti.

Autiochl-

(lUittlll.

,s{nfjii/i.s li'hns ( !), tlio reward and tlio Diviiio will (in
tho docalognc).

Tho notitia Christ/ divides itself iuto knowledge
of his person and of his office. In respect of the
first it is concerned with the perception tiiat Ood
has redeemed ns throngh a man (cf. the hypothetical
articles of nominalism). C*ln*ist was a mortal man
who was sanctified hy the Father, endowed with
Divine wisdom and power, raised from the deml, and
finally exalted to like power with God. This is the
exegetical rosnlt of the New Testament. God sent
him in order to lift men np into a new state, i.e. to
exalt the mortal nnto inunortality (early Church idea;
cf. especially the Antiochians). This was an arhi-
trary decree of Gufl, and the bringing of the same
to pass (miraculous birth, resurrection) was quite as
arbitrary. Christ as n prophet completed the trans-
mission of the perfect Divine law (explaining and
deepening of the decalogue), declaring with certainty
the promise of eternal life and verifying b}' his death
the example of a perfect moral life, after that he had
complied with certain sacramental ordinances By
his preaching he gjjve a strong impulse toward the
observance of the Di ino will and at the same time
established the general purpose of God to forgive the
sins of the penitent .and of those striving to live

more uprightly (cf. nominalism). Inasmuch as no Nominal-
ism.

one can perfectly keep the Divine law, justification
comes, not through works, but through faith. This
faith, however, is trust in the T^aw-giviT, who has

( ,

;■ ■•■/

Valuable
Eleiiicnts

538 OUTLINES OF TFE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

set beforo us h glorious end, eternal life, ixnd lias
awakened through the Holy Spirit the future cer-
tainty of this life; furthermore, it is reliance on
Christ, who, clothed with Divine power, truly frees
tliose from sin who put their trust in him. lu par-
ticular is noteworthy • (I) The refined, in many re-
spects, excellent criticism of ecclesiastical Christology
from the standpoint of the Scriptures and the reason
— the Scripture statements in regard to the pre-
existence of Christ raised, it is true, some difficulties
— , (2) The attempt to set forth the work of Christ iu
accordance with the scheme of the three offices, and
the acknowledged inahili ty to extend it beyond his
prophetical office. Within the limits of the latter
everything was in reality handled: " Coiuprehendit
turn praecexita, turn, promissa dei perfecta, turn
denique modem ac rationem^ qui nos et p)raeceptis
et promissionibus dei confirmare debeamus'\ Be-
yond this, however, Socinianism knew nothing. The
T^aecepta. " prciecepta''^ are the interpreted decalogue, with the
addition of the Lord's prayer, and the special com-
mandments of the sure and steadfast peace in God
through prayer, praise and reliance on God's help,
abstinence from love of the world as well as self-
denial and patience. Thereto are to be added the
special ceremonial commands, viz. : Baj^tism and the
Lord's Su}'^)er. The former is confession, duty and
symbol , the forgiveness of sin was also thought of
for the sake of the Scriptures in a disgraceful man-
ner, and infant baptisiu was discarded, yet endured

BajiMsm

'lucl Lord's

S'"pper.

THREE-FOLD ISSCINCi OF PIISTOliY OF DOGiMA. 539

I 3

(because it has to do with a ceremony). The Lord's
Supper, by the hiyiiig aside of all other views, was
conceived of as an ordained memorial meal. The
promissa del are the promise of eternal life and of rromissa

^ ^ Del.

the Holy Spirit. In setting forth this last Socin-
ianisra did great service, contra'";";-wise it gave to the
forgiv^eness of sin an ambiguous meaning. In opposi-
tion to the evangelical view it taught : " In vita acfer-
na simnl conipreliensa est peccatorum veinissi(i\
This eternal life was only very superiicially described,
and the fundamental Catholic thought in Socinianism
crops out in the article that the Holy Spirit is
granted only in proportion to moral progress. To the
question as to how Christ has effectually guaranteed
the commands and the promises, it was replied ; (1)
Through his sinlessness, (2) Through liis miracles, (3)
Tb rough his death. The latter was considered as a
proof of his love, and then in an extended manner
the satisfaction-theory was contested. Herein lies
the strength of Socinianism. Although one cannot
accept a great many of its arguments, because they
are founded upon the Scotistic idea of God, yet one
must acknowledge tliat the juristic satisfaction-
theory is here really answered. The thought of the
merit of Christ is retained. But how meagre is it when
the catechism, once more reverting to faith, explains :
^^ Fides ohedientiain nostrdtn dco coiiinieiiddtioreni
gvatioremque facit et ohedieutiae defectiis, mndo
ea sit vera ac seria, siipplet, uttpie a dcit justiji-
oemur ejjicit''\ This is in complete contrast with

Christ's
Sinlt'ss-

I1C>SS,

Minu'lt'S.
Death,

Doctriric of
Faith.

540 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

l'ri('st)iof)(l
of Clirist.

Doctrine of
Church.

Sociuian-

ism

Disst)lves

Dogma.

ovau^elical ideas coiicorDiiig faith. That which is
afterward said aljoiit justification is a worthless
accommodation of Pauline ideas. Accommodations
are, in general, not infrequent. — In connection with
the priestly office of Christ the poiiianeiit priesthood
of Christ is emphasized, while that which transpired
once is fundamentally discarded. Christ's dominion
over all beings and things is very briefly touched
upon.

At the close the catechism reverts to the Church
and defines it once more as a school : " Coeius eorum
Jiomitiftm, qui doctrinam salutarem tenent et pro-
Jitentur.^'' Pastors (doctors) and deacons are neces-
sary to the Church ; but nothing is said about ordina-
tion, and the episcopal succession is contested. The
reflections on the visible and invisible Church are
indefinite and unclear.

