YALE university library

A39002013116463B

THE
SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY
CONSIDERED
IN ITS RELATION TO
CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY,
IN
A COURSE OF LECTURES
DELIVERED BEFORE
THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD,
IN THE YEAR MDCCCXXXII.
AT THE LECTURE
FOUNDED BY JOHN BAMPTON, M.A.
CANON OF SALISBURY.

BY
RENN DICKSON HAMPDEN, M.A.
LATE FELLOW OF ORIEL COLLEGE.

OXFORD,
PRINTED BY SAMUEL COLLINGWOOD, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY,
FOR THE AUTHOR.
SOLD BY J. H. PARKER, OXFORD :
AND BY J. G. AND F. RIVINGTON, LONDON.
MDCCCXXXIII.

EXTRACT FROM
THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT
OF THE
REV. JOHN BAMPTON,
CANON OF SALISBURY.

 " I give and bequeath my Lands and Estates to
" the Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University
" of Oxford for ever, to have and to hold all and sin-
" gular the said Lands or Estates upon trust, and to the
" intents and purposes hereinafter mentioned ; that is to
" say, I will and appoint that the Vice-Chancellor of the
" University of Oxford for the time being shall take and
" receive all the rents, issues, and profits thereof, and
" (after all taxes, reparations, and necessary deductions
" made) that he pay all the remainder to the endowment
" of eight Divinity Lecture Sermons, to be established for
" ever in the said University, and to be performed in the
" manner following :
" I direct and appoint, that, upon the first Tuesday in
" Easter Term, a Lecturer be yearly chosen by the Heads
" of Colleges only, and by no others, in the room adjoin-
" ing to the Printing-House, between the hours of ten in
" the morning and two in the afternoon, to preach eight
" Divinity Lecture Sermons, the year following, at St.
" Mary's in Oxford, between the commencement of the
" last month in Lent Term, and the end of the third week
" in Act Term.
a2

iv EXTRACT FROM CANON BAMPTON'S WILL.
" Also I direct and appoint, that the eight Divinity
" Lecture Sermons shall be preached upon either of the
" following Subjects — to confirm and establish the Chris-
" tian Faith, and to confute all heretics and schismatics
" — upon the divine authority of the holy Scriptures —
" upon the authority of the writings of the primitive Fa-
" thers, as to the faith and practice of the primitive Church
" — upon the Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus
" Christ — upon the Divinity of the Holy Ghost — upon the
" Articles of the Christian Faith, as comprehended in the
" Apostles'1 and Nicene Creeds.
" Also I direct, that thirty copies of the eight Divinity
" Lecture Sermons shall be always printed, within two
" months after they are preached, and one copy shall be
" given to the Chancellor of the University, and one copy
" to the Head of every College, and one copy to the Mayor
" of the city of Oxford, and one copy to be put into the
" Bodleian Library; and the expense of printing them shall
" be paid out of the revenue of the Land or Estates given
" for establishing the Divinity Lecture Sermons; and the
" Preacher shall not be paid, nor be entitled to the revenue,
" before they are printed.
" Also I direct and appoint, that no person shall be
" qualified to preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons, un-
" less he hath taken the degree of Master of Arts at least,
" in one of the two Universities of Oxford or Cambridge;
" and that the same person shall never preach the Divinity
" Lecture Sermons twice.1'

PRE FACE.

IT is not an unusual effect of taking a particu
lar view of a subject, to give the appearance of
overlooking another view of it, no less important
than that immediately presented. This is par
ticularly the case in a question of religion, in
which the mind naturally fixes its eye on the
divine part of the argument : and we are apt ac
cordingly to regard that as altogether slighted,
because it is not ostensibly brought under our
survey. I wish therefore to obviate any such miscon
ception of my design, in regard to the observa
tions contained in the present course of Lec
tures. I am exclusively engaged in considering
what I may call a human section of the complex
history of Christianity. But I would not, at the
same time, be thought insensible to the divine
part of the history ; or to forget, even for a mo
ment, the holy Agent himself by whom the
a 3

vi PREFACE.
great work, in all its sacred outlines and living
energy, has been wonderfully wrought.
I request accordingly, that it may be remem
bered throughout, what is the immediate and re
stricted business of my inquiry : that it presup
poses a Divine origin to the Christian revela
tion, and a superintending Providence over its
whole course. This is my point of departure.
Assuming that the Holy Spirit has not been un
faithful to his charge over the church of Christ,
I have endeavoured to take some account of
that resistance, which the human agent has op
posed to the diffusion of the truth as it was
purely inspired. A work of Christian evidences
would have for its leading idea the operation of
the Divine Author and Guardian of the Faith.
Take, for instance, the Gospels, or the Acts of
the Apostles : and it is the facts bearing on the
character of the Divine Being and the Divine
dispensations, which are solely or prominently
brought to view. Human sentiments and con
duct are the mirror in which the work of God is
reflected. Or take any merely human treatise
on the evidences of Christianity: and the object
will be found to be, to detect, amidst the various

PREFACE. vii
circumstances which have accompanied the rise
and propagation of the Gospel, the indications
of a power, wisdom, and goodness, more than
human. As the present, however, is not a work
of evidences, but a particular view of the con
nexion of human philosophy with the given
truths of the Scriptures, the agency of man
here forms the leading idea : and this therefore
I have singled out for particular observation.
There seems indeed to be an unreasonable
jealousy in regard to any attempt to describe
the importance of the human means concerned
in the establishment and maintenance of the
Gospel truth. There is a proneness in professed
defenders of Christianity, as also in the Christian
in general, to overstate the argument in its fa
vour. Whatever detracts accordingly from their
own undue estimate, they are apt to regard as
taking so much from the real evidence of Chris
tianity. But let us not estimate the cares of the
Author of our salvation for the security of his
work, by the standard of our fears. Let the
human agents whom He has employed in the
furtherance of it, have contributed their utmost
either to support or to thwart what He has
a 4

viii PREFACE.
begun, the work still remains his. As in the
natural world ; corruption and disease may mark
for their own the fairest works of the Divine
hand, but cannot unmake them : so neither are
we to suppose that the superintendence of Christ
over his Church no longer exists, because the
fields of his vineyard have been overrun with
thorns and weeds.

CONTENTS.

LECTURE I. p. 3.
ORIGIN OF SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY.
NJ ATURE of the Inquiry proposed, the force of Theory on Theo
logical language — the Scholastic Philosophy an important branch
of this General Inquiry — its connexion with the philosophy of
Aristotle — Neglect of consideration of its influence in compari
son with that of Platonism — the greater extent of its influence
— its more immediate interest.
The Scholastic Philosophy the result of a struggle between
Reason and Authority — its history to be traced to the ascendancy
of the Latin Clergy — contrast between the Greek and Latin
Fathers — Practical character of the Latins exemplified in their
leading men — strict correspondence sustained among them —
Contrast of state of Society in the East and the West — Civil
disturbance and misery of the West favourable to the power of
the Latin Church — Rhetorical character of the Latin theological
writers — Fruitless attempt of Jerome to improve the Latin lite
rature of his time — Monastic Institutions of the West less en
thusiastic than those of the East — Origin of the Scholastic
System more developed in the progress of the Church after the
middle of the Vth century. — The principle of liberty of reason
which had led to the power of the Church, operating within the
Church, leads at once to heresy and ecclesiastical coercion —
Extent of jurisdiction over opinion claimed by the Latin Clergy
evidenced in the predestinarian Controversy of the IXth cen
tury — Subsequent history a continuance of the struggle between
Reason and Authority in the West. — Subjugation of the intel
lect leads to its insurrection — Character of its efforts at this pe
riod. The argumentative theology at length sanctioned by the
Church itself in its authoritative capacity — The Book of the

x CONTENTS.
Sentences — Albert the Great, and -Thomas Aquinas, perfect
the method established — Success of Scholasticism owing to its
combination of unlimited discussion with deference to authority.
LECTURE II. p. 51.
FORMATION OF THE SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY.
General statement of the evil of a Logical Theology — The
Church sanctions the use of Logic only as an art of defence —
Platonism the established Philosophy of the Church — An art of
Logic indispensable to the speculating Christian in the West —
Division of the Sciences in the middle age — Tendency of the
age to blend all into a metaphysical Logic, or Dialect — Logic
perverted into a Science of Investigation — Obstructions to the
real improvement of Logic — Ignorance of Aristotle's writings in
themselves — Importance of the writings of Boethius — Effect of
the Crusades in opening fresh sources of knowledge — Progress
of Scholasticism illustrated in the division of parties into Nomi
nalists and Realists — Triumph of Realism.
Realism, the scientific basis of Scholasticism — Nominalism,
the resource of the more liberal speculators — Opposition be
tween Duns Scotus and Ockam — Ascendancy of a Logical Phi
losophy evidenced in the subsequent state of knowledge.
Theology erected into an exact demonstrative Science — its
Principles drawn from the incomprehensible nature of the Di
vine Being — Regard to Authority maintained, by assigning Faith
as the preliminary to the whole Speculation — Aristotle's Phi
losophy applied as a method of eliciting the Divine truths in
volved in the Scripture — This resulted in a combination of the
Ideal Theory of Platonism with the Sensualism of Aristotle's
Philosophy — Logic the instrument in effecting this result —
Union of Mysticism and Argumentation in the Scholastic writ
ings — Abuse by the Schoolmen of the disputatious form of
Aristotle's writings.
Fundamental errors of Scholastic Theology, i. its neglect of
the Historical Nature of the Christian Scriptures — consequent
loss of the real instruction contained in them — 2. their Rhe
torical nature also overlooked in an exclusive attention to the
mere words of revelation. — 3. their Ethical lessons also dispa
raged in the pursuit of theoretic truth.

CONTENTS. xi
LECTURE III. p. 97.
THE TRINITARIAN CONTROVERSIES.
Questions on the Trinity naturally the first to engage the
attention of disputants — Their ecclesiastical and political im
portance in the early ages — Maintenance of the orthodox doc
trine chiefly owing to the Latin Church — Controversies on the
subject assume a scientific form in the Scholastic writings —
Promiscuous character of Ancient Philosophy exemplified in the
discussion — Scholastic System applies the philosophy of mind
to the investigation of God from his Effects in the world — Doc
trine of the Trinity, in its principle, the ideas or reasons of all
existing things, traced to the Intellect of God — Description of
the Scholastic mode of rationalizing the doctrine — Orthodox
theory of the Divine Procession the exact view of the principle
of Causation — Extremes of Sabellianism and Arianism traced to
their misconception of this principle — Mischievous effect of the
notion, that doctrines must be defended from their speculative
consequences — Influence of Materialism — Rise of a technical
phraseology — Logical principles employed in settling the precise
notions of the different terms introduced — Popular illustrations
of the Trinity examples of this mode of philosophizing — Contro
versies turn principally on the views taken of sameness, unity,
diversity, &c. — Differences between the orthodox and the Sabel-
lians and Arians in regard to the Divine Unity — Difficulties pro
duced by the word Persona, obviated by logical distinctions.
Illustration of the doctrine of the Incarnation from the prin
ciples of the established logical philosophy — It accounts for the
differences between the orthodox, the Nestorians, and Euty-
chians. Application of this philosophy in the Controversies on the
Procession of the Holy Spirit — The words Filioque added to the
Nicene Creed — This addition ultimately maintained on logical
grounds. General practical reflections — Difficulties on the subject of
the Trinity metaphysical in their origin — Popular misappre
hension of the Divine Unity an instance of this — The various
theories all Trinitarian in principle — Simplicity of belief in
Scripture facts, the only escape from perplexity.

xii CONTENTS.
LECTURE IV. p. 153.
THE PELAGIAN CONTROVERSIES.— PREDESTINATION AND
GRACE.
Scholastic nature of controversies relative to Divine and Hu
man Agency — State of the West disposes the Latin Christians
to the discussion of such questions — Importance of the ques
tions in order to Church-government — The disputes here at
first, less philosophical in comparison with the Trinitarian —
Consequent laxity in the terms of the Pelagian theories, occa
sions more continual disputes — The Schoolmen, the first to
systematize these doctrines — Connexion of them with the pre
vious theory of the Trinity — Scholastic view of Predestination
an application of the Principle of Activity in the Divine Being
to human actions — Importance of excluding reference to the
Divine Intelligence, in our estimate of Predestination — Mode
in which the notions of Contingency and Necessity, Time and
Eternity, were employed in Scholastic reasonings. — The only
proper difficulty on the subject is, the prevalence of Evil — No
tions of Optimism influential on such speculations — The term
Good in ancient philosophy coincident with an object of will —
Reprobation consequently, as implying evil willed, unknown to
Scholastic system — Illustration to be derived to our article on
the subject from the theories opposed by the Schoolmen — Dread
of Manicheism in the Latin Church.
Scholastic notion of Grace as the effect of Predestination,
both physical and logical — The term Grace designates properly
a general fact of the Divine conduct — Application of Aristo
tle's physical doctrines in the scholastic account of the process
of Grace — The theory of Transmutation — Instinctive Principle
of motion attributed to the System of Nature — Approximation
to Pantheism in this system.
Practical reflections — Truths of Grace and Predestination
concern the heart principally — Theoretic statements of them
must always be peculiarly open to difficulty — The difficulties,
evidently, chiefly metaphysical — The doctrines, practically taken,
full of real comfort and peace.

CONTENTS. xiii
LECTURE V. p. 207.
THE PELAGIAN CONTROVERSIES.— JUSTIFICATION.
Truths of Divine and Human Agency necessarily qualify each
other — Human Agency, as viewed in the Scholastic system, the
continued action of the First Cause — Justification, the law of
Divine Operation in the Salvation of Man — Sketch of the Chris
tian scheme involved in this principle — Theory of Human
Agency concerned first in accounting for Resistance to the Di
vine Will — Difficulty, as felt in ancient philosophy, was to re
concile the fact with the certainty of Science — Schoolmen adopt
Aristotle's practical views of human nature — Application of the
term Corruption founded on his physical philosophy — Theory of
the Propagation of Sin maintains the universality of the prin
ciple of Corruption — Objections of Pelagius and Celestius to this
theory — Error, both of the Orthodox and of the Pelagians, in
speculating on the nature of Original Sin — Concupiscence — the
application of this term to Original Sin, derived from ancient
divisions of the soul — Materialism involved in the Specula
tion. — Doctrine of Original Sin, the counterpart to the doctrine
of the Incarnation — Disputes between the Orthodox and the
Pelagians turn on the force of the terms Nature and Person —
Connexion between the heresies of Nestorius and Pelagius —
Distinction between the effect of Adam's sin, and the sin of
subsequent parents on their posterity — View of the Christian
life, as a change, coincides with this theory of Original Sin —
Faith, the infused element of the new life — Doctrinal statements
of Justification by Faith, to be interpreted by the light of
Scholastic notions involved in it — Scholastic Notion of Free
will, not opposed to Necessity, but to the Force of sin, in en
slaving the will — Introduction of the theory of Justice into the
Christian Scheme — Notion of Merit to be understood in con
nexion with this theory ; as also of Merit of Condignity, Merit
of Congruity — Peculiar views of Repentance, as a compensa
tion for offence — of Punishment and Satisfaction, as applied to
the Sacrifice of Christ — of Self-Mortification and Supereroga
tion — drawn from this theory of Penal Justice.
Inefficacy of Repentance to remove guilt, and need oi Atone
ment, illustrated by these speculations — Debasing effect of Scho
lastic theory of Expiation — True view of Human Agency to be

xiv CONTENTS.
found in simple practical belief of the Atonement — Union of
Strength and Weakness, implied in this doctrine, coincident
with facts of human nature — Mischievous effect of speculative
discussion of the subject — Moderation and forbearance of lan
guage on the subject most accordant with the spirit of Pro
testantism. LECTURE VI. p. 261.
MORAL PHILOSOPHY OF THE SCHOOLS.
No proper Moral Philosophy in the Scholastic System — Con
fusion of moral and religious truth injurious to both — Instance
in Paley's Moral Philosophy — Moral Truth at first taught on the
ground of Authority — Platonism influential in blending it with
Theology — Influence of Christian literature, the Sermons, and
legends of the Saints, Ambrose's Treatise " On the Offices of
" Ministers," Gregory's " Morals," Boethius' " Consolation of
" Philosophy'' — Ethical science corrupted by being studied with
a view to the power of the Clergy.
Schoolmen systematize ethical precepts drawn from practice
of the Church — The Treatise " Of the Imitation of Christ" —
Plato's theological account of the Chief Good combined with
practical detail of Aristotle's Ethical Theory — Scholastic moral
system a development of the Divine Energy in man's internal
nature — Aristotle's notion of Happiness accordant with this view
— Scholastic gradations of moral excellence to be traced to this
fundamental idea — Hence, also, the importance attributed to
the life of contemplative devotion — The doctrine of Perfection
— Distinction of Counsels and Precepts — Outline of this double
morality seen in the Aristotelic notion of an Heroic Virtue-
Coincidence of Aristotle's theory of Good-Fortune with the
superhuman virtue of the Scholastic System — Connexion of
ethical doctrine of the Schools with notion of Original Sin —
Mortal and Venial Sins — Proper ground of this distinction —
Division of Virtue into Theological and Moral, and into infused
and Acquired — Doctrine of Gifts.
Origin of questions in Modern Moral Philosophy to be traced
to scholastic discussions — Instance in the idea of Moral Obli
gation — Extreme opinions as to the relative importance both of
Theology and Ethics — Proper province of Ethics, inquiry into
the principles of Human Nature — Revelation only gives new

CONTENTS.
objects to those principles — Importance of regarding the Science
of Ethics as in itself independent of Religion.
LECTURE VII. p. 307.
THE SACRAMENTS.
Doctrine of the Sacraments a continuation of the Scholastic
scheme of Divine Agency — Separate nature of the soul and
body assumed throughout the speculation — The Sacraments
viewed as the means of supporting and renovating the life of
the Soul — General notion of them founded on the belief in
secret influences — Belief in Magic auxiliary to this notion —
Connexion of Sacramental Influence with the doctrine of the
Incarnation — Agitation of the subject in the IXth century in
connexion with Alexandrian Philosophy — Difference of opinion
as to whether the Sacraments were signs or instruments — Pre
cision of language respecting the Eucharist in particular — Pre
eminence assigned to this Sacrament attributable to the esta
blished theory of Sacramental Influence — Doctrine of Intention
— Question of the effect of the Vice of the Minister on the
efficacy of the Sacrament — Notion of impressed Character at
tributed to some of the Sacraments — Evident superiority of
Baptism and the Eucharist in comparison with the rest — Rough
form of the early Controversies on the Sacramental Presence of
Christ — The terms Substance and Species not taken at first
in a strict metaphysical sense — Aristotelic Philosophy of Mat
ter and Form, Substance and Accident, introduced to perfect
the theory of the Sacraments — This exemplified particularly in
Transubstantiation — Connexion of this doctrine with the power
of the Church enforces the assertion of the mystical virtue of
the consecrated elements — Physical theory of Transmutation
applied to the establishment of the Presence of Christ — Con
nexion with this, of the notion of the mysterious efficacy of
certain words — Realism involved in the further use of the no
tions of Substance and Accident in the account of Transub
stantiation — The theory of the doctrine at variance with popular
representations of it.
General reflections on the abuse of the doctrine of the Sacra
ments in the Scholastic System — its repugnance to the spirit of
Christianity — Necessity of vigilance against the temptations to
refinement on this subject.

xvi CONTENTS.
LECTURE VIII. p. 347.
NATURE AND USE OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY.
Examination of the nature and use of Dogmatic Theology sug
gested by previous inquiry — Confusion of thought on the subject,
evidenced in popular statements of the relation between Faith
and Reason — also in attempts to settle the necessary points of
belief— Discussion of the Scholastic principles : 1. that whatever
is first in point of doctrine is therefore true ; and, 2. that the
logical consequence of any doctrine is necessarily true — The
former principle, a remnant of Scholastic view of Theology as a
demonstrative science. — Universality and ubiquity of belief no
tests of divine truth — The principle only true when strictly con
fined to Scripture facts — Contrast of the earlier and later Chris
tian writers in the tradition of doctrine — The preference for
earliest authorities inconsistent with the principle which es
tablishes doctrines by logical consequences — Symbolical nature
of language in its application to Theology — Unscriptural doc
trines must result from the method of logical deductions — Ne
cessity imposed in such a case of answering all objections —
Impossibility of maintaining thus the principle of Authority —
Progressive accumulation of doctrines by such a mode of pro
ceeding — Truth of Fact confounded with Truth of Opinion in
the Scholastic method — No dogmas to be found in Scripture
itself — Dogmas therefore to be restricted to a negative sense,
as exclusions of unscriptural truth — Articles and Creeds not
necessarily to be dispensed with, because imperfect — Their de
fence however not to be identified with that of Christianity —
Use and importance of Dogmatic Theology to be drawn from its
relation to Social Religion.
Sum of the whole inquiry — Present interest of it — Scholas
ticism the ground of controversial defence to the Church of Rome
— Remnants of it in Protestant Churches in the state of Con
troversy, and in the importance attributed to peculiar views of
religious truth- — Result of the examination sufficient to prove
the force of Theory on our Theological language — The impress
sion from this fact not to be transferred to the revealed truths
which are real parts of sacred history — Real beneficial effect of
honest search into the truths of Divine Revelation. LECTURE I.

LECTURE I.
ORIGIN OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY.

SUMMARY.
Nature of the Inquiry proposed, the force of Theory on Theo
logical language — the Scholastic Philosophy an important branch
of this General Inquiry — its connexion with the philosophy of
Aristotle — Neglect of consideration of its influence in compari
son with that of Platonism — the greater extent of its influence
— its more immediate interest.
The Scholastic Philosophy the result of a struggle between
Reason and Authority — its history to be traced to the ascendancy
of the Latin Clergy — Contrast between the Greek and Latin
Fathers — Practical character of the Latins exemplified in their
leading men — strict correspondence sustained among them —
Contrast of state of Society in the East and the West — Civil
disturbance and misery of the West favourable to the power of
the Latin Church — Rhetorical character of the Latin theological
writers — Fruitless attempt of Jerome to improve the Latin lite
rature of his time — Monastic Institutions of the West less en
thusiastic than those of the East — Origin of the Scholastic Sys
tem more developed in the progress of the Church after the
middle of the Vth century. — The principle of liberty of reason
which had led to the power of the Church, operating within the
Church, leads at once to heresy and ecclesiastical coercion —
Extent of jurisdiction over opinion claimed by the Latin Clergy
evidenced in the Predestinarian Controversy of the IXth cen
tury — Subsequent history a continuance of the struggle between
Reason and Authority in the West. — Subjugation of the in
tellect leads to its insurrection — Character of its efforts at this
period. The argumentative theology at length sanctioned by the
Church itself in its authoritative capacity. — The Book of the
Sentences. — Albert the Great, and Thomas Aquinas, perfect
the method established. — Success of Scholasticism owing to its
combination of unlimited discussion with deference to authority.

B2I

i Peter IV. ii.
If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of
God.

E£ tis \a\et, <ay Adyta ©eov.

Si quis loquitur, quasi sermones Dei. Lat. Vuxg.

LECTURE I.

CHRISTIANITY had its beginnings amidst ob
structions of a twofold character; the self-right
eousness of the human heart, and the presumption
of the human understanding. It had to war with
the pride of man, entrenched within these double
fortifications. Not only were those principles of our
nature, on which it was to exercise its sanctifying
influence, armed in hostility against it ; but those
on which it had to rely as the interpreters of its
overtures of peace and pardon, misconstrued and
misrepresented its heavenly message.
The history of infidelity and of heresy affords
abundant instances of this twofold counteraction to
the truths of the Gospel. It is not of the action
of the heart on the understanding, and of the un
derstanding on the heart, that I now speak. That
this mutual action and reaction take place in all
our decisions on moral questions, is undoubtedly
true ; and a highly interesting fact it is both to the
Theologian and the Moral Philosopher. The point,
however, on which I now insist, is the separate in
fluence of the two great classes of principles, which
our nature exhibits, on the reception of divine truth.
There is a resistance simply moral, and another
simply intellectual ; — the force of Vice and the force
of Theory ; — both of which have played a consider-
b3

6 LECTURE I.
able part in the drama of Religion. Each demands,
accordingly, a distinct consideration, from those who
would fully solve that great problem, which the ex
istence of a complex system of facts and doctrines,
under the name of Christianity, presents to the
thoughtful mind.
My purpose in the following Lectures is, to ex
amine into the influence of one of these Classes of
principles — those of the understanding; — and to en
deavour to present to your notice, the force of
Theory in its relation to the divine truths of our
Religion. It is that portion of the inquiry which
has attracted the least investigation in itself. For
though ecclesiastical histories purpose to give a view
of theological opinion, there is none that I am ac
quainted with, which has given an account of the
effect of Opinion as such on the doctrines of Chris
tianity. They give rather a view of human pas
sions in their relation to the divine truth, or of
human nature in general in its reception of the
Gospel. They do not shew how the intellect of man
has insinuated its own conclusions into the body of
the revelation in the course of its transmission, and
modified the expressions by which the truth is con
veyed. I do not indeed purpose to enter into the whole
of so large an inquiry. Nor can I pretend, in the
compass of the present Lectures, to exhaust even a
part of it. I must content myself with laying be
fore you that portion of it which has forcibly struck
my own mind ; and which I hope may also prove,

LECTURE I. 7
both interesting in itself, and important to the re
sult of the whole inquiry into the theoretic modifi
cations of our theological language.
It is then to the effect of the Scholastic3 Philo
sophy that I have directed my attention, and en
deavoured to trace the modifications of our theolo
gical language as illustrated in that vast theoretic
system. The existence alone of that system in the
very heart of the Christian Church for so many
centuries — for more than a thousand years if we
comprise the period of its formation antecedent to
its perfect maturity, for more than five centuries if
we look only to its perfect development — is a most
striking fact. And I only wonder that it has not
attracted more notice than it has hitherto obtained.
We meet indeed with some incidental remarks in
works of philosophy or theology on the theoretic
character of the system. But with these remarks
it is usually dismissed as a method long gone by,
which has had its day and is now extinct, and re
mains only a monument of frivolous ingenuity, to
be neglected and despised by the more enlightened
wisdom of the present age. But surely a pursuit
in which the human mind has been so long en-
•' The word Scholastic has now obtained a secondary mean
ing from the disputations with which it was connected. We
see its original sense in the following passage : Omnes enim in
scriptis suis causas tantum egerunt suas ; et propriis magis lau-
dibus quam aliorum utilitatibus consulentes, non id facere ad-
nisi sunt ut salubres ac salutiferi, sed ut scholastici ac diserti
haberentur. Salvian. De Gubern. Dei, Pruefat. ed. Baluz.
B 4

8 LECTURE I.
gaged, and which has thus, as an indisputable mat
ter of fact, educated the human intellect in the
West, for the larger views, and more elevated
thoughts, and more masculine vigour, of Modern
Science and Modern Theology, demands more re
spect, more serious consideration. If it supplied, as
it undoubtedly did, the elements of our present im
provement, the stock of principles of which the
Reformation, both religious and intellectual, of the
sixteenth century, availed itself; to which that re
formation was forced to address itself; whose lan
guage it was forced to adopt in order to be under
stood and received ; neither the historian of the
human mind, nor the student of Religion, ought to
leave this track of inquiry unexplored. The Scho
lastic Philosophy in fact lies between us at our
present station in the world, and the immediate dif
fusion of the truth from heaven, as " the morning
" spread on the mountains," an atmosphere of mist
through which the early beams of Divine Light
have been transfused. It has given the celestial
rays a divergency whilst it has transmitted them,
and, by the multiplicity of its reflections, made
them indistinct as to their origin.
To the members indeed of this University,
which, with such wisdom, has retained the study
of Aristotle's Philosophy, justly regarding it as the
strongest, best discipline of the mind, whilst it has
discarded the dialectical abuses of the system, the
inquiry into the nature of Scholastic Philosophy
peculiarly recommends itself. It becomes an in-

LECTURE I. 9
quiry into the nature and effects of that very phi
losophy which our University discipline upholds to
a certain extent. For the Scholastic method is
nothing more than a view of the philosophy of
Aristotle, as it was moulded by the state of civil
ization and learning, and by the existing relations
between the civil and ecclesiastical powers in the
course of the middle ages. It is what the cherished
study of this place was at a period, when it was
pursued with an excessive intensity of devotion to
the combined authority of the Philosopher and the
gifted commentator on his doctrines. The erection
of this and other Universities was the great ex
ternal means, by which the Scholastic Philosophy
was constituted into that form which it ultimately
attained. The chairs of theology and philosophy,
established here and elsewhere, were the oracular
seats, from which the doctrines of Aristotle were
expounded, as the rationale of theological and moral
truth. The collection of these several authoritative
decisions at length rose into a peculiar system of
Philosophy in itself ; of which Aristotle indeed was
the foundation and cement, but the structure itself,
commentary piled on commentary, and conclusion
on conclusion.
It may appear strange, then, that whenever the
history of religious opinion has attracted attention,
curiosity should rather have been directed to the
effects of Platonism, than to those of the more es
tablished Aristotelic philosophy. It is owing, per
haps, to the circumstance that Platonism has been

10 LECTURE I.
more arrogant in its pretensions : it has aspired, not
to modify, but to supersede Christian truth. Chris
tianity had to struggle in its infancy against the
theology of the school of Alexandria ; which re
garded the Christian system as an intrusion on the
philosophical ascendancy which it had hitherto en
joyed. The New-Platonists disputed the originality
of the Christian doctrine, asserting that the sayings
of our Lord were all derived from the doctrines of
their Master b. Nor was the mischief from the
Alexandrian School neutralized, when, its open hos
tility being found ineffectual, disciples of that school
merged themselves into the Christian name. The
accommodation which then took place between the
theories of their philosophy and the doctrines of the
Faith, proved a snare to members of the Church.
Hence, upon the whole, resulted, even in the be
ginnings of the Gospel, an ambiguity respecting the
peculiar rights of the antagonist systems. And
this ambiguity affected the question of the self-
originated divine character of the Christian Truth.
The attention of Theologians, therefore, could not
b De utilitate autem historic, ut omittam Graecos, quant am
noster Ambrosius qusestionem solvit, calumniantibus Platonis
lectoribus et dilectoribus, qui dicere ausi sunt, omnes Domini
nostri Jesu Christi sententias, quas mirari et praedicare cogun-
tur, de Platonis libris eum didicisse, &c. Augustin. De Doct.
Christ, lib. II. c. 2. vol. III. p. 12. ed. 4to. Venet. 1584.
Libros beatissimi Papa? Ambrosii credo habere sanctitatem
tuam ; eos autem multum desidero, quos adversus nonnullos
imperitissimos et superbissimos, qui de Platonis libris Dominum
profecisse contendunt, diligentissime et copiosissime scripsit.
Augustinus Paulino, Epist. XXXIII. Oper. vol. II. p. 39.