In Socinianism the dissolution of dogma is exem-
plified ui)on Catholic soil, as in Romanism the neu-
tralization. In the place of tradition the external rev-
elation in the Bible steps in. Religion, in so far as
it is apprehensible, is swallowed up in moralism.
Still there remain fortunate inconsistencies and
Socinianism presents, even apart from these, a pleas-
ing side : (1) It had the courage to simplify the (jues-
tioiis concerning the reality and content of religion
and to discard the burden of the ecclesiastical past,
(2) It broke the contracted bond between religion and

THKEE-FOLI) ISSUING OF HISTORY OF TXXJMA. 541

science, between Christianity and Platonism, {'■]) It
helped to spread the idea that the religious state-
ment of truth must be clear and apprehensible, if it
is to have power, (4) It tried to free the study of the
Holy Scriptures from bondage to the old dogmas.

CHAPTER TV.

THE ISSUING OF THE DOGMA IN PROTESTANTISM.

1. lilt rochicf ion.

POST-TRIDENTINE Catholicism and Socinianism are
in many respects modern phenomena, but as regards
their religious kernel they are not modern, but much
rather the consequences of media) val Chri.Jianity.
The Reformation as represented in the Christianity
of Luther is still in many respects an old Catholic
I)henomenon, not to say also a mediiVVcd; yet judged
by its religious kernel, it is neither, but nuich rather
a restoration of Pauline Christianity in the spirit of
a new age. On this account it happens that the
Reformation cannot be judged sold}' by the results
which it gained during the first two generations of
its existence; for it did not begin <.s a harmonious
and consistent manifestation. Luther's Christianity
was the Reformation; within the periphery of his ex-
istence, however, Luth(>r Avas an old Catholic-mediiev-
al phenomenon. The period from \')\U to l.*)"2:>, the
most beautiful years of thc^ Reformation when it stood
in living n4ations with all men and seemed to intro-

Roforma-
tioi; Kesto-

rutioii of
riuilinism.

Lutl\('r"s
Christian-
ity tlif
Reforma-
tion.

■' i

I ;;

Luthor's
Message.

Restorps

Gospel

Religion.

Revivifies

Catholic

Dogmas.

542 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA,

duce a new order of things, was only an episode.
Luther soon drew hack again within his Hmitations.
These were not, however, a mere thin shell, so that
Melanchthon and the epigonoi could have forgiven
the shrinkage; but Luther realized that they were
bound uj) with the very sinews of his power and he
asserted them with this understanding.

Ijuther's greatness consists in the knowledge of
God which he re-discovered in the Gospel. Living
faith in God who in Christ says to the poor soul :
" Sal as tua Cf/o ,snni''\ the certain assurance that
God is the being upon whom man may absolutely
rely — that was Luther's message to Christendom.
He restored the religious view of the Gospel, the
sovereign right of religion in religion, the sovereign
worth of the historical Person Jesus Christ in
Christianity. In doing this he went back bej'ond
the Church of the Middle Ages and the old Catholic
times to the New Testament, yes, to the Gospel
itself. But the very man wlio freed the Gospel
of Jesus Christ from ecclesiasticism and moralism
strengthened the force of the latter under the forms
of the old Catholic theology, yes, he gave to these
forms, which for centuries had lain dor nan t,
once again a value and a meaning. Ho was the
restorer . ■i; ^"he old dogmas and he ga v^e tncm back to
faith. One ir i ^' credit it to him that these formulas
are even uvtil t^-d \y v, living po^'^er in the faith of
Protcstau !';!"» . '^'''wW^' in the Ciitholic Churches they
are a dead 7e:' ..lif. (Jur; will i! j justice to the ^^ en-

f>
I

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DO(iMA. 54'')

fire Luther^'' only by allowing his two-f-nJ relation
to the old CatlKjlic theology to stand iml ly tiy-
ing to explain it. Luther turned his conten^)orarii'S
aside from the path of the humanistic, Franciscan
and political Christianity and compelled thorn to in-
terest themselves in that which was most foreign to
them — tJie Gospel and ihe old tJieoJor/i/. He pro-
claimed the Gospel anew and was able to defend the
" Q}(tcinique vult sdlcus esse" of the Athanasian
creed with a full voice.

In order to understand his attitude, one may reA^r contests
to the following: (1) The difficuUies about which i^o^'trines.
there was a contest flowed especially from mediirval
theology, and Luther's historical horizon shut down
about the time «)f the origin ot the pajjal Church;
that ^^dlich lay back of tliis was blended for him at
many points with the golden horizon of the Nem
Testament^ {'I) Luther never contended against er-
roneous theories and doctrines os siicJi, but old}
against those theories and doctrines which plainly
vitiated the 2)iirif as ecaufjclii; in him there did not
dwell the irresistible impulse of the thinker who
strives after theoretical clearness; much rather did
he have an instinctive dislike and an inborn distrust
of that spirit which, guid(Hl solely by knowledge,
shrewdly corrects errors; he also b}- no means pos-
sessed all the endowments and critical facilities of
the age — ^' sfibJinieiiicn/ borne, (/((uelirii/oi/ saratif,
ferriblement naif", this hero has been called by one a. . '>ts
who knows men, (;5) The old dogma corresponded to Dogmas.

Contonda

for Puritas

Evangelii.

Aims at,

Roforniii-

tion Only.

Results of

his

Labors.

514 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the new conception of the Gospel which he preached ;
he wanted tlie correct faitJi and nothing else; the
ancient dogma, however, in contradistinction to the
mediccval, represented Christianity not as a conflu-
ence of faith and works (the latter did not belong to
the dof/iiia), of grace and merit, but rather as the act
of God throiujh JesN.s Christ unto the forgiveness
of sin and eternal life. Luther san^ onlij this
element in the old dogma ; he overlooked all else.
Hence he conceived his mission as that of a reformer :
It is necessary only to place upon the lamp-stand
that which the Church already possesses, l)ut has lost
sight of among its other possessions; it is neces-
sary to restore the Gospel of the free grace of God
in Christ by a rehabilitation of the ancient dogma.

Was he really right? Did his new conception
of the G()S])el fall in naturally with the ancient
dogma? Men insist upon this even today, — it
is true with more or less uncertainty and with the
qualification, that Luther added an imi)ortant ele-
ment, viz., the doctrine of justificati(jn. But did he
not do away with the infallible Church tradition,
with the infallible Church office, with the infallible
canon of Scripture? And must his conception of
the Gospel be still clothed with the old dogma?
Wherein consists that conception? How far did his
criticism of tradition go? What did he retain?
Was his attitude altogether consistent, or is the
present state of Protestantism, which is so full of in-
consistencies and errors, to be traced back to him?

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 545

?Iied ;
the
o the
Dnflu-
ng to
e act
ness
this
else,
mer:
itajtid
3 lost
eces-
God

2. Lnther\s Christianity.

Luther's Theoloji:iG von Kostliu, Th. Harnack, Lommatzsch.
Herrmann, cler Verkehr des Christen niit Gott, 18S6. Rit.schl,
Rechtfertigung u. Versohuung, Bd. I. u. III. KattenliUKcl),
TiUther's SteHuug zu den okunienisclicn Symholen, 18H3.
Gottschick, Luther'8 Anschauung von christl. Gottesdien.st,
1887. Zur alt[)rot('st. Rechfert. — Lehre, cf. Loofs undEichhorn
i. d. Stud. u. Krit. 1884 u. 1887.

In the cloister Luther thought ho was fighting
with himself and his sins; but in reality he was
wrestling with the religion of his Church. In the
system of sacraments and observances, to which ho
subjected himself, ho did not find the assurance of
peace which he sought. Even that which shoukT
have given him consolation revealed itself to him
as an object of terror. In such distress it came
to him slowly and gradually through the corroded
ecclesiastical confession ("I believe in the forgive-
ness of sins") and the Holy Scriptures, what the
truth and power of the Gospel really is. Augustine's
form of belief concerning the first and last things
was also a guiding star to him. But how much
firmer did he grasp the essence of the thing ! That
which he here learned, that which he laid hold of
with all the strength of his soul as the sole thing
was the revelation of the gracious God in the Gospel,
i.e. in Christ. The same experience which made
Paul Luther underwent, and while it did not come
to the latter so violently and suddoidy as to the

former, yet he also learned through this experience
35

Luther
Wrt'stU'S
with Re-
ligion of
his Church.

August ino

a Guiding

Star.

RlinplifloR
Religion.

Christian
ity Obje.;
vveij is
Christ;
Subjective-
ly it is
faith.

54G OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

that it is Godivho bestows fait Ji: "Since it pleased
God to reveal his Son in me."

That which he experienced he afterwards learned
to express, and there resulted, when measured
by the multifarious things which the Church prof-
fered as "religion", primarily a stupendous reduc-
tion. Out of a multiform system of grace, perform-
ances, penances and reliances he extracted religion
and restored it to its simple greatness. The Chris-
tian religion is living faith in the living God who
has revealed himself in Jesus Christ and laid bare
his heart — nothing else. Objectively it is Jesus
(i'lrist, subjectively it is faith; its content, however,
is the grr cious God, and therefore the forgiveness of
sin which includes sonship and blessedness. With-
in this circle the whole of religion was enclosed for
Luther. The livi:(^^ God — not the philosophical or
mystical abstractiori — the revealed, the assured, the
gracious God apprehensible to every Christian. Un-
wavering heart trust in him who has given himself
to us in Christ as our Father, personal confidence
in Christ who stands by his work in our stead —
that was for him the sum total of religion. Above
all anxiety and sorrow, above all the artifices of as-
ceticism, above all prescriptions of theology he pressed
on to Christ that he might lay hold upon God him-
self, and in this act of faith, which he recognized as
the work of God, he won an independence and a
steadfastness, yes a personal assurance and joy, such
as no mediaeval man had ever possessed. From the

1
f

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 547

}

perception : " By our pcjwer nothing is ilono", he drew
the hii'hcst inner freedom. Faith — that meant for /'^'*''i"
him now no longer an (jljedient accei)tanco of ecele- FoJiwe-
siastical teaching, or historical /(<r/a, not supi)osing
and not doing, not actus initiationts upon which a
greater thing follows ; hut the certainty of the for-
giveness of sin and therefore personal and absolute
surrender to God as the Father of Jesus Clu-ist, which
transforms and renews the whole man. Faith is a
conscious trust, which then makes man glad and
joyous toward God and all creatures, which as a
good tree surely brings forth good fruit, and which
is ever ready to servo and to suffer. The life of a
Christian is in spite of all evil, sin and guilt hid in

God. Because this certainty animated Luther, he Lnthor Ex-
periences

also experienced the freedom of a Christian man. I'^rwdom,
This freedom was not a bare emancipation, or a
certificate of manumission, but to him it was the
triumph over the world through the assurance that
when God is for us no one can be against us. He
next won for himself the right of the individual ; he
experienced the freedom of conscience. But a free
conscience for him was bound up with inner allegi-
ance, and the right of the individual he understood as
a holy obligation to courageously tln'ow oneself upon
God and to serve one's neighbor in reality and in
self -forgetful love.

Therewith is already said what the Church was to J?n"'^^'•^
him — the fellowship of believers whom the Holy Beul-ve
Spirit has called through the word of God, enlight-

vers.

Funda-
mental
Ideas of
Church.

Contends

Against

Abuses in

Church.

648 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ened {uid sanctified, who inure and more are to bo
built up through thi^ Gospel in true faith, awaiting
the glorious future oi the children of God and so
serving one another in love, each in his own place.
This confession concerning the Church effected an
enormous reduction. It rests wholly upon the fol-
lowing simi)le fundamental thoughts: (1) That the
Holy Spirit founded the Church through the word
of God, (:*) That this word is the proclamation of
the revelation of God in Christ in so far as it awakens
faith; (3) That the Church, therefore, has no other
province than that of faith, that it is, however, within
the same the mother upon whose lap man attains
unto faith, (4) That because religion is simply faith
no particular performances and no particular prov-
ince, be it now the open cultus, or the chosen course
of life, are the sphere in which the Church and the
individual can verify their faith, but the Christian
in the natiral ordering of his life is to prove his faith
through the loving service of his fellows.