LECTURE I. 11
but be drawn to the subject. The Faith itself was
at stake in the endeavour to disentangle it from the
theories of the Platonizing Christians. It was to
be determined whether Christianity was a true re
ligion possessing an intrinsic authority. It has not
been so with regard to the Aristotelic philo
sophers. These were in comparative obscurity
when the Alexandrian School gave the law to the
literary world. They did not put forward any
pretensions as the rivals of Christianity, but pur
sued their own independent path, struggling rather
against the domination of the Platonists than against
the Christian innovator. The Church too looked
upon the Peripatetic school with shyness and aver
sion at the first, regarding it as atheistic and im
pious, the resource of heresy and religious perfidy ;
whereas towards the Platonic system, the early
doctors entertained a tacit partiality, amidst their
actual hostility to the professors of that system.
Opposing Platonism, as a sect jealous of the rising
power of Christianity, they still felt no repugnance
to the intermixture of its speculations with the
vital truths of the religion. The philosophy of
Aristotle, on the contrary, crept into the Church
imperceptibly, and even against the consent of the
Church. No compromise took place between its
disciples and the members of the Church. There
was none of that ostentatiousness of principles on
their part, which characterized the proceedings of
the New-Platonic school in their intercourse with the
Church. But the logic of Aristotle continued from

12 LECTURE I.
time to time to supply the heretic with arms. And
this dexterous warfare, carried on by the heretic,
gradually brought the Church to the use of the
same arms which it had rejected with disdain.
Thus, amidst all the disavowals of the system
which it strenuously made, the Church became un
awares Aristotelic. It had learned the arts of its
impugners, and spoke the language of their theories
in its own authoritative declarations against them.
But in reality, the question of the influence of
Aristotle's philosophy is more important on this
very account, that it has been more subtile, more
silently insinuated into, and spread over, the whole
system of Christian doctrines. Being employed as
an instrument of disputation, it has not been con
fined, like Platonism, to certain leading points of
Christianity, as, for instance, to the doctrines of the
Trinity and the Immortality of the Soul, but has
been applied to the systematic development of the
sacred truth in all its parts. That complete dis
cussion, which the minutest points of Christianity
obtained under the discipline of the Aristotelic phi
losophy in the hands of the Schoolmen, has fixed
our technical language in every department of
Theology. I consider it therefore necessary for the
perfect understanding of those terms of our Re
ligion, which an established usage has now made
the unchangeable records of religious belief ; which,
both the orthodox and the heretic, the catholic and
the schismatic, alike employ in all their religious
statements and arguments ; to examine to some ex-

LECTURE I. 13
tent, how far their history may be traced in the
Aristotelic theories of Scholasticism.
In that familiarity which we have acquired from
our infancy with the mysterious terms of Christian
Theology, the necessity of inquiring into their
history escapes our ordinary reflection. We little
think that we are walking among the shades of de
parted controversies, among the monuments, and the
trophies, of hearts that have burned with zeal, and
of intellects that have spent themselves in the sub
tilty and vehemence of debate. But as to the un
conscious traveller over ground which history or
poetry has ennobled, so to us, the land is mute :
it brings not the rich recollections of other men and
other days : and we pass on in careless haste, think
ing it enough, that these memorials of our Fathers
in the Faith serve the actual occasions of our pre
sent convenience.
The Scholastic Philosophy, indeed, is preemi
nently a record of the struggle which has subsisted,
between the efforts of human reason, on the one
hand, to assert its own freedom and independ
ence ; and on the other hand, the coercion exer
cised over it by the civil or ecclesiastical powers.
In the general survey of it, it will be observed to be
distinguished by two very opposite characteristics;
an unbounded liberty of discussion, that advances
with unawed step into the most startling curiosities
of minute inquiry ; and a servile addiction to the
previous determinations and sanctions of the vene-

14 LECTURE I.
rated doctors of the Church. Both these facts, so
conspicuous in the matured form of the Scholastic
Theology, are the surviving evidences of that strug
gle under which its system gradually rose and esta
blished itself. It was by its artful combination of
these two ingredients of the human judgment, — the
positiveness of dogmatism, and the waywardness of
private reason, — that its empire was decided. To
this combination we owe the precision and the com
pass of our theological language. No thought was
left unexpressed, which the captiousness of real or
imaginary objection might obtrude on the sacred
subject ; no authority was passed by, without being
tasked for its contribution to the exact definition of
each point examined.
On the present occasion I shall address myself
principally to the development of these facts, as
they are illustrated in the History of the Scholastic
Philosophy ; reserving the consideration of the ge
neral nature of the Philosophy itself, and the illus
trations to be derived from it to particular terms
of Theology, for the subjects of the following Lec
tures. The origin of the Scholastic Philosophy carries
back our inquiry to the causes of the ascendancy
obtained by the Latin Clergy over the Greek. The
establishment of the Papal power of Rome was in
itself among the effects of that ascendancy — the
consummation to which it led. The real ground of

LECTURE I. 15
that Power lay more deeply than in the temporal
advantages which the see of Rome possessed, or in
the successful policy of its Bishops. The continu
ance of the Papal power, amidst its rapid transition
through the hands of successive Bishops, and these
also often individuals not distinguished by their
talents or their general merits in the ecclesiastical
body, argues the stability and perpetuity of a prin
ciple upholding that power, and guarding it against
the casualties of personal imbecility and worthless-
ness. This principle was the predominant influence
of the Latin Clergy. The course of events in the
early history of the Church seemed to be eminently
favourable towards the preponderance of the Greeks.
Theirs were the Churches immediately founded by
the Apostles. Theirs was the language of the sa
cred books and of philosophy. Theirs, with a few
exceptions, were the Apologies by which Chris
tianity defended itself against the assaults of the
Jew or the Pagan in the first centuries. It was their
writers, who took the lead in systematizing the doc-
trines of the Faith, and allied them with philosophy.
It was their Bishops who took the ostensible part
in the great Councils of the first four centuries, and
the first half of the fifth. In the course of that pe
riod, too, occur the names of all the most illustrious
Fathers of the Greek Church ; Justin Martyr, Ori
gen, Eusebius of Csesarea, Athanasius, Basil, the
two Gregories, Chrysostom ; men of acute and elo
quent genius, as well as of intrepid energy. Still
the efforts of the Greeks may all be characterized as

16 LECTURE I.
eminently literary ; as philosophical defences and
expositions of the Faith, more than practical ener
gies in its behalf. This I observe is their generate
character ; not denying, at the same time, that there
are exceptions to this general remark, in some strik-'s
ing instances of individual conduct, among those to.
whom I have referred. 4
Contrast, on the other hand, the labours of the*
Latin Clergy during the same period. The practical
character here shews itself as the prominent feature ;
the literary, or philosophical, being entirely subordi
nate to it. The Latins have not that splendid array
of philosophical writings, which the catalogue of the
Greek Fathers exhibits ; but they had sagacious po
litical leaders, popular advocates of the sacred cause,
men of extensive knowledge of the world combined
with a nervous enthusiasm of thought and feeling.
In TertuUian, for instance, we see the art of the
rhetorician united with the obstinacy and rude ve
hemence of the practical enthusiast: in Cyprian, ,
amidst the placid flow of his style, the resoluteness
of moral feeling, which at length carried him to 1
martyrdom : in Lactantius and Arnobius, the per
suasiveness of advocates intent more on the effect of
their arguments than on their philosophical accu
racy or logical cogency : in Jerome and Augustine,
at once the rigour of logicians, the comprehensive
views of philosophers, the persuasiveness of orators,
the command of political leaders.
Jerome, perhaps, is one of the most extraordinary
instances which history exhibits, of the union of dark

LECTURE I. 17
and solitary abstractedness of mind, with dexterous
facility in wielding to theoretic views the com
plex means which human society presents. His
influence was like that of invisible agency, proving
its existence by its effects, but defying our search
into its mysterious powers. Whether at Rome, dic
tating the law of religion to devout followers, or
lurking in the wilds on the Syrian confines0, or
buried in the seclusion of his monastery at Beth
lehem, this extraordinary man appears to have se
cured in himself the declining fortunes of ortho
doxy, and effectually established its future dominion
in the Church.
Take again the case of Ambrose ; a civil officer
of Rome, in the full activity of youth, and as yet
unbaptized, suddenly called by the acclamations of
the people to the vacant archbishopric of Milan,
then the seat of the Western Empire d. He united
the inflexible religion of Athanasius with the prac
tical dexterity of the man of the world : so that,
whilst he carried his principles into effect with a
straight-forwardness of purpose, which appeared the
result of a reckless enthusiasm, forcing its way in
spite of the current of human affairs : he yet, by
his penetration into characters and circumstances,
evidently calculated the force of resistance to be
^See his Epistle to Damasus. Hieronym. Oper. torn. II. p.
131. — Note A. Appendix.
d Gregory Nazianzen also describes the election of a person
who had not even been baptized, to the bishopric of Csesarea.
—Note B.

18 LECTURE I.
encountered, and the ultimate superiority of his in
fluence. Study him in his different relations with
the Emperor Gratian, with Theodosiuse, with Jus-
tina and the younger Valentinian ; and compare
with him the conduct of Athanasius in the like
circumstances. In the latter, we see a bold uncom
promising enthusiasm, a chivalrous ardour in the
cause of religion, undaunted by difficulties, acquir
ing intensity by struggle with adventures : but
throughout it is a theoretic enthusiasm which his
conduct displays. The actions of the man seem
only the bold expression of his theories. But in
Ambrose we contemplate the talent of the skilful
Governor of the Church ; a determination inspired
by a confidence of actual power ; and an exertion
of that power for the maintenance of his religious
principles f.
e Qui leges tulerat, quam patienter tulit sententiam sacerdotis
Mediolanensis. Et ne sententiam emolliti presbyteri, et princi-
pibus applaudentis, fuisse teneram putes, a regalium usu sus-
pensus est princeps, exclusus ab ecclesia, et poenitentiam co-
actus est explere solennem. Joann. Saresberiens. Policraticus,
lib. IV. c. 6. p. 225.
f Christians in the IVth century had still retained a great
deal of heathen practice mixed up with their religion. Ambrose
acted the reformer by his authority. — Itaque cum ad memorias
sanctorum, sicut in Africa solebat, pultes, et panem, et merum
adtulisset, atque ab ostiario prohiberetur, ubi hoc Episcopum
vetuisse cognovit, tarn pie atque obedienter amplexa est, ut ipse
mirarer, quam facile accusatrix potius consuetudinis suae, quam
disceptatrix illius prohibitionis effecta sit. Augustin. Confess. VI.
cap. 2. In cap. 3. of the same book, Augustine gives an account
of the manner in which the time of Ambrose was occupied. —
Note C.

LECTURE I. 19
Where again in the Greek Church shall we find
a parallel to Augustine, the individual to whom
perhaps, after the great Apostle of the Gentiles, the
Christian cause, so far as human ability has sup
ported it, owes principally its present strength and
triumph. There are in Augustine some lines of
character strongly resembling those of the Apostle
himself. He displayed an ardent zeal like that of
Paul ; a sleepless vigilance like that of Paul for the
spiritual needs of the Church ; like Paul also, a
vigorous power of argumentation, a perception of
the force of heretical objections, and an energy of
rapid retort. Like the Apostle again, he had been
the ardent devotee of a hostile system of religious
opinion. The Manicheism of his early life had
nourished the fire of enthusiasm in him ; as in the
youthful bosom of St. Paul the prejudices of a
Pharisee had glowed into the flames of a perse
cutor. Neither of them could take a passive sub
ordinate part in any course in which they might be
engaged. The parallel only fails, when we think of
the frankness and simplicity of the Apostle, com
pared with the shrewdness and versatility of the
Saint. We see the force of Augustine's character
in the management of the Church itself, the work
of greater difficulty, rather than in the dexterous
use of the civil power. The Church of the West
during the period when he flourished, the latter
half, that is, of the IVth century and the com
mencement of the Vth, was daily becoming a more
complex machine, more unwieldy to ordinary
c 2

20 LECTURE I.
hands, demanding talents of the first order to grasp
its various relations, and a commanding moral
power to direct and control the whole system.
Such occasions, it has been often observed, are
always found to call forth the spirits that alone are
meet to cope with them. Jerome was a spirit of
this mould ; still more so was Augustine. He had
not the learning, or the eloquence, or the depth of
character, which Jerome possessed ; but he had the
advantage of a more pliant temper, a more social
taste, a more personal influence — an influence, not
merely of respect for his station, and talents, and
moral power, but evidently of affection for the
man s. In Jerome there was a strong tinge of
Oriental enthusiasm : Augustine was throughout the
Latin Churchman. It is the care of the Churches
which he evinces through his whole career : we
never lose sight of him as the Chief Pastor of the
flock, as the head of a vast spiritual community, for
which he appears to hold himself responsible. His
very writings, in fact, are so many actions. The
view of them as compositions is lost, in the im
pression which they give us, of the design of the
writer to produce some practical effect. We do him
injustice, when we contemplate him simply as the
writer, or the literary debater. In this respective
are apt to pronounce him inconsistent, or even con
tradictory to himself. But this very inconsistency
is a strong evidence of the really practical design of
s See the Letter of Volusian. — Note D.

LECTURE I. 21

•r

the writer. He was too acute a logician, not to
see the speculative consequences of his own state
ments — too skilful a rhetorician, not to suspect that
his own positions might be urged against him.
But, at the same time, he had too deep an acquaint
ance with the practical course of things, not to be
aware, that the skill of the logician is not omnipo
tent over the affairs of life ; and that he who would
rightly avail himself of men and things, must some
times be content to wear that guise of paradox,
which the actual constitution of the world often
exhibits in itself.
A feeling of surprise indeed must arise in our
minds, when we look back to the IVth century,
and contemplate that restless activity by which the
leading members of the Latin Church were dis
tinguished. An active communication indeed sub
sisted throughout the Church at large. Athanasius,
from his retreat in the solitudes of the Thebaid,
could make his counsels felt in the heart of the
Empire ; and Chrysostom, from his exile on Mount
Taurus, could sustain an incessant intercourse with
the Faithful at the most remote places. But in the
Western Church more especially, the correspondence
of feelings and views was vigorously sustained by
the great leaders of the Church, evidently as the
great instrument of unity in doctrine and govern
ment. No point of heterodoxy was touched in one
part of the Empire, but it regularly spread in widen
ing circle until it reached the opposite extreme.
The Bishops and rulers of the Church had the
c 3

22 LECTURE I.
deacons and presbyters h at their command, to bear
their various communications of intelligence, and
their replies to the questions sent to them from the
distant provinces of their communion. Sagacious
practical men, at different important stations, formed
a chain of communication, which was kept in con
stant tension, and vibrated throughout wherever the
impression was made '.
The state of society, both civil and religious, in
the Western Empire, was such as to occasion and
promote the influence of the Latin Clergy. The
decline of the Roman Empire in the West ex
hibited more of the character of a violent breaking
up and crumbling into pieces ; whilst in the East
there was a continuity of dissolution, like the silent
melting of a frozen mass, full of decay, yet pre
serving the general sameness of its form. The cala
mities of the West had produced a shock through
out society, and spread a demoralizing influence
through all classes of men. Paganism, which, even
in the IVth century, amidst the widely-extended
dominion of Christianity, had not been effaced from
the intercourse and manners of civil life, reclaimed
to itself the waste which barbarian inroads had
h Sanctum Presbyterum Firmum, anno praeterito ob rem
earum Ravennam, et inde Aphricam Siciliamque direximus,
quem putamus jam in Aphricae partibus commorari. Hieronym.
Augustino, Ep. XXX. Aug. Op. Vol. II. p. 36. col. 2. ed. quarto.
Has literulas de sancta Bethleem sancto presbytero Inno-
centio dedi perferendas. Hieronym. Aug. Ep. XXIV. p. 29.
1 Note E.

LECTURE I. 23
made. A distrust of Providence, and a heathen
profligacy of manners, were the sad evidences of an
unchristianized people. Nor were the Clergy them
selves exempt from that general pollution which
took place at this period of confusion. But the
ecclesiastical society happily had the advantage of
some common principle of union, which no other
form of society in the West then enjoyed. They
presented the great check to the complete dis
organization of the whole frame of society. The
Church formed a refuge, where the sympathies of
human nature might once more be felt and an
swered — an asylum from the antisocial elements
which were raging without it. Every thing else
was become partial and local and insulated : Chris
tianity alone exhibited a character of ubiquity.
Under its shade were gathered all nations and
languages, without distinction of Jew or Gentile,
Greek or Barbarian, bond or free.
The Church accordingly, during the IVth and Vth
centuries, was strengthened by great accessions to the
ecclesiastical body from the mass of the people, as
well as from the higher orders of the community k.
But this very circumstance, whilst it rendered the
Latin Clergy the only really influential power, tended,
by the great preponderance which it gave them, to
render the Church in itself an instrument of dis
organization. The immense disproportion which
existed between the spiritual chiefs, and the body
k Note F.
c 4

24 LECTURE I.
over whom they presided, in point of intelligence
and moral culture, was a temptation to acts of
tyranny, and pride, and avarice. We hear of the
severe oppression in those times, of the inferior
clergy by the superior, and, in general, of the en
croaching and secular spirit of the priests 1. In the
mean time, however, the Latin Clergy, by effectual
steps, secured the throne of the Western Empire
to the Spiritual Power. The several Barbarian
Kings or Emperors, who held the temporal sway,
succeeded only to a portion of the rule of the
Caesars over the West. The real unchanging do
mination, the truly Roman sway, was the spiritual
one ; lasting in its immortal principle through suc
cessions of dynasties ; often indeed veiling its high
pretensions under the language of adulation and
servility, as it did its persecutions in prayers of
charity and pity ; but at the same time " binding
" kings in chains and nobles in links of iron ;" — in
chains indeed of unearthly temper, and links of
iron that no hand was seen to forge, but against
which sinews of flesh could not avail.
An important difference is to be observed further
between the Greek and Latin controversialists ; and
one which considerably affected the character of the
Latins, in that point of view, to which I have been
directing your attention, in order to account for the
eventual triumph of the Latin Theology. The Greek
1 Note G.

LECTURE I. 25
was by education a sophist in the proper sense of
that term. His business was Philosophy. But the
Latin Divines of the early centuries were chiefly of
the class of Orators, or Rhetoricians, by profession.
TertuUian, Cyprian, Lactantius, Arnobius, Minu-
cius Felix, Victorinus, Augustine, were all of that
class. Their employment had been either to defend
causes in the courts of judicature, or to instruct
others in the arts of pleading and composition. The
necessity of the case had imposed this duty on the
Latins ; as all proceedings in the courts throughout
the Roman Empire, and all concerns of public busi
ness, indeed, were carried on in the Latin language.
On the other hand, Greek being cultivated as the
language of philosophy and literature, the idiom of
the learned and the refined, the accomplished master
of that privileged tongue was left to pursue the
speculations of his ancestors, on the high and subtile
questions, of the Origin of the Universe, of Fate
and Providence, and the Nature of Man.
We may clearly perceive a different character of
the earlier Latin Theology, as contrasted with the
Greek of the same period, in this respect. The
Latin flows on more diffusively, more irregularly,
more rhetorically, in a word, in his style of ar
gumentation ; dwells on a point which he thinks
strong, without scrupling to recur to it, and insist
on it ; and is far less exact in the meaning which
he annexes to the terms employed. The Greek, in
deed, shews himself also a rhetorician ; rhetoric be
ing a branch of his universal philosophy. But he

26 LECTURE I.
is principally engaged in illustrating some tenet of
philosophy, and applying it to Christian doctrine.
He is more logical than the Latin, in this sense,
that he is intent rather on proving that something
which he maintains is true, than of enforcing a be
lief in it. This, I observe, is the general character
of contrast: whilst we shall occasionally find the
Greek assuming the office of the Advocate, and the
Latin that of the Sophist.
In the schools established by the Emperor Valen-
tinian, in the middle of the IVth century, through
out the Roman Empire, we find the same contrast
in the means of education provided for the study of
the two languages. At the school of Constantinople,
probably the model of all the others, professors in
each department of literature were appointed ; ten
grammarians for each language ; but for the Greek,
a philosopher, and five sophists ; for the Latin, three
orators"1. The Latins, we find, travelled from school
to school, as their services might be required in the
rhetorical department. And they were thus led to
the study of Civil Law, to the deduction of esta
blished principles of jurisdiction to particular cases,
and the mode of applying these principles in prac
tice. So that whatever philosophy they originally
possessed, was essentially dialectical and rhetorical.
It was no investigation of facts ; it was no discussion
of fundamental principles ; but a practical direction
and use of what was already established. If they
m Stillingfleet, Origines Britann. Vol. I. p. 212, 213.

LECTURE I. 27
did attempt to philosophize more largely, the specu
lation relapsed into the professorial dogmatism in
which their minds had been trained.
The Greeks, accordingly, regarded the Latins with
disdain ; as nameless in the roll of Philosophy and
Theology. Jerome displayed an anxiety to remove
the unphilosophical character from the theology of
the Latin Church ; as at the mpst flourishing period
of the Republic, Cicero had endeavoured to remove
it from the Roman literature. " He applied him-
" self to the study of history and antiquity ; partly,
" because he found," as Erasmus says in his Life,
" that up even to that time theology with the
" Latins was almost in its infancy, and on that
" account a great many were averse to the reading
" of the divine volumes ; hoping the result would
" be, that more would take delight in sacred litera-
" ture, should any one equal the majesty of theo-
" logy by the dignity of his style of discourse ; and
" partly, in order that there might be matter of
" reply to heathens who despised Christians as
" infants and ineloquent "." But Jerome failed in
the extent of his design, as Cicero also did in his
attempt to introduce a Roman philosophical litera
ture. The state of the Latin portion of the Roman
Empire did not admit of it. A practical theology
was wanted ; such as could serve the occasions of
men who had to take an active part in the business
of the Church ; and such as accorded with that bent
" Note H.

28 LECTURE I.
which the needs of social life had already given to
the minds of the Latins. This then was a theology
which partook more of the character of debate ; in
which the powers of the rhetorician might be suc
cessfully applied, for the carrying of some point in
dispute. The same practical character of the Latin Divines
was illustrated in the nature of the monastic insti
tutions of the West compared with those of the
East °. There was none of that austerity originally
among the Latin monks, for which the Orientals
were conspicuous. There was no obligation of vows,
no restriction to place or particular society. The
Latin of the IVth century retired from society, to
be relieved from the grievous burdens which the
° Benedict, at the commencement of the Vlth century, was
the first to introduce vows and solemn engagements into the
monastic institutions of the West. Born in 480, in Italy, at
Nursia. Of the uncongeniality of the monastic life to the Latin world,
we have evidence in the description which Salvian gives of the
reception, which monks experienced in the streets of Carthage.
" If at any time," he says, "* a servant of God, or one from the
" convents of the Egyptians, or from the sacred places of Jeru-
" salem, or from the holy and venerable retirements of the de-
" sert, came into that city on the office of his divine work ; as
" soon as he appeared to the people, he met with contumelies,
"sacrileges, and maledictions: nor this only; but with the
" most wicked broad-laughs of flagitious men, and the detest-
" ing hisses of ridicule, was he beaten, as with thongs." De Gub.
Dei, lib. VIII. p. 190. ed. Baluzii, Paris. 1669.
See Sulpicius Severus' account of the Monastery of St. Martin
in the neighbourhood of Tours. Vit. B. Martin, cap. 1 o. — Note I.

LECTURE I. 29
iniquities of civil or ecclesiastical rulers laid upon
him ; to enjoy leisure from the functions of public
offices, from which the profession of a monk excused
himP. The Oriental seems to have retired in order to
be alone ; to luxuriate in the dreary and melancholy
loneliness of his meditations ; that he might be dead
to the world, and live to God and himself. The
Latin withdrew himself from other business, in order
to transact with a more intense devotion that high
calling, to which his spiritual citizenship had exalted
him. He sought solitude as a means of acting more
forcibly on the busy scene of society ; of making
his abstract contemplations enter into the actions of
other men ; and thus, even whilst personally absent,
being effectually present, amidst the life of man.
Thus were those who had left the life of monks
often called to the office of Bishops ; to the active
superintendence, that is, of the Church, in the West.
They had not disabled themselves, by solitude, for
active duties ; but, on the contrary, disciplined them
selves for office. And in the discharge of these du
ties, many of them shewed that they had learned
the arts of government, and could carry their mea
sures into effect, through a full consciousness of
their powers.
I have dwelt considerably on the ascendancy of
the Latin Church, and the practical character which
P Jerome's Life by Erasmus. Hieronym. Oper. Vol. I. —
Note J.

30 LECTURE I.
it evidenced in contrast with the Oriental ; as I
conceive that the account of this influence of the
Latins, not only is the true view of the Origin of
the Scholastic Philosophy historically ; but contains
in it the general principles of that Philosophy, and
may give us a just Theory of its nature, antece
dently to its proper development. We may discover
in it two principles in action ; the maintenance of
an internal principle of liberty in the soul of man
superior to all external restraints ; and the founda
tion of a spiritual authority on that principle, supe
rior to every other authority. The spiritual princi
ple was the great bond which drew men together
from the colluvies of barbarism, in which all civil
society was involved at the approaching fall of the
Roman Empire in the West ; and the invisible do
minion founded on it, was that controlling power,
which ultimately became the irresponsible, infallible,
authority of the Latin Church. Neither of these
principles was as yet fully developed ; they were
as yet struggling for existence amidst the adverse
powers of civil commotion and tyranny. The ma
turity of the Scholastic Philosophy was a symptom
and test of their having reached their perfection. I
proceed to point out, how it resulted out of that
state of things in the Latin Church which I have
already laid before you.
The practical character of the Latin Theologians
is still more fully exemplified in the history of the
Church after the first half of the Vth century. The

LECTURE I. 31
management of the people, by imparting to them
spiritual counsel and guidance, the instruction of
the young, the regulation of monastic institutions,
the internal order of the ecclesiastical body itself,
the assemblage of Councils, constitute the chief em
ployment of the Latin Clergy. They succeeded, in
the course of a hundred and fifty years, in convert
ing all the schools of learning established by the
Emperors into ecclesiastical societies, and all litera
ture and science into Theology : so that, at the
opening of the Vlllth century, the face of civil so
ciety was changed, and the monotony of religious
rule pervaded all things. The continued invasion
of Barbarians, whilst it interrupted the course of
literary labours, and diminished the chance of theo
logical improvement, gave opportunity for increas
ing the dependence of the people on the Clergy, and
kept the Clergy in constant watchfulness for the
maintenance of their spiritual ascendancy. The im
portance which the Latin Clergy had acquired dur
ing this interval, when philosophy was silent in the
Western world, and literature degenerated into a
pastime, is evidenced in the influence possessed by
Alcuin*! and other ecclesiastics with Charlemagne.
An Anglo-Saxon ecclesiastic, from the school of
York, became the associate and the counsellor of
the greatest monarch of the age. The people were
reduced to a state like that of the Israelites in
their days of oppression, when " there was no
1 Alcuin, born at York about 735.

32 LECTURE I.
" smith to be found in all the land of Israel, lest
" the Hebrews should make them swords or spears;
" but all the Israelites were forced to go down to the
" Philistines to sharpen" the instruments of his daily
work. In the general disturbance of the West, a
second confusion of tongues had taken place ; and
the oracles, both of divine and human wisdom, were
no longer accessible to the mass of believers. The
Christian society at large consisted, in fact, of a
promiscuous assemblage of the most discordant ma
terials ; all complexions of Barbarian rudeness, in
juxta-position with the relics of Roman civilization.
The Clergy alone spoke one language ; sympathizing
with all the shades of this vastly-diversified com
munity, as being drawn from all its ranks. Pos
sessing too a secret instrument of communication in
their knowledge of the Latin, the sacred language
of their Theology, they were insulated from the
surrounding flood of barbarism, and held together
as a mysterious privileged order1".
The same principle acted powerfully within
the sacred order itself. The gifted few of the
Clergy, in relation to the rest of their own body.
were, through their enjoyment of leisure for
r To a certain extent it was required of the laity to make a
confession of Faith, both in the Latin language and in that of
their country. — Jubendum est ut Oratio Dominica, in qua omnia
necessaria humanae vitae comprehenduntur, et Symbolum Apo-
stolorum, in quo fides Catholica ex integro comprehenditur, ab
omnibus discatur tam Latine quam Barbarice, ut quod ore con-
fitentur corde credant. Ex Concilio Cabilonensi, cap. 3. Abaelardi
Oper. p. 369. ed Paris. 4to. 1616.

LECTURE I. 33
the cultivation of their own minds, and for the work
of ecclesiastical government, what the Clergy, on the
whole, were to the religious community. In this
state of things, the schools of Theology became na
turally the source of all intelligence and practical
government. Theologians alone had the secret on
which the vitality of Power depended ; and the
Civil Rulers, therefore, who had any political saga
city, shewed it, in the dexterous use and direction of
the force, which they could not coerce, and which
was already in possession of the real dominion. The
great number of Schools, or Universities, instituted
or revived by Charlemagne, are evidences, at once,
of the ascendancy of the theological power, and of the
wise policy of the Emperor in availing himself of it.
But that liberty of human reason, which formed
the basis of the great spiritual society, continued
at the same time to live in the bosom of the Church
itself. The very aggressions of the ecclesiastical
rulers on the liberty of the inferior members of
their own body, or on the community of the Faith
ful at large, tended to keep the spirit of personal
freedom of thought in a constant state of reaction.
The revival, if not the origin, of heresies, is in
a great measure an effect of this reaction. The
Church itself had called forth a principle of resist
ance to constituted powers. It had taught men
to feel, that there was a sentiment of personal inde
pendence which no external coercion could control.
It was only an extension of this sentiment to the
D

34 LECTURE I.
particular matters of religious belief, when indi
vidual members of the Church began to think for
themselves, and to form parties within the Church.
Heresies within the Church would present a refuge,
like that which the Church at large had presented
against the persecution of tyranny without in the
civil world.
The heresies of the West accordingly were par
ticularly distinguished by this character. They
were insurrections of human reason, rebellions
against the domination of the spiritual power.
Thus they were comparatively very few, at the
time when the human understanding was humbled
and debased by the ignorance and barbarism of the
age preceding the reign of Charlemagne. They
were more frequent in the East during the same
period. Here they were the offspring of philosophy,
of those relics at least of philosophy, which sub
sisted among a people, still proud of their intel
lectual elevation above the rest of the world, and
cherishing their literature as the splendid and en
deared recollection of former glory. In the West,
however, Heresy produced little disturbance, until
the period, when the vigour, infused by more ac
tive measures of education, roused the mind from
the apathy into which it had sunk. The Arian
controversy seems to have been only faintly pro
longed : and the opinions of the Semi-Pelagians in
the South of Gaul had never perhaps been entirely
silenced13- But the Predestinarian dispute of the
" Note K.

LECTURE I. 35
IXth century gives us a lively picture of the con
flict, between the liberty of private reason and the
spiritual ascendancy of the Church. There we see
the effect of education, in awakening the dormant
power of the public mind, and the extent of juris
diction over opinions which the Latin Clergy
claimed. This controversy is particularly worthy
of remark in the history of the Scholastic Phi
losophy ; as it appears the first occasion, on which
the Latins employed the speculations of human
reason, to counteract the unauthorized conclusions
of a member of their own body. John, surnamed
Scotus Erigena l , appellations denoting his race
and place of birth, a philosopher, at the court of
Charles the Bald, was engaged by Hincmar, Arch
bishop of Rheims, to answer the obnoxious positions
of the Predestinarian Gotteschalc u. All previous
defences of orthodoxy had been the works of the
Clergy, the spiritual advocates of the faith, the
Bishops and Saints of the Church. The works
' Scotus, as the common appellation of the inhabitant of
Ireland and Scotland ; Erigena, marking that he was born in
Ireland. Bede, speaking of Ireland, says : " Heec autem pro-
" prie patria Scottorum est ; ab hac egressi, ut diximus, tertiam
" in Britannia Brittonibus et Pictis gentem addiderunt." Hist.
Eccl. lib. I. c. i. — He was born between 800 and 815 : the pe
riod of his death, according to Baronius, in 883. The story of
his having been pierced to death by the writing instruments
of the Scholars at Malmesbury, in a tumultuous assault in the
school, though scarcely credible in itself, is characteristic of
the insubordination and licence of the Schools of the middle
age. — Note L.
u Note M. D 2

36 LECTURE I.
themselves thus far had something of the spiritual
character in them ; — they were invested with the
authority of the holy persons, from whose dictation
they proceeded. But here we see a layman and a
philosopher by profession, employed as the chosen
advocate of the sentence of the spiritual ruler. The
force of reason evidently began to be acknowledged
and felt, as a powerful antagonist which the Church
had fostered in its own system, and against which
the Church therefore had need to fortify itself with
weapons of the same temper. The expedient, in
deed, was found to be of dangerous effect ; since the
philosophy of Erigena served rather to scatter the
seeds of still more dangerous perplexity to the creed
of the Church : and Hincmar x was forced to dis
own the assistance which he had inconsiderately
invoked >'.
From this period we may notice a continued
struggle in the Latin Church, between the advo
cates of Reason and the advocates of Authority.
x Hincmar, driven from his see by an incursion of the Nor
mans, died December 21, 882, three years after the death of
the persecuted Gotteschalc, and in the 37th year of his Epi
scopate. >' Two Councils condemned the work of Scotus, as containing
haereses plurimas, ineptas qusestiunculas, et aniles paene fabel-
las, pluribus syllogismis conclusas, Scotorumque pultes puri-
tati fidei nauseam inferentes, &c. Vind. Pradestin. et Gratia
Hist, et Chron. Synops. p. 12. in the work entitled, Veterum
Auctorum, qui IX saculo de Pradestin. et Gratia scripserunt,
Opera et Fragmenta, by Mauguin. 2 vols. 4to. Paris, 1650.

LECTURE I. 37
The contest between Ratramn and Paschase on the
doctrine of the Eucharist ; of Lanfranc with Beren-
ger on the same subject ; of Anselm with Roscelin
on the nature of Universals ; the complaints of
Bernard against the dialectical theology of Abe-
lard z ; are all illustrations of the collision between
Reason and Authority a. All these disputes, in fact,
were in principle the same. They were only varied
forms of rationalism13 — the pure exertions of the
mind within itself, conscious of its own powers,
and struggling to push itself forth against the con
stringent force of the Spiritual government. The
mind sought no diversion into the paths of general
literature ; — there was no study of history or natural
science ; — none of these could afford it that relief
which it demanded, if even opportunities had ex
isted for the prosecution of such studies. An effort
was required, that immediately bore against the
pressure by which it was distressed. The re
action must be, where the force had been directed.
** Radbert Paschase, Abbot of Corbey in France A. D. 844,
died April 26, 85 1 . — Ratramn, or Bertram, a Monk of Corbey,
contemporary with Paschase. — Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canter
bury, consecrated 1070; died May 24, 1089. — Berenger, died
1088 ; his controversy with Lanfranc began in 1047. — Anselm,
Archbishop of Canterbury, born 1034, died 1 109. — Roscelin, died
: 0g0. — Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, the great Saint of the Xllth
century, born 1091. — Abelard, born 1079, died 1 142. — Note N.
a Note O.
b This term, having been lately appropriated to a particular
class of theological opinions, may require the explanation, that
it is here used in the general sense corresponding with its
etymology. D 3

38 LECTURE I.
The Spiritual power forbad the mind to think for
itself, to use its own faculties, to examine, to dis
cuss, to object. Obedience was become another
word for Religion c. It was no wonder, then, that
some more liberal spirits essayed those natural ex
ertions of their faculties on which the painful pro
hibition lay. It was like one who had been bound
hand and foot, feeling the luxury of the limbs once
more free, and enjoying the perception that he yet
has strength and energy. It is enough for such an
one, to feel the play of his muscles, to exult that he
has broken the bands in sunder, and cast away the
cords from him. We can sympathize with the
wildness of his gesticulations, however distorting
and fantastic. So we may appreciate the efforts of
the Rationalists of the middle ages. Their mind ex
ulted in the simple perception that it still was free.
It is impossible for us, at this day, to conceive
the force of the pressure of authority on the mind
in those ages. The Schools of Philosophy were
intirely in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Power.
The discipline of moral restraint was extremely
weak ; for we read of acts of the greatest outrage
committed by the students. The same spirit of
irregularity and violence, of which Augustine com
plains as disgracing the Schools of his day, at Car-
c Aquinas, it is said, being asked why he had suffered him
self to be annoyed by some troublesome brother of his Order,
who had worn him out with walking, answered, " By nothing
" else is Religion perfected but by Obedience." Vita S. Thome
Aquin. Oper. Vol. I. ed. Antuerpiae, 1612.

LECTURE I. 39
thage, Milan, and Rome, seems to have descended
to those of the subsequent ages d- But, amidst the '
moral disorder which prevailed, there was the
greatest severity of mental coercion e. The case
was similar in the monasteries : the greatest moral
irregularities17 were suffered to exist in them, amidst
all the strictness of the creed professed, and the
solemnities of rituals, and rules £. A passive, un
thinking obedience to spiritual direction, was the
great object aimed at in all these institutions. It
was the intellect, therefore, that was the point of
attack, — the governing principle within the indi
vidual. If he were instructed, in a school of
Philosophy, he was taught to think as his supe
riors thought. If he were brought under the rule
of a Religious Order, he was taught to sacrifice
his own personality in the will of the superior. It
was no desire accordingly of what we now under
stand by liberty, which actuated the struggles of
human reason : the licence of the times afforded a
sort of compensation for the miseries of social
tyranny: but it was a resistance to the internal spell
which bound the faculties ; a resumption of the long-
d Augustin. Confess. 1. V. c. 8. c. 12. — Note P.
•* Cod. Theod. 1. 14. tit. 9. A.D. 370, gives the severe re
strictions imposed on Students at Rome. Du Boullay cites a
canon of the IVth council of Toledo to the same purport.
Hist. Acad. Paris, t. I. p. 76.
f Abelard was never noticed with censures on account of his
moral irregularities, whilst he was severely attacked for his spe
culations. * Note Q.
D 4

40 LECTURE I.
lost perception of personal individuality. There
was no sympathy between the efforts of the Italian
Republics to obtain social liberty, and those within
the Church to recover personal freedom of thought ;
though both efforts were proceeding at the same
period h.
It is a curious fact that the Spiritual Powers
persisted in strenuously opposing the successive
efforts of the Rationalists, and at the same time
gradually adopted the very system to which they
were so averse, into their own authoritative Theo
logy. They opposed, that is, both the principle of
the Rationalists, — the principle that human reason
was to be exercised in matters of religion, — and the
conclusions to which the unrestrained use of it had
led. But afterwards, when the books of contro
versialists had passed into records of opinions, they
readily adopted, as guides in their decisions of any
new opinions, the conclusions of that rationalizing
method which as such had been so passionately
denounced. Throughout the whole period, when
the Scholastic Philosophy may be said to have been
growing, we meet with constant disclaimers, on the
part of Church-leaders, of the system itself — a con
stant appeal to the authority of the Scriptures and
holy Fathers against the rationalist spirit of the
times. Luther himself has not more vehemently
h This has been remarked by M. Guizot, in his admirable
Lectures on the History of Civilization in Europe. Cours
d'Histoire Moderne, Lecon VI. p. 37. Paris, 1828.

LECTURE I. 41
denounced the Scholastic Philosophy, than Bernard
and other Doctors anterior to the Reformation, have
declaimed against the importunateness of the spe
culations of their times K Thus even the celebrated
work of Peter Lombard k, Bishop of Paris in the
Xllth century, did not escape the censures of theo
logians, at the time when it appeared1. After
wards it was regarded with the highest veneration
as the precious depository of the Sentences of the
great Fathers and Luminaries of the Church ; and
became itself an Authority of the Church. Amidst,
too, all the prohibitions of Papal Legates in suc
cessive reformations of the University of Paris ;
amidst express instructions to the Clergy, that they
should seek rather to become theodidactim, than
versed in the arts of human disputation ; appeared
the works of Albert, surnamed the Great, and of
his illustrious disciple Thomas Aquinas n — the most
elaborate specimens of that exercise of Reason
which the Church denounced. When the authors
themselves were dead, and the reputed sanctity of
their lives diffused a savour of religion over their
speculations, then the value of such subtile defences
of the doctrine of the Church against the like as
saults of a self-interpreting Reason was acknow
ledged : and these works, especially those of the
' Note R.
k Peter Lombard, Bishop of Paris 1159, died 1164.
1 Note S. m Note T.
r Albert, born about 1193, died 1280. — Thomas Aquinas,
born 1224, died 1274; canonized by the Pope John XXII.
1323. — Note U.

42 LECTURE I.
latter, — the Augustine, as we may call him, of the
middle age, — were consecrated with the appro
bation of the Spiritual Power, as part of the stock
of Ecclesiastical Authority.
The same effect, it may be observed, had taken
place in the Und and IHrd centuries. The phi
losophizing Divines were continually objected to, by
those who held forth the Scripture as the only Au
thority on sacred things. Still the philosophical
Theology proceeded. Clement of Alexandria0, in
the Und century, undertook its special defence in
his work entitled Stromata, inculcating its sub
servience to Christian knowledge. This work af
terwards passed into the Church as an authoritative
document. In the Latin Church the case was different in this
respect : that the peculiar authority which that
Church claimed, was derived immediately from the
practical influence of its great Divines, Jerome and
Augustine, the two, who may be regarded as, in an
especial sense, the Fathers of the Latin Church.
With their exertions, they established also their
writings, as a documentary appeal next in authority
to the Scriptures themselves. And though these
writings were extremely argumentative, they were
more the authoritative declarations of the spiritual
rulers, commanding the silence of other reasoners
in the presence of their judgment. We trace ac
cordingly in the Scholastic Philosophy a constant
° Died A. D. 220.

LECTURE I. 43
preference for the authorities of these two, and of
Augustine more particularly, in whom the whole
power of the Latin Church ultimately resided. In
the Und and IHrd centuries, then, the opposition
was rather to the philosophies of Plato and Ari
stotle, as corruptions of the simplicity of the faith.
Subsequently, the opposition of the Latin Bishops
and Saints was dictated by a jealousy for the es
tablished opinions and conclusions of the venerated
Fathers of the Church p.
The work of Peter Lombard, which afterwards
constituted the great Text-book of the Scholastic
Theologians, and which established to that writer
the title of " The Master," or " The Master of the
Sentences," was exactly such an exposition of Chris
tian doctrine, as we might have expected from that
conflict between Reason and Authority, which ex
isted in the Latin Church. It is an elaborate com
pilation of passages from the writings of the emi
nent Latin Doctors ; a tissue stiff with antique
embroideries, and displaying the ingenuity of the
artist who has so curiously wrought the patchwork
into a whole. He introduces little reasoning of
his own, only enough to give a consistency to his
citations, and he avoids all reference to the opinions
of heathen philosophers. He seems throughout on
his guard against the suspicion of exercising the
privilege of thinking for himself too far, endeavour
ing to shew, that he follows received opinions, rather
p Note V.

44 LECTURE I.
than his own speculations i. The work was pro
bably written in imitation of a treatise of a Greek
Father of the VIHth century, — the treatise "On the
Orthodox Faith," by John, a Monk of Damascus,
celebrated in the Iconoclast disputes of his times,
or Damascenus, as he is usually termed ; — a writer,
who sets out with the profession, that he states
nothing of his own, but only what the holy and wise
had taught1. This work had been translated into
Latin ¦*, and was regarded with great deference by
the Latin Divines, for the very reason probably,
that it was a mere record of opinions already sanc
tioned by the approbation of the Church. In Lom
bard, however, there is little of the logical precision
by which Damascenus is characterized. He is in
tent on displaying his authorities for the positions
1 Aristotle is incidentally referred to by Lombard, Sentent.
lib. II. dist. i. B, but not in the way of authority.
1 'Epw Toiyapovv e(/.ov oiiSeV ra. Se &Tropa,o'v}v deloti; re kcu o-od)oi<; ccvtoda
\e"A€y pha o-uXX^SSiji' eKSvjtro^ai. Joan. Damasc. Dialectica. Oper. vol. I.
p. 9. He chiefly follows Gregory Nazianzen. Peter Lombard,
speaking of him, says : Joannes Damascenus, inter doctores Grae-
corum maximus, in libro quem de Trinitate scripsit, quem et Papa
Eugenius transferri fecit, &c. Sent. I. dist. 19. p. 59. ed. Louan.
s Eugenio tertio, summo Pontifice, liber de Fide Orthodoxa
Latine redditus est a Burgundione cive Pisano. Hac porro
translatione usi sunt Magister Sententiarum, Sanctus Thomas,
aliique subinde Theologi. . . .
Id enim proposuerat sibi, ut sua nequaquam, aut nova, cude-
ret, sed veterum potius placita, variis in voluminibus sparsa, in
unum opus theologicum congereret. . . . Quamobrem, nedum in
Oriente, verum etiam in Occidente, et apud Latinos, magna
semper fuit apud Theologos ipsius auctoritas. Le Quien, Pro-
legom. in lib. de Fid. Orth. Damasc. Oper. torn. I. p. 119.

LECTURE I. 45
advanced. At the same time the form of Qviestions,
in which the several points of Theology are dis
cussed, shews the inquisitive spirit of the age in
which such a work appeared; that, though Abelard
had been silenced by Councils, the spirit which
crowded his Lectures with hearers ¦*, was still vigor
ous in the Church itself. The Book of the Sen
tences, so far as it was disputatious, expressed the
demands of this spirit ; so far as it was a com
pilation of authorities, maintained the spiritual su
premacy of the Church u. The previous remarks
have tended to shew, that the Latin Theology was
not averse to disputation, from its earliest period
of development : only it affected not a merely li
terary disputation, but such as had reference to
some practical effect. The connexion then of dis
putation in this fundamental work of the Scholastic
Theology, with the enforcement of deference to the
spiritual authority, gave it that popularity which it
obtained in the Church x.
' Coactus est ille scripta sua coram igni dare. Nee idcirco
juventus studia aemulans ab eo defecit. Paul. JEmil. Veronens.
Hist. Franc. V. — Prcef. Apolog. Abaelardi Oper.
11 In the time of Charles V. this work was held in so import
ant a light, that of two Professorships instituted at Louvain
by that Emperor, one was appointed for the interpretation of
the Old and New Testaments, the other for the interpretation
of the " Book of the Sentences." Prof, ad Pet. Lomb. Sent.
Louan. 1553.
** Lombard profited at once by the previous labours of Abe
lard, and by the example of the persecution which had attended
them. He was not only a hearer of Abelard, but is said to have
made Abelard's Treatise of Theology a frequent subject of his

46 LECTURE I.
But no sooner was the principle of such a work
recognized, than other works, answering the same
requisitions of human reason, appeared. The Xlth
and XHth centuries had evinced extraordinary ac
tivity in the exercise of the human intellect. But
the efforts then put forth were desultory and irre
gular. They were the results of individual enter-
prize and courage : like the voyages of mariners
pushing out to sea, not knowing where the tide and
winds might drive them. Now a principle was
established, according to which human reason might
freely expatiate. The liberty of commenting and
discussing without limit might be indulged, pro
vided the intellect confined itself within the range
of established authorities. The world of conse
quences and deductions was open to the Rationalist,
whilst that of First Principles was surrounded with
Stygian waters. What the speculator had to guard
against was, the appearance of proposing any thing
new ; any thing that did not admit of being traced
up to some received opinion. The suspicion of ori
ginality was fatal to the reputation of the Scholastic
Divine. " If any man speak, let him speak as the
" oracles of God ;" that is, according to the sense of
the Scholastic age, let him speak only the words of
those, whom God has successively sent as the min
isters and dispensers of sacred truth y. If it was a
study. Not. ad Hist. Calam. P. Abcelardi. — Oper. p. 1160.
Whilst he probably therefore derived much of his own Theology
from that work, he was careful to throw it into a less ob
jectionable form. y N0t;e W.

LECTURE I. 47
point on which the Church had pronounced, that
was no longer a matter of opinion. It was to be
received as a sentence. To discuss it simply as an
opinion was heretical. Hence the expedient of Dis
tinctions ; the artifice, by which an acute Reason
could maintain its own hypothesis, consistently with
the devotion due to the prescriptions of authority.
It is under this point of view, that we shall dis
cern the origin of that speculative dialectical cha
racter which the Scholastic Philosophy assumed. It
was the crisis, when the reasonings of individual in
quirers ceased to be simply expressions of personal
contemplations, but were pursued on a systematic
plan, that combined in it, the restless impatience of
the human mind, and the arbitrary determinations
of the spiritual authority ; that made Heresy itself
the handmaid of orthodoxy ; like the fable, which
would represent pleasure and pain linked together
by the heads, as the means of neutralizing their
opposition %.
Why this Philosophy assumed the particular form
which it actually exhibits ; — by what means Ari
stotle became the great oracle of the system, super
seding the more theological Philosophy of Plato ; —
and the general character imparted to the Theology
of the Western Church from that circumstance;
will be the subjects of consideration in my next
Lecture. ** Platon. Phaed. c. 9.

LECTURE IL
FORMATION OF THE SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY.

E

SUMMARY.
General statement of the evil of a Logical Theology — The
Church sanctions the use of Logic only as an art of defence —
Platonism the established Philosophy of the Church — An art of
Logic indispensable to the speculating Christian in the West —
Division of the Sciences in the middle age — Tendency of the
age to blend all into a metaphysical Logic, or Dialectic — Logic
perverted into a Science of Investigation — Obstructions to the
real improvement of Logic — Ignorance of Aristotle's writings in
themselves — Importance of the writings of Boethius — Effect of
the Crusades in opening fresh sources of knowledge — Progress
of Scholasticism illustrated in the division of parties into No
minalists and Realists — Triumph of Realism —
Realism, the scientific basis of Scholasticism — Nominalism,
the resource of the more liberal speculators — Opposition be
tween Duns Scotus, and Ockam — Ascendancy of a Logical Phi
losophy evidenced in the subsequent state of knowledge.
Theology erected into an exact demonstrative Science — its
Principles drawn from the incomprehensible nature of the Di
vine Being — Regard to Authority maintained, by assigning Faith
as the preliminary to the whole Speculation — Aristotle's Phi
losophy applied as a method of eliciting the Divine truths in
volved in the Scripture — This resulted in a combination of the
Ideal Theory of Platonism with the Sensualism of Aristotle's
Philosophy — Logic the instrument in effecting this result —
Union of Mysticism and Argumentation in the Scholastic writ
ings — Abuse by the Schoolmen of the disputatious form of
Aristotle's writings.
Fundamental errors of Scholastic Theology, i . its neglect of
the Historical Nature of the Christian Scriptures — consequent
loss of the real instruction contained in them — 2. their Rhe
torical nature also overlooked in an exclusive attention to the
mere words of revelation. — 3. their Ethical lessons also dis
paraged in the pursuit of theoretic truth.

E 2

Acts XIX. 8— n.
And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for
the space of three months, disputing and persuading the
things concerning the kingdom of God. But when divers
were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way
before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated
the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.
And this continued by the space of two years ; so that all
they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus,
both Jews and Greeks.

Elcre\da>v be els rr\v avvayayriv, k'napp-qo-L&^eTO, km p,rjvas
Tpeis biaKeyofxevos, kcll ireCOoov tcl irepl ttjs /3acrtXet'as tov ®eov.
'£ls oe rives eo-KXrjpvvovro koX ryneLQovv, naicoXoyovvTes ttjv obbv
kvanrtov tov irKrjOovs, airocrTas am avru>v, acpcopiae tovs p.a6r)Tas,
k<x6' fjfxepav bta\eyop.evos kv rr\ o~)(o\fj TvpAvvov twos. Tovro
he iye.ve.To em err] Mo, <oare irdvras tovs kcltoikovvtols ttjv
' AcrCav aKOvaat, rbv \6yov tov Kvpiov 'Irjcrov, 'lovbaiovs re koI
EAAjj i>as.

Introgressus autem synagogam, cum fiducia loquebatur
per tres menses, disputans et suadens de regno Dei. Cum
autem quidam indurarentur, et non crederent, maledicen-
tes viam Domini coram multitudine, discedens ab eis,
segregavit discipulos, quotidie disputans in schola tyranni
cujusdam. Hoc autem factum est per biennium, ita ut
omnes, qui habitabant in Asia, audirent verbum Domini,
Judaei atque Gentiles. Lat. Vulg.

LECTURE II.

IN my first Lecture, I have endeavoured to shew
the origin of the Scholastic Philosophy, in the pecu
liar circumstances of the Latin Church ; that it was
such a system, as naturally grew out of the struggle
continually subsisting in the West between Reason
and Authority. I now purpose to explain the na
ture of that Philosophy itself, when it became the
acknowledged system of the Church ; to give some
account of its formation ; and of the general cha
racter of the Theology resulting from it.
The subject immediately before us, is one of
the most serious interest to all, who have a just
concern for the maintenance of sound practical
Christianity. We are now tracing to its origin
that speculative logical Christianity, which sur
vives among us at this day ; and which has been
in all ages, the principal obstacle, as I conceive, to
the union and peace of the Church of Christ. To
some indeed the assertion may even seem strange,
that the cause of Christianity has suffered to such
extent, from the logical character of the speculations
adopted into its system. They may readily admit
in general terms, that the intermixture of any spe
culation whatever with the body of religious truth,
must be detrimental to that truth. But they may
not be aware, at the same time, of the mischief
E 3

54 LECTURE II.
arising from the purely logical character of the spe
culation. It will be the object of the whole of the
present course of Lectures, to point out this mis
chief. But in order that I may carry my hearers
along with me throughout in my design, I would
place in front of the observations now to be sub
mitted, the nature of that evil which Scholasticism
embodies in it, — the evil of a Logical Theology.
If it be inquired then, why a Logical Theology
should be injurious to the cause of Christian truth,
we must seek an account of the case, not in the
association of any particular truths of human reason
with those of revelation, but in the simple fact of
the irrelevance of all deduction of consequences to
the establishment of religious doctrine. The Scrip
ture intimates to us certain facts concerning the
Divine Being : but conveying them to us by the
medium of language, it only brings them before us
darkly, under the signs appropriate to the thoughts
of the human mind. And though this kind of
knowledge is abundantly instructive to us in point
of sentiment and action ; teaches us, that is, both
how to feel, and how to act, towards God; — for it is
the language that we understand, the language
formed by our own experience and practice ; — it is
altogether inadequate in point of Science. The
most perfect reasonings founded on the terms of
theological propositions, amount only to evidences
of the various connexions of the signs employed.
We may obtain by such reasonings, greater precision
in the use of those signs. But the most accurate

LECTURE II. 55
conclusion still wants a key to interpret it. There
must be in fact a repeated revelation, to authorize
us to assert, that this or that conclusion represents
to us some truth concerning God.
If then it should appear, that the Scholastic Phi
losophy was in its fundamental character, a Logical
Theology, the nature of that evil which it has im
ported into Religion, will be sufficiently apparent.
And antecedently to our entering into the examin
ation of particular points, the reason will be seen in
general, of that vast apparatus of technical terms*
which Christian Theology now exhibits. It will
appear, that, whilst theologians of the schools have
thought they were establishing religious truth by
elaborate argumentation, they have been only mul
tiplying and arranging a theological language.
Nor let it be thought that the evil has rested
here ; — that the mere futility of the process has
worked its own antidote. Experience tells us that
it has not rested here. The signs have been con
verted into things. The combination and analysis
of words which the Logical Theology has produced,
have given occasion to the passions of men, to arm
themselves in defence of the phantoms thus called
into being. Not only have professed theologians,
but private Christians, been imposed on, by the
specious religion of terms of Theology ; and have
betrayed often a fond zeal in the service of their
idol-abstractions, not unlike that of the people of
old, who are said to have beaten the air with
spears, to expel the foreign gods by whom their
E 4s

56 LECTURE II.
country was supposed to be occupied3- For my
part, I believe it to be one of the chief causes of the
infidelity which prevails among speculative men.
Notions are proposed to them, which they feel them
selves competent to examine with freedom ; because
they have an instinctive perception of the source
from which they are derived. Every one who re
flects at all, has some knowledge of metaphysical
truth ; for it is the truth that is most intimate with
him. And when a reflecting person, accordingly,
has notions proposed to him, which he finds to be
part of the internal stock of principles belonging to
his nature, he is led to compare them with each
other, to discern contrarieties, and to reject what
perplexes and confounds him.
Premising these observations, with the view of
keeping steadily before the attention, the object,
not only of this Lecture in particular, but of the
whole course ; and as a general index to the re
marks which I shall be continually directing to the
same point ; I proceed now, to give a sketch of the
progress of Christian Theology to that state, from
which the evil consequences adverted to, have flowed.
These evil consequences have long been fully ac
knowledged in the parallel case of Physical Science.
It has been admitted there, that conclusions from
abstract terms, are no valid indications of facts in
nature. May we hope, that the time will come,
when the like will be as fully, and as practically,
admitted in Theology !
a Herodotus, in his account of the Caunians.

LECTURE II. 57
" Time was," says a Greek Father b, " when
" things with us were flourishing and well-ordered;
" when this exquisiteness, and precision, and tech-
" nicality, of Theology, had not so much as access
" to the divine courts ; when the saying or hearing
" any thing of subtilty, was accounted the same as
" playing tricks with pebbles that deceive the sight
" by sleight-of-hand, or as imposing on spectators in
" dancing with various and effeminate inflexions ;
" when simplicity and ingenuousness of expression
" had the estimation of piety. But from the time
" of the Sexti and the Pyrrhos, the tongue of
" antithesis c, like some grievous and malignant
" plague, has insinuated its corruption into our
" Churches, and frivolity has been considered eru-
" dition ; and, as the Book of the Acts says, we
" spend our time in nothing else but in telling or
" hearing something new d."
In this passage, Gregory Nazianzen, writing dur
ing the keen agitation of the Arian disputes, is ex
pressing his strong dislike of that disputatious logic,
which had proved an active weapon of disturbance
t> Gregor. Nazianz. Orat. XXI. p. 380. ed. Prun. Paris, 1609;
also Orat. XXIII. p. 422.— Note A. Lecture II.
c Antithesis was the favourite expedient of the heretic Mar
cion. By stating antitheses, or contrarieties, in the Old and
New Testaments, Marcion wished to prove, that the God of
the Jews was distinct from the God of the Christians. See
TertuUian adv. Marcion. lib. I. c. 11. lib. II. c. 29. — The ex
pression appears to be drawn from the ancient Physical Phi
losophy, in which the doctrine of Contrarieties was a funda
mental principle. d Note B.

58 LECTURE II.
to the Church. Early in the Latin Church, in the
writings of TertuUian, we find the like remon
strances against the dialectical warfare with which
heresy assailed the doctrine of the Trinity d. From
other ecclesiastical writers also, many passages might
be collected to a similar purport. And yet the great
Father of Latin orthodoxy, Augustine, expressly di
rects the Christian student to acquaint himself with
the discipline of disputation, the Logic or Dialectic
of those times ; characterizing it, as available for
" the penetration and solution of all kinds of ques-
" tions in sacred literature ;" and only cautioning
against " a passion for wrangling, and a childish
" sort of ostentation of deceiving an adversary13."
To logical science, in fact, simply considered as
an art of defence, as a discipline of disputation ap
plicable to the service of orthodoxy, there was never
any indisposition on the part of the Church author
ities. The most violent declaimers against the re
finements of logic are often, on the contrary, exam
ples of the most strenuous and undaunted argumen
tation in their own writings. As defenders of the
sacred truth, they would justify themselves by an
appeal to the manner and the precept of the Scrip
tures. The Epistles, it would be observed, were for
the most part works of controversy. St. Paul is
ll Tertull. de Praescript. Haer. c. vii. p. 205. fol.
e Sed disputationis disciplina ad omnia genera quaestionum
quae in literis Sanctis sunt, penetranda et dissolvenda, et pluri-
mum valet : tamen ibi cavenda est libido rixandi, et puerilis
quaedam ostentatio decipiendi adversarium. August, de Doctr.
Christ, lib. II. c. 31.

LECTURE II. 59
particularly represented in the passage of the Acts,
which I have already read, and in other places, as
" disputing and persuading the things concerning
" the kingdom of God '." The word " disputing" —
in the original, SiaAe-yo^ews* — would be recognised as
the technical term, by which the Greeks denoted
their familiar exercise of philosophical discussion ;
and which gave the name of Dialectic to their ori
ginal logical science. Again, in the conversations
of our Saviour himself, traces would be found of
the argumentative method of the ancient Schools :
such as the dilemma respecting the baptism of John?:
and the mode in which he sometimes evades a par
ticular question, by putting a question in return.
To the same purport would be interpreted, the de
scription of him in the midst of the Jewish Doctors,
hearing them, and asking them questions h. Such
passages as these are expressly referred to, indeed,
by theological writers, in order to prove, that the
science of argumentation is a just accomplishment
of the Christian, who would " give a reason of the
" hope that is in him." Still more, the word Logos
' Note C.
s This instance is still more striking when we refer to the
Greek, Matt. xxi. 24. ''Epa-r^ru w*a; Kq.yu Xoym ha — expressions
which remind us of the Socratic method of disputation — the
erotetic method by which the Greek sage used to extort the truth
from his reluctant opponent in argument. See also Matt. xxii.
41—46. 11 'EitepwuvTa. Luke ii. 46. Duodecim annos Salvator imple-
verat, et in templo senes de quEestionibus legis interrogans,
magis docet, dum prudenter interrogat. Hieronym. Epist. ad
Paulin. p. 6. Opera, Vol. I.

60 LECTURE II.
has been singled out for especial remark ; and1 its
application to Christ, as the Reason or Wisdom, and
Word, of God, has been cited, as an account of the
connexion of Logic, the science of words and rea
sons, with Christian Theology1.
It would appear, therefore, that the authorities of
the Church objected only to the employment of logic
in discussing questions of religion, when it was found
a vexatious instrument in the hands of the heretic.
Where the disputant professed an agreement with
the prescriptive views of the Church, there was no
objection in this case to the use of subtilties, which
otherwise incurred the severity of reprobation and
invective. Even sophisms, it was conceded, might
be rightly employed, where the design was, to esta
blish the orthodox truth, and subvert the false and
delusive conclusions of heresy '**. Thus was a kind
of Lacedaemonian policy pursued in regard to the
cultivation and exercise of logical science in the
Church. The member of the spiritual common
wealth was trained to acts of hostility against the
stranger and the enemy, but was most inconsistently
expected to live in quietness and inaction at home.
The whole institution was for war abroad ; whilst
he was strictly prohibited from displaying the skill
which he had acquired, in any occasion of domestic
grievance. The natural consequence was, that, as
the Spartan was restless within his own territory,
so the Christian logician was ever impatient to exert
1 Note D. k Note E.

LECTURE II. 61
¥
his disciplined acuteness within the pale of the
ChUrch itself.
Aristotle had been the great authority of some of
the early heretics. The speculations on the Trinity,
introduced by Artemon and Theodotus in the Und
century, were imputed to their study of Aristotle,
amongst other philosophers and authors of exact
science l. A prejudice against Aristotle appears to
have been created from that circumstance among
the professors of Christianity ; so far, that " Aristo
telic subtilty" was the familiar expression for a minute
and captious logic ; and the name of the philosopher
himself became almost a by- word for the master
and guide of each adventurous reasoner in Theo
logy m. Unjust and unreasonable as this imputation
was, it undoubtedly had its weight. It is enough
to give a name to any matter of objection, for the
many to join in the clamour against what they have
not examined, or have no disposition to examine.
Thus a traditional dislike to the logic, or rather the
philosophy in general, of Aristotle; — for he was
chiefly known as a logical Philosopher; — descended
from the early ages of the Church ; and his philo
sophy, accordingly, had to fight its way to the throne,
which it afterwards occupied with an undisputed,
unlimited, dominion.
So far, indeed, as Philosophy was owned by the
Church, the Platonism of Alexandria was the ascend
ant system. The piety of Platonism, its abstracted-
1 Note F. m Note G.

62 LECTURE II.
ness from the visible world, its elevation of the
moral sentiments, recommended it forcibly to the
imagination and the feelings of the contemplative
theologian. It appeared eminently, in contrast with
other systems, a knowledge of divine things ; a
knowledge, which led the mind to " acquaint itself
" with God, and be at peace." The Aristotelic Phi
losopher was regarded as a profane intruder, bring
ing the noisy jargon of the world into a sanctuary,
where every thought and feeling should be hushed
in holy contemplation. The busy spirit of the Latin
Churchman was a strong counteraction to this mys
ticism. Still the expressed partiality of Augustine
for the philosophy of Plato, combined with the in
vectives against Aristotle, thrown out from time to
time, had established that philosophy, in name at
least, as the orthodox system of the Western
Church ".
But whatever were the objections to Aristotle,
and to the art with which his name was associated,
it was impossible that logical science could remain
dormant in such a state of things, as that which the
Christian Church presented in the middle age. The
principles which I pointed out in my former Lec
ture, as conspiring to the rise of the Scholastic
Philosophy, the liberty of individual mind, and the
restraint of spiritual authority, would necessarily
force the mind into an artificial method of philoso
phizing. The intellect was in a situation, analogous
to that of a heart cut off from all that used to give
" Note H.

LECTURE II. 63
play to its feelings, and turning inwardly to feed on
itself. An art of Logic answered these internal
cravings of the mind. It enabled the mind, to wan
ton within the limits of prescribed hypotheses, and
to indulge in excursions which gave at least the
semblance of freedom to its efforts. Here was the
fundamental grievance, which led the intellectual
Christian of the middle age to cultivate a subtile
logic ; and raised the name of Aristotle to that
dreary eminence, from which he looks down on the
subject realms of Scholasticism.
The arts indeed were divided into different de
partments of study. The mystical number of Seven
completed the enumeration of them : but even in
this narrow range there was sufficient to exercise
and discipline the intellect, had they been independ
ently pursued. The three first, technically called
the Trivium, were Grammar °, Logic, Rhetoric ;
forming together the elementary instruction of the
Schools. The remaining four, under the corre
sponding name of the Quadrivium, or the Ma-
thesis, being Arithmetic, Geometry, Music p, Astro
logy % were the studies of the proficient. In fact,
however, no one of these sciences was independently
° John of Salisbury gives an interesting account of what was
taught under the name of Grammar, in what he says of Bernard
of Chartres, in his Tract entitled Metalogicus, lib. I. cap. 24.
p. 780. — Note I.
p On the connexion of Music with Theology see Abelard, In-
trod. ad Theol. lib. I. Oper. p. 1017. — Note J.
*" Astrology was the name for what we now call Astronomy,
as well as for the mystical art of divination by the stars.

64 LECTURE II.
pursued. All were studied in subservience to Theo
logy ; as subordinate sciences, handmaids, and mi
nisters, to Theology, the queen-science, to which all
owed obeisance and service. The result was, of
course, that no one science was studied perfectly, or
on its own principles ; and soon, all were absorbed
in one vast speculative system, in which Logic took
the lead ; but of which the constituent principles
were, an abstruse system of Metaphysics drawn
from the philosophy of Language.
The neglect into which the different arts fell in
process of time, is important to be observed ; for it
marks the direction, in which the efforts of specula
tion were then tending. The mind seized on every
subject, in order to convert it into theological specu
lation. Logic, consequently, became more than a
mere instrument of disputation. It was converted
into a method of philosophy, an instrument for in
vestigating truth. As one of the Seven Arts, it was
neglected, no less perhaps than the rest. There was
no searching into its principles, with the view of
ascertaining a just theory of argumentation. Its
exaltation to the rank of the science of Investiga
tion, left the fields of its own proper region unculti
vated, amidst the vain ambition of conquests over
the empire of science. As an organ of philosophy,
it was explored only in its connexion with meta
physical truth ; as it serves, that is, to unravel those
associations of thought, of which it is the key, so
far as it is the result of them, — an effect produced
by the mind's operation within itself.

LECTURE II. 65
It is obvious, that the study of a Science solely
with a view to a particular object, and that too an
object not strictly connected with it, must narrow
and corrupt it. A very cursory survey of the
Dialectic of Damascenus will shew, to what a di
minutive outline the noble Science of Aristotle had
dwindled, in the Greek Church of the VHIth cen
tury. We find there, no longer an enlarged phi
losophy of language, but mere Terminology ; a col
lection of technical terms, explained, in immediate
application to their theological use, and by way of
Introduction to Theology. Such, in a still greater
degree, was the Logic of the Latin schools. It was
only indeed at the time of Cicero, that Aristotle's
writings were brought to light, from the long ob
scurity in which they were buried. And it is not
asserting too much to say, that, even had the Ro
mans been disposed to encourage a speculative phi
losophy, there was then no one competent, either
justly to value, or fully to explain, his logical doc
trines. An art of logic had long been current in
use, the Dialectic of the Stoics, which, so far from
opening the mind to the reception of a truly phi
losophical method, had diverted men from the right
pursuit, had prejudiced them with wrong notions
of the science. If Aristotle therefore were studied,
it would naturally be such portions of his Logic,
as coincided, or seemed to coincide, most with the
existing imperfect views. Hence the almost ex
clusive study among the Latins of his treatise en
titled, The Categories, or Predicaments. Though
F

66 LECTURE IL
other treatises of his Logic were translated into
Latin, these soon fell into disuse. A compendium
of Dialectic, founded on the Categories of Aristotle,
and passed under the name of Augustine, became
the ordinary text-book, from which the whole sci
ence was professed to be taught in the Latin schools,
down to the end of the XHth century. Other ab
stracts of logic, drawn from Boethius, Cassiodorus,
and Capella, appear also to have been used ; and
each distinguished master, probably, composed his
own treatise of the art. But all were confined to
the same meagre technicalities, which alone accorded
with the corrupt theological taste of the times.
Whilst indeed the Church-authorities so jealously
watched the progress of logical speculation, the
writings themselves of Aristotle lay under a ban of
exclusion. Some of his treatises were actually coupled
in the same sentence which branded the heretical
disputer : — such was the prevailing ignorance, even
at the University of Paris, the principal school of
the Latin world, respecting the contents of those
volumes, which alone developed the principles of
the philosopher, of whom all professed themselves
the disciples r.
This ignorance, and the fear resulting from it,
were the result of that state of things, in which we
find the Latin Church after the division of the Em
pire. Reduced to an infrequent intercourse with
Greece, the Latin lost not only the knowledge, but
the language itself, of philosophy. He could no
'* Note K.