With these four sentences Luiher stood over
against the old Church, Througli the first he re-
stored the word of God according lo a sound judg-
ment to the fundamental place in the Church.
Through the second he restored, in opposition to all
the theologians, ascetics and sects of the Middle
Ages and of the ancient Church, the Gospel to the
Gospel ixwdi exalted tliQ " consohitiones in Christo
propositae" to be the sole norm. Through the third
he reduced very greatly the idea and scope of the

TirURE-FOlJ) ISST'INfJ OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 540

MonaHti-
cism.

Church, but brought ///f rA'//(7/ IxicL- fo Hsj'dHU.
Through tho fourth, Hn.illy, he restored the natural
status of marriage, of the family, of secular calling
and of tlio state; he emancipated these from the
guardianship of the Church, but subjected them to
the spirit of faith and of love. Thereby ho broke
down the mediieval and ancient ecclesiastical concep-
tion of the world and of the ordering of human life,
and thus transformed the idea of religi^tus perfec-
tion as no other Christian since the apostolic age has
done. In the ])lace of the combination of monastic D«;nounce8
withdrawal from the world and ecclesiastical domin-
ion over the world, he set the Christian the great
task of verifying his faith in the ordering of his
natural life : Ho is to serve his neighbor in self -forget-
ful love and hallow his occupation. The righteous-
ness of the natural course of life was in no sense for
Luther a realized ideal — ho had eschatological pre-
conceptions and awaited the day when the world
should pass away with its lust, its pain, its devilish-
ness and its course of life — but bt-ause he made
faith so grand and so sovereign he sutTered for and
in religion nothing that was foreign to it. A<'Cord-
ingly through his mighty preaching all the vagaries
of the Middle Ages were dissolved. He wished to
teach the world nothing elst. than what it signifies ^j^^jfl^"
to possess God; yet in recognizing this most im-
portant realm in its peculiarity, every thing else came
to its true relations, viz. : science, the family, tho
state, charity, civil c ailing. In that he raised to the

Science,
family,

IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

1.0 ^^ I

I.I

125

^ U^ 12.0

1.8

1.25 u

!.6

h 6" —

►

'^ >

<$'^

^^W^^'J

Hiotographic

Sciences
Corporation

33 WEST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, NY. 14580

(716) 872-4503

550 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

lf-4-

1!. iL

\\ 1

first rank lluit which l)oncath tlio rubbisli of refined
and coniplicatod ideals had liitherto been least
esteemed — humble and safe reliance upon God's
fatherly provision and loyalty in one's calling — he
created a new epoch in the history of the world.

He who takes his position here can hardly per-
suade himself that Luther brought to the old " sound"
dogma only a couple of new doctrines :

Luther's theology should be treated in close counection with
the above mentioned development of his fundamental views.
In theological terminology he was surprisingly unhampered
and used the doctrinal formulas very freely. The traditional
theological scheme he as a rule treated so freely that in each
instance, when corret^tly xmderstood, he discovered the entire
doctrine. This can bo proven from his doctrine of God (God
without and within Christ), from his doctrine of Providence
(the first article, rightly understood, is the whole of Christen-
dom), from his Christology ("Christ is not called Christ be-
cause he has two natures, but he bears this glorious and
comforting name on account of the office and work which he
took upon himself ; Christ is the mirror of the Father's heart") ,
from his doctrin. of sin (sin is " to have no God") , frofn his
doctrine of predestination and of the will's lack of freedom
(religious experience does not arise conjointly out of historical
and sacramental acts, which God performs, and subjective
acts, which are in any sense man's, but God alone works the
willing and the doing) , from the law and the Gospel (distin-
guishing between the possibility and the reality of redemp-
tion) , from his doctrine of penance (this is the humility of faith,
hence the entire life is a continuous penance) , from his doctrine
oi just ijicat ion. In each of these doctrines Luther expounded
the whole — the free grace of God in Christ— but he made himself
most at home in the Pauline scheme of justification ^^ propter
ChriHtiunpcr fideni". The fine-pointed formulas concerning
the Jiistitia impntativa and the scholc^tic sundering of justifi-
cation and sanctification (faith and love) did not originate
with him or with the Melanchthon of the earlier days ; yet each
of these men gave the provocation to the same. Everywhere

THREE-FOT.D ISSUINfJ OF IITSTORY OF DOfJMA. r)51

howaHconcornod with (iMi'h asHUirnicrof salvation . " WIumo
there is forgivenoas <»f sin, there is also life and hlesscdm-ss".
In this conviction ho won his religious indei)endeuce and free-
dom as against everything which is not from (rod ; for inde-
pendence and freedom alone are life. Tlie assurance of the
forgiveness of sin in Christ was to liini the sum of religion.
Therefore did he bring religion back to this. But the positive
side of the forgiveness of sin was for him the sonship through
which the Christian comes to a self-sufficient existence as
over against the world, needs nothing and stands neither under
the slavery of the law, nor in dependent ui)on men — a priest
before God and a king ovei' the world.

3. Luther's Strictures on the Dominating Ecclesi-
astical Tradition and on the Dogma.

Luther always went from the centre to the circum-
ference in his criticism, from faith to institution,
and did not attack doctrines as such, but doctrines
which obscured or destroyed right living.

(1) He set aside the dominating doctrine of sal-
vation as destructive (Apol. IV. init. : " Adversarii^
quum nequequid remissio peccatorum, neque quid
JideSy neque quid gratia^ neque quid justitia sit,
intelligantj misere contaminant locum de Justifi-
catione et obscurant gloriam et beneficia Christi
et eripiunt piis conscienti is propositus in Christo
consolationes") , and in truth showed his opponents
that their doctrine of God (sophistic philosophy and
subtile reasoning), their Christology (they speculate
about the two natures and do not know the beneficia
Christi), their doctrine concerning the truth, right-
eousness and grace of God (they do not attain unto
"consolation" and hence err in blind reason), their

Rejects

Church

Doctrine of

Salvation.

552 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

•■■W

p 1

Attacks
Old Catho-
lic Idea of
Perfection.

Destroys
Catholic
Doctrine of
Sacra-
ments.