LECTURE II. 67
longer avail himself of the treasures of Greek wis
dom in their own authentic depositories, but was
obliged to have recourse to the secondary channel
of translations and commentaries in the Latin lan
guage. The very professors of science fell into a
decrepitude of learning, which needed every auxiliary
to its feebleness.
It was the noble conception of the admirable
Boethius to have repaired this loss to the Latin
world, and to have transfused into their own tongue
the principal documents of Greek philosophy ; not
only by translations, but by his own writings. He
applied himself to this vast undertaking, with a
spirit worthy of the best days of Rome, and a talent
for philosophy, cultivated by hearing the last suc
cessors of Plato and Aristotle, on the classic ground
itself where those philosophers had taught. Un
happily however, cut off by the cruel jealousy of
the Emperor Theodoric, in the midst of his patri
otic and gentle labours, he lived only to bequeath
to the Christians of the West an inconsiderable
portion of these comprehensive designs.
But what Boethius accomplished served, in fact,
to maintain the tradition of Philosophy, through the
dark period consequent on the opening of the Vlth
century, to the days of its incipient regeneration in
the VHIth. He was, to the Latin Science, what
Augustine was, to the Latin Theology s. His writ-
s Augustine knew nothing of the Greek Philosophy but
through translations. He had disliked and neglected the study
of Greek in his youth ; and his mature age called him to prac-
F 2!

68 LECTURE II.
ings were the foundation on which the Scholastic
Philosophy afterwards reared its complex system;
so far as they presented an example to the Latin
Church, of that eclectic philosophy of the New-Pla
tonists, which combined the logic and metaphysics of
Aristotle with the fundamental theories of Plato.
The Latin Christians then, confined by the policy
of their Church, as well as by the circumstances of
the times, within the narrow boundaries of the
Latin Philosophy, became necessarily mere sciolists
in the very art which they ostentatiously professed.
In the XHIth century however a marked im
provement is discernible. The Western Church
feels the influence of that general excitement and
renovation of society, which the transportation of
Europe into Asia by the first Crusades had pro
duced. An ardour is revived for the recovery of
the monuments of Greek Philosophy ; and several
of Aristotle's treatises, which had been unknown or
forgotten in the schools of the West, are now
brought home to the inquisitive Latin. An im
portant accession is made to the stock of Latin
literature, by translations from the works of Ara
bian philosophers, who had laboured in the exposi
tion of Aristotle's doctrines. The genius of the
Arab, wild and waste as his own plains, imparts
the touch of its metaphysical enthusiasm to the
reanimated spirit of the Latin schools t. And thus
at length Scholasticism, rich with the Aristotelic
cal labours of another kind. See his Confessions, lib. I. c. 14.
VII. c. 9. VIII. c. 2. t Note L.

LECTURE II. 69
spoils gathered by other hands, attains its fulness of
stature, as a logical philosophy, the interpreter at
once of Revelation and of Nature.
In the meantime however irregular efforts were
continually made towards an enlargement of the
basis of the Dialectical Science professed in the
Schools, and to introduce the Logic of Aristotle
himself11. Whilst some obstinately adhered to the
existing narrow system, content with the little
sphere in which they could exert a feeble talent
with address and applause ; or apprehensive of
danger from any experiment of improvement ; there
were others of vigour and penetration of mind, be
yond the horizon which limited their excursions, or
bold enough to risk the imputation of heresy in their
adventurous pursuit of the truth.
The question debated between the Nominalists
and Realists is a striking instance of this fact ; and
is of great importance consequently in tracing the
progress of philosophy among the Latins to its
ultimate development in the Scholastic system.
Unfortunately, there are no extant writings of
Roscelin, the ostensible head of the Nominalists of
the Xlth century ; so that it is scarcely possible to
ascertain what his precise opinion was. The evi
dent cause however of that violence with which his
logical theory was attacked, was, its supposed con
sequences in theology. He was accused of having
taught, that in expressing the doctrine of the Tri
nity, we might say three Gods, with as much pro-
11 Note M.
F 3

70 LECTURE II.
priety as we say there are three Persons; if the
former were only sanctioned by the usage of speech.
Anselm of Canterbury, himself an acute reasoner,
to whom the opinion of Roscelin was reported as a
matter of heresy, had the candour to suspect the
Justness of the imputation x. But as the oracle of
orthodoxy of his time, Anselm still felt himself
called upon to check the progress of the heretical
logic. By his active vigilance, both as a writer and
a governor of the Church, the offending Nominalist
was silenced. But not so the cause itself of Nomi
nalism. This had too deep a seat in the requisi
tions of the human mind in that age ; it shrank
from the gaze of orthodoxy; but it still grew in
the shades of the Schools.
The triumph of Realism is particularly to be
noticed here, as an instance of the very same prin
ciple which had given its general mould to the
Scholastic System. It was Philosophy held in sub
ordination to Church-Authority. It was that view
of the origin of human knowledge which carried
men from efforts of self-information, from examin
ation of nature to repose on principles infused into
the mind by dictation from others. This theory,
by assigning, what metaphysicians call an objective
reality, to the general notions of the mind, made the
whole of our knowledge deducible from abstract
ideas. A dictatorial and a speculative Theology
readily combined with such a theory. Men were
x Note N.

LECTURE II. 71
thus taught, to distrust the senses ; to distrust con
clusions from mere experience ; and to rely only on
the clear consequences of unquestioned speculative
principles. It was the maxim, Invisibilia non de-
cipiunt, made the ground of alliance between Re
ligion and Philosophy. Nominalism, on the contrary,
by denying any objective reality to general notions,
led the way directly to the testimony of the senses
and the conclusions of experience. Though in the
Scholastic age itself, the whole consequences of that
theory of human knowledge might not be per
ceived, it would lead men certainly, even in that
dark period, to think more for themselves — to ex
amine their own convictions — to look to the exter
nal evidence by which any given assertion might
be supported. For if it were admitted, that the
notions of the mind, expressed by general terms,
were not the actual representatives of objects exist
ing out of itself, men would no longer depend on
abstractions, as their sure and only means of know
ledge. They would doubt the physical truth of con
clusions resting solely on such evidence ; and would
be disposed at least to seek some ground of belief
elsewhere. The validity of an appeal to experience
would, of course, be but tremblingly entertained at
such a period, amidst the complete general subjugation
of the intellect to the force of Religious Authority.
And we shall not be surprised therefore, that the
Nominalists of that day, or of the following century,
did not push their theory to its full consequences >r.
y Note O.
F 4

72 LECTURE II.
The triumph of Realism is coincident with the
ascendancy of the Scholastic Philosophy. It is just
at this point, that the maturity of the struggle be
tween Reason and Authority was consummated.
Albert and Aquinas, by adopting the Realist doc
trine, gave its proper philosophical basis to Scho
lasticism. Before the middle of the XIHth century,
when these great authors of the system flourished,
it could not be considered as having obtained any
definite scientific character. The ground-plan of
such a mode of speculation had been previously
sketched, with more or less distinctness, and parti
cularly, by Anselm, Abelard, and Lombard. But
these established the Principle, on which the specu
lation should henceforth proceed ; gave it a body
and a system, working out the original faint out
line from the more extensive materials supplied to
their hands.
The conflicts of argument at an earlier period,
shew the unsettled state of opinion as to the prin
ciple of the system, which those several efforts were
tending to erect. The questionings of the IXth
century on the nature of Christ's Presence in the
Eucharist, evince a doubt as to the point where the
evidence of the senses ends, or how far such evi
dence might be admitted against internal convictions
of the mind. Here the original Platonism of the
Church ruled the case. A Real Presence was as
serted, which implied the deceptiveness of the
senses z- Whilst however this decision prevailed, it
z In the Catechismus ad Parochos, the direction is given to

LECTURE II. 73
did not pass, we may observe, without a counter-
appeal on the part of the disputant of that age, to
the validity of the testimony so imperiously set
aside. As we glance through the Xlth and Xllth cen
turies, we perceive the philosophical character of
Scholasticism coming more into view. In its pro
gress through that period, it exhibits not so much
the literary form as the professorial. We find in
dividuals eminent for their talents as lecturers, like
the Sophist of old, leading after them, by the charm
of their voice a, troops of sequacious hearers, as they
went from place to place. This was a state of ef
fervescence. What was wanting evidently for the
literary perfection of the system, was a more ex
tensive acquaintance with the stores of ancient phi
losophy. Individuals were vaguely seeking rather
to originate systems of their own, than working on
any established method.
But the Scholasticism of Albert and Aquinas
being once recognised as the philosophy of the
Church, we find the same spirit in action, which had
originally given truth to Scholasticism itself. No
minalism seemed to be silenced ; but it was only to
recruit its vigour, and to struggle more effectually
the ministers of Religion, to withdraw their flocks, as much as
possible, from attending to the judgment of the senses. — Curan-
dum igitur est, ut fidelium mentes, quam maxime fieri potest,
a sensuum judicio abstrahantur ; atque ad immensam Dei vir-
tutem et potentiam contemplandam excitentur. Catech. ad
Paroch. p. 195. ed. 4to. Romae.
a Plato, in the Protagoras. — Note P.

74 LECTURE II.
against the ascendant doctrine of the Realists.
John Duns Scotus, and William Ockam, the two
most distinguished names of the following period,
are the personal representatives of the rival theories
as then subsisting in the philosophy of the Schools b.
Ockam, indeed, has obtained a merited celebrity by
the title of the second founder of the school of No
minalism ; and from having, on that account, in
curred the condemnation of the ruling party in the
Church ; of the University at least of Paris, the
great centre of philosophical orthodoxy in those
times c. It is evident that, now that a proper
Church-Philosophy had been established, Nominal
ism was to the present system, what the previous
efforts of speculation had been, when the objection
was to all speculation whatever. It was regarded as
hostile to reasonings, on which a systematic per
fection had been given to the Christian truths. It
is remarkable however, as illustrative of the ma
turity of the School-Theology ; of its perfect trans
formation, that is, into a Logical Philosophy ; that
Nominalism was maintained by Ockam, rather as a
question of Philosophy than of Theology d. Prac
tically he was a Realist, no less than his Master
Duns Scotus, whom he strenuously opposes in
theory : since we find both equally pursuing the
track of their predecessors, not only in the dry syl
logistic form of their arguments, but in the import-
b John Duns Scotus taught at Cologne in 1308. — William
Ockam died in 1343.
c Note Q. a Note R.

LECTURE II. 75
tance attributed by them to abstract notions in their
respective speculations.
The XlVth century in fact, though it witnessed
the revival and spread of Nominalism, the germ of
a future revolution in science, exhibits precisely
that state of learning and literature, which might
be expected from the established ascendancy of a
Logical Philosophy. The dominion of a sterile
principle is shewn, in the blank waste which the
fields of knowledge present ; in the no-harvest pro
duced from even that happier soil on which the
hand of Roger Bacon e had laboured. The senten
tious philosophy extracted from the writings of
Aristotle was wonderfully attractive to the sciolists
of the day; as it furnished them with an ample
nomenclature of science, and enabled them to pro
nounce with little effort on every point of specula
tion. It was attractive also to the gifted spirits of
the age ; for they would see, that there was enough
deeply to interest and exercise the highest intellect,
in the questions excited by that master of exact
thoughts and comprehensive views. Whilst the
former class could thus readily fill the schools with
a wordy war, the latter spent their strength in mi
nute speculations subservient to the dominant spirit
of Scholastic Logic. Thus was the state of things
immovable for a period. A great effort appeared
to have been accomplished; and men rested for a
while, in devout admiration and self-complacency at
what they had gained ; more oppressed by the vast
e Roger Bacon, born 12 16, died 1294.

76 LECTURE II.
stores which had crowded on them, than able to
apply these treasures to any solid account.
This state of quiescence sufficed however for the
perpetuity of the Aristotelic Philosophy in the
West, even after the revolutions of science which
characterized the following centuries. It is not
with a logical philosophy, as with any other system.
A particular theory in metaphysics, or physics, may
have its day and pass away. But a science, which
is an universal method — which is carried into every
subject — particularly one like this, entering into the
vitals of Religion, and entwining itself with a para
sitical fondness round the majestic body of sacred
truth — cannot be dispelled altogether by any re
formation. It becomes part, not only of the scien
tific language of a people, but the idiom in which
they express their ordinary ideas. This has been
eminently the case with the philosophy of Ari
stotle, in its transition through the schools of the
middle age. It is in the very air of our social life.
Its legend, though worn, is not effaced from the
current coin of our philosophy and our theology.
On the present occasion, we are concerned with
its influence on our Theology : or to state it more
explicitly, with the traces of itself, which it has left
on the terms familiarly employed in our creeds and
articles and expositions of religion. With a view
to this result, I shall now give some account of the
general character of Theology, as moulded by the
disputations of the Schools.

LECTURE II. 77
The tendency of the whole system which we
have been reviewing, was, to erect Theology into a
perfect Science. It set out with the design of en
abling the Christian, when assailed on points of
heresy, or perplexed with questionings as to truths
simply proposed to his belief, to give a reason of
the doctrines of his Faith. Assuming that matters
of Faith might become matters of understanding to
those who believed; it attempted to establish, by
processes of reasoning from given principles of
Theology, each doctrine of Religion, independently
of the sacred authority on which it rests in the
Scripture. Arguments, proposed originally as an
swers to an opponent, and availing properly only, as
solutions of particular objections, or refutations of
particular statements, were applied as grounds of
evidence, for the establishment of the truth uni
versally. And thus a vast collection of principles
was obtained, from which conclusions in Theology
might be drawn. At length Theology rose into a
regular demonstrative science, built up on axioms
of metaphysics, and cohering in all its parts by the
cement of logical connexion f.
Rightly to conceive the nature of this scientific
or logical Theology, we must divest our minds of
that popular notion of Science, which modern im
provements in Philosophy have introduced. It is
not the reduction and classification of facts, which
was understood as Science by the Scholastic Phi
losopher. His notion of Science was deduced from
f Note S.

78 LECTURE II.
the ancient philosophy, which considered no know
ledge worthy of the name, but such as rested on
fixed indisputable principles; — not, as those collected
from experience and observation, open to exception
and contradiction from varied and conflicting ex
periences ; — but possessing an intrinsic necessary
evidence ; of the nature, that is, of mathematical
truth. When Theology then was exalted by the
Schoolmen to the rank of the queen-science, and
viewed as containing in it the primary truths of all
knowledges; it was conceived to be the science of
necessary principles, on which the mind reposed
with the fullest confidence, as impossible to be
otherwise than they are, and therefore affording a
sure ground for the conclusions of reason.
But to the Christian speculator, under such a
method, these principles would, of course, be sought
nowhere else, but in the Divine Being himself. He
who alone " changes not," would naturally be the
point of departure in such a philosophy. His nature
and attributes, so far as they were explained by the
light of reason, or revealed by the illumination of
Scripture, would alone present to the inquirer that
immobility and eternity and absolute priority of
truth, of which he was in quest.

b Secundum hoc quaerit sermocinales et logicas scientias, ut
ancillentur ad sciendi adminiculum et modum, sive addiscendi.
.... Impossibile est, quod haec scientia finem in aliis scientiis
habet; sed ipsa finis aliarum scientiarum est, ad quam omnes
alias referuntur ut ancillae. Albert. Mag. in Lib. Sent. Tract. II.
qu. vn. fol. 7. — Also Aquin. S. Theol. Ima P. qu. 1. art. 5.

LECTURE II. 79
It was a circumstance favourable to this scientific
Theology, that what the ancients called their First
Philosophy, or their abstract philosophy of Being,
they dignified by the name of Theology h ; placing
under this head, the speculation concerning spiritual
natures, as well as the science of the principles
of the human mind. The application again, of the
term Truth to the person of Christ, as also of
Wisdom to the knowledge of the most sublime and
divine things, (both in the Scripture and in the
works of philosophers,) further promoted the erec
tion of Christian Theology into that exact theoretic
form, which it obtained in the Scholastic system.
Originating however in a combination of the
judgments of speculative Reason with the prescrip
tions of Authority, the system, at its maturity, ex
hibits in its internal structure, the result of that
conflict of elements, out of which it had grown. Its
principles, as I have said, were to be drawn from
the nature of the Divine Being ; as the only sure
ground on which a Divine and Universal Philosophy
could fix its first steps. But where was the evi
dence or criterion of the truth of those principles ?
Given the nature of the Divine Being ; given the
principles themselves immediately as they existed
in Him ; there could be no doubt of the truth of the
conclusions deduced from them. But it was ad-
11 Est apud eundem Aristotelem, in Imo Metaphysicorum,
praeclara disputatio de summa ilia divinaque sapientia, mirifice
in Theologiam nostram congruens. Petavii Dogm. Theol. Pro-
legom. c. 8. — Also Aquinas, S. Theol. Ima P. qu. i. art. 6.

80 LECTURE II.
mitted that the nature of God, as He is in Himself,
is incomprehensible by the human faculties ; that we
cannot attain in the present life to the knowledge
of his essence'. This difficulty might appear in
superable. But it was not so to the Schoolman
versed in an eclectic philosophy, in which the mysti
cism of Plato was blended with the analytical method
of Aristotle. The principle of Faith here answered
the purpose of solving this speculative difficulty, as
well as of securing the prescriptive right of Autho
rity. Theology then, as a natural knowledge, could
not itself discover and establish the principles on
which it reasoned. It might however receive those
principles, through Faith, from an higher science,
the science or knowledge of God ; as one human
science receives its principles from another ; as
Music, according to the illustration of Aquinas, as
sumes its principles from Arithmetic, or Perspec
tive from Geometry k. If we believe the Scripture
' The Scholastics inherited this admission not only from the
Platonic philosophy, but from their own early authorities.
Hilary has well expressed the truth. — Perfecta scientia est, sic
Deum scire, ut, licet non ignorabilem, tamen inenarrabilem
scias. Credendus est ; intelligendus est ; adorandus est; et his
officiis eloquendus. S. Hilar, de Trin. lib. II. c. 7. torn. II. p. 31.
k Quaedam vero sunt, quae procedunt ex principiis notis lu-
mine superioris sciential, sicut Perspectiva procedit ex principiis
notificatis per Geometriam ; et Musica ex principiis per Arith-
meticam notis. Et hoc modo sacra doctrina est scientia, quia
procedit ex principiis notis lumine superioris scientiae, quae sci
licet est scientia Dei et beatorum. Unde sicut Musicus credit
principia tradita sibi ab Arithmetico, ita doctrina sacra credit
principia revelata sibi a Deo. Aquinat. Summa Theolog. Prima
Pars. qu. 1. art. 2.

LECTURE II. 81
accordingly, we may proceed to the exercise of un
derstanding: — the authority of Revelation being
conceded, Reason has its ground, on which it may
build its airy edifice of speculation l.
The object accordingly of the Scholastic Theology
was, to detect and draw forth from the Scripture,
by aid of the subtile analysis of the philosophy of
Aristotle, the mystical truths of God, on which the
Scripture-Revelation was conceived to be founded.
The Scripture itself, addressing us in the language
of our natural knowledge, conveys to us the prin
ciples of the Divine Science by analogies, which at
once intimate the truth, and veil it from human
apprehension. Philosophy applied to the Scripture,
dispels these shadows with which the truth as now
seen is overcast ; removes the veil which now inter
cepts our view ; withdraws our attention from the
mere symbols and signs ; and brings ultimately be
fore the eye of the mind, the mysterious, yet more
real, verities of the Divine knowledge.
Thus was the Idealism of the Platonic School
combined with the Sensualism of the Aristotelic.
The principles on which the Scholastic Theology
1 Et ut alia taceam, quibus sacra pagina nos ad investigan-
dam rationem invitat ; ubi dicit, " nisi credideritis, non intel-
" ligetis," aperte monet, intentionem ad intellectum extendere,
cum docet, qualiter ad ilium debeamus proficere. Denique,
quoniam inter fidem et speciem, intellectum, quem in hac vita
capimus, esse medium intelligo, quanto aliquis ad ilium pro-
ficit, tanto eum propinquare speciei (ad quam omnes anhela-
mus) existimo. Anselm. De Incarnat. Verbi, praef. p. 33.
G

82 LECTURE II.
here professed to be based, were no other than the
Ideas of the Divine Mind, as assigned by the Pla-
tonists of the Alexandrian School. Translated into
the language of Aristotle, these Ideas of Platonism
became, in the Scholastic system, the Forms of
things; — the expression being adopted, by which
Aristotle denoted the differences, or characteristics,
that distinguish one object from another™. By this
substitution of technical phraseology, was the phi
losophy of Aristotle brought to the support of a
Theory, which in his own writings he has strenu
ously condemned as a vain mystification of science.
The employment of Logic, as an organ of inves
tigation, naturally led to this result. The business
in which such a method of philosophizing was
really engaged — the utmost that it actually ac
complished, amidst all its curiosity and activity —
was to frame a science of exact definitions. Logical
distinctions and conclusions amount only to an
analysis of the notions involved in general terms;
and when employed therefore to ascertain the na
ture of a thing, terminate in giving a more exact
notion of the term by which it is signified. Such
in fact was the science of Forms in Aristotle's Phi
losophy. They were strictly the logical definitions
of the species of things ; limits fixed in the region
m Respondeo dicendum, quod necesse est ponere in mente
dtvina ideas. Idea enim Graece, Latine forma dicitur. Unde
per ideas intelliguntur formae aliquarum rerum, praeter ipsas res
existentes, &c. Aquinat. Summ. Theolog. Ima Par. qu. xv.
art. i. — Also qu. xliv. art. 3. — Note T.

LECTURE II. 83
of the mind alone ; and so far coincident with the
Ideas of the Platonists.
This then was a neutral ground between the two
philosophies, on which the Scholastic Theology took
its stand. Here, as in a point of contact, met the
theories peculiar to each, to diffuse themselves after
wards in a vast system of Realism, that embraced
within it the whole world of science. For whilst it
was admitted with Aristotle, that our natural know
ledge originates in occasions furnished by the ob
servations of Sense, this sound experimental phi
losophy was absorbed and lost, in the more sublime
and mystical science, to which it was held to be the
mere introduction, or symbolical language.
We may see, at the same time, how the mystical,
and the practical character, originally belonging to
the Latin Theology, still continued to characterize
it, when it assumed the definite form of Scholasti
cism. The regard paid by the Schoolmen to the
mystical treatises of The Celestial Hierarchy, and
The Divine Names, — works, composed probably in
the Vth century, but, in the fashion of the age n,
" We must not suppose that there was always fraud designed,
in such ascriptions of works to venerated names. There pro
bably was in this particular case, as it appears to have been a
bold effort on the part of the New-Platonism, to establish itself
in the Church. But in many cases, the practice appears to
have been adopted on rhetorical grounds, to give greater in
fluence to the arguments of a work. Alcuin used this method,
with a view of exciting emulation of the great writers of anti
quity. Gibbon mentions a supplicatory letter of Pope Stephen
III, A. D. 754, written in the name and person of St. Peter.
Rom. Emp. c. 49- It was in the same taste, that, at one time,
G 2

84 LECTURE II.
ascribed to Dionysius the Areopagite, the convert
of St. Paul at Athens, shews that their system did
not recoil even from the most extravagant mysticism
of contemplation °. Indeed no further proof of the
fact is required, than the commentaries lavished on
the Book of the Canticles p, at the different periods
of Scholasticism. Still, as we might expect, the
practical character is the more apparent. The fore
ground is filled with discussion and debate. We
find ourselves in the midst of arguers and masters
of Theology, to whose reasonings we must listen
with a docile attention ; whilst we bow in awe be
fore the mystic forms of a piety and a spirituality,
which cast their solemn shadows over the scene of
disputation. The whole philosophy of Aristotle readily accom
modated itself to such a Theology. His physical
science is throughout logical, being indeed a body
of conclusions from his metaphysical doctrines.
writers of the middle age used to assume after their own names,
that of some classic author.
° The singular work of Erigena on The Division of Natures,
whilst as an original work of Philosophy it exhibited too bold
a form of metaphysical speculation for the taste of the Latin
Theologian, is an evidence of the strong current with which
Platonism flowed in the Western Church in the IXth century.
P It is curious to find Jerome, in prescribing a course of edu
cation for the infant grand-daughter of Paula, recommending
the study of the Canticles, as the ultimate point of her theolo
gical progress. Hieronym. Epistol. ad Laetam. Opera, torn. I.
p. 57. Bernard has eighty-six Sermons on the Canticles, and
these form only an unfinished work. — Note U.

LECTURE II. 85
His ethical science, though in its principles founded
on fact and observation, is thrown, in its didactic
form, into the same logical mould. So that, upon
the whole, his Philosophy, in its written form at
least, may justly be regarded, as a deduction of
given principles to the particulars implied in them ;
as a method of establishing truth, by processes of
reasoning, by discussion of questions on points of
speculation, rather than by interrogation of nature.
The method of a Logical Philosophy must con
sist chiefly of discussion of opinions. Argument,
and not evidence, will be the object of its pursuit.
It will be concerned in finding out, what may be
unanswerably affirmed, rather than what is the fact
and the truth of things. The interminable ques
tions of the Schoolmen were but an exaggeration of
the method of Aristotle himself; — a depraved ap
plication of his maxim, that, " to propose doubts
" well i," is of service for the discovery of truth.
This mode of proceeding was strictly their philo
sophical Analysis : in untying the perplexed knots
in which the ingenuity of speculation or fancy
might entangle a subject, they were opening, ac
cording to their views, the real nature of the sub
ject so involved. It was more indeed the example
of the Greek Sophists that they followed, than of
Aristotle himself in this respect. For though Ari
stotle may ascribe too great importance to the dis
cussion of logical questions and difficulties, he has
q To iMopfrat W.S«. Metaphys. 1. III. c. i.— Also Topic.
1. I.— Ethic. 1. VII.
G 3

86 LECTURE II.
not so entirely rested the truth of science upon
them ; nor has he descended to such frivolities of
inquiry. The Schoolmen, however, rest the whole
strength of their cause in the determination of
questions. Their whole Theology is a congeries of
doubts ; the effect of which is to leave the mind in
a state of Academic Scepticism, very different from
that reasonable satisfaction which is apparently the
object of pursuit1-. They readily seized the man
ner of the Philosopher, so far as it appeared on the
surface of his writings. They pronounced senten-
tiously ; but they omitted to philosophize largely.
The vast materials through which his research
must have extended, were to them a subterranean
world, over which they trod with unsuspecting
step. What added to their delusion was, that the
writings of Aristotle are, for the most part, sug
gestive treatises, composed with reference to the
oral instruction, with which they were accompanied
in their delivery. Appearing consequently in the
form of text-books, they were easily converted into
authorities, applicable in detached sentences to the
decision of each controverted point.
In Scholasticism accordingly the Dialectical Art
I was all in all. Theology becoming a science founded
on Definitions, and being conceived to contain the
first principles of all other sciences, was forced to
have recourse to the analytical power of Lan-
l* See John of Salisbury, Policratic. lib. VIII, c. 6. p. 425.
Metalogic. lib. III. pp. 839, 845. — Note V.

LECTURE II. 87
guage, the only means of combining into one mass
the various incongruous materials usurped into its
system. Each term of language being significant of
an indefinite number of particulars ; and these par
ticulars again, when denoted by words, being each
significant of other particulars ; language presents
a medium of classification to an indefinite extent.
But the very medium of classification thus pre
sented, enabling the mind to combine things, in
dependently of actual observation of facts with a
view to such combination, imposes on us by the
subtilty and facility of its application. We believe
that we have combined real facts in nature, when
we have only explored and marked connexions
which our own minds have woven together.
Such then was the Theology of the Schools. It
is, in effect, what we designate in a word by Real
ism — the conversion of mere Logical and Metaphy
sical truth into physical — a description, as it were,
of the lands and seas of the visible world by an
untravelled eye, from a study of the map of the
human mind. For whilst some Scholastics pro
fessed to disclaim the Realist doctrine, yet, as I
have already observed of the great leader of the
Nominalists of the XlVth century, all were prac
tically Realists in this respect, that they applied the
analytical power of language to the interpretation
of nature. It may further illustrate the character
of a Theology so constructed, to observe the ana
logy which it bears to the personifications of heathen
mythology. The genius of Paganism seized the
G 4

88 LECTURE II.
fancy with some image of loveliness or mirth or
awe, expressing the tendency of the mind to realize
its own abstractions, in the fabled beings of a many-
peopled heaven. Scholasticism in like manner has
its apotheosis of human ideas ; only that here an
exact Logic has worked the transmutation, which
Poetry effected in the other.
When a Theology of this a priori character was
established, it nullified the use of the Scripture as
a record of the divine dealings with the successive
generations of mankind. The voice of God was no
longer heard as it spoke " in sundry times and in
" divers manners" to holy men of old ; but simply
as uttering the hallowed symbols of an oracular
wisdom. The whole of Revelation was treated as
one contemporaneous production ; of which the se
veral parts might be expounded, without reference
to the circumstances in which each was delivered.
For what was termed in the Schools, the Analogy
of Faith, was not, as might be supposed, an inter
pretation of passages relatively to particular periods
and particular occasions, but merely the shewing
that " the truth of one Scripture was not repugnant
" to the truth of another8." The Bible thus lost
its most important characteristic in the comparison
with other assumed Revelations. The Koran is
professedly the effusion of a single writer ; — slowly
s Analogia vero est, cum Veritas unius Scripturse ostenditur
veritati alterius non repugnare. Aquinas, Summ. Theolog. Ima
Par. qu. i. art. io. — Note W.

LECTURE II. 89
dealt out indeed at intervals as the calls of imposr
ture suggested ; and therefore spread over some
period in its actual delivery. But if we compare
it with our sacred books in this respect ; in the one,
we find a continuous rhapsody unconnected with
the solid materials of progressive history ; in the
other, we have details of successive events — docu
ments of history, of prophecy, and of precept —
published at distinct and wide intervals, relating to
the history of mankind at large, as well as to that
particular people among whom they were pub
lished. If now we regard the Scriptures in the way of
the Schoolmen, as having God for their proper sub
ject, instead of reading them as a divine history of
man, we naturally neglect the analogies of times
and circumstances. The immutability of the Divine
Being, in the contemplation of whom we are then
exclusively engaged, is the prevailing object of our
inquiry. Distinctions of time lose all their import
ance in this point of view. Our business is, to col
lect into one theory every scattered intimation of
the Divine being and attributes.
If on the contrary we take the nature and con
dition of man under Divine Providence, as the great
subject of our sacred Books, we are as naturally led
to study the facts recorded in the Scripture in their
real historical place. We then seek to learn, what
man has been at the infancy, and at the maturity, of
his condition in the world ; how he has been treated
by his Creator at different periods, and how he has

90 LECTURE II.
responded to that treatment. Hence results an his
torical theology, a register as it were of the reli
gious conduct of man under the government of
God ; and consequently principles of the Divine
Character and Government applicable to the future
direction of our lives. Such however was not the
method of the Schoolmen. They inverted the pro
cess, and commenced with those notions in which
they should have ended their inquiry.
The theology of the Schools involved further a
total disregard of the Rhetorical nature of the Scrip
tures. In the ascendancy of the spirit of dog
matism, every sentiment of holy exhortation, the
terrors of rebuke, the winnings of persuasion, the
piety of fatherly love, the commands of authority,
all disappear, except in the inert tangible material
of the words themselves, on which an unfeeling
reason may act. I need only advert here to the
effect produced on the doctrines of Grace by this
intrusive Logic. The truth of the Divine Predes
tination has suffered, perhaps more than any other,
from being treated in this way. We recoil from
the train of consequences which have been de
duced from it, and from the subtile speculations by
which the notion of it has been attempted to be
defined. But read it in the Scripture ; — take it as
a word of encouragement, as an unanswerable ap
peal to the heart ; — feel it, that is, and be per
suaded by it, as an argument of the Holy Spirit
pleading with you ; — and then you find, that it has

LECTURE II. 91
not been written in vain in the history of God's
providences. The subject of the Rhetorical nature of the Scrip
tures is of large compass; and one that, from its
real importance, deserves a more distinct consider
ation than it has yet obtained. I feel convinced
that, were due weight given to it in our theological
studies, it would tend more than any thing else,
to dissipate the wild theories of speculative religion
ists, and bring men to the true way of finding out
God in the Scriptures. At present however I only
allude to it, as the neglect of it was involved in that
kind of Theology, which the Schools established.
The Schoolmen had a high veneration for the text
of Scripture — not inferior, I should say, to that of
the most zealous Protestant. But it was an im
properly-directed veneration — a reception of the
Scripture, not simply as the living word of God, but
as containing the sacred propositions of inspired
wisdom. We know to what scrupulous nicety the
Jews carried their glosses of the older Scriptures.
Theirs was a respect simply for the words of God ;
not incompatible, as experience proved, with an ac
tual nullification of the Divine Word itself. Their
Scribes were expert in interpretation and comment,
whilst the people wandered as sheep not having a
shepherd. Thus did the theologians of the Schools,
with dutiful officiousness, gather up the fragments
of revealed truth ; but, in the mean time, they lost
the opportunity of feeding on the bread of God
which came down from heaven. Their piety be-

92 LECTURE II.
came a superstition, transubstantiating the truth of
God into the verbal elements by which it was sig
nified. The preternatural enlargement of the logical
powers of the understanding, from being an effect of
the discipline of the Scholastic Philosophy, became
in its turn a cause of the morbid taste for verbal
exposition. The subject and predicate of Scriptural
propositions were examined in their respective force
of signification, with the view of ascertaining the
nature of the things described. This was done in
subserviency to the statement of theological defini
tion ; to fix exact limits within which the Catholic
faith might be included. As heresies multiplied,
more and more were such definitions required ; and
the verbal analysis of Scriptural propositions was
carried on to meet the increasing demand. And
thus, out of simple declarations of Scripture, a mass
of theories was constructed. In justifying their
practice by an appeal to the argumentative charac
ter of the Scripture, they forgot to observe, that the
Scripture-arguments are arguments of inducement,
addressed to the whole nature of man — not merely
to intellectual man, but to thinking and feeling man
living among his fellow men ; — and to be appre
ciated therefore in their effect on our whole nature ¦*.
* The remark applies as well to the evidences of Christianity.
No one, as far as I am aware, has so stated the force of the
Christian argument, except Bishop Butler. In the Chapter on
the subject in his Analogy, he points out that the true estimate
of the Evidences is in their effect. Each may be answered

LECTURE II. 93
They were like critics, examining some work of
art in the portions of its composition, and exploring
the adjustment of each to a certain standard of ideal
perfection, instead of looking at the whole as a pro
duction of taste, directed to interest a spectator.
From the observations already made, it would
appear, that the ethical nature of the Christian Scrip
tures had been insufficiently attended to by the
Divines of the Schools. Eager to erect their Theo
logy into a Philosophy of the Divine Being, they
were comparatively indifferent to the humbler truths
which lay in the walk of man's every-day life. But
they did not at the same time omit the consider
ation of human duties ; as I shall have an oppor
tunity of shewing on a future occasion. What I
would point out now is, the disparagement of Re
velation, as a code of moral discipline ; and the
exaltation of Theology, in the sense of a Theoretic
Science, as the appropriate subject of the Inspired
Volumes. This would follow indeed from the in
fluence of that dialectical spirit, with which they
pursued the whole inquiry into Divine Truth. Con
clusions, and not Precepts, or Rules of Conduct, were
the object of attention as they read ; and instead
separately ; but there is no denying the real effect produced by
them as a whole on our complex nature. Whoever has ex
amined them must feel that they impress him strongly ; or if
he refuses to admit the effect in his own case, he cannot but
allow that they are such as to produce an effect on men in
general. The last point is enough.