Opposed
Augustine.

doctrino of sin aiul free-will (they are Pelagians),
of justification and faith (they do not know what it
means to have a gracious God, and they rely upon
merits) and of good works were false and misleading
to the soul. With this bill of particulars Luther en-
countered not only the scholastics, but also the
Church fathers, yes Augustine himself, therefore
the whole ancient Catholic Church teaching.

(2) Luther attacked the old Catholic (not simply
media)val) ideal of perfection and of blessedness.
In destroying the idea of a dual morality to its very
roots he put in the place of monastic perfection the
faith which relies upon the forgiveness of sin, in the
place of the conception of blessedness as a revelling
in holy sentiment and in holy knowledge the comfort
of a free conscience and sonship with God.

(3) Luther destroyed the Catholic doctrine of the
sacraments, not simply the seven. Through the
three sentences : (a) The sacraments contribute unto
the forgiveness of sin and nothing else ; (b) Sacra-
menta non implentur duni fiunt, sed diun credun-
tur; (c) They are a peculiar form of the redemptive
word of God (of the promissio dei) and therefore
have their virtue in the historical Christ — he trans-
formed the sacramental elements into sacramental
ordinances and recognized in them only one real
sacrament, viz. : the pardoning word of God. He
here opposed Augustine no less than the scholastics,
and in combining the Christus praedicatus, the
forgiveness of sin and faith in the closest unity he

Critictam

THREE-FOLD TKSriNO OF HISTORY OF DOOM A. 553

excliuled all olso: iVIystical revelling, matorial good,
the ojnis opcratutn, the haggling for the sake of the
effect and the dispositions. Not as "instruments"
of grace, which secretly ])r('p(irc future life in men
and l)j^ the transfusion of love mfike good works jjo.s-
sible^ did he apprehend the sacraments, but as the
verbum visibile^ in which God himself co-operates
with us and gives himself to us to bo one with him
in Christ. God irorks through the word in the sac-
rament faith and confidence, i.e. ho works the for-
giveness of sin. As regards the Lord's Supper and
baptism Luther carried this out. But he struck the
Catholic Church the severest blow by his criticism of 'sSS
of the sacrament of penance ; for (a) Ho restored the Penance.
sovereign efficacy of heart-felt penitence, without
doing away with confessio and sat isf actio, if rightly
interpreted, (b) He conceived of this penitence in
opposition to the attritio, which was to him a
Satanic work, in the strictest sense as hatred of sin
springing out of the perception of the greatness of
the blessing which has been forfeited: "Against
thee, thee only, have I sinned" ; (c) He promoted the
constancy of trustful penitence and thereby ex-
plained the penance done before the priest as a special
act ; (d) He did away with the necessity- of the priestly
cooperation; (e) Ho taught the absolute union of
contritio and absolntio, both of which are included
in the fides; (f) He did away with all the mis-
chief connected with the sacraments : Computations
in regard to temporal and eternal benefits, purga-

554 OUTLINES OF THE TTTRTOIIY OF DOGMA.

Destroys
.IlitTiirchi-
Cttl Pritjstly

System.

t<iry, worship of saints, nnu'iturioiis Hatisfactions
and iiidulgeiicos, in tliat ho reduced everything to
eternal guilt. Thus did he destroy the tree of the
Catholic Church by creating from its roots light and
inclination and a new impulse.

(4) Luther destroyed the vwtivQ hierarchical and
priesfUj ecclesiastical system, denied to the Church
the right of jurisdiction over the key {i.e. over
the word), declared the episcopal succession to be a
fiction and proclaimed the right of the special priest-
hood alongside of the general. In that he left but
one office, the preaching of the Gospel, to stand,
he dissolved the Catholic Church of the popes not
only, but also of Irenaous.

(5) Luther did away with the traditional cnltus
Cuiius Or- ordinances as regards their form, aim, content and

significance. He would know nothing of a specific
Divine service, with special priests and special offer-
ings. He discarded the sacrificial idea in general, in
lieu of the one sufficient sacrifice of Christ. The
worship of God is nothing else than the simplicity of
the individual's reverence for God in time and space.
He v/ho attributes to it a special merit, for the sake
of influencing God, commits sin. It has to do only
with edification in faith through the proclamation of
the Divine word and with the general praise-offering
of prayer. The true service of God is the Christian
life in reliance upon God, penitence and faith, humil-
ity and fidelity in duty. Unto this service of God
the public service should contribute. Here also he

Does Away
with Tra-
ditional

THREE-FOLD ISSUINCJ OF HISTORY OF DO(SMA. 5.55

Hhattered the Church, not only of tht» Midtlh^ Ages,
but also of the ancients.

(0) Luther destroyed the formal cvfrrnal author-
ities of Catholicism; he did away with the distinc-
tion between thing imd authority. Because to him
the proclaimed Christ (God in Christ, God's word)
was the thing and the authority, he cast the formal
authorities overboanl. Even before the letter of
Scripture he did not hesitate. During the very time
when he was contending against the absolute author-
ity of tradition, of the pope and of the councils, he
set that which Christ did over against the clear
letter of Scripture and did not shrink from speaking
of errors in the Biblical writers in matters of faith.

(7) Luther conceded to his opponents their dog-
matic terminology only so far as he did not dis-
card it. He had the liveliest feeling that the whole
terminology was at least misleading. This can be
proven from his expositions (a) of the various con-
ceptions of justification sanctijicatioy vivijicatio^
regenerato, etc., (b) of the conception satisfac-
tion (c) ecclesiay (d) sacramental (e) homousion^
(f) trinitas and unitas. The terminologj^ of the
scholastics he declared to be false, that of the old
Catholic theologians to be unprofitable and cold.
But the most important is that he distinguished in
the doctrine of God and in Christology between that
which pertains to us and that which pertains to the
thing itself, thereby clearly indicating what the doc-
trine of faith really is and what is a matter of

Di'stroys

Kxtvnml

Authority

of Cnthol-

iclBUl.

Declares
DoKiiiatic
Terminol-
ogy Mis-
ieadiUK.

550 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOOMA.

sj)ocMil;itiv() rcaHon, or at ])eHt the indemonstrable
secret of faith.

P^T--

E^ y,i

p l^^

W\ :

fc^'-- ^^

!''■* ■

IxiirriiHiic

cliiisiiaii-

ity l»y

Kvuii-

Kelical.

Immense
Task!

Luther did away with the old dogmatic Christian-
ity and put a new evangelical conception in its place.
The Keformation is inrefility an exit of the history of
dogma : This the foregoing survey teaches clearly and
explicitly. That which Augustine began, but was
not able to realize, Luther carried through. He estab-
lished the evanp^elical faith in the place of the dogma
by doing away with the dualism of dogmatic Chris-
tendom and practical Christian self-judgment and
independence, and thus freed Christian faith from
the trammels of the ancient philosophy, of secular
knowledge, of heathen ceremonies and cunning mo-
rality. The doctrine of faith, the true doctrine,
he restored to its sovereign right in the Church —
to the terror of the humanists, ecclesiastics, Fran-
ciscans and rationalists ( Aufklarer) . The true the-
ology should have the deciding power in the Church.

But what a task ! It appeared still almost like a
contradiction : To restore the significance of faith as
the content of revelation to its central position as
against all subtile reasoning and doing, and thus to
call out the repressed theoretical element ; and still,
on the other hand, not simply to take that faith
which the past has constructed, but rather to indi-
cate the form in which it is life and creates life, is
practice yet the practice of religion. From the

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTOKY OF DOOMA. r)r)7

strable

greatness of the problem is explained also the insolv-
ency of those elements in Lnther's theolo^^y which
perverted the same and must qualify the declaration,
that the Reformati<jn was the end of the history of
dogma.

4. The Catholic Elemcnls Retained villi and
within Luther''ii Christianitfj.

However much or however little Luther here re-
tained — it belongs indeed to the "entire Luther",
but not to the " entire Christianity" of Tjuther. How
was Luther able to retain Catholic elements, and
what elements did he conserve? Of these two (ques-
tions, which should be answered, the first has already
been answered in part (see j). 5-43) ; only a few things
need to be added here.

(1) Luther defended faith as against the corre-
sponding works, the doctri)ia evamfelii as against
justifying penances and processes. Hence he stood
in danger of adopting or of tolerating every state-
ment of faith, if only it seemed free from law and
works. He fell into this pitfall. His idea of
the Church was perverted thereby. It became as
ambiguous as the idea of the doctrina evangelii
(fellowship of faith, fellowship of pure doctrine). — {'i)
Luther thought in general only of contending against
the doctrinal errors and abuses of the medijieval
Church, and since ho traced all misfortunes to the
pope, he formed too high an estimate of the ante- ipnomnt of
papal ancient Church. — (3) Luther knew the old iic church.

Faith Op.

)H»H<vl to

Works.

Chi.'f
At tuck
A>,'ainst

I'OIHJS,

558 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

!'l

^li

Call.'d
MiiiHt'ir a
Catholic.

Not a
HyHt«'inatic
Theo-
logian.

Able to Ex-
l)rt'88 his
Faith in

Traditional
Doctrines.

Sacra-
ments Still
Means of
Qrace.

Catholic Church very slightly and ascribed to its
decisions in an oUscure manner still a certain author-
ity. — (4) Luther always reckoned himself and his
undertaking as within the one Catholic Church,
claimed that this Church gave him the title-right to
his Reformation, and hence he had a lively interest
in i)rt)ving the continuity of its faith. This proof
seemed most securely supplied in the old faith
formultis. — (5) Luther was no systematic theologian,
but romped in the Church like a child at home; he
had no longing after the holiness of a well-ordered
doctrinal structure ; but his power was likewise his
weakness. — ((5) Luther was able to express his entire
Christianity within the scheme of the traditional
doctrines, and hence he was at peace with the old
formulas. — (7) Luther was in concreto — not inten-
tionally — a media)\al exegete; he found therefore
many traditional doctrines in the Scriptures, although
they are not contained therein. As regards history
he had in truth intuitive perception, but he developed
no method. — (8) His perception of the essence of the
word of God did not entirely destroy his Biblicism,
but rather did this return after 1523 more strongly.
That " it stands written", remained to him a power.
— (9) Also as regards the sacraments there remained
for him still therein a superstitio as ^^ means of
grace *^ (instead as the one grace), and this had the
weightiest consequences for his doctrinal work. —
(10) He was unable to rid himself of remnants of the
nominalistic scholasticism, and these influenced his

THRKE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 559

doctrine of Ood, of predestination and of tlie sacra-
ments. — (11) After that lie had learned wisdom in
his struggle with fanatics, ho was distrustful of the
reason, and went far beyond distrust to antagonism
against it as a prop of self-righteousness. He in
truth hardened himself against reason in clever con-
fidence, and retrograded at several important points
of questionable Catholic belief which recognized the
Divine wisdom in paradoxes and absurdities, before
which man must bow. Esi)ocially his haughty re-
pulsion of the "enthusiasts", who possessed true in-
sight into not a few points, and his aversion to ad-
vancing along with secular civilization struck the
Reformation its severest blows.

The conse(iuence of this conduct was that so far
as Luther left a system of theology to his adherents
it appeared as a highly confused and unsatisfactory
picture: Not as a new building, but as a modification
of the traditional structure. Accordingly it is clear
(according to Sec. 3) that Luther introduced no
finality, but only made a partial beginning of a
reformation even according to his oivn principles.
The following are the most important confusions and
problems in his legacy :

(1) The confounding of the Gospel and the doc-
trina evangelii. Luther in truth never ceased to
consider the articuli fidei as a manifold testimony
to that with which the Christian faith is alone
concerned; yet along with this he gave the same still
a value of its own. Accordingly the intellectual-

MHtniBtful

ReoHOD.

Luther'i
Systom

no
Fioality.

Confounds
Gospel

and

Doctrina

Evangelii.

6G0 OUTIJNKS OF THK IIIHTOUY (»K IXKiMA.