94 LECTURE II.
therefore of tracing the coincidence of revealed obli
gations with the internal laws of our moral nature,
they were intent only on applying the rules ob
tained, whether from Scripture or from the works
of philosophers, to particular cases, and forming a
code of Casuistry rather than a Theory of Moral
Sentiments and Duties. Happily for the ethical
system of the Schools, the chief human authority
followed was that of Aristotle. The sound sense
of this philosopher was a corrective to the extrava
gancies, into which their religious enthusiasm, or
their speculative refinement, separately might have
carried them. Fenced within the inclosure of Scrip
ture precepts, and under the guidance of Aristotle,
they reared a more comprehensive and sober sys
tem of morality, than such as would have resulted
from their theological opinions alone ; or from the
maxims of the Christian moralists who preceded
them; or from the condition of social life in the
middle ages.

LECTURE III.
THE TRINITARIAN CONTROVERSIES.

SUMMARY.
Questions on the Trinity naturally the first to engage the
attention of disputants — Their ecclesiastical and political im
portance in the early ages — Maintenance of the orthodox doc
trine chiefly owing to the Latin Church — Controversies on the
subject assume a scientific form in the Scholastic writings —
Promiscuous character of Ancient Philosophy exemplified in the
discussion — Scholastic system applies the philosophy of mind to
the investigation of God from his Effects in the world — Doc
trine of the Trinity, in its principle, the ideas or reasons of all
existing things, traced to the Intellect of God — Description of
the Scholastic mode of rationalizing the doctrine — Orthodox
theory of the Divine Procession the exact view of the principle
of Causation — Extremes of Sabellianism and Arianism traced
to their misconception of this principle — Mischievous effect of
the notion, that doctrines must be defended from their specu
lative consequences — Influence of Materialism — Rise of a tech
nical phraseology — Logical principles employed in settling the
precise notions of the different terms introduced — Popular illus
trations of the Trinity examples of this mode of philosophizing
— Controversies turn principally on the views taken of same
ness, unity, diversity, &c. — Differences between the orthodox
and the Sabellians and Arians in regard to the Divine Unity —
Difficulties produced by the word Persona, obviated by logical
distinctions. Illustration of the doctrine of the Incarnation from the prin
ciples of the established logical philosophy — It accounts for the
differences between the orthodox, the Nestorians, and Euty-
chians. Application of this philosophy in the Controversies on the
Procession of the Holy Spirit — The words Filioque added to the
Nicene Creed — This addition ultimately maintained on logical
grounds. General practical reflections — Difficulties on the subject of
the Trinity metaphysical in their origin — Popular misappre
hension of the Divine Unity an instance of this — The various
theories all Trinitarian in principle — Simplicity of belief in
Scripture facts, the only escape from perplexity.
H

Rom. I. 30.
The invisible things of him, from the creation of the
world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that
are made, even his eternal power and Godhead.

Ta yap aopara ovtov cnro ktCctkos Koaptov, rots irorfiJ.ao~i
voovfj-eva KaOoparat, rjre cdbws ovtov bvvajMs Kai OeioTrjs.

Invisibilia enim ipsius, a creatura mundi, per ea quae
facta sunt, intellecta, conspiciimtur ; sempiterna quoque
ejus virtus et divinitas. Lat. Vulg.

LECTURE III

I HE consideration of the Trinitarian controversies
naturally takes the lead in the present inquiry. We
have seen, that the Scholastic Philosophy had for
its basis a theoretic knowledge of the Divine Being ;
a knowledge of God as the Highest Cause of all
things, the Primary Being in the order of the Uni
verse. We have also seen, that it was a system
of Realism, employing terms denoting abstractions
of the human mind, as the philosophical accounts of
processes in nature ; and establishing revealed truths
by logical deduction. It was consistent therefore,
that theologians, the disciples of such a philosophy,
should commence their Books of Sentences, their
Sums of Theology, and their Commentaries, with
expositions of those First Truths which immediately
respect the Divine Being a.
The controversies, however, involved in the doc
trine of the Trinity, are the least peculiar to the
Scholastic Theology, in point of fact. They were
a Thus too, not only in the decrees of the Council of Trent,
but in our own Articles, the doctrines on this head occupy the
first place; the Church of Rome evidently following that method
of Theology, which her great Doctors had sanctioned by the
authority of their practice ; whilst the Fathers of the Church of
England, even in shaking off the spiritual bonds of Rome, were
tacitly influenced by the discipline in which their minds had
been trained.
H 2

100 LECTURE III.
congenial indeed to the spirit of that Theology, and
presented it with materials, on which it has amply
exercised its keen and inexhaustible research. But
the outlines were supplied to its hand, by the labours
of earlier disputation. It remained only for the
Schoolmen, to dilate, to give distinctness, to me
thodize objections and replies, and to reduce each
member of the disputation to its proper place, in a
minutely-articulated system of Theology. This in
general is what they have accomplished : and they
have accomplished it, we must allow, with extra
ordinary penetration, with amazing compass of
thought, and, on the whole, with an admirable skill.
I speak more particularly of Aquinas, in whom, we
see the system, in its utmost perfection of workman
ship. The more indeed we study his writings, the
less we shall wonder, that the admiration of a spe
culative age should have crowned such labours, with
the titles of Angelic, Seraphic, Profound, and other
similar designations of honour, which distinguish
the several leading Doctors of the Schools b
These controversies could not fail to attract the
curiosity of the Greeks, at an early period of the
Gospel. For their Philosophy, in itself a mass of
subtile speculation into the nature of Being, was
confronted by a system of Theology, declaring facts
illustrative of the great First Being, the object
of their pursuit, and professing to have surpassed
b Aquinas is styled the Angelic Doctor ; Bonaventura, the
Seraphic ; Alexander de Hales, the Irrefragable ; Duns Scotus,
the Subtile ; &c.

LECTURE III. 101
the utmost reach of all former discoveries of the
truth. Looking from a distance at the ardour and bit
terness, with which minute points of difference were
debated, in the several attempts to perfect the theory
of the Trinity, we are apt to feel surprise at the
extraordinary excitement ; and either to pity, or to
smile at, such apparent waste of intellect and energy.
But such feelings are awakened only by very super
ficial views of the case. Adequately to conceive the
interest of theological questions, at the period, when
they were most keenly agitated, we must view them
under a political aspect. We must imagine, how
persons may have felt, whose social existence and
importance were regarded as at stake, in any shock
to the unity of the Faith. The theory of the Divine
Being was eminently that point, in which an unity
of opinion was indispensable to the religious society.
The smallest discrepancies in this primary article, —
the very base on which the society stood combined, —
compromised the principle of perfect unity, as really,
as the greatest differences. The abstract curiosity
of the question itself, and the habit of disputation,
contributed, undoubtedly, to give an eagerness, and
a relish, to controversies on the Trinity. But these
are not sufficient to account for the origin, and
the extent, of the interest excited. For the interest
evidently was not confined to the Church-leaders :
they were fully supported by the spirit existing in
the Christian public at large. The profane fami-
H 3

102 LECTURE III.
liarity, with which articles of the Trinitarian
question are said to have entered into the every
day conversation of the times, characterizes the
general feeling on the subject, at a period, when
the Spiritual Polity formed the great common
wealth of the Roman world ; and whilst Philo
sophy, regarded as identical with Theology, was
essentially dialectical or colloquial. There was, in
fact, no other topic of such common concern. The
national bond of union had been lost in the vague
citizenship of the Roman Empire; and that Em
pire, now falling into disjointed masses, ceased to
possess the charm of a common welfare, or a com
mon glory, for the individual members of it. But
whilst the fabric of civil society was daily decaying,
the principle of religious union, as I pointed out on
a former occasion, was diffusing and strengthening
itself by sure advances. In such a state of things
as this, the bold assertion of its characteristic doc
trines, in their points of contrast with the antagonist
systems of Judaism and Paganism, would naturally
appear. Assertions of its external evidences would
diminish ; and its internal system, the theory of the
religion, would be brought more prominently into
notice. The battle being won, the victors had only
to proclaim the name of the Lord in songs of tri
umph — to tell it out among the heathen, that He
was God alone. It was then, in this day of triumph,
that the peculiar notions of God, involved in the in
ternal system of Christianity, were freely discussed
in writing and in conversation. When friend met

LECTURE III. 103
friend, or stranger met stranger, it was the natural
inquiry, what was doing in the great religious com
monwealth. It was of less consequence, even poli
tically, to the mass of the people, what victories,
Constantine, or Constantius, might have gained over
the arms of Imperial opponents, than to which party
of the theological disputants the reigning Emperor
inclined. The passionate obstinacy, with which the
people of Alexandria, and of Milan, supported the
cause of their Prelates, shews, how deeply implicated
the fortunes of individuals were, in the decisions of
questions on the doctrine of the Trinity.
What rendered these disputes more complex,
was, that they were agitated, whilst as yet an active
intercourse subsisted between the Greek and Latin
Churches, as members of one spiritual body. The
Latins were unable, on account of " the narrowness
" of their language and their poverty of terms c,"
to reach the precision and compass of the Greek
phraseology. But the Greeks, regarding their own
tongue as the sacred idiom of philosophy and the
ology, strove to impose their own modes of thought,
and their very words, on the reluctant sense of
the Latins. Even among the Greeks themselves,
disputes were multiplied, as each employed the prin
cipal terms of the controversy in a strictly philoso
phical, or in a popular, acceptation ; as the habits of
c Gregory Nazianzen speaks of disputes having been caused,
8ia arevorryra rfjs rrapa tois 'iTaAoir ykarrns, nal bvopArav rreviav.
Orat. XXI. p. 46.
H 4

104 LECTURE III.
thought in individuals, were coloured with Oriental,
or Greek, associations. So great indeed were the
impediments arising from the varied use of Terms,
where the whole discussion was fundamentally dia
lectical, that the measure of accommodation be
tween those who really agreed with each other,
would probably have failed in any other hands but
those of Athanasius. The years which that intrepid
advocate of orthodoxy spent at Rome during his
second exile, when, with the sagacity of Themis-
tocles, he studied the language of the party, on
whose protection and influence he had thrown him
self, gave him a facility for overcoming the existing
obstacles from the discordances of language. He
seized the points of agreement between the contend
ing parties, and, by his wise and conciliatory policy,
secured, at least, a standard of orthodoxy for future
ages of disputation, both to the East and the Westd-
But though Athanasius was the great author of
that theoretic agreement, which established the or
thodox doctrine of the Trinity ; the maintenance,
and diffusion of it, were owing principally to the
active zeal of the Latin Clergy. Nothing can de
clare this more strongly, than the fact, that the
original of the Athanasian Creed is a Latin com
position. It is sufficiently remarkable, that eccle-
" The works of the Latin Fathers were sometimes translated
into Greek. We find Damascenus quoting passages from Am-
brosius in Greek. Contra Jacobit. p. 443. Oper. Damasc. In
general however the Greeks were ignorant of the Latin literature.
—Note A. Lecture III.

LECTURE III. 105
siastical history has not been able positively to
assign the authorship, or date, of the Creed as a
composition e. It appears to me, that the silence re
specting the individual author was designed, or at
least his name was forgotten, in the wish to give
a higher authority to the document; and that its
reception by us in its present form, as the " sym-
" bol" or " faith" of Athanasius, is an evidence of
the triumph of a party in the Church, thus de
claring their authoritative judgment, under the sanc
tion of a name, which expressed in itself every
thing hostile to Arianism f. The Greek placed
" the sword of Aristotle" in the hand of the Latin ;
but the spiritual legionary of Rome girded it on,
and cleft with it the way for the orthodox truth,
through the opposing ranks of heresy and infidelity.
The jealousy, with which the Latin Church watched
" Vigilius of Tapsus, to whom it has been ascribed, is excluded,
from the expressions not being those employed by him, in touch
ing on the same points. He uses the word, Unio, where the
Creed has Unitas. See Le Quien, in Dissert. Damascen. prefixed
to his edition of the works of Damascenus. Hilary of Aries, a
contemporary and correspondent of Augustine, has also been
supposed to be the author of the Creed ; and so has Vincent of
Lerins, of the same period. But the Creed throughout savours
more of the African Theology than of the Gallic. Many of the
expressions closely correspond with the language of Augustine
himself. f It is by no means necessary, as I have before observed, to
have recourse to the supposition of fraud, to account for the
attaching the name of a particular author to any writing. The
Schoolmen, however, cite the Creed as written by Athanasius
himself ; which was natural in an age ignorant of criticism, and
when Greek authors were read only in Latin translations.

106 LECTURE III.
the whole doctrine of the Trinity, corresponds with
this view. The Greeks sustained the debate more
on particular points, disputing about the parts;
whilst the Latin seems to have looked on the whole,
as a deposit entrusted to his care. The Latin at
once looked to the effect of each proposition on
the whole question ; and raised his arm against the
authors of the heretical language, as against the
impious blasphemer, the denier of the truth con
cerning God s.
The living disputants however, who gave the
mould to the controversies on the Trinity, had long
passed away, when, with the rise of intellectual
activity in Europe, the quarrels of other days were
resuscitated in the Schools of a theological litera
ture. In the Volumes of the Scholastic divines, we
contemplate the phantoms of the departed, acting
over, in solemn representation, the pastimes of their
real life ; and the transactions of ages of tumult and
noise glide before our eyes, as in one panoramic
scene. It is here then, that the Trinitarian con-
s So vigilant were they, that Hincmar of Rheims commanded
the ancient Hymn, Te Trina Deitas, to be altered to, 71? Summa
Deltas, and wrote a book himself against it; the former ex
pression admitting of a tritheistic construction. The alteration
however excited the jealousy of the other great party of the
Gallic Church, that of the South of Gaul ; and Ratramn of
Corbey was employed to defend the obnoxious expression ; which
he did in writing. The keenness of the Occidentals on the
Trinity, was probably the effect of persecution ; — the Arian
persecution in Africa, under the Vandals, and in France and
Spain, and even Italy, under the Visigoths. — Note B.

LECTURE III. 107
troversies fully reveal themselves as a Science.
They are no longer living energies, acted on by
events, and modified by personal intellect and cha
racter ; but a combination of logical theories, all
tending, as to a common point, to establish a per
fect theory of the Divine Being. The various
opinions of the early disputants, were, for the most
part, founded on, or maintained by, the same method
of philosophizing, of which the Scholastic system
was the mature development. The disputations of
the Schoolmen, accordingly, are, at once, an historical
sketch of the Trinitarian question, and an establish
ment of the theory of the Trinity by a course of
logical investigation. The Doctor of the Schools, as
the judge of the sacred cause argued before him,
hears the pleadings of the heretic, and the replies
of the orthodox ; and extracting the truth from the
conflict of opinions, pronounces it with the weight
of reason and authority, at once, as the conclusion
of the philosopher, and the sentence of the master of
theology. Generally then, in the first place, I would observe
respecting the controversies on the Trinity, that the
only means of arriving at just notions of them, is,
to be aware of that promiscuous combination of
sciences, which formed the ancient Logical Philoso
phy; and which was adopted into the Christian
Church, both as coincident with Theology, and as
an organ for the investigation of Truth. The
several disputations will be found to have for their

108 LECTURE III.
object; either to explain the Being and Attributes of
God on assumed physical principles ; or to reconcile
the various hypotheses advanced with each other,
and illustrate them, in their connexions and con
sequences, by processes of argumentation, and exact
distinctions. But the two proceedings are con
tinually running into each other ; as must be the
case, where metaphysical truth is only a refined
materialism, and physical truth is sought in the
abstractions of metaphysics : — which was eminently
the case in the Ancient Philosophy, and the Scho
lastic system founded on it.
The pantheism of the New-Platonists was an ex
treme case of the application of the logical method
of philosophizing. When nature is explored in
the mirror of the human mind, material objects
are easily represented to our thoughts, as pos
sessing only a shadowy metaphysical existence.
The mind becomes every thing in fact and reality,
as it is every thing in its power of conception and
generalization h. And when the philosopher is also
a theologian, and carries up his speculation from
the human mind to the divine, the theory of ma
terial nature resolves itself into the pure existence
of the Divine Being, in whose intellect are the
h Aristot. De Anim. 1. III. C. 9. 17 faxr/ ra ovra rras eVri iravra.
Ibid. C. 3. Kai ev Si) ol Xeyovres ttjv \^u^jjv rival ronov rihuaV nkrjv on
ovre o\t], aXX' rj varyriKr), oifre hrikif^ria, dWa bvvapei ra ("8r) 
orav 8e ovras eKacrra yevrjrat, as 6 liria~Tr\p.vsv \eyerat o Kar evepynav.
Aquin. Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xiv. art. i. — Note C.

LECTURE III. 109
primordial causes, the immutable first principles, of
all existing things.
The Schoolmen, as I pointed out in my last Lec
ture, did not explicitly adopt the Platonic doctrine
of Ideas, the basis of the pantheistic philosophy.
They did not proceed to the extreme of resolving
all material things into mere phenomena, the simple
manifestations of the Divine Being : the more ex
perimental philosophy of Aristotle guarding them
from the express admission of this extreme theory :
but they virtually admitted it, in their a priori
method of tracing up all real existences to the
Being of God. Thus, according to their view, all
power, or wisdom, or goodness, observed in the uni
verse, were actual derivations of qualities, intrinsi
cally residing in God himself, and going forth as it
were out of Him into the works of his creation;
not simply the evidences of the existence of such
qualities in Him as their Author and Giver ; but the
real presence of the Divine qualities themselves
analogically denoted by those terms. So again, the
relations of human life, as that of Father and Son,
were, according to their view, not original as ex
isting in human nature, but founded on their arche
types in God. Appeal was made to that text of St.
Paul ; — " I bow my knees to the Father of our
" Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family
" in heaven and earth is named," — ex quo omnis
paternitas in terris et in ccelo nominata est; — to
prove, that the filial relation among men, was only
an expression, or copy, of a prior relation, existing

110 LECTURE III.
between the Father and the Son in the Holy
Trinity i.
A philosophy of this kind led them to seek their
definitions of the Being and Attributes of God, in
the phenomena of the material world. The analo
gies of the physical universe were to such phi
losophers, more than presumptive proofs of the ex
istence and character of God : they were positive
resemblances, or participations, of the Divine Na
ture ; so that, in the survey of these, the mind con
templates express manifestations of God himself.
This is the sense, in which the School-Divines speak
of our knowing God, only by the Effects of his agency
on the world. At the first view, they may appear
in this admission, the advocates of a cautious in
ductive Theology, that modestly gathers up the
notices of God's agency scattered throughout nature.
But a closer attention to their method, will shew,
that this very notion of our Divine Knowledge, was
highly speculative ; that, as I have stated, it was a
discernment of God himself, as manifested in his
works, — a theory of the principles of the Divine
Nature, indirectly obtained through the veil of the
material world, but immediate and direct at the
same time, so far as those principles were discernible
by the spiritualized intellect k-
Such was their construction of the Apostle's
1 This instance may suffice to shew the Scholastic miscon
ception of the real nature of Scripture-truth, when speculators
could so readily seize on a word to raise a system of Theology. —
The argument is lost in our translation. — Note D.
k Manifestum est autem, quod ea quae naturaliter fiunt, de-

LECTURE III. Ill
words to the Romans ; " The invisible things of
" God are clearly seen, being understood by the
" things that are made :" words, perhaps, in them
selves, borrowed from the Platonic philosophy, but
clearly intended by the Apostle, in the practical
argument pursued in this Epistle, only to declare the
sure attestation of Nature to the Divine Being, by
whom its constitution and course have been framed.
As their Theology, accordingly, was the Science
of God, — an attempt to explore the mysterious
principles of the Divine Intelligence, on which the
truths of Revelation were conceived to depend, —
the Schoolmen set themselves in the first instance,
to rationalize the doctrine of the Trinity. The in
tellectual grounds of this doctrine demanded to be
ascertained, and premised ; because these would con
stitute the great First Reasons, or Principles, from
which, the whole train of reasonings to the ra
tional principles of other doctrines, would neces
sarily be deduced. Or, to express it more ac
cording to their technical method, the Being of
terminatas formas consequuntur. Haec autem formarum deter-
minatio oportet quod reducatur, sicut in primum principium,
in divinam sapientiam, quee ordinem universi excogitavit, qui
in rerum distinctione consistit. Et ideo oportet dicere, quod
in divina sapientia sunt rationes omnium rerum, quas supra
diximus ideas, id est, formas exemplares in mente divina ex-
istentes. Quae quidem licet multiplicentur secundum respectum
ad res, tamen non sunt realiter aliud a divina essentia, prout
ejus similitudo a diversis participari potest diversimode. Sic
igitur ipse Deus est primum exemplar omnium. Aquinas, S.
Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xliv. art. 3. — Note E.

112 LECTURE III.
God, considered abstractedly from the works of his
creation, presented to the Philosopher that ultimate
abstraction of which he was in quest ; — the Ideas,
or Forms, of all existing things of the Universe,
reduced to their perfect simplicity and immate
riality. Every particular subordinate theory of doc
trine drawn from the analogies of nature, would
thus be rationalized in the most intense degree;
being contemplated, as it was the reason, the very
intelligence, of God himself.
For in order to understand the Scholastic mode of
proceeding, in their reasonings on this as well as
every other truth of Christianity, we must bear in
mind throughout, the nature of the inquiry under
taken. It was to assimilate and identify, as far as
possible, two apparently different systems — the re
vealed, and the intellectual, world. The facts of both
were assumed ; — those of the revealed world, as given
in the words of Scripture and in the authoritative
decisions of the Church : those of the intellectual
world, as ascertained by the principles of the esta
blished philosophy. Their object then was, to ex
tort from that philosophy, a confession of the mys
terious wisdom, revealed in Scripture and ex
pounded in the dogmas of Theology. The primary
truth therefore, which, in one sense, may be called
a Theory of all revealed truth ; as being, in the just
view of it, the combined result of all the Scripture-
facts; — the doctrine of the Trinity; — was to be con
verted into a speculative a priori principle, — a logical
basis, from which all other facts of Scripture, ra-

LECTURE III. US
tionalized in like manner, might be demonstratively
concluded.

The controversies on the Trinity, accordingly, if
we view them in their result, were a determination
in precise terms of that account of the Divine
Being, which the Scripture-Revelation involved :
those terms being drawn from the analogies of na
ture, in which the mysterious truth was conceived
to be veiled. But in their progress and formation, —
in the views taken of those analogies on which the
reasonings are founded, — use is made of all existing
theories, in the different branches of science, whether
physical, metaphysical, or moral, as then understood
and received.
The human mind, as I have observed, being taken
as the medium of philosophical observation in the
Scholastic system, the facts of Scripture and nature
were resolved into the fundamental principles of our
mental constitution. These presented in such a
method of inquiry, those ultimate truths which the
philosopher desired to reach. For after all the va
rious associations of thought have been analysed, —
after the utmost effort of minute subdivision of no
tions, — there still remains an higher ground of ab
stract contemplation ; that, in which all these various
ideas are resolved into the principle of Consciousness
itself, — into the nature of the thinking mind, in which
all this wonderful mechanism of thought is carried on.
It was observed then, that in the human mind
i

114 LECTURE III.
there were two distinct classes of facts ; those in
which the mind is exercised immediately on itself —
the intellectual principles; and those in which it
applies itself, as it were, to external objects — the
moral principles. Plato, and Aristotle, had both
recognised this division of the mind. The School
men inherited and availed themselves of this divi
sion, in their survey of the various manifestations
of God, for the erection of their philosophical system
of the Trinity.
The effects discernible in nature being summed
up in these primary laws of the human mind, and
there regarded as in their Causes ; the next step of
the speculation was, to trace the order of connexion
between these principles now viewed in the mind.
An object of our moral nature, as Aristotle had
pointed out, must first be apprehended by the intel
lect ; it must first be known in order to be pursuedm.
The intellectual principle therefore was prior in
order to the moral — or the intellect prior to the will.
Thus far the speculation was merely human. The
various effects of nature were referred to their great
m Necesse est autem quod amor a verbo procedat ; non enim
aliquid amamus, nisi quod conceptione mentis apprehendimus.
Unde et secundum hoc manifestum est, quod Spiritus Sanctus
procedit a Filio. Aquin. S. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxxvi. art. 2.
Sed Deum velle, habet aliud verum naturaliter prius eo,
scilicet Deum cognoscere, quoniam Deus naturaliter prius cog-
noscit quodlibet volutum, quam velit illud. Omnis enim volutio
est necessario praecogniti, sicut tam Philosophis quam Theo-
logis satis constat. Bradwardin. De Causa Dei, lib. I. c. 12.
p. 200.

LECTURE III. 115
moving causes in the mind ; and a theory was given,
of the mode in which these causes moved, or pro
ceeded into effect. But the human mind being
formed in the image of God — being in itself an ef
fect of the agency of the Supreme Mind, — the transi
tion was easy, from the human principles of causa
tion, to the divine, as from the inferior and derivative
agency, to the superior and the original. The mind
therefore, its intelligence, and its will, were contem
plated, as they had their being, in the mind, the in
telligence, and the will of God. These principles,
accordingly, were the true analogies, corresponding
to the Scripture designation of the great Divine
Cause of all things, under the name of the Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit. It only remained, in reason
ing upon these analogies, to take into view the
circumstances of imperfection and darkness, under
which they were discerned, — the proper incom
prehensibility of the Divine subject by the human
faculties in the present state. It was necessary
further, to proceed by negations ; to abstract from
the divine truth, whatever was peculiar to the ordi
nary human notion of Causation ; and so to ap
proximate to the notion of the Divine Being, as He
exists in himself, — to the theory of the Causa Al-
tissima, as it is purely the principle of causation.
Aquinas philosophizes concerning the Trinity ex
actly in the way that I have described. Assuming
the process of the intellect and the will in man, as
the counterpart of the Scriptural truth which he
has undertaken to explain, he demonstrates the
I 2

116 LECTURE III.
theory of Divine Procession according to it. The
Son, the Logos, the Reason and Word of God, is the
principle of intelligence in the Divine Being, — the
internal word of God, expressing and comprehend
ing all the principles of created things. The Holy
Spirit is the Love of God towards his creation, re
garded as it subsists in his own nature ; as it centres
in the Divine Word or Reason, or principle of intelli
gence ; being the nexus, or bond of union, between
the Father and the Word. But why, it may be
asked, is the one process called Generation ; the other
simply Procession? — why is the Word called the Son,
and the Love of God called the Spirit ? It is the
resemblance of the thought to the mind from which
it proceeds, that gives the appropriateness of the
term Generation in its highest sense, — that of like
producing like, — to the Procession of the Word or
Reason of God ; and therefore, the relation of the
Word is represented, as that between a Father and
a Son ; and the Word is called the Son. But in the
process of the will, there is no resemblance between
the object on which it is exerted, and the will itself.
Hence, there is no appropriate name for the pro
ceeding of the Divine Love, but the general one of
Procession ; and this relation in the Divine Being
can only be expressed by the name of Spirit, founded
on the analogy of spiration, or breathing, by which
his derivation from the Father and the Son is de
scribed in Scripture n.
n Aquin. S. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxxvu. art. i. The ex
pression, ex substantia Patris, was appropriated to the Son ; so

LECTURE III. 117
In this speculation there is certainly a great deal
of the language of Platonism. In the Timceus, we
find, the term povoyevrjf, the unigenitus of the Latin
Fathers, more than once applied to the Universe, the
secondary Divine Being of the Platonic system ;
and the description of a third Being, as a bond be
tween God and the Universe — ha^ov ev fj.eaw ap.<po~iv
fyvayuyov °. But though there is a Platonic under
current of thought in the scholastic theory, the ap
plication of the theory is Aristotelic. Plato did
not attempt to shew the nature of the Divine Being,
as a Principle of Motion. His Deity was simply a
general Theory of the Universe. Whereas Aristotle
endeavoured to trace the successions of motions,
from the changes in the visible world, to their " First
" Mover" in God. His Deity was an abstract principle;
as that of Plato was ; but the theory was drawn
from a philosophy of Motion. The Schoolmen ac
cordingly considered the Being of God, not only
with the eye of Platonic mysticism, but further, as
the principle of Efficiency — the Cause from which
all Effects proceeded ; only viewing this principle of
that, though the Holy Spirit was spoken of as consubstantial
with the Father and the Son, it was not considered correct to
describe the Spirit, as of the substance of the Father, but only
to apply to Him the term, proceeding from the Father. See
Abcelardi Introd. ad Theol. lib. II.— Note F.
0 Plato. Timaeus, p. 307. Bipont. Ed. eh S8e povoyevrjs ovpavos
yeyovas : and at the end of the Dialogue.
There is a reference also in this mode of philosophizing to
ancient theories of the Universe — as to the vovs of Anaxagoras,
and the principle of Love assigned by Hesiod and Parmenides.
—Note G. I 3

118 LECTURE III.
Efficiency, or Causation, in that ultimate state,
where all outward effects vanished in the abstract
view of the Cause itself.
The orthodox theory of the Trinity, accordingly,
consisted in an exact scientific view of the prin
ciple of Causation. It was that theory, in which,
the efficient principles of the universe being traced
up to Mind, and the principles of intelligence and
action in the mind, were further regarded in the
Divine Being intrinsically; as distinct from those
effects, by which they are outwardly displayed to
our contemplation. The heterodox in either ex
treme, whether those whose theories were charged
with unitarian consequences, or those who incurred
the imputation of tritheism, failed in speculating
concerning the principle of Causation. They did
not contemplate it in the ultimate evanescent state;
as it exists purely internally in the Divine Being.
The Sabellian 'ZwaXottfyfi, or Unio, viewed the Cause
in the act of transition into Effect. It supposed the
Divine Being to be a Vast tide of efflux and reflux, by
which the Deity was, continually, and successively,
protended from the Father, to the Son, and the Holy
Spirit?. It thus did not view the Deity under those
P Aquinas, as well as the other Schoolmen, often present this
idea of the Divine Being. Quoting Damascenus, Aquinas says :
Unde et Damascenus dicit, quod principalius omnibus quae de
Deo dicuntur nominibus, est, Qui est. Totum enim in seipso
comprehendens, habet ipsum esse, velut quoddam pelagus substantia
infinitum et indeterminatum. Damascen. de Fid. Orth. I. 12.
Aquin. S. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xiii. art. 11. Also Joan. Duns
Scot. Quodlib. qu. xiv. fol. 41.

LECTURE III. 119
negations or limitations, in which every thing of
Effect, as distinct from the principle of Causation,
disappeared. It contemplated the Deity, as, in a
manner, going out of Himself. The Arian exposed
himself to the charge of maintaining a tritheistic hy
pothesis, — or, if he denied this, an unitarian ; — whilst
he stated the principle of Causation in the Deity, in
combination with the effect produced ; regarding the
Son, as an effect produced by the Father, and the
Holy Ghost, as an effect produced by the Son. He
did not restrict his view, any more than the Sabel-
lian, to the simple point, where the Deity was re
garded as pure Efficiency, — pure Energy or Act, as
the Schoolmen speak ; but gave an account of Him
after a gross manner, as He is seen in the material
world. All that was intended, at the first, by these spe
culations concerning the Divine Procession, was, to
present to the mind a view of the mysterious facts
of the Trinity, according to that theory of Causa
tion, which was the philosophical creed of the day ;
and thus to satisfy the questions of speculative men.
Origen indeed attributes the origin of all heresies in
religion, to the anxiety of inquisitive men to under
stand the doctrines of Christianity. Rather, they
were owing to the undue solicitude of Christians to
meet the objections of opponents. Theoretic views
of the Scripture Truth, it was thought, might be
useful, in maintaining an argument with the infidel
philosopher, or the sceptical Christian ; they might
i 4

120 LECTURE III.
serve at least as arguments to the individual ad
dressed. But soon, the more scrupulous, or the less
philosophical, believer would take alarm at the in
troduction into religion, of expressions apparently
foreign to the truth. The alarm would spread ; and
the leaders of orthodoxy would be roused to vindi
cate the sacred cause. The heretic philosopher
would be called on for his defence ; he would be in
duced to maintain the position which he had origin
ally advanced ; and his defence of his peculiar view
would then lead him into further speculations on
the subject. Thus were men of both parties, the
reputed orthodox, as well as the reputed heretic,
gradually forced into conclusions, and from these
conclusions into other premises, at which they might
at first have revolted. They gradually went deeper
and deeper, until at length their footing was lost,
and they abandoned themselves to the current.
When once the principle is recognised, that a doc
trine must be defended from all the consequences
deducible from it ; there is no extravagance of
theory, which the disputant may not be forced to
adopt, for the sake of saving his original hypo
thesis. When the Arian, for instance, explained the Di
vine Procession, as an external efficiency in God, it
would naturally be argued, that, on this principle,
the Son was the creature of the Father. The same
reasoning would apply to the nature of the Holy
Spirit. Hence, by logical consequence, it would be
the creed of Arianism, that the Holy Spirit was the

LECTURE III. 121
creature of a creature; and that both the Son and
the Spirit were inferior to the Father. Whether
this were the original creed of the Arian, or no, it
seems scarcely possible, but that, in the progress of
controversy, he should have been brought to the
admission of it. His theory assumed a distinctness
between the Father and the Son, analogous to that
between an effect and its antecedent cause. This
implied some interval of Time between the Two.
He was forced to admit this ; though he might re
duce the interval to the evanescent limit of a mo
ment. But it involved still the admission, that the
Son was not coeternal with the Father.
Again, the Sabellian Theory produced an indis
tinctness in the mode of apprehending the Son and
the Holy Spirit. Hence, it might naturally be said,
that the Sabellian made no real distinction between
the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: that the dis
tinction, according to him, existed only Xoyai, logic
ally ; and he would be called on to defend himself
from the charge of asserting a verbal Trinity. In
maintaining his hypothesis, he would be led on, to
insist further on the validity of those distinctions,
which it asserted ; and these logical statements, or
verbal reasons, would tend to confirm his opponents
in their original view of his doctrine. He would
more and more establish the idea, that the Trini
tarian distinctions, according to his doctrine, rested
only on definitions.
Notions of materialism, we may perceive, were

122 LECTURE III.
mixed up with these several theories of Causation.
The materialism of the Gnostic systems was more
open and avowed : it stands forth confessed, par
ticularly, in the 7rpo/3oXrj, or prolation, of the Valen-
tinians i. But though in the progress of the Tri
nitarian speculations, the original materialism of
the Church-philosophy r is partly disguised under
metaphysics and logic; it may still be detected, as a
fundamental prejudice in the mind of the later spe-
culatist. Though he may be engaged in stating
only the modes of apprehending the subject ex
plained, — in shewing those just conceptions, which
the mind ought to form, of the primary principles of
the Divine Being, — he is continually perplexing the
subject with notions drawn from material things; —
appearing, at one moment, to take a word in its
strictly logical sense, as descriptive only of a process
in the mind; at the next moment, reasoning from it,
as if it described a process in nature. Thus even
in what was considered the orthodox view of the
q TertuUian speaks of the Son as, ex ipsius (Patris) substan
tia missum; and as prolatum a Patre; defending the last assertion,
as distinct from the Valentinian probola, which implied separa
tion. Adv. Prax. c. vii, viii. p. 504.
r Augustine says, that it was his prejudice against the belief
of immaterial substance, that kept him back from an earlier
profession of Catholic Christianity. — Ipsum quoque Salvatorem
nostrum, unigenitum tuum, tanquam de massa lucidissimae mo
ils tuae porrectum ad nostram salutem, ita putabam, ut aliud
de illo non crederem nisi quod possem vanitate imaginari.
Talem itaque naturam ejus nasci non posse de Maria Virgine
arbitrabar, nisi carni concerneretur. Confess, lib. V. c. 10.
Ibid. c. 14. lib. VI. c. 3.— Note H.

LECTURE III. 123
Divine Proceeding, — avowedly a theory of the Deity
as the great First Cause, — materialism intruded
itself, in the attempt to trace the order of deriva
tion of the Son and Holy Spirit from the Father.
Such texts as ; Ex ore Altissimi prodii ; Eruc-
tavit cor meum verbum bonum; Ego de Patre
exivi; Ego ex Patre processi; (I quote the trans
lations used by the Latins, as these illustrate bet
ter their mode of deducing reasons from words of
Scripture;) were argued from, as proofs, that the
Son was of the same substance with the Father8.
Then in applying this notion, the metaphysical
principle, that " whatever is in God is God Him-
" self," was appealed to, as further proof, that the
Son, being of the substance of the Father, must also
be God *.
The theory however of the Divine Procession,
and its modifications by the Sabellian or Arian,
s Verbo Domini coeli firmati sunt, et spiritu oris ejus omnis
virtus eorum; applied by Anselm. De Process. Sp. p. 130.
Also by Ambrose and others. — Note I.
t Ad primum ergo dicendum ; quod in inferioribus non pro
cedit persona a persona per amorem, ex defectu et materialitate
est personarum : scilicet quia non quicquid est in ipsis est
idem eis. Et ideo non procedit persona a persona, nisi divi-
sione alicujus ab ipsis : quod universaliter accipit virtutem ad
formandum totum. Et amor qui est in inferioribus, non est
idem eis, sed passio quaedam. Sed in Deo quicquid est, Deus
est : et ideo cum aliquid procedit ab ipso, tali in procedendo
communicat naturam divinam ; et modo emanationis, pro-
prium accipit existendi modum quo persona est. Albert. Mag.
in Lib. Sentent. Tract. VII. qu. xxxi. fol. 84.

124 LECTURE III.
demanded their appropriate phraseology, without
which they could not be maintained. In fact, these
were only points of departure, from which the vari
ous controversies of the Trinity took their course.
The questions next arose, how to reconcile these dif
ferent views with the Unity of the Divine Being ; —
how to discriminate between the Father, Son, and
Spirit ; and what common name was to be assigned
them. Then came also the disquisitions arising
from the Incarnation of the Word, and their re
action on the notions conceived of the Trinity ; and
the minute discussions concerning the relation of the
Holy Spirit to the other members of the Trinity, as
to the order and mode of procession ; and the re
action of these also on the original hypotheses of
the Trinity.
Now all such questions strictly fall under the
general heads which constituted the Dialectical
Science of ancient times. The reduction of all ob
jects examined under certain classes ; their differ
ences under the common class to which they might
be referred ; their properties ; their circumstances ;
and that assemblage of classes on each particular
object, by which it is logically defined ; were the
points of inquiry with the dialectical philosopher.
So they were with the Scholastic Divine, in his at
tempt to settle his theory of the Trinity. The
notions again of identity and diversity, similarity
and dissimilarity, priority and posteriority, coin-
stantaneousness, consecutiveness, &c, were, as Ari-

LECTURE III. 125
stotle points out and illustrates, the great matter of
inquiry with the ancient dialectician11. But these
are precisely what occupy the attention of the Scho
lastic Divine, in all those subordinate questions,
which arose out of the speculation concerning the
Processions in the Divine Being. I shall now illus
trate some of these points ; the limits of a discourse
obliging me to restrict myself to a specimen only,
in such abundant materials of evidence. A speci
men however may amply suffice for the induction
which I wish to establish, of the force of logical
theories, in the existing views and statements of the
Trinitarian doctrines.
The manner in which the Unity of God was
maintained in the different speculations, of the ortho
dox, the Sabellian and the Arian, is extremely wor
thy of observation. It was an Unity both physical
and logical which the orthodox held ; whereas the
Sabellian taught only a physical unity, the Arian
only a logical. The orthodox, for example, asserted
that there was no division, no separation, no trans
mutation, of the Divine Being, in the Trinity ; but
that the whole Deity was transfused (they employ
this very term) from the Father to the Son and the
Holy Spirit. To express this entire presence of
the Godhead in each, without any separation, they
adopted the word circumincessio, the Treptx^pwn of
« Aristot. Metaph. lib. III. c. I. rrepl oo-av oi SiaKeKTiKoi ireipavrai
o-Koneiv.

126 LECTURE III.
the Greeks * ; characterizing by it, as they con
ceived, the Scripture account, / am in the Father,
and the Father in me, and that mutual Love of the
Father to the Son, which was the Holy Spirit pro
ceeding from both. Thus too they delighted to speak
of the Son, as of the Substance, or TJsia, of the
Father, and of the whole Trinity, as Consubstantial,
or Homoousiony. The word Substance, by the am
biguity of its meaning, as also was the case with
the TJsia of the Greeks, answered the purpose of
the orthodox Latin, in asserting at once a physical
and logical unity. It was employed without preci
sion ; sometimes to denote the material nature or
the principal portion of a thing ; sometimes as sy
nonymous with essence or the logical species ; some
times for individual Being, the support of Attri
butes or Properties z. It was taken accordingly by
the Latins into the account of the Trinity, rather
than Essence, which corresponded more closely
with the Greek TJsia; as was also the term con-
substantial, rather than coessential, the more exact
translation of homoousion. These terms served to
exclude the material notion of actual division or
motion in the Divine Being ; and at the same time,
affirmed, that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,
all agreed in the same definition of Deity — that, so
far as they were God, there was no difference in the
x Kai ttjv iv dXkrjKais irepV)(a>Pr\a'lv ^X0V(Tl ^'Xa ^(rrjs (TwaKoMprjs
Kai a~up.(pvpcrea>s' ov8e e^to-rap.ev(ov, rj Kar ovaiav repxopivav Kara tt\v
'Apeiov Siaipecnv. Damasc. De Fid. Orthod. I. p. 140.
y Note J. » Note K.

LECTURE III. 127
account, and notion, of their Being. Such was the
unity, at' once physical and logical, maintained by
the orthodox.
The Sabellian approached nearly to the orthodox
in his account of the Divine Unity; since he not
only maintained the Divine distinctions, but was
willing also to use the term homoousion in the de
scription of the Trinity. The Latins indeed, during
the agitation of the Arian disputes, were taunted by
the Greeks, as symbolizing with the Sabellian : his
zeal for the consubstantiality, being construed into an
indiscriminateness in his notions of the Father a,
Son, and Holy Spirit. The stress of the controversy,
accordingly, between the Sabellian and the orthodox,
lay in the proof, that, in his application of the word
homoousion, the Sabellian maintained an actual soli
tude of the Divine Being, — merely the physical notion
of usia or substance, and not the logical also ; a
sameness, that destroyed the distinction of number
a Hilary of Poitiers, on making his appearance at the Coun
cil of Seleucia, was anxiously inquired of concerning the faith
of the Gallic Church, which the Orientals suspected of Sabel-
lianism. Sulpicius Severus says : Is ubi Seleuciam venit, magno
cum favore exceptus, omnium in se animos et studia conver-
terat, ac primum quaesitum ab eo, quae esset Gallorum fides :
quia turn, Arrianis prava de nobis vulgantibus, suspecti ab
Orientalibus habebamur, trionymam solitarii Dei unionem se
cundum Sabellium credidisse; sed exposita fide sua, juxta ea
quae Nicaeae erant a patribus conscripta, Occidentalibus per-
hibuit testimonium. Hist. Sacr. II. c. 42. p. 271.
Illud apud omnes constitit, unius Hilarii beneficio, Gallias
nostras piaculo haeresis liberatas. Ibid. c. 45. p. 279. See
Letter of Jerome, Note A. Lect. I.

128 LECTURE III.
in the members of the Trinity, and left only a dis
tinction of Names b.
The Arian Unity was a logical, and not a physi
cal unity ; because the difference which the Arian
assigned between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,
would not admit the assertion of a sameness, or even
of a similarity, of substance, and left only a general
consonance in which the Holy Three agreed. The
term God, indeed, might be applied to each, accord
ing to the Arian notion; but evidently only in a
generic sense, as equivalent to divine nature. Thus
it was, that the Arian asserted an unity in thought,
and will, and action ; interpreting, in this way, the
saying, / and the Father are one. He urged again
the text, the Father is greater than I, as evidence
against the unity of substance ; taking substance in
the sense of individual Being — the ¦v-parry olo-la. of
the Categories. The orthodox, consequently, had to
shew against the Arian, that such an unity as this,
was a severing of the Godhead ; that it consisted
with so great a distinction between the Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit, as either to establish three Gods,
or otherwise, one Supreme God and two subordinate
Divine Beings.
The various illustrations of the Trinity from na
tural objects, employed in the writings of the Fathers
and the Schoolmen, are instances of the same dia
lectical spirit, which laboured to establish the Divine
Unity amidst the Trinitarian distinctions. The con-
b Note L.

LECTURE III. 129
nexion between the sun, the ray, and the heafe;
the fountain, the stream, and the lake ; the seed,
the stalk, and the fruit ; the metal, the seal, and
the impression; the memory, the intelligence, and
the will ; the premises and conclusion of a syl
logism ; and other like instances ; — have been ad
duced on this point, when the design has been,
not so much to establish the truth, as to illustrate
itc. It is probable, that such illustrations were
drawn from the explanation of Sameness, given by
Aristotle. The instance, indeed, of the application of
the word same to the water taken from the same
fountain, is that expressly given by the philosopher,
in his Topics, to shew, that things are called the
same, so far as they are very strongly alike d. The
Christian speculators, when pressed in argument to
explain, in what the identity of the Godhead con
sisted, resorted to illustrations in which, a close
resemblance, or intimate connexion, was regarded
as equivalent to sameness. And we thus see the
reason, why the Anomaeans objected to the admission
of the expression, homoiousion, or similar substance,
into the Creed e. It was felt by these reasoners, that
similarity and sameness were convertible terms,
when applied to the essence of a thing. Accord
ingly, both Hilary and Basil were disposed to
sanction the term, on the same ground on which
the Ultra-Arians rejected it ; as equivalent, that is,
c Note M. d Note N.
e Sulpic. Sever. Hist. Sacr. lib. II. c. 40.
K

130 LECTURE III.
when rightly understood, to the homoousion of
Nice f-
The disputation, in its progress, turned upon the
point, how far difference might be asserted, con
sistently with that sameness, which constituted the
Divine Unity of Being, or Substance. It was in
quired, whether the distinction could be rightly ex
pressed by hypostasis, or persona; whether the
ideas involved in one, or the other, of these terms,
did not import too express and real, or too shadowy
a distinction. The difficulty here was; to avoid dis
tinguishing the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in
such a way, as to represent them differing, as three
angels, or three men, differ from each other ; and
yet to preserve the real distinctions. Dialectical
Science furnished the expedients in this difficulty ;
and established that peculiar phraseology, which we
now use, in speaking of the Sacred Trinity, as three
Persons and one God.
The manner in which reasonings had been drawn
from the visible effects of Divine Power, Wisdom,
and Goodness, to the existence of a Trinity in the
Divine Being, seemed to confound the Trinitarian
f Testor me utrumque sensisse; says Hilary, De Synod, hb. I.
— "If the term airapaXkaKrSis be added to the term (homoiousion)
" I also admit it ;" Basil. Epist. ad Apollinar. Note to Damasc.
Dialectic, p. 38. — Hilary, De Trin. lib. IV. c. 4. p. 73. gives
several Arian explanations of the term homoousion. Arians en
deavoured to shew, that they objected to it, on grounds distinct
from those on which it was held by the orthodox. — Note O.

LECTURE III. 131
Distinctions with the Divine Attributes. It was pri
marily important therefore to the Theologian, to
mark the difference between the two. He points
out accordingly ; that, whilst the Attributes of God
exist substantially — are of the substance or essence
of God, — or in logical language, belong to the Cate
gory of Substance ; — the Trinitarian distinctions ex
ist relatively, — or belong to the Category of Relation ;
the terms, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, denoting
intrinsic relations in the Divine Being, agreeably to
what I have before observed. Whence it followed,
that it would be improper to speak of the divine
power, or justice, or wisdom in the plural ; for this
would be to assert three Beings, or Substances, in
God. But there was no impropriety in asserting
three Relations ; since these differed in properties
only, and their distinctness did not multiply, or
separate, the Divine Substance s.
But this idea of the Trinitarian Distinctions
could not alone satisfy the requisitions of a logical
philosophy. Distinct Relations must be in distinct
subjects. They could only be conceived, as they
were based on their peculiar supposita, or grounds.
This was the occasion of the adoption of the word
g Ea vero quae significant essentiam adjective, praedicantur
pluraliter de tribus, propter pluralitatem suppositorum : Dicimus
enim tres existentes, vei tres sapientes, aut tres aeternos et im-
mensos, si adjective sumantur. Si vero substantive sumantur,
dicimus unum increatum, immensum, et aeternum, ut Athana
sius dicit. Albert. Mag. in lib. Sentent. Tract. IX. qu. xliv.
fol. 94. Aquinas, S. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxxix. art. 3.
—Note P.
K 2

132 LECTURE III.
Hypostasis, by the Greeks, and of Person, or Sub-
. sisting Person, by the Latins. Hypostasis indeed
was a word already consecrated to the use of Re
ligion, from its being employed by St. Paul in several
passages of his Epistles. It is obviously a tech
nical term, denoting that ultimate point of meta
physical analysis, in which we conceive the bare
existence of any thing, apart from its properties :
the expression itself being a metaphorical one,
drawn from a supposition, that the connexion be
tween the being and the properties of a thing, re
sembles that between a material prop, or base, and
what it supports. It will be found, I think, to be
used in this fundamental sense by the Apostle. The
Greek therefore answered strictly on the principles
of his dialectical science, when, being interrogated
as to the point where he rested the Trinitarian
distinctions, he replied, that they were three Hy
postases. But to the Latin, the want of a philosophical
vocabulary rendered the answer not so easy. When
the Latin was pressed with the question, — quid tres,
or quid tria f — what are the three ? — he found, that
his unscientific language denied him the means of
answering satisfactorily. He had no other word,
that sufficed at all to represent, what the Greek in
tended by Hypostasis, but Persona: since Substan
tia was already appropriated to denote the Divine
Being. What rendered Persona more applicable
to the high subject, was, that, in its transition to
denote an individual man, it was first applied to

LECTURE III. 133
individuals of dignityh- The Schoolmen are express
in pointing out, after Augustine, that the term was
adopted, not to express any definite notion, but to
make some answer, where silence would have been
better ; to denote, by some term, what has no suit
able word to express it'. But the term exposed
him to a double inconvenience. If it was under
stood, in its original sense, of a mask, or character
assumed, he was charged with Sabellianism ; if it
was taken in its acquired sense, it gave the sound
h Thus Aquinas says, Cum Persona importat dignitatem, &c.
S. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxix. art. 3. qu. xxxn. art. 3. He ar
gues, that the humanity in Christ is not a Person, because it was
assumed a digniori. Cicero uses Persona in this elevated sense :
as in, personae et dignitatis esse negent — DeFin. I. c. 1. Black-
stone states, in accordance with this, that the appellation of
" Parson" is " the most legal, most beneficial, and most honour-
" able title that a parish priest can enjoy; because such a
" one, (as Sir Edward Coke observes,) and he only, is said
" vicem seu personam ecclesice gerere." Commentar. B. I. c. 11.
P- 3§4-
The use of the term was probably facilitated by its adoption
in the systems of Grammarians. The Scholastic writers draw
illustrations from the grammatical use of the ist, 2nd, and 3rd
Persons, to the Persons of the Trinity.
It is probable, as a friend has observed to me, that the as
sociation, which made Persona signify dignity, is the notion of
the public character, which every one in office must act. A pri
vate person is not called upon to personate, or act, for instance,
the Magistrate, the Bishop, &c. But when such partes have
been given him in the drama of the world, he must use his
authority under the proper mask, ov persona.
' Tres nescio quid, is the expression of Anselm, in his Monolo-
gium. — P. Lombard. Lib. Sentent. I. Dist. 25. — Aquin. S. Theol.
Prima Pars, qu. xxxi. art. 2. qu. xxxn. art. 3. — Note Q.
K 3

134 LECTURE III.
of Tritheism. On the one hand, the Arian, dis
satisfied with the term, still exacted of him, the
confession of the three hypostases of the Greeks;
and " branded him," on his refusal, as Jerome in
dignantly complains, " with the cautery of the
" Union k." On the other hand, the difference as
serted was too great, to be consistent with an unity
of Substance, if by three Persons were conceived
three individual Beings.
In order to obviate this last inference, it was
necessary to have recourse to the original subtile
speculation, on which the Procession of the Divine
Being was founded. It was pointed out, that the
objection arose, from an inattention to the peculiar
circumstances, to which the reasoning applied.
There was in God no distinction of matter and
form, as in all created things. In man we see the
two principles of matter and form, — the idea of the
Divine Intellect, and the material on which it is
impressed. The idea or form, when viewed out of
the Divine Being, must have a suppositum of mat-
k In the Epistle to Damasus, before referred to ; and given
in Note A of Lecture I. — The anxiety to avoid Sabellianism
sometimes led the orthodox into tritheistic modes of expression.
Gregory Nazianzen, in Orat. I. speaks of " some over-orthodox
" persons," rives tS>v nap' rjplv ayav 6p6o8o££>v, having introduced
" polytheism." Aquinas, in like manner, observes, that, " for the
" purpose of stating the truth of Essence and Person, holy Doc-
" tors have sometimes spoken more expressly, than the pro-
" priety of speaking admitted." S. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxxix.
art. 5. Such appears to have been the case with Dr. W. Sher
lock, in his Defence of the Trinitarian Doctrine ; in which he
insisted on the notion of three distinct Minds. — Note R.

LECTURE III. 135
ter, on which it may act. It thus is individualized
in matter. The humanity imparted in each in
stance, constitutes an individual Being, separate
from other instances in which the same operation
takes place. But in God there is no material in
dividuation. In Him the form and the suppositum
are identical. So that, whilst the Divine Nature is
communicated, and distinct relations therefore are
constituted, there is no separation of Beings. The
persons accordingly are Three, whilst the Divinity
remains One1.
Sometimes indeed the objection was answered in
another way. It was argued, that the Deity would
not be multiplied, though we might assert Three
Persons ; since it was only the usage of speech
which made us say Three Men — employing, that is,
the word man in the plural — of Three Individuals.
There was strictly only one humanity, the common
essence of all human individuals. This explanation,

1 Hasc igitur est ratio, quare Socratem, et Platonem, et
Ciceronem, dicimus tres homines : Patrem autem, et Filium, et
Spiritum Sanctum, non dicimus tres Deos, sed unum Deum ;
quia in tribus suppositis humanae naturae sunt tres humanitates ;
in tribus autem personis est una divina essentia. Aquinas, S.
Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxxix. art. 3.
Nam nee Deum, nee personas ejus cogitat ; sed tale aliquid,
quales sunt plures humanae personae. Et quia videt unum
hominem plures homines esse non posse, negat hoc ipsum de
Deo. Non enim idcirco dicuntur tres personae, quia sint tres
res separata?, sicut tres homines : sed quia simihtudinem habent
quandam cum tribus separatis personis. Anselm, De Incar.
Verb. c. vi. p. 40.
K 4

136 LECTURE III.
however, merged the physical notion of the Divine
Being in the logical m.
These several difficulties, in the explanation of
the Trinitarian doctrine, are well summed up and
stated by Aquinas, in a manner which throws light
on the logical character of the whole theory.
" It behoves us," he says, " in what we say of
" the Trinity, to beware of two opposite errors, tem-
" perately proceeding between both ; the error of
" Arius, who laid down, with the Trinity of Per-
" sons, a Trinity of Substances ; and the error of
" Sabellius, who laid down, with the unity of Es-
" sence, an unity of Person. To escape, then, the
" error of Arius, we must avoid, in divine things,
" the terms Diversity and Difference, lest the unity
" of Essence be destroyed. We may however use
" the term Distinction, on account of the Relative
" Opposition. Whence, if any where, in any au-
" thentic Scripture, diversity or difference of Per-
" sons is found, diversity or difference is taken for
" Distinction. Again, that the Simplicity of the
" Divine Essence may not be destroyed, the terms
" Separation and Division must be avoided, which
" are of a whole into parts. Again, that equality
" may not be destroyed, the term Disparity must
" be avoided. Further, that similitude may not be
" destroyed, the terms Alien and Discrepant must
" be avoided. . . . Further, to avoid the error of Sa-
" bellius, we should avoid Singularity, that the
" communicability of the Divine Essence may not
m See Curcellaei Oper. p. 852. — Note S.

LECTURE HI. 137
" be destroyed. . . . We ought also to avoid the term
" One Only, TJnicum, that the Number of Persons
" may not be destroyed. . . . The term Solitary also
" must be avoided, lest the association, of Three
" Persons be destroyed"."
If we compare, with these general disputations
respecting the Trinity, the particular controversies
connected with the Incarnation and the Procession
of the Holy Spirit, we shall find them following the
same method.
The discussions on the Incarnation were, in like
manner, partly physical, partly logical. It was at
tempted to be explained, in what way the Son might
be said to be generated of the Father ; whether out
of the substance of God, or out of a common Di
vinity, of which each participates ; or by division
of the Paternal substance, as a portion severed from
the Father : whether further, He is the Son of God
by nature, or necessity, or will, or predestination,
or adoption. The confusion of principles of differ
ent sciences in these promiscuous inquiries, is suf
ficiently apparent. But it was by such a philosophy
that the orthodox language was settled, declaring
the Son " begotten, before all worlds ; of one sub-
" stance with the Father."
The account of the Incarnation itself was more
peculiarly logical; still there was a mixture of phy
sical speculation respecting the principle of life in
man. The notion entertained, both by Fathers
n Aquin. Summa Theolog. Prima Pars, qu. xxxi. art. 2. — Note T.

138 LECTURE III.
and by Schoolmen, was, that the animating prin
ciple was infused into the body ; and thus, the inert
matter of the flesh became the living substantial
form of man. That all souls were consubstan-
tial with the Deity, was an ancient Pythago
rean notion, that survived in the Church. Thus
TertuUian speaks of man as animated out of the
substance of God. The observation of this fact
accounts for the opinion attributed to Apollinarius,
that the Divinity was the animating principle of
Christ. He was fearful of introducing a Quaternity
into the Notion of the Divine Being, if it were con
ceived, that our Lord possessed the Substance of
human nature, a sentient and intelligent human
principle, as well as the Substance of the Divinity ;
and was thus led to the denial of the perfect huma
nity of Christ °.
The peculiarly logical part of the inquiry appears,
in the points of controversy between the orthodox
and the Nestorians and Eutychians. These were,
in respect to the Incarnation, analogous to the
disputes between the orthodox and the Sabellians
and Arians, on the general question of the Trinity.
The points of sameness and diversity were here
also to be exactly determined. The orthodox main
tained, that the notion of sameness here consisted,
in the Personal individuality of Christ, regarded as
o Damascen. De Haeres. p. 77. note. — Lombard. Sent. II. Dist.
17. B. Putaverunt enim quidam haeretici, Deum de sua sub
stantia animam creasse, &c, p. 178. — See Ibid. Dist. 18. H. on
the Creation and Infusion of the Anima, p. 182. — Note U.

LECTURE III. 139
a Member of the Trinity ; whereas the diversity was
in the two Natures, the divine and the human,
united in His Person. But the Nestorian offended
against the theories of the logical philosophy, in
stating two different hypostases, as the support of
those common properties which belonged to Christ,
and destroyed also the personal individuality. The
Eutychian maintained the personal individuality, but
destroyed the substantial differences. Theories of
the composition and mixture of bodies, entered
largely into these discussions : but they were still
metaphysical in principle, resulting only in settling
the connexion and relation of ideas concerning the
Incarnation. They terminated in the decision of the
place which the terms — Substance, Nature, Person, —
should hold in the definition of the whole nature of
Christ. And the excellence of the orthodox theory,
we may observe, consisted, in its excluding from
that definition, all ideas imported from the physical
speculations, and reducing it to perfect consistency
with the original theory of the Divine Procession.
It brought the inquirer back to the point from
which he set out, to acknowledge the simple Di
vine Personality of the Saviour, — that He was the
Word made flesh. The disputes, at the same time,
were in many points merely verbal ; the contro
versialists reasoning about words which they took
in different senses p. We should observe, for in-
P Apollinarius and Cyril took the word Nature in different
senses : Apollinarius, after the manner of the Oriental Chris
tians, for Essence, or Substance ; Cyril, in a popular sense, for

140 LECTURE III.
stance, how the more general language, according to
which, our Lord was described as having two whole
and perfect Natures, was preferred to the assertion
of two Substances. The term Nature here expressed
the proper Divinity and the proper Humanity; —
the proper Divinity, as indicating that real persona
lity, which belonged to Christ, as very God of the
Substance of the Father; the proper humanity, as in
dicating that abstract humanity, which He assumed
to the Divinity, by being made flesh of the Substance
of his Mother. It was adopted, evidently, to avoid
the assertion, that our Lord assumed to the Divinity
any particular individual man ; which would have
implied a twofold personality % We may observe
too, how the perpetual union of the Godhead and
the manhood in Christ, was secured, by the logical
basis, on which the distinct properties of the two
natures were rested. Being united in one hypos-
an individual thing in itself, whether essence, or hypostasis, or
person. Many Catholics thought, that, to oppose Nestorius,
one Nature in Christ was to be professed, taking Nature in its
common meaning. Dissert. Damasc. II. p. 42. — Contra Ja
cobit. c. 52. p. 408. t. I. Oper. Damasc.
Monophysites objected to the illustration, drawn from the
union of soul and body, to the two natures of Christ, arguing
that soul and body constituted only a single nature. Damasc.
Dialect. 41. p. 44. — Note V.
1 Non enim est alius Deus, alius homo in Christo, quamvis
aliud sit Deus, aliud homo ; sed idem ipse est Deus, et qui homo.
Verbum enim caro factum, assumpsit naturam aliam, non aliam
personam. Nam cum profertur homo, natura tantum quas com
munis est omnibus hominibus significatur, &c. Anselm, De
Incarn. Verb. c. 5. p. 39. — Note W.

LECTURE III. 141
tasis, — or, as it is expressed, the union being hy-
postatical, — the two natures remain "indivisible
" throughout r." Thus we find the language of our
article affirming in Christ, " two whole and perfect
" natures," " never to be divided."
The controversies relating immediately to the
Holy Spirit, became more dialectical in their pro
gress. At first, the Latins were content to speak of
the Holy Spirit, as the mutual Love of the Father
and the Son ; using the language of Platonism s.
Afterwards, as they came into collision with the
Greeks on the point of the procession of the Holy
Spirit from the Son, the disputation with their
philosophical antagonists obliged them to a more
precise, and strictly logical, mode of stating the
doctrine. This transition may be noticed, in the
treatise of Anselm on the Procession of the Spirit ;
a work composed in his more advanced age, after a
conference with the Greeks, in which he had taken
an active part. In this treatise there is no mention
of the original theory of the Latins, but the proof
«* Thus Damascenus, " When, once for all, the natures re-
" ceive the hypostatical union, naff ima-rdo-iv ivua-iv, they remain
" indivisible for ever," adialperoi el$ to na.vte'hei;. Dialectica, cap.
67. Oper. p. 78. " for though the soul," he adds, " is parted
" from the body in death, still the hypostasis of both is the
" same." — Note X.
s Rationes praecipuae, quibus probatur Spiritum Sanctum a
Patre et Filio procedere, sumuntur ex verbis Dionysii, lib. de
Divinis Nomin. c. \; ubi dicit, quod etiam in Deo extasim fa-
cit divinus amor: non sinens ipsum sine germine esse, &c.
Albert. Mag. in Sent. Tract. VII. qu. xxxi. fol. 73.

142 LECTURE III.
of the point is rested entirely on logical grounds f
such as, the necessity of identifying the Father with
the Spirit, or of asserting the procession of the Son
from the Spirit, if the procession of the Spirit from
the Son were denied.
The point appears to have been left undetermined
during the heat of the Arian disputes. The heresy
of Macedonius, in stating the Holy Spirit to be a
creature, was only a form of Arianism ; and did not
touch this question immediately l. The orthodox
seem to have avoided any express assertion of the
Procession from the Son ; both, as it was not re
quired in that state of the controversy, and as the
Procession from the Father was more directly op
posed, both to the Sabellian and Arian notions of
successive, or continuous, derivations u- But the spe
culations of the Nestorians concerning the Incarna
tion, were found to bring perplexity into the subject.
Aquinas expressly attributes to the Nestorians, as a
novel article, the doctrine, that the Holy Spirit does
t Theodoret objected to Cyril of Alexandria, for asserting the
procession of the Spirit from the Son, ex Filio, as savouring of
the heresy of Apollinarius, and of Macedonius. Dissert. Da-
mascen. I. c. 2. De Fid. Orthodox. I. Damascen. Oper. torn. I.
p. 141.
"" This appears to have been the foundation of the objections of
the Greeks to the insertion of the proceeding " from the Son."
Cavebant enim, Le Quien says, ne, Ariano more, Spiritus
Sancti productio in Filium praesertim refunderetur. Note at
p. 141. Damasc. Oper. torn. I. on the text of Damascenus,
re tov Yiov be to nvev/m oi Xeyofiev. The opposition once begun,
other reasons were of course readily devised, both for, and
against, the filioque.