TUUl

»!'

i \ i ■
11 1 ■ ,

M Y''

m
it

1 1

ity of Hcholaslicism, ho Imnlensomo to faith, was
not rootod out; rather ditl it hooii hecomo, under the
titloof j)nn' (loctriney a fearful power and the Church
bocamo a theologianR* and pastors' (Mnircli (of. the
history of the confessional in tlio Lutlieran church).
The conseijucnce was that (\itholic mysticism aj^ain
crept in to counterbalance Luther's p(>culiar teaching
(especially that of justification) and the evangelical
ideal of life was beclouded (see Hitschl, Gosch. des
Pietismus, IJ Bde.). Thus to the future, instead of
a clear and simple beipiest as regards faith, doctrine
and tho Church, wjis rather left a probli'm, viz. : To
maintain tho "teaching" in the true Lutheran sense,
and yet to free it above all from everything which
cannot be appropriated through s])iritual submis-
sion, and to stamp the Church as the fellowship of
faith, without giving it tho character of a theolog-
ical school.

(2) The cotifanndhiQ of vrauijdical faith and
YAixhMvi fff<' ^>l^l dogma. Since Luther expressed his new re-
Dogma. demptivG faith in the language of the old dogma, it
was not possible to prevent the latter from asserting
its old claims and its old aims, — yes, he himself fur-
ther developed the same within the original scheme of
Christology, viz., in his doctrine of tho Lord's Sup-
per. In that he however poured the new wine into
the old wine-skins, there arose a speculation regard-
ing tho ubiijuity of the body of Christ which ranged
over the loftiest heights of scholastic inconsistency.
Tho sad consequence was that Lutheranism imme-

Confounda
Evan

TIIUKK-KOLI) ISSUIN(} OK HlSTOUY OF I)0(iMA. M\

t'», was

Church
(cf. tlio
''hurch).

»('hin^r
>goh'cal
eh. (?os
'toad of

oc'tri no

«onsc,

H'Jiich
nhrnis-
Jiij) of
loolog.

^* and
3Wre-
na, it
rting
' fur-
no of
Sup-
into
ard-
ged

ne-

diutoly maintained as notd vcclvsiae tho niont ox- p.^.J'i'.iln^
trcinn Kchohistic teaching whicli any Church has
ever maintained. This fact is not strange; for how
can one without absurdity inchidc within tlie scheme
of the doctrine of the two n.'itures th(» faith-idea that
the man J(;sus Christ is th(^ revelation of (lod liimself,
in HO far as Ood lias given us in him to know his own
fatherly heart, laying it bare to uh? Even because
Luther first really made earnest work with faith in the
God-man (the oneness of God and man in Christ),
must the /icTufiaan to the speculation regarding the
"natures" have the most distressing consequences.
The same can bo sh<)W*n as regards the reception of the Empha-
Augustinian doctrine of the original state mid of orig- J'a™**<>«e8.
inal sin. Hero also Luther could only increase the
paradoxes and absurdities, in that he sought to express
in these formulas his evangelical conviction that all
sin is godlessness and guilt. Everywhere it is plain
that when the evangelical faith is thrust into the
dogmatico-rational scheme which the Greeks, Au-
gustine and the scholastics created, it leads to bizarre
formulas, — yes, first makes this scheme wholly irra-
tional. Therefore the Reformation of tho future
has the task of doing away with this cosmo-theistic
philosophy and of putting in its place the simple ex-
pression of faith, tho true self-judgment in the light
of tho Gospel and tho real import of history.

(3) T'e confounding of the word of God and the ^^o?d o*}"
Sacred Scriptures. Luther, as has been remarked, antfBibie.

never overcame his wavering between a qualitative
86

662 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

h '«

Confounds

Grace

and Meang

of Grace.

and a literal estimate of the Holy Scriptures, and the
controversy regarding the Lord's Supper only con-
firmed him in the latter view. He had not yet broken
the bondage of the letter. Thus it happened that his
church arrived at the most stringent doctrine of in-
spiration, while it never quite forgot that the content
of th ^ Gospel is not everything that is contained be-
tween the lids of the Bible, but that it is the procla-
mation of the free grace of God in Christ. Here also
remains to the Church of the Reformation the task of
dealing earnestly with the Christianity of Luther
as against the "entire Luther".

(4) The confounding of grace and the means of
grace (sacraments). The firm and exclusive con-
ception which Luther formed of God, Christ, the
Holy Spirit, the word of God, faith, the forgiveness
of sin and justification (grace) is his greatest service,
above all the recognition of the inseparableness of
the Spirit and the word. But by an apparently
slight modification he arrived at very doubtful con-
clusions, in that he finally transferred that which
pertains to the word (Christ, the preaching of the
Gospel) to the idea " vocal e verbum et sacramenta ".
Rigiicly did he contend that Christ himself works
through the word and that one is not to accept an out-
ward union of word and Spirit, sign and thing sig-
nified. But not only by the setting apart of certain
^I'li'^la? ordinances and " means of grace" did he return to the
System, narrov^^ circle of the Middle Ages which he had for-
saken — the Christian lives, as he himself best knew,

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OP HISTORY OP DOGMA. 503

mdthe
ly con-
broken
hat bis
of in-
;ontent
aed be-
procla-
3re also
task of
Luther

arts of
TQ con-
st, the
iveness
ervice,
aess of
arently
ul con-
which
of the
3nta ".
works
anout-
ig sig-
3ertain
I to the
ad for-
knew,

Justifies

Baptisui

Strictly

as Means of

Qracti.

not by means of grace, but by personal communion
with God, whom he lays hold of in Christ, — but
in still greater measure by the effort, (A) To justify
infant baptism as a means of grace in the strictest
sense, (B) To accept penance still also as the means
of grace in the initiation, (C) To maintain the real
presence of the body of Christ in the eucharist as
the essential element of the sacrament.

Note on (A) . The forgiveness of sin (grace) and
faith being inseparably united, infant baptism is
then not a sacrament in the strict sense {"abseute
fide baptismus niidiim et inefficax signmii tantum-
modo permaneV\ says Luther himself in his Larger
Catechism). In order to avoid this conclusion,
Luther resorted to subterfuges which mark a relapse
into Catholicism {fides implicita, substitution.*]
faith) . The worst of it was that he granted the per-
mission — in order to preserve infant baptism as a
complete sacrament — to separate regeneration and
justification (objective and subjective) . Infant bap-
tism thus became a sacrament of justification (not
of regeneration) ; the worst confusion set in and that
glorious jewel of evangelical Christianity, justi-
fication, became externalized and hastened to be-
come a dogmatic locus along with the others and
lost its practical significance.