LECTURE III. 143
$ot proceed from the Son; referring to the Council of
Ephesus, in which a creed of the Nestorians was con
demned on that ground-*. To those who, as the
Nestorians, admitted two hypostases in Christ, there
was a logical difficulty, in admitting the procession
of the Spirit from the Son ; since it introduced a
Quaternity in God instead of a Trinity. At length,
having been gradually introduced, it seems, in the
course of divine service, in some Churches of the
West, the words filioque were sanctioned by the
IHrd Synod of Toledo, towards the close of the
Vlth century, when the Goths of Spain abjured
their Arianism. At the beginning of the IXth cen
tury, the Gallo-Frank Church adopted the same ex
pression. Afterwards, but at what precise period is
a matter of uncertainty, at the instance of the
Western Churches, it received the sanction of the
Apostolic See ?. The gradual admission and preva-
" Ad tertium dicendum, quod Spiritum Sanctum non proce-
dere a Filio, primo fuit a Nestorianis introductum, ut patet in
quodam symbolo Nestorianorum damnato in Ephesina Synodo.
Et hunc errorem secutus fuit Theodoritus Nestorianus, et plures
post ipsum. Inter quos fuit etiam Damascenus. Unde in hoc,
ejus sententiae non est standum. Quamvis a quibusdam dicatur,
quod Damascenus, sicut non confitetur Spiritum Sanctum esse
a Filio, ita etiam non negat ex vi illorum verborum. Aquinas,
S. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxxvi. art. 2.
We see also in this passage, how anxious the Schoolman was,
not to lose any authority that had once been sanctioned by the
Church. Even the opposing Greek must be brought over to
his side, if possible.
y Leo III. refused his authority for inserting the words filioque,
into the Nicene Creed, simply on the ground of not altering the

144 LECTURE III.
lence of the article among the Latins, marks the
triumphs of the orthodox theology under the strong
hand of the Spiritual Power ; whilst, in the East,
the state of controversy, controlled by Imperial dis
putants, would admit no alteration of the original
formularies z. It shews, how tenacious the Latin was,
of what had once been passed as a doctrine, by the
authority, or even the practice only, of his Church ;
and with what pliant facility his logic could min
ister reasons for its abstract truth, and incorporate
it with the system of his faith. The words were
confessedly an addition to the Nicene Creed. The
Latins only claimed to themselves the right, of more
explicitly stating the doctrine on that point a- But
the Greek urged the anathema of the Council against
all who should alter the words of the Creed, and
fiercely resisted all accommodation with the Latins
on the point. According to the Schoolmen, the
ground, in which the procession of the Spirit from
the Son was maintained, was altogether logical :
since, as they argue, unless it be allowed, there will
be no means of distinguishing the Holy Spirit from
original formulary ; professing at the same time his full assent
to the doctrine involved in the addition.
z Ratramn of Corbey is said to have written a work, about
A. D. 868, against the Greeks. The title of it evidences the dif
ferent characters of the Greek and Latin disputants. Contra
opposita Grxcorum Imperatorum Ramanam Ecclesiam infaman-
tium, libri quatuor Rathramni Monachi. Mauguin, torn. II. Dis
sert, c. 17. in his Collection of Tracts of the IXth century on
Grace and Predestination.
a Anselm de Process. Sp. Scti. Oper. torn. III. p. 134. —
Note Y.

LECTURE III. 145
the Son. Relations, they observe, are only distinct
when they are opposed. Thus the Father has two
Relations, one to the Son, and the other to the Spirit;
but these two relations, not being opposed, do not
constitute two Persons. The like then would be
the case, if the relations of the Son and the Holy
Spirit to the Father were not opposed : whence it
would follow, that the Son and the Holy Spirit were
but one Person a.
I have now taken a review of the principal parts
of the Trinitarian controversies, so far as I have
thought it necessary to illustrate the origin of our
theological vocabulary on this sacred subject. I have
some general remarks yet to offer, on the effect pro
duced on the whole doctrine, by the consideration of
those scholastic discussions to which I have called
your attention.
The examination then, I would observe, has forci
bly impressed on my mind the conviction, that the
principal, if not the only, difficulties on the doctrine
of the Trinity, arise from metaphysical considera
tions — from abstractions of our own mind, quite
distinct from the proper, intrinsic, mystery of the
holy truth in itself. Perplexities from the nature
of Number, of Time, of Being; in short, all those
various conceptions of the mind which are its ulti
mate facts, and beyond which no power of analysis
a Aquin. S. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxxvi. a. 2. Respondeo
dicendum, quod necesse est dicere Spiritum Sanctum a Patre
esse. Si enim non esset ab eo ; nullo modo posset ab eo per-
sonaliter distingui, &c. — Note Z.

146 LECTURE III.
can reach ; these, I think, the course of the present in
quiry has tended to shew, are our real stumbling-
block, causing the wisdom of God to be received as
the foolishness of man. These have forced them
selves on the form of the Divine Mystery, and given
it that theoretic air, that atmosphere of repulsion,
in which it is invested.
The truth itself of the Trinitarian doctrine
emerges from these mists of human speculation, like
the bold, naked land, on which an atmosphere of fog
has for a while rested, and then been dispersed. No
one can be more convinced than I am, that there is
a real mystery of God revealed in the Christian dis
pensation ; and that no scheme of Unitarianism can
solve the whole of the phenomena which Scripture
records. But I am also as fully sensible, that there
is a mystery attached to the subject, which is not a
mystery of God.
Take, for instance, the notion of the Divine Unity.
We are apt to conceive that the Unity must be un
derstood numerically1-; that we may reason from I
^ In Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. 45. p. 717. the question is
proposed, " If the nature of God is simple, how will it admit the
" number three ?" &c.
Again, Integer, perfectus numerus Trinitatis est. Concil. Sir-
miens. A. D. 357. Hilar. De Synodis, Opera, p. 466. — np6t he
Kai rfwcriKij dvdyKt] povdSa eivas ISvd&os apx^v. Damasc. De Fid. Orthod.
Les-
The Valentinian System was a play of numbers. The Pytha
gorean part of Platonism, the philosophy of Numbers, it cannot
be doubted, must have exercised great influence over the minds
of the early philosophic Christians. So also would the Jewish
mystical application of Numbers, on the converts from Judaism.

ECTURE III. 147
the notion of Unity, to the properties of the Divine
Being. But is this a just notion of the Unity of
God ? Is it not rather a bare fact, a limit of specu
lation, instead of a point of outset ? For how was
it revealed in that system, in which it was the great
leading article of divine instruction? When Moses
called upon the people ; — " Hear, O Israel, the Lord
" our God is one Lord ;" — was it not a declaration,
that Jehovah is not that host of heaven, — that multi
plicity of the objects of divine worship, which heathen
idolatry has enshrined, but the God in heaven, and in
the earth, and in the sea, — not the Teraphim of
domestic worship, but the Universal Governor, over
shadowing all things with the ubiquarian tutelage
of his Providence ? Surely the revelation of the
Divine Unity was not meant to convey to Israel any
speculative notion of the oneness of the Deity ; but,
practically, to influence their minds in regard to the
superstitions from which they had been brought
out. It was no other than the command ; " Thou
" shalt have no other Gods but me."
Now, were this view of the Revelation of the
Divine Unity strictly maintained, would it not
greatly abate the repugnance often felt at the ad
mission of a Trinity in Unity ? We should profess,
that we only knew God, as the exclusive object of
divine worship ; and should acknowledge, that it
was quite irrelevant to our scheme of Religion,
either to demonstrate, or to refute, any conclusion
from the nature of Unity, concerning any further
revelation of the Divine Being. To deny a Trinity,
L 2

148 LECTURE III.
would then be felt the same, as to assert, that, be
cause Polytheism is false, therefore no new mani
festation of God, not resulting from the negation of
Polytheism, can be true.
There is another observation, which the present
inquiry has suggested, and which I think of great
importance, in order to a just view of the Trinitarian
Controversies. Let it then be remarked, that all the
theories proposed on the subject are Trinitarian in
principle. If the opinions of Praxeas, and Artemon,
and Theodotus, of Paul of Samosata, Noetus, Sabel-
lius, and others, amounted to Unitarianism ; it was in
the way of consequence, or inference. They set out
with a Trinitarian hypothesis, and either explained
it away themselves by their speculations, or had the
consequences of their theories forced on them by
their adversaries, as the principles of their belief.
We can plainly perceive, though unfortunately but
very slight memorials remain to us of their dis
quisitions, that their anxiety was, to account for
certain acknowledged facts of the Scripture narra
tive. They refer to admitted manifestations of God,
as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit : and
the desire of accommodation to Jewish or Hea
then prejudices, the refutation of the theories of
others, the fancies of private speculation, — these, and
other influences concealed from our research, — sug
gest to the several inquirers peculiar combinations, or
analyses, of the given facts, in their respective doc
trines of the Trinity. Take the reverse of the case,

LECTURE III. 149
and you will judge, what a difference would have
been in the language of these theorists. We should
have had no attempts to explain the Divine Unity
consistently with Trinitarian distinctions. They
would not have been employed in explaining away
distinctions, which they did not admit in some sense
at least. They would have simply explained, and
enforced, the Unity which they did admit. Or, had
they referred to Trinitarian distinctions as main
tained by opponents in argument, they would have
endeavoured to disprove them, instead of labouring,
as they have done, to retain these very views, how
ever imperfectly, erroneously, or vainly, in their
own systems.
One fact is clear through all this labyrinth of
variations which theological creeds have exhibited; —
that there is some extraordinary communication
concerning the Divine Being, in those Scriptural
notices of God which have called forth the curiosity
of thinking men in all ages. To me it matters
little, what opinion on the subject has been prior,
has been advocated by the shrewdest wit or deepest
learning, has been most popular, most extensive in
its reception. All differences of this kind belong to
the history of the human mind, as much as to the
ology, and affect not the broad basement of fact on
which the manifold forms of speculation have taken
their rise. The only ancient, only catholic, truth is
the Scriptural fact. Let us hold that fast in its
depth and breadth — in nothing extenuating, in no
thing abridging it — in simplicity and sincerity; and
L 3

150 LECTURE III
we can neither be Sabellians, or Tritheists, or Soci-
nians. Attempt to explain, to satisfy scruples, to
reconcile difficulties ; and the chance is, that, how
ever we may disclaim the heterodoxy which lurks
on every step of our path, we incur, at least, the
scandal at the hands of others, whose piety, or pre
judices, or acuteness, may be offended by our words.
I should hope the discussions in which we have
now been engaged, will leave this impression on the
mind. Historically regarded, they evidence the re
ality of those sacred facts of Divine Providence,
which we comprehensively denote by the doctrine
of a Trinity in Unity. But let us not identify this
reality with the theories couched under a logical
phraseology. I firmly and devoutly believe that
word, which has declared the Name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But who
can pretend to that exactness of thought on the sub
ject, on which our technical language is based?
Looking to the simple truth of Scripture, I would
say, in the language of Augustine, Hcec scio. Distin-
guere autem inter Mam Generationem et hanc Pro-
cessionem, nescio, non valeo, non sufficiod. — Verius
enim cogitatur Deus, quam dicitur ; et verius est,
quam cogitatur e.
11 Contra Maximin. III. p. 237. 4to ed.
«De Trin. VII, c. 4.

LECTURE IV.
THE PELAGIAN CONTROVERSIES.
PREDESTINATION AND GRACE.

SUMMARY.
Scholastic nature of controversies relative to Divine and Hu
man Agency — State of the West disposes the Latin Christians
to the discussion of such questions — Importance of the ques
tions in order to Church-government — The disputes here at
first, less philosophical in comparison with the Trinitarian —
Consequent laxity in the terms of the Pelagian theories, occa
sions more continual disputes — The Schoolmen, the first to
systematize these doctrines — Connexion of them with the pre
vious theory of the Trinity — Scholastic view of Predestination
an application of the Principle of Activity in the Divine Being
to human actions — Importance of excluding reference to the
Divine Intelligence, in our estimate of Predestination — Mode
in which the notions of Contingency and Necessity, Time
and Eternity, were employed in scholastic reasonings. — The
only proper difficulty on the subject is, the prevalence of Evil —
Notions of Optimism influential on such speculations — The
term Good in ancient philosophy coincident with an object
of will — Reprobation consequently, as implying evil willed,
unknown to Scholastic system — Illustration to be derived to
our article on the subject from the theories opposed by the
Schoolmen — Dread of Manicheism in the Latin Church.
Scholastic notion of Grace as the effect of Predestination,
both physical and logical — The term Grace, designates pro
perly a general fact of the Divine conduct — Application of Aris
totle's physical doctrines in the scholastic account of the pro
cess of Grace — The theory of Transmutation — Instinctive
Principle of motion attributed to the System of Nature — Ap
proximation to Pantheism in this system.
Practical reflections — Truths of Grace and Predestination
concern the heart principally — Theoretic statements of them
must always be peculiarly open to difficulty — The difficulties,
evidently, chiefly metaphysical — The doctrines, practically
taken, full of real comfort and peace.

James I. 17.
Every good gift, and every perfect gift, is from above,
and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is
no variableness, nor shadow of turning.

Tlaara boms ayaOri, Kai tt&v bd>pr)p,a Ti\ewv, ava>6ev kern
Karapalvov dw6 roi) Trarpbs t&v (pcaTtav, irap' <3 ovk evt irapaX-
Xayrj rj Tpovrjs amoo-K(.acrp.a.

Omne datum optimum, et omne donum perfectum, de-
sursum est, descendens a Patre luminum ; apud quem non
est transmutatio, nee vicissitudinis obumbratio. Lat. Vulg.

LECTURE IV.

IN opening my inquiry into the influence of the
Scholastic Philosophy, as also in entering on the
illustration of it in the Trinitarian Controversies, I
had occasion to point out the fact of the real as
cendancy obtained by the Latin portion of the
Christian Church. It appeared that this ascendancy
was not at once decided and complete ; but that
still it was effectually achieved by those stirring
spirits, the great Latin Fathers of the IVth century.
A review of another class of controversies, which,
next to those on the Trinity, engaged and absorbed
the attention of Christian disputants, — the controver
sies relating to Divine and Human Agency, — will
still more illustrate this origin of the Scholastic
Philosophy, and its incorporation with Theology, as
a subtile instrument of spiritual power.
We now, indeed, enter on ground which is more
peculiarly that of Scholasticism; where the Greek
Theology is comparatively silent, and the whole
moulding and ultimate complexion of the doctrines
professed, are the work of the Latins, or rather of
the influential portion of the Latins, the African
Churches, under the management of Augustine, at
the commencement of the Vth century. The Greeks,
looking more with the eye of philosophers than
of Church-leaders, at the questions of Divine and

156 LECTURE IV.
Human Agency, did not take a strictly theolo
gical interest in their decision. They regarded
these questions, rather as the proper matter of phi
losophical disquisition ; as they really are, when
justly considered ; since they suggest themselves to
the inquisitive mind, independently of any peculiar
views of God and man resulting from Revelation.
This field of disputation therefore, as a part of
Christian Theology, was left open to the busy intel
lect of the Latin Divines.
In the East indeed, there was not that call for
the decision of these questions, which existed in the
West. The attention of the Greeks was sustained
on parts of the Trinitarian controversies, at the
period when Pelagianism was producing a ferment
in the Latin Church. The uniformity of the general
state of things in the Eastern Empire, is strikingly
contrasted by the restlessness, and fever of change,
with which the West was troubled during the IVth
and Vth centuries. Though the East was the theatre
of wars during that period, there was no such uni
versal shock to the repose of the human mind,
as in the West, where revolution and confusion
had taken the place of regularity and order. The
world witnessed the sack and misery of the Im
perial City herself; whose fall might well seem the
prelude of the universal dissolution of society. All
was either ruin, or expectation of ruin. This anar
chy of social life in the West might naturally re
present itself to the religionist, as well as to the pro
fane and irreligious, as the disenthroning of Provi-

LECTURE IV. 157
dence ; whilst the one would be confirmed in his
infidelity, the other would be staggered in the con
fidence of his Faith. To a Christian trained in a
speculative Theology, the difficulty would be aggra
vated. The immutability and perpetuity of order,
which he had been taught to ascribe to the Divine
Principles, would receive, to his apprehension, a
contradiction, in what he observed passing around
him. How prevalent such feelings were, we may
learn from the testimony of Salvian, a Gallic writer
of the Vth century, in his work " on the Government
" of God ;" whose expressions, though allowance must
be made for a declamatory style, give a vivid repre
sentation of the disorder of the times, and of the
infidel distrust of Providence resulting from it. The
evil seems to have reached its height, when this
writer drew his picture of it. It was at such a
crisis, when Pelagianism began to make advances
in the world; when opinions were disseminated,
which were regarded, or at least apprehended in
their consequences, as infringements on the great
truths of Providence and Grace, and as in this sense
harmonizing with the profane tendency of the agea.
Africa, however, continued for some time exempt
from the general ruin, and Augustine had leisure to
contemplate the rolling wave in its progress, before
» See also Augustine's complaint of the drunkenness which
prevailed in the African cities in his times ; and with which
even the celebration of the memory of the martyrs was pro
faned : and the ineffectual attempts of the Bishops to check it.
—Note A. Lect. IV.

158 LECTURE IV.
at length the cities of Carthage and Hippo were
swept under itb- Jerome also, sequestered from every
thing but the storms of a passionate enthusiasm, at
his loved retreat in Palestine, could watch the state
of religious feeling at this crisis, and, himself un
moved, mingle with the agitating events of the
West. But the sceptre of spiritual power was then
passing from his veteran hands to the more vigorous
Bishop of Hippo c ; and, whilst his counsels and ex
ample are sought in the difficulties of the strug
gle against the Pelagianism of the times, it is the
African Divines, with Augustine at their head, who
take the lead in the controversies ; to whose ex
ertions the orthodox decision is owing d. Read the
repeated expostulations of the African clergy, con
veyed, in the form of respectful epistles, to the heads
of the Roman Church, on the case of Pelagius and
Celestius ; and, under their half-expressed fears of the
orthodoxy of Rome, and their obsequious language
of duty, you will easily see, who are the real arbiters
of the dispute ; whose is the influential opinion, be-

b Jerome born A. D. 331, died in 420.
Augustine born A. D. 354, died in 430.
Pelagian Controversies began to be agitated in 405 .
c Jerome, amidst his compliments of Augustine, still reminds
him who it is that makes these acknowledgments : Quem
post me, he says, in writing to Augustine, orientem in scriptura-
rum eruditione laetatus sum. Epist. XIV. in Augustin. Oper.
torn. II. p. 1 9. — Note B.
d Prosper, in speaking of the Council of Carthage, says,
.... cui dux Aurelius, ingeniumque, Augustinus erat. Carm.
de Ingratis. — Note C.

LECTURE IV. 159
fore which even the pride of the Apostolic See
must bow e.
The nature and the decision of the controversies
on Divine and Human Agency, bespeak entirely the
practical theology of the Western Divine. These
controversies were of leading importance in relation
to the government of the Church. Opinions, adverse
to a belief in the supremacy of Divine Providence,
were also adverse to the dependence of the spiritual
community, on the personal oracles of the Divine
Will, and visible ministers of the Divine Power. If
the real invisible Theocracy were not acknowledged
in the fullest sense, the principle of a deputed theo
cratic power would sink in estimation at the same
time ; and the hearts of the people would be se
duced from that loyalty, with which the sacerdotal
ministrations had been hitherto attended. So that,
even though the logic of Pelagius, and the known
purity of his character, might have acquitted him
from the charge of teaching a doctrine of ingrati
tude and rebellion against God ; yet it was probable,
that discussions, touching the nature and necessity of
Divine Grace, if they amounted only to a modera
tion of language on the subject, would raise ques
tionings and unsettle the faith of many f. Practical
men would readily see this, and, regarding the mat
ter, not as a point of disputation, but as a question
of government, would take their measures against
consequences probable in fact, rather than against
the abstract speculation itself.
e Note D. f Note E.

160 LECTURE IV.
It was also to hearts, which had so lashed them
selves to the helm of the Christian vessel, a ques
tion of piety or impiety, whether an exclusive, or
a qualified, ascription to God, of the glory of human
salvation, should be adopted in the dogmatic lan
guage of the Church. In opposing Pelagianism,
they conceived themselves pleading " the Lord's con
troversy" against His " ungrateful" creatures s, and
felt their zeal, as Churchmen, stimulated by the
righteousness of the cause which they advocated.
To impute any efficacy to Human Agency, in thd
great work of Salvation, might appear a denial of
God's mercy and power, — a disclaimer of that Pro
vidence, whose blessing had hitherto crowned their
measures with success. They exulted in an oppor
tunity of vindicating the cause of God, through evil
report and good report; rejoicing in the very hatred
incurred at the hand of the heretic h.
S Prosper's Poem against the Pelagians, is inscribed, De In-
gratis. Bradwavdine, Archbishop of Canterbury in the XlVth
century, entitles his elaborate metaphysical work against Pela
gianism, De Causa Dei. Bradwardine died in 1349.
h They perverted our Lord's declaration, " Rejoice when
" men hate you and persecute you," &c.
Macte virtute, says Jerome, writing to Augustine, in orbe
celebraris ; catholici te conditorem antiquae rursum fidei vene-
rantur, atque suspiciunt : et, quod signum majoris glorias est,
omnes haeretici detestantur, et me pari prosequuntur odio;
ut, quos gladiis nequeunt, voto interficiant. Epist. 25. —
Augustini Oper. torn. II. p. 29. 4to ed.
Gregory Nazianzen speaks with exultation of the shocking
manner of Arius's death. Arius is uniformly regarded by the
orthodox Fathers as another Judas.

LECTURE IV. 161
The Pelagian controversies, accordingly, evidenced
a different character, at their outset, from that by
which the questions on the Trinity were distin
guished. The assertion may seem paradoxical ; but
it may be said, that they were more properly re
ligious than the Trinitarian ; that is, they were
viewed more immediately in their reference to the
general sentiments and conduct of Christians, and
decided, in the first instance, on practical grounds.
The disputes on the Trinity, indeed, more properly
belonged, in principle, to Christianity; as, on the other
hand, the Pelagian controversies, in principle, be
longed to Philosophy. But, in the discussions of the
former, Christianity was almost forgotten in the
philosophical spirit with which they were pursued.
And so, in the discussions of the latter, the proper
philosophical arguments, by which the truths re
specting Divine and Human Agency might have
been fairly appreciated, were neglected ; and points
of abstract inquiry were decided by their probable
effect on human practice. The consequences of
certain opinions were estimated in each case, both
in the Trinitarian and the Pelagian disputes. A
Theology, essentially logical, shewed itself in the one
as in the other. Only, in the Trinitarian disputes,
the argumentation was exclusively and strictly lo
gical ; in the Pelagian, the logical and practical con
sequences were confused together. Because such an
effect would probably follow such an opinion in the
conduct of the Christian, therefore, it was argued,
the opinion must be untrue. M

162 LECTURE IV.
Thus the objection, which Jerome adduces against
the theory of the power of man imputed to Pela
gius, is, that it tended to an " apathy" and " a sin-
" lessness k," such as was inculcated by Stoic or
Pythagorean, and consequently would lead to a
state of inaction and presumptuous security. The
imputation, surely, is groundless and unphilosophical
as an argument against the truth of the theory;
though, as a practical objection, and rhetorically
employed, it may avail. In like manner Augustine
argues, that, if the doctrine of Pelagius were ad
mitted, the importance of Baptism would cease ;
men would no longer think it necessary to resort to
the laver of regeneration, to be washed from pol
lutions which they did not acknowledge. Again,
that the duty of Prayer would be neglected : in vain
would our Lord have commanded men to pray, that
they be not led into temptation, when the self-forti
fied soul felt, within itself, the fond presumption
that it was safe.
We may perceive, then, in the origin of these con
troversies, a confusion of rhetorical and logical ar
gumentation; such as might naturally have been
expected from the rhetorical school, in which the
Latin Fathers were trained, and from that prac
tical design which was ever uppermost in their
minds in all their theological discussions. Had
these controversies, in their connexion with Chris-
fc 'AvaBtla et avoifAapvrio-ia. It is curious to find the very same
consequences imputed to Calvinism in more modern times. —
Note F.

LECTURE IV. 163
tianity, been as fully treated by the Greeks as the
Trinitarian were, we should have found a more
exact technical vocabulary on the several points
of discussion, as well as a more logical deduc
tion of consequences, at the outset of the dispu
tation. As it was, they were left by the Latin
Fathers in the unscientific, floating form of prac
tical conclusions. The Latins had not the acumen,
and the expertness, of the Greek theologian ; as
neither had they a proper instrument of philosophy
in their language ; to enable them to draw those
lines of discrimination, on which an exact theoretic
phraseology could be constructed. Indeed, they had
no design of so stating the truths of Divine and
Human Agency. They were bent on resisting a
practical mischief. And hence has resulted that very
remarkable difference in the comparison with the
Trinitarian controversies. A copious phraseology,
an exactness and rigour of statement, are charac
teristic of the Trinitarian theories, from the first
full discussion of them. On the Pelagian question,
we seek in vain, in the writings of Augustine, any
positive, dogmatic language, by which an exact
theory of Divine and Human Agency, in their re
lation to each other, may be enunciated. This is
evidenced in the fact, that the orthodox, the Jan-
senists, the Thomists, and the Jesuits, or Molinists,
all equally refer themselves to the authority of that
Father. Something must be allowed in such re
ferences for the obligation felt by the several dis
putants, to maintain their agreement with so catholic
M 2

164 LECTURE IV.
an authority. Something too must be allowed for
the unphilosophical nature of the Latin language.
Still, had Augustine spoken with more dogmatical
precision on the subject, there would not have been
that plausibility of evidence in his writings to views
so opposed.
The observation is illustrated in the disputes sub
sisting on the Question, after the death of Augus
tine, and in the difficulty manifested, in the course
of these discussions, of ascertaining the precise views
of Augustine himself. In the monasteries of the
South of Gaul, not long after the death of Augus
tine, objections were raised against some of his as
sertions, as destructive of the freewill of man1. The
authority of the Father was maintained at the ex
pense of the orthodoxy of his objectors ; who, as
not advancing to the full length of the Great Mas
ter's language, were accused as favourers of Pela
gius, or as Semi-Pelagians. But we do not find any
thing of this kind taking place, in regard to the
great authorities on the question of the Trinity.
There is no ambiguity, for instance, on the Trinity,
as to the precise doctrine of Athanasius, or Gregory
Nazianzen. The precision of the Greek Philosophy
guards the doctrines of these writers throughout.
1 Mera pev roi ye Bdvarov tov ev dyiois Avyovarivov rjp^avro rives
ra>v ev r<3 kXij/)£0 to pev Svo-o-efies Kparvveiv hoypa, naKcos 8e Xtyctv 'Av-
yovarivov Kai diaavpeiv, a>s dvaipeo~iv tou dvre^ovcriov elo-rjynadpevov .
"AXXa Kai KeXeoTicos 6 'Paprjs, vnep re Beiov dvSpos, Kai Kara to>v dva-
kivovvtov ttjv atpetriv, to'is ey\a>piois ypd(pav emaKoTtois, ttjv kivov-
pevrjV rrkdvrpi ea-rqa-ev. Photii Biblioth. c. 53. Voss. Hist. Pelag.
lib. 1. c. 30. p. 81.

LECTURE IV. 165
The same is observable in Augustine himself, in his
treatises on the Trinity. But, where he had not the
previous clearing of the question, in its theological
bearings, by the labours of Greek theologians, he is
more the practical reasoner than the accurate theo
rist ; stating rather what may check a growing evil,
than what is calculated to set at rest a speculative
question. I do not indeed say this, as supposing
that any speculative statement, or scheme, of Di
vine and Human Agency, could set the question
at rest. Experience proves the contrary. It opens
too many attractive views to the curiosity of the
human mind, for speculation to acquiesce in any
given definition of the subject. But I merely wish
to point out the state, in which the Pelagian con
troversies descended to the Church : particularly,
as it affords some solution of the general state of
those controversies in all ages of the Church. It
is a striking fact, that Trinitarians, with little ex
ception, are all now agreed among themselves :
whilst, in regard to the Pelagian controversies*
there subsists the greatest variety of opinion in
whole Churches and among individuals. Each spe
culator has his theory, his peculiar view; — each
separate communion, some antagonist statement on
the several points involved in them. Now, it is not
enough to say, that one class of truths is more prac
tical than the other, and therefore more awakens
the attention and interest of thinking persons. Those
who rightly discern and value the Trinitarian truths,
will hardly allow, that there are any truths of the
M 3

166 LECTURE IV.
Gospel more strictly practical than these. But, even
on that supposition, there will still remain to be ac
counted for, a remarkable difference, in the opening
for controversial discussion, presented in the terms,
by which the truths relative to Divine and Human
Agency are expressed. There is a great deal of de
finition and of apparent precision of language on the
subject. But, with all its formality, the disputation
bears the mark of its rhetorical origin, leaving an
escape for the theorist to raise up his own system
even on the terms of its theories.
In the revival of the Pelagian Question in the
IXth century, in the discussions on Predestination
to which I alluded in my first Lecture, an attempt
was made by Erigena to introduce the language of
philosophy into the subject. He laboured to prove,
against the unfortunate Gotteschalc, who had de
duced from the writings of Augustine " a twofold
" Predestination," as it was termed, — a Predestina
tion to Life, and a Predestination to Death, or Re
probation, — that it was impossible for the doctrine
of Reprobation to be true ; on the grounds, that
Death and Sin, and Evil in general, were non
entities, mere negations, that had no proper being,
and therefore could not pre-exist in the mind of
God, or be predestined. This conclusion, however,
of Erigena, being founded on an abstruse, mys
tical philosophy, not very intelligible to an age of
literature, only then emerging from the barbarism
of preceding times, obtained no favourable reception

LECTURE IV. 167
with the Church. In fact it only roused a spirit
of resistance. The Southern Church of Gaul felt
alarmed for the authority of Augustine. Not only
were individuals engaged in replying to the argu
ments of Erigena ; but even the Church of Lyons,
softer in temper than her sister of Rheims m, pub
lished her strictures on the arguments of the phi
losopher, and her remonstrances against the perse
cution of Gotteschalc ; characterizing, as " inhuman
" cruelty," the violence with which the poor sufferer
had been treated11.
This resistance against a more theoretic view of
the doctrines involved in these Controversies, was
a further means of keeping the discussion in that
practical form, in which it had been bequeathed to
the Church by Augustine. The writers against
Erigena, Ratramn of Corbey, Prudentius, Bishop of
Troyes, and Florus, a Deacon of Lyons, are all
strongly opposed to a scientific discussion of the sub
ject. They rule the question by the simple autho
rity of Scripture and the Fathers ; objecting to Eri
gena, on the very ground, that he had corrupted the
simplicity of the truth by refinements of reason
ing0. Such then was the form, in which the Theories
m The Southern part of Gaul had a larger infusion of Roman
Civilization, and this is seen in the different character of the
Church there, as compared with the Northern.
n Note M of Lecture I.
o These several writings are in the Collection, by Mauguin,
of Authors of the IXth century on Grace and Predestination.
M 4

168 LECTURE IV.
belonging to the Pelagian Question descended to the
proper age of Scholasticism — the period, when the
disputations of the Schools were reduced to a sys
tematic form, in consequence of the fuller introduc
tion of the Aristotelic Philosophy. Therefore it is,
that I characterize this class of controversies, as more
peculiarly Scholastic than the Trinitarian. The
conclusions to be established were handed down to
the Schoolmen, in the volumes of their own great
Master. But these conclusions wanted contexture
and theoretic stability. It yet remained, for the
doctrines on these points to be moulded into a ra
tionalized system of Theology ; to be deduced in
connexion with the Principles of the Divine Being,
already laid down as the scientific basis of all truth.
It has been seen, in the account which I gave of
the theories proposed on the Trinity, that the ground
of the speculation was, the notion of God, as the
Principle of Causation or Efficiency; that this no
tion itself was drawn from analogies in the human
mind, viewed as the means of tracing up the facts
of the visible world to their fixed principles in God.
The speculations on the Pelagian Question, as
developed in the Scholastic system, were an appli
cation of this fundamental principle of the Theology
to a particular class of facts ; those produced by
moral and intellectual Beings. The theory of God,
as a Trinity in Unity, had respect, according to the
scholastic views, to the whole universe : it was the
mysterious solution of the whole order of things ;

LECTURE III. 169
containing in it the immutable reasons, or principles,
of all existences whatever. The account, however,
of the peculiar phenomena attending the thoughts
and actions of rational agents, such as angels and
men — and of men more particularly, as the subjects
of Divine Grace revealed in the dispensations of re
ligion — suggested occasion for a more explicit and
distinct inquiry. A theory of Providence, therefore,
was to be drawn out ; of the connexion rather of
Providence with the natural and revealed condition
of human nature.
The Schoolmen, accordingly, proceeded to philo
sophize on the mode, in which the Will of God ful
filled itself, consistently with the free-will of man.
The spirit of their Theology made it incumbent on
them to demonstrate the operation of the Divine
Will, as the sole Master-Will, comprehending in
itself the derived and subordinate wills of all other
agents. And here the important point to be observed, in
developing the force of theory on the doctrines now
under review, is, the reason, why they referred the
speculation to the Will, rather than to the Intelli
gence of God. It was in pursuance of a maxim of
their adopted philosophy, that " mere intelligence
" moves nothing," — is no cause of production or
change p. The inquiry was essentially concerned
about a theory of change, — an account of a class of
ever-flowing, variable, phenomena. To understand
this, we should be aware of the extent of meaning
P AristOt. Ethic. VI. diavoid 8' avrrj ov6ev Kivei.