Note on (B). Faith and true penitence are accord-
ing to Luther one, yet so that faith is prius: In so o/orMe.
far as the Christian lives continually in faith, he
lives continually in penitence; special penitential

Accepts
Penance as

564 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

p'l

si' '^

11;

1( >' i'i ,

^^W

mi ^ '

nl 1

If! '

r ''■

m I

Restores
Confes-
sional.

acts have no value, and without true faith there is
absohitely no true penitence. Thus Luther preached
from the standpoint of a believing Christian. The
danger that this doctrine might lead to ethical laxity
is quite as clear as the other danger, that thereby
one could convert no Turks, Jews, or vile sinners.
Melanchthon first, then Luther felt this. But in-
stead of distinguishing between pedagogical mis-
sionary principles and the statement of faith, they —
because the Catholic sacrament of penance still influ-
enced them — carried the former over into the latter,
and accordingly encouraged an ante-faith penitence,
which could no longer be distinguished from the
attritio, and then permitted the sacrament of pen-
ance (without obligatory oral confession and satis-
factions) to enter as an act of forensic justification.
True, Luther along with this always retained his
old correct view; but the idea, when once al-
lowed entrance, developed with frightful rapidity
and created a practice, which was worse, because it
was more lax, than the Romish confessional (see
the reaction of pietism) . In it the idea of faith was
externalized, even to mere attendance upon Church ;
the old accepted efficacious means of grace ex opere
operato came to the front very slightly decked, and
the justification of the sinner was jumbled into an
outer forensic act, a conscience-soothing Divine judg-
ment, which crept in inevitably when the priest ab-
solved the sinner in foro. In order to repress
frivolity, the back-door of the Catholic idea was

.! 3.:

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OP DOGMA. 565

opened, and the frivolity now first became great!
The thought, however, that justification is the sphere
and the edification of the Christian was hopelessly
obscured; it passed now only as the jiistificatio
impii. Therefore must the pious look about for a
new means of edification, if now his justification
is only a (repetitious) "objective" initiation act.
Here lies to-day still the fundamental curse.

Note on (C). Numberless times did Luther recog-
nize that one may seek in the word and in the sac-
rament only for the assurance of the forgiveness of
sin, and with " grim contempt" did he reject every-
thing which men then made dependent upon the sac-
rament. He also never surrendered this convic-
tion, irhich does not alloiv the question concerning
the body of Christ in the eucharist to crop out as
a theological question at all. But when he saw
that first Karlstadt, then Zwingli and others per-
mitted the sign and the thing signified to be sepa-
rated and thus endangered the certainty of the for-
giveness of sin in the sacrament, he sought, influenced
likewise by mediaeval tradition, to securely establish
the latter by laying hold of the real presence in the
sacrament, and he defended this with increasing
temper and complete stubbornness as though the
question was as to the reality or non-reality of
the forgiveness of sin . One can understand Luther's
position in the controversy only when one recognizes
this quid pro quo, and when one further realizes that
Luther instinctively sought for a means of ridding

Maintains

Real
Presenc^e in
Eucharist,

Karlstadt,
Zwingli.

5C0 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Revives

himself of spirits who Ciowded about him and to
whom in true self -protection — in the interest of his
evangelical perception and of his standing as a re-
former — he could not extend the hand. But the
Blbilclsm. thing had its own logic. While contending in the
name of faith for the one point, the real presence,
which did not express the nature and peculiarity of
his own faith, all the mediaeval interests in him
were aroused which seemed to have been over-
come. Here awakened Biblicism (" esf\ " esf ), here
scholastic doctrinarianism in the place of the fides
sola, here a perverse interest in sophistical specula-
tions, here an unheard-of regard for the sacrament
alongside of and above the word, here a leaning
toward the opus operatum, and above all a narrow-
hearted and loveless temper! As regards the
statement of the doctrine itself, it could not fail
to be more paradoxical than the Catholic. Transub-
stantiation was not recognized, but the hypothetical
declaration of Occam and other nominalists, that in
one and the same space (with, by, and beneath) the
visible elements and the true body of Christ are en-
closed. The same man who earlier had derided the
scholastics now explained : " The sophists speak cor-
rectly here", supplied his Church with a Christology
which in scholastic inconsistency far exceeds the
Thomistic (ubiquity of the body of Christ), eliminated
faith from the sacrament so completely that he raised
the doctrine of the manducatio infidelium to the
articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae (" the body

Revives
Occam's

View.

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 567

and to
of his
IS a re-
liit the
in the
esence,
irity of
n him
I over-
'), here
e fides
3ecula-
rament
eaning
arrow-
Is the
ot fail
ansub-
betical
hat in
h) the
ire en-
ed the
k cor-
x)logy
is the
nated
•aised
o the
body

of Christ is bitten by the teeth") and trumped the ir-
rationality of the doctrine as a stamp of its Divine
truth.

Through the form which Luther gave to the doc-
trine of the eucharist he is partially to blame that the
later Lutheran church in its Christology, in its doc-
trine of the sacraments, in its doctrinarianism and in
the false standard by which it measures departures in
doctrine and proclaims them heretical, threatens to
become a scrawny twin of the Catholic Church ; for
Catholicism is not the pope, nor the worship of the
saints, nor the mass — these are consequences, — but
the false doctrine of the sacraments, of penance, of
faith and of authority in matters of faith.

The form which the churches of the Reformation
took in the 16th century, was not homogeneous, or
definite : This the history of Protestantism indicates
even to this day. Luther once more lifted the Gos-
pel, placed it upon the lamp-stand and subordinated
dogma to it. It now remains to hold fast to and
carry forward that which he began.

Gott sclienko uns nur ein festes Herz, Muth,
Demuth und Geduld !

FINIS.

Luthor's
Weakness

Luther'g
Strength.