170 LECTURE IV.
attached to the word Motion, in the ancient Physics.
It included under it much more than we apprehend
by the term ; applying to any change whatever that
might occur, either in the internal structure, or ex
ternal form of bodies, no less than to their change of
place. As the nature of the soul was classed among
the objects of physical inquiry, any modification of
the soul, by its exertion in action, came under this
definition of Motion. We may judge then of the con
nexion of the maxim, to which I have referred, with
the theory of Divine Agency. In exploring the
principle of actions, we exclude from the induction
whatever belongs to the simply intellectual view of
their nature. We look only to the motive principle.
We are sufficiently accustomed, indeed, to ascribe the
moral nature of actions to the motives exemplified
in them. But we little think of the abstruse philo
sophy on which the expression is founded ; that it
is a rejection of every thing else but the Will, — the
principle of Activity, — from the abstract theory of
human conduct.
The doctrine of Predestination, accordingly, is a
reference of actions to their primary Motive, the
great principle of all Activity, the Will of God. The
reasons or ideas of actions, as of all other effects
throughout the Universe, might have existed eter
nally in the Divine mind ; like the principles of an
art in the mind of the artist: but nothing would
have been created, no action would have taken
place, unless the Divine Will had stretched out the
hand of God to the work. It was the Will of God

LECTURE IV. 171
that occasioned the Divine Intelligence, the wisdom
or word of God, to go forth, and diffuse the Divine
power, wisdom, and goodness over the works of a
visible world.
From the perfect simplicity, indeed, of the Divine
nature, the Will of God is identical, as the School
men assert, with his Intelligence ; as both are also
identical with his Being i. But, in speculating con
cerning the principle of voluntary actions, it is im
portant that the attention should be confined strictly
to that ultimate abstraction which properly repre
sents their nature in the Being of God — the simple
principle of the Divine Will.
Had the views of the Schoolmen, and of others
who have philosophized after them, been confined
strictly to this point, much perplexity of thought on
the questions arising out of the subject would have
been avoided. A simple solution in that case would
have been given of the effects of subordinate agents,
by deducing them from the great law of the Divine
Will. This class of variable phenomena would, at
least, have been simplified, by being contemplated
as His agency, in whom is no variableness, nor
shadow of turning. They would have been deprived
of their anomalous character, by the steadiness of
purpose with which such a theory would invest them.
1 Et sic oportet in Deo esse voluntatem, cum sit in eo in-
tellectus. Et sicut suum intelligere est suum esse, ita et suum
esse est suum velle. — Aquinas, Sum. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xix.
art. i. Quia essentia Dei est ejus intelligere et velle. Ibid. art. 4.

172 LECTURE IV.
But the intellectual principle, as being physically
inseparable from the moral, has been also brought
into the speculation : and the stability, attributed to
this principle, has been taken into the view of the
origin of those changes which the moral world ex
hibits. Conclusions have been drawn from that
other maxim of ancient philosophy, that what is
known — whatever is the object of Science — must be
fixed and immutable. It has been forgotten in the
course of inquiry, that the speculation is concerning
the principle of change, — that it is an endeavour to
ascertain some limit to those variable results which
the human will produces, by viewing them in their
original cause of variation, itself immutable, the Will
of God.
Thus, when any event or effect is simply regarded
in its reference to the Will of God, the assertion
which it becomes us to make respecting it, is that
its accomplishment could not eventually be resisted ;
could not be frustrated. The design of that act of
volition must surely be effected : the wills of all sub
ordinate agents must work together with that sove
reign Will, which pursues its own purposes through
their agency. In the acts of Human will there is
no assurance of the result being the object intended ;
there is no certainty of correspondence between the
motive and the effect, because of the various obstacles
arising from the conflicting wills of different indivi
duals. But, even of the Human will, we may pre
dict a certain result, in proportion as the agent ap
pears to have calculated justly the resistance, or the

LECTURE IV. 173
cooperation, to be expected from the wills of others.
Now the Divine Will is only an extreme case of
this analogy, — a case in which are included the
wills of all creatures, — where the purpose, accord
ingly, will surely be accomplished, not only amidst
the utmost variety and complexity, and apparent
contradiction of human wills, but by means of that
very entangling and contrariety of motions which
puzzle the eye of the human spectator. Take
however the Divine Intellect into the account ; re
gard any given effect as the simple object of Divine
knowledge ; and we must then say that the effect
could not be otherwise; the result, in any other
form, becomes inconceivable and self-contradictory :
as known to God, it must be infallibly and specula
tively true : a conclusion which brings us immedi
ately to a doctrine of Necessity, or Fatalism.
The Schoolmen attempted, in this speculation, to
solve the difficulty which had perplexed the ancient
philosophers. Whilst some of these resorted to the
notion of a sovereign fate, or a principle of malig
nity, or necessity — and the more pious to that of a
providence — to explain the devious course of human
events ; all may be regarded, as having admitted
the impossibility of reducing this class of facts to
any strictly scientific principles. They were placed,
indeed, among those truths which were held to be
essentially variable or Contingent, in contradistinc
tion to those which were called Necessary, as capable
of being referred to fixed laws. So that, whilst the

174 LECTURE IV.
philosopher assigned these several abstract causes
for the variable phenomena of actions, it was not a
solution of the facts that he proposed, but a con
fession of his ignorance of any proper philosophical
account of them.
The Platonic doctrine of an abstract Idea of Good,
was the nearest approach to such an account. This
was, however, an attempt to reduce the calculations
of moral judgment, to the certainty which belongs
to the purely intellectual perceptions, rather than a
theory that applied itself to the actual anomalies of
human life. But the Schoolmen, adopting Aristotle's
practical view of the subject, admitted, with that
philosopher, the uncertainty of human conduct in
its dependence on the free-will of man. At the
same time, as theologians and logicians, they felt
themselves bound to reconcile this admission with
the fixedness of those Ideal Principles, from which
all this devious course of human actions primarily
originated. The manner in which they effected the reconcilia
tion, is extremely worthy of our notice, as an in
stance of the dependence of their Theology on meta
physical theories. The explanation rests entirely
on assumed definitions of Time and Eternity. These
are contrasted with each other ; Time, as the " mea-
" sure of motion," — Eternity, as the " measure of
" permanent being." Whilst events therefore, viewed
in connexion with the capacities of finite beings,
develope themselves successively, and are uncertain,
or contingent, as arising out of their proximate causes;

LECTURE IV. 175
they are fixed and immutable in their " presentiality"
before God, whose eternity admits no change, no suc
cession r.
It is sufficiently clear, I think, from these diffi
culties, and their proposed solution, that the meta
physics of a logical philosophy have tied the knot,
in which this subject has been involved. Realism
converted distinctions, which are the mere cre
ations of the mind, into differences in the nature of
things. For the terms, Necessary and Contingent,
express nothing more than laws of thought, the
varied character of evidence belonging to dif
ferent perceptions of the mind : the necessity im
puted to the objects of Divine knowledge being a
consequence from the notion of immutability; the
contingency imputed to the facts of human life,
being the simple evidence of experience, which may
vary, and even be directly contrary, without any in
trinsic absurdity. Whence, the attempt to reconcile
them is only to confound two distinct classes of
mental facts. The Schoolmen, indeed, were not ig
norant of the nature of this distinction ¦* ; but the
logical basis of their Theology obliged them to in
terpret it in the way in which they have done. The
necessity, and fixedness, and eternity of the Divine
Being, were the given principles, which their method
called upon them to apply to the facts of human ex
perience. They commenced with the rigour of logic,
"* Note L.s, Sum. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xix. art. 3. — Note H.

176 LECTURE IV.
and were forced to throw its chains over the stream
of human affairs.
The only proper difficulty in the subject of
Divine Agency, — that which has more strictly the
force of objection against it, — is, the fact observ
able in the world, of apparent resistance to the will
of God, by the deep and wide prevalence of evil.
This fact impugns the very ground on which the
truth of the Divine Agency is founded ; since the
good designed in the constitution of the world, is
the evidence to us of that great law of natural re
ligion, — that God wills the happiness of his creatures.
In short, it is principally, if not solely, from a con
viction of the Divine good-will, that we assign to
God the operation of will at all.
But even this difficulty, real as it is, (for the ex
istence of sin and misery in the world is as clear a
fact as any in its history,) is greatly aggravated by
that speculative optimism, which seems a funda
mental prejudice or instinct of our minds. The
maxim that nature works all things for the best —
that there is nothing imperfect or vain in her sys
tem — was the form which this idea assumed in the
ancient philosophy. It would be well, if we held it
simply as a general truth, highly important for our
practical needs ; as a resource in the perplexities of
life ; but rejected it altogether as a ground of spe
culation. For as soon as we begin to reason from
it, that, " of two ends, the better must be the design
" of Providence;" as the ancients did reason, and as

LECTURE IV. . 177
*¦ ff\
we are ourselves apt to do; we incur difficulties
arising from our own conceptions of what is best.
We have then to satisfy the importunate requisi
tions of imaginary hypotheses.
When we come indeed to examine the subject
more closely, as it is illustrated by that Logical
Philosophy on which our attention is now engaged,
the theory itself of Predestination will be found to
involve reasonings on this fundamental principle.
It is, in fact, a speculation founded on our moral
nature ; which cannot rest satisfied, until it has mo
delled the system of Grace, as of Nature, after its
own tendencies towards an excellence and perfection
beyond its positive experience. The Father of Mo
dern Philosophy has observed, that the human in
tellect supposes a greater regularity and equality
in things than it actually finds. This is particularly
the case in the world of religion. Captivated with
the contemplation of the eternal destinies of man, it
loves to trace the links, which bind together the
remote parts of the mysterious life of the soul, in
continuous and uniform series. It will not acquiesce,
therefore, in the naked declarations of Scripture on the
subject of Human Salvation. It eagerly seizes on the
truths contained in these, to recast them in the mould
which its own imaginations have framed. Hence
that charm, which doctrines of Absolute Predestina
tion, Indefectible Grace, Assurance of Salvation, and
the like, possess both for the philosopher and the
vulgar. The mind is placed by them in a com
manding elevation, from which it beholds the whole
N

178 LECTURE IV.
course of the Christian life stretched before it. It
feels itself transported into the very region which
properly belongs to religion ; where the amazement
of thought, naturally excited by the subject, seems
to be answered by the majesty and sublimity of the
scenery presented. Otherwise, it might be matter of
surprise, how pious and amiable men have delighted
in stern and appalling views of the Divine Predes
tination ; not scrupling to declare the devout emo
tion, with which they could contemplate the terrors
of Divine wrath, sentencing the sinner to everlast
ing dereliction and misery **.
To understand, however, the theoretic nature of
Predestination, we must enter more fully into the
ethical speculation, of which it is the counterpart in
the system of Religion : if, at least, we would rightly
estimate the meaning of the dogmatic declarations
on the subject.
Whatever is the object of a natural passion, or
active principle of the soul, was termed, in the lan
guage of ancient philosophy, " a good," and an
" end;" — an end, because the affection, or active prin
ciple, when duly exerted, was conceived to rest in its
object, then attained or completed ; — a good, because
nature does nothing in vain, and suggests no object
to the desires of man, without a beneficial design.
The notion of Good became thus essentially at
tached to an object of the will ; or was rather the
t Note I.

LECTURE IV. 179
result of such an association. Accordingly, whatever
was desired, was represented to be a good, either
real or apparent ; — a real good, if the affections were
rightly constituted ; — an apparent good, pursued as
real, where the affections were disordered and per
verted. This general view of moral facts will be
recognized as pervading the ethical philosophy of
Aristotle. And hence the great business of that
philosophy, as of the ancient Ethics in general,
was, to find out the general law of Good, or
great End of Actions ; the object universally aimed
at, though often under mistaken views, in the va
rious moral facts which human life exhibits ; or,
as it was abstractedly termed the Chief Good, —
the ultimate End, or in Scholastic language, Final
Cause, of all actions.
Now, if we conceive this Theory of Actions trans
ferred to the Divine Being, we shall obtain a just
view of what the Schools intended by the doctrine
of Predestination. The End, or Final Cause, of all
the actions of God, — of all exertions of his will,
— could be no other than his Goodness. As, under
the view of religion, the Chief Good of Man must
be God himself, so, to the will of God, there could be
no other object than the Divine goodness itself. So
far then as all things done in the universe were the
actions of God, they were referable to the great law
of good, original in the nature of the Divine Being.
Nothing evil, as such, could be referable to God,
because what was evil could not be conceived to be
the object of Will at all, much less of the perfect
N 2

180 LECTURE IV.
Divine will. It was wrong therefore, according to
the Scholastic doctrine, to speak of the predestina
tion of evil. The wicked might be said to be pre
destined to punishment, but not to the evil com
mitted by them. This was only the result of their
improper exercise of their own will ; through which,
as individuals, they missed the good designed for
them by God; and, in thus missing it, sinned against
the benevolent constitution of God. Good would
surely follow, whatever might be the actions of the
individual, however evil these might be in their
immediate result, since nothing else but goodness
could be the object of the Divine Will. God there
fore could not be said to will the evil action of the
sinner ; though He might " permit" it, in order to that
ultimate good which He educes out of it. The use
of the word Permission may be remarked here ; as it
has passed into modern use, and is employed still to
remove the objection arising from saying, that God
appoints or decrees evil. Taken in its popular sense,
it only removes the difficulty a step further ; as it
still leaves the question, why God does not interfere
to prevent the evil done and suffered in the world.
But the scientific use of it, by Aquinas, seems to be,
to avoid making evil an object of volition ; and yet
not to exclude it from the cognizance and control
of Divine Providence as an event u.
Reprobation accordingly, in the Calvinistic sense,
had no place in the Scholastic theology. Predesti
nation, regarded as the sole primary cause of all our
« Note J.

LECTURE IV. 181
actions, as they are moral and Christian — as they
have any worth in them, or any happiness — was as
serted in that Theology in the most positive man
ner ; though different Doctors varied in further ex
positions of its nature x. But Reprobation, as it
implies a theory of the moral evil of the world, I
think I may confidently say, is no part of the Sys
tem^. The term, indeed, is derived to us from the
Schoolmen ; and so far they are chargeable with
having perplexed theology with the disquisitions
arising out of it. But, had they employed the term
to denote an antecedent will, on the part of God, of
the sin and misery of the wicked, they would have
contradicted that philosophy, from which they drew
their speculation on the subject.
Whether it becomes us to theorize at all on the
subject, is another question. But, if there must be
theory, the Schoolmen were so far right, that they
simply endeavoured to trace the Divine Goodness,
as manifested by Nature and Revelation, to its pri
mary cause in the Divine Being. Their theory in
culcated the great truth, that the apparent anomalies
of the world were in reality instances of the same
general law ; that the evil actually found in nature,
was not the design of God, or the effect of any Prin
ciple of Evil. This is their Predestination. And
they assert Election accordingly, in the same man
ner, as part of Predestination. Election, according
x Note K.
y Aquinas, Sum. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxm. art. 3. —
Note L. N 3

182 LECTURE IV.
to them, is an analysis of Predestination, considered
as a moral act : since, where there is good willed,
there must be the love, and consequently the choice
of the persons so predestined z.
Looking indeed back to the origin of the question
of Divine Agency in the Latin Church, to the cha
racter and conduct of Augustine, who gave the first
impulse to it ; and observing at the same time the
mode in which it is explained by the Schoolmen; I
cannot but think, that the dogmatic assertion of
Predestination is primarily to be understood solely
in opposition to Manicheism, and its kindred errors,
with which Pelagianism was associated : that the ex
clusive design of it was accordingly, to maintain a
theory of Divine Goodness, — to exhibit the moral and
religious world in harmony with the physical, that
God might be seen as all in all. The Latin Church
appears to have felt a constant dread of the influx
of Manicheism. The cry of Manicheism was sure
to rally defenders round the standard of orthodoxy.
The poor sufferers, cruelly executed at Orleans in the
Xlth century, were murdered under the plea of their
profession of Manicheism. The alarm was spread
against the rising sect of the Albigenses of Thou-
louse, in the following century, on the same ground3.
z Note M.
a The Pelagians seem to have retorted the charge of Ma
nicheism on the Orthodox : — Catholicos Manichaeorum nomine
criminantur. — Contr. Duas Epist. Pelag. ad Bonifac. lib. ii.
Augustin. Oper. torn. vii. p. 286. — Note N.

LECTURE IV. 183
Augustine naturally felt a strong antipathy to that
error, from which he had, with many painful strug
gles, extricated himself. Whilst the disciple of
that gross, material philosophy, he had been accus
tomed to regard Evil as a substantial or corporeal
element of the Universe, coordinate with Good.
Having once overcome this noxious prejudice of his
early creed, he shrank from any approach to it af
terwards, as from an antichristian enemy. We see
this in his manner of treating the questions raised
by Pelagius. He is constantly viewing them in
their connexion with the Manichean doctrines. As
a practical man, bent on carrying a point of Church-
government, he calls attention to the unpopular
consequences of the Pelagian notions ; calculating
doubtless that the alarm of Manicheism would come
with full force from one, able to speak, from his own
experience, of its delusions.
The antipathies of Augustine descended, with his
doctrines, to the Schoolmen. Following his foot
steps, they sought only to set forth his views of the
Divine Agency, as of every other question of theo
logy, with theoretic precision.
It would appear, accordingly, that the Scholastic
doctrine of Providence, and of Predestination as a
part of Providence, is opposed to philosophical no
tions of Providence current in the early ages of the
Church. In speaking indeed of the Divine Power,
Aquinas expressly points this out.
" There have been some," he says, " as the
" Manichees, who said that spiritual and incorporeal
N 4

184 LECTURE IV.
" things are subject to divine power, but visible
" and corporeal things subject to the power of a
" contrary principle. Against these then we must
" say, that God is in all things by his Power.
" There have been others again, who, though they
" believed all things subject to divine power, still
" did not extend divine Providence down to these
" lower parts : in whose person it is said, in Job
" xxii. ' He walks about the hinges of heaven, and
" ' considers not our concerns V And against these
" it was necessary to say, that God is in all things
" by his Presence. There have been again others,
" who, though they said all things belonged to the
" Providence of God, still laid it down, that all
" things were not immediately created by God ; but
" that He immediately created the first creatures,
" and these created others. And against these it
" was necessary to say, that He was in all things
" by his Essence c."
These are the theories, accordingly, which should
be studied, in order to have a right conception of
the definition of Predestination, as given in the
Scholastic writers, and from them derived to modern
Theology. But, if this be the case, the most important ele-
b Job xxii. 13, 14. " And thou sayest, How doth God know?
" can He judge through the dark cloud ? Thick clouds are a
" covering to Him, that He seeth not ; and He walketh in the
" circuit of heaven."
c Aquinas, Sum. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. vm. art. 3.

LECTURE IV. 185
ment for a right judgment of the doctrine, as pro
fessed by our Church, has been generally overlooked.
Divines have been anxious to shew, that our Re
formers were not of the same opinion on this sub
ject as Calvin. It is evident, however, that the
statement in our Articles could not have been ex
pressly opposed to Calvinistic views. For such an
opposition would imply, that the theories opposed
were prevalent at the time ; whereas they were
maintained at their greatest height after the com
position of our Article. Theory is met by counter-
theory, when the language of erroneous speculation
has begun to infect the orthodoxy of the Church.
A speculation, indeed, may have been in exist
ence — may have been growing, — as many of the
Trinitarian theories were, before they obtained the
names by which they are now known. So un
doubtedly was, what is now called Calvinism. Still
it would not be opposed by a dogmatic statement,
until the profession of the theory was become no
torious, and troublesome to the leading Clergy of
the times.
It has been often observed of our XVIIth Ar
ticle, that, whilst it declares a predestination to Life
and Glory, it is reserved on the subject of Reproba
tion, speaking on this point in the language of prac
tical admonition d. It is no little confirmation of
d The allusion at the end of the Article to the " Will of God"
should be particularly noticed, as illustrative of the train of
thought throughout it, and also the correction of the expression
by the terms joined with it : — " that Will of God is to be fol-

186 LECTURE IV.
this view, that it coincides exactly with the theory
of Divine Agency, developed in the reasonings' of
the Scholastic Philosophy. From observing this
coincidence, I should conclude, that our Reformers,
feeling themselves called upon by the state of opinion,
to make some authoritative statement on the sub
ject, and led also to speculate on it, from their
own education in the theories of Scholasticism;
returned to the original mode in which the truth
had been theoretically propounded. They saw, at
least, the moderation of that language : the notions
involved in it, were their philosophical creed : and
they wisely preferred it to the extreme views of
some of their contemporaries.
Consistently with this notion of Predestination,
Grace is set forth by the Scholastic writers as the
" Effect of Predestination," or Predestination as the
" Preparation of Grace." Both indeed are spoken
of as Divine " ordinations" to the Life Eternal e,
and are equally characteristic therefore of the Di
vine Agency, as taught in the Scholastic Theology.
But, the Pelagian controversies have given a more
Christian emphasis to the term Grace, by its employ
ment as the antagonist statement to the anathe
matized doctrines of Pelagius ; and made it equiva-
lowed, " which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word
" of God." These last words call us from the theoretic sense of
the "Will of God" to the practical one, of the precepts con
tained in Scripture.
e Aquinas, Sum. Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxiv. art. 3. — Note O.

LECTURE IV. 187
lent practically to the whole of Gospel-truth. So
that, in fact, it more properly represents the part
of God in the scheme of human salvation, than any
other term of Theology.
Amidst the copious matter of inquiry, which a
term, so pregnant with theological interest, presents
to our hands, I confine myself to what belongs
more strictly to the notion of Divine Agency — the
point particularly selected for illustration in the pre
sent Lecture.
First then I would call attention to the word
Grace itself. The sense, which the discussions of
Pelagianism have impressed on the term, is par
ticularly to be noticed. The dogmatic manner
in which we now speak of " the grace of God," —
placing it in contrast with the powers of human
nature, or with nature in general, — conveys the idea
of something positive in God, something that admits
of explanation as to what it is, — of definition, and
distribution into its various kinds. We hear of
grace operating and cooperating ; grace preventing
and following; grace of congruity, grace of con-
dignity. But how erroneous is the conception pro
duced in the mind, by these several modes of speak
ing ? When we try the notion of Grace by a sur
vey of the Scripture-dispensations, what is it but a
general fact, a summary designation of the various
instances of benevolent, pitiful condescension on
the part of God, to the wants and helplessness of
man ? It is thus that " grace and truth" are said

188 LECTURE IV.
to come by Jesus Christ. The mission of Christ
to the world was the strongest instance of the be
nevolent exertion of God for our good. Thus St.
Paul speaks of the grace of God having appeared
unto all men, in sending his Son into the world,
characterizing by the word grace this act of heavenly
interposition. Thus, too, we are said to be " saved
" by grace;" the Apostle alluding, evidently, as be
fore, to the act of Christ's coming into the world and
dying for our sins. Again, we are desired to pray
for " grace," — and grace is said to be " given" to us.
These last instances convey a dogmatic impression ;
but when we consider them more strictly, they
resolve themselves into concise modes of speaking,
adapted to the purpose of giving a distinct and
striking view of the fact to which reference is made.
We pray, that is, that God will graciously help us ;
and, in acknowledging the gift of grace, we deny our
own sufficiency, and declare that what we do good,
is of God working in us both to will and to do.
The word Truth is subject to the like erroneous
conception ; but here we are not apt to fall into the
realism of supposing something in God positively
denoted by the term : since it has not been equally
the occasion of religious dispute.
It is then from Scholasticism that we have derived
this positive sense. Those subdivisions which I have
referred to, of " preventing" and " following" grace,
grace " operating" and " cooperating," and others
which our Church has not adopted ; are expressly
taken from the Scholastic Theology. Grace is

LECTURE IV. 189
treated of in this system, as something " infused f"
into the soul, by virtue of which the sinner is jus
tified, and the operation of which on the heart it
is endeavoured to trace through the stages of its
process p.
The order of ideas pursued, may be stated gener
ally as the following. Grace is first communicated
to the soul of man in baptism, as an infused prin
ciple superadded to his natural powers, — as the seed
of a new birth regenerating the soul. Hence is
obtained the primary impulse, the original motive
or efficient cause, by which the sinner is set forward
on the course of the Life eternal. This produces in
him a motion towards God ; in which state it is called
" a preventing" and an " operating" grace ; — prevent
ing, as it precedes all motion on the part of man ; —
operating, as it is the sole mover or motive prin
ciple. The soul of man being thus set in action
towards God, is brought to feel its own sinfulness.
But, though it has received this divine seed, —
this element of holiness and future happiness, — still
the natural powers are unable to expand and mature
the germ, that it may grow to the life everlasting.
The progress of the soul must therefore be sustained
by him, who gave it the principle of spiritual
f Aquinas, Summa. Theol. Prima Ildae.
s One of the questions discussed by Aquinas is, Utrum Gratia
ponat aliquid in Anima. S. Theol. Prima Ildae. qu. ex. art. i.
which he decides in the affirmative. — Note P.

190 LECTURE IV.
life. The desire of holiness and the hatred of sin
are implanted : but the temptations to which the
weakness of the flesh exposes the regenerated soul,
must be resisted by continued divine assistances, by
grace following and cooperating. And the soul,
contemplated in this state of progress, is said to be
endued with the " grace of perseverance h." And
when, at last, the course in which the soul has been
proceeding through this continued divine aid, is
completed ; still grace is needed, that it may obtain
remission of sins — a pardon of that guiltiness which
even repentance cannot obliterate from the soul.
Finally, by grace, it is glorified in the presence of
God. Such is an analysis of the progress of the soul
enjoying the "habitual gift of grace," as taught
by the School divines. It is justification, if the pro
cess of grace be considered in its effect on the sinner.
It is predestination, if it be contemplated in God
himself, as the effect of his eternal Love. It is Salva
tion, if the antecedent agency of the Son of God be
the point from which the process is viewed. It is
sanctification, if it be referred to the operation of the
Holy Spirit, whose " gift" it is, and whose peculiar
office it is, thus to move and quicken the soul '.
h The Kaprepla of Aristotle — the power of holding out against
temptations from pain — is what Augustine and the Schoolmen
understood chiefly by Perseverance. The transition of the
word into a symbol of mystical doctrine, is among the curious
instances of the disguise of Aristotle's philosophy under terms
of Theology. Aquin. S. Theol. Prima Ildae. qu. cix. art. io.
• Note Q.

LECTURE IV. 191
In examining this account of the nature of Grace;
whilst we fully acknowledge the general truth im
plied in it, that all our salvation is of the free
gift and goodness of God ; we may clearly perceive,
that the mode of thinking is founded on princi
ples of ancient physical philosophy : in which, ac
cordingly, we must seek the account of our tech
nical language on the subject of Divine Agency.
I. The doctrine of Transmutation was a vital
principle in Aristotle's Philosophy. According to
this doctrine, any object in nature might be trans
muted into another — the actual form of any thing,
not depending on its being constituted of any par
ticular substance or matter, but on the presence of
its constituent properties. When those properties
were removed by the presence of other natures, with
which they could not coexist, the thing itself was
changed. It passed into that other form, to which
these new qualities belonged. I shall have occasion
to illustrate this point further, when I come to
speak of the doctrine of Transubstantiation, into
which it enters more particularly. I allude to it
only now, for the sake of illustrating the notion,
by which our Christian state under the influence of
Grace is described. If it be allowed, that the state
of holiness and perfection to which the Gospel seeks
to bring us, is a state for which we are not fit in our
present condition, evidently we must undergo some
change, some special adaptation for that glory which
we are destined to receive. The qualities then, to

192 LECTURE IV.
speak in terms of the ancient philosophy, of that
form which we are to assume, must be brought to
our present nature. The holiness of the Gospel
state must be superinduced on the intrinsic unholi-
ness in which we now stand. In a word, we must
be transformed. The old things must pass away,
and all must become new l. We must cease to be
what we were, and be new creatures. On this prin
ciple, then, the presence of the grace of God is indis
pensably necessary to render us meet for the in
heritance of the saints. It comes and displaces that
previous form of unrighteousness which once was
our nature. Thus is it true both scripturally
and philosophically ; " Except ye be converted, and
" become as little children, ye cannot inherit the
" kingdom of heaven." As we have borne " the
" image of the earthy," we must also bear " the
" image of the heavenly." We must be " trans-
" formed" by the renewing of our mind — Christ
must be "formed" in us.
II. But the proper and full solution of the lan
guage adopted by Augustine, and after him by the
School Divines, in the Doctrines of Grace, is to be
found in the refined Materialism of the ancient
l Baptismus adhibetur hominibus in hac vita, in qua homo
potest transmutari de culpa in gratiam : sed descensus Christi
ad inferos, exhibitus fuit animabus post hanc vitam, ubi non
sunt capaces transmutationis praedictae. Et ideo per baptismum
pueri liberantur a peccato originali et ab inferno : non autem
per descensum Christi ad inferos. Aquin. S. Theol. Illtia P.
qu. lu. art. 7.

LECTURE IV. 193
theological philosophy of Naure. According to
Aristotle, Nature was in itself an instinctive prin
ciple of motion and rest. It was a vast system of
distinct powers, ever exerting themselves, and real
izing by this activity the various forms of physical
being. But what was it that sustained this activity?
what was it that kept Nature in this state of effort —
in this restless pursuit of that perfection of being, in
which alone it could rest — throughout the various
things of the universe ? It was the great Principle
of Beauty and Goodness — the abstract perfection of
the whole Universe — the Chief Good — which ani
mated and moved each member in the system of Na
ture. The great struggle of the whole, — the effort
of each particular thing in Nature, — was ; to attain
to this ultimate form of beauty and perfection.
There could be no quiescence in any thing, so long
as it had not accomplished its utmost effort, in order
to the attainment of this End — this Final Cause, of
all its motion. This pure abstraction of Excellence
pervaded all things alike — the inanimate as well as
the animate — the irrational no less than the rational.
All in their measure felt its influence m — the transi
tory things of the world aiming at its immortal excel
lence by successive productions and reproductions of
themselves ; and the durable, as the heavenly bodies,
attaining more perfectly to a perception of the Di
vine Principle, by their invariable and endless re
volutions. In rational Beings, it was the great End
«n The idea may be traced in the language of Hooker, at the
end of the ist book of the Ecclesiastical Polity.
O

194 LECTURE IV.
to which all their desires tended, the Active Cause
of all their activity, — that gratification which they
pursued more or less rightly and fully, as their
passions were governed, and their intellect was cul
tivated ; — the real happiness aimed at under all the
manifold and capricious disguises of pleasure. Here
then was the Divinity of the philosophic system of
the Universe. Hence its designation, in the language
of Aristotle, as the First Mover, itself unmoved; —
that which being itself invariable, impassible, eter
nal, acted on, and moved all things, from the great
est to the least. Hence, too, we find the Schoolmen
speaking of the Deity, as pure Act — pure Energy
— Power, whose development and operation were
coinstantaneous with, and inseparable from, its ex
istence. This was a system of Theism, which trembled on
the verge of Pantheism — of a system, that is, which
sinks individual existence in the vague notion of
One instinctive Universal Divine Being. And it
was soon, we find, so perverted by the Stoics,
and by the Alexandrian School, in which the Pla
tonic doctrine of Ideas assumed this modification.
Its ready transition, also, into a system of Fatalism
is sufficiently apparent. The connexion of all the
motions in the universe with the First Mover, ex
hibits the analogy of a chain of links depending
from the Divine Being, in a series of perpetual con
nexion. It becomes a doctrine of Necessity, or Fate,
or Destiny, according as the peculiar views of the
philosopher impart to it their shade.

LECTURE IV. 195
Theories of this kind, we know, were extremely
prevalent at the time when the Pelagian controver
sies were agitated. In the Vth century, indeed,
vigorous efforts were made to restore the modern
Platonism to its empire in the Church, and in the
Schools. The publication at that period of the
mystic Treatises of the Pseudo-Dionysius, was an
effort of this kind. During this age too, Proclus,
the distinguished disciple of the Alexandrian school,
presided in the school of Athens. In the Vlth
century, Simplicius and others were employed in
accommodating the theories of Platonism to those of
Aristotle, and forming, out of the union, an Eclectic
Philosophy, in which the dogmas of Alexandria
were the dominant principles. At the same time,
Boethius, at Rome, was engaged in the like labour.
We see also, at the opening of the Vllth century,
the prevalence of a doctrine of mystic connexion
between the things of the world and their great pri
mary Cause, in the conjoined Unitarianism and
Fatalism of the Mahometan Creed. In the IXth
century again, we find the pantheistic philosophy
attracting the notice of the Western Church, by the
fame of Erigena, the eminent advocate of the
Theory in its boldest form.
But the adoption of Aristotle's system of nature,
in its more genuine principles, introduced a more
express reference to the doctrine of Motion, in the
language of the Schools, on the subject of Grace.
The material analogies were then fully introduced,
as a means of explaining those invisible motions
o 2

196 LECTURE IV.
which the Spirit of God works on the soul. In this
system, neither was the Deity identified with the
individual acted on, nor was the individual annihi
lated in the Deity n. The distinctness of the divine
agent and the human recipient was maintained ; in
accordance with the Scripture revelation of God, as
a sole Being, separate in his nature from the works
of his Providence and his Grace. Still the notion of
Him as an Energy — as a moving Power — entered
into all their explanations of the Divine Influence
on the soul. So far they were strictly Aristotelic.
But, with this exception, the Platonic notion of a
real participation of Deity in the soul of man per
vaded their speculations. Aristotle's idea of hu
man improvement and happiness was rather, that of
a mechanical or material approach to the Divine
Principle — an attainment of the Deity as an end of
our Being. We see a great deal of this in the scho
lastic designations of the progress of man in virtue
and happiness. Plato's view, on the other hand, was
that of assimilation, or association with the Divinity.
This notion more easily fell into the expressions of
Scripture, which speaks of man as created in the
image of God ; of our future state as like that of
the angels of God ; and which holds out to us an
example of Divine Holiness for our imitation.
n In saying this, I must make an exception with respect to
the language of some Scholastic writers : as, for instance, that
of Abelard ; whose expressions, in his " Introduction to Theo-
" logy," are decidedly pantheistic ; identifying the Holy Spirit
with the Anima Mundi of the Stoics.

LECTURE IV. 197
The pantheistic notion then of a participation of
Deity, or an actual Deification of our nature0, is the
fundamental idea of the operation of Grace according
to the Schoolmen. The Aristotelic idea of motion —
of continual progress — of gradual attainment of the
complete form of perfection — is the law, by which
this operation of Grace is attempted to be explained.
Expressions of Scripture also coincided with this
view; so far as our state in this world is spoken
of, as a going on towards perfection — as a grow
ing in grace ; and we are exhorted to be unmove-
able, always abounding in the work of the Lord p.
In fact, this system, made up of Platonic and Aris
totelic views, was regarded as sanctioned by the
Apostle, in his application of that text of philosophy :
" In him we live, and move, and have our being i."
The soul, it was conceived, might be transformed by
the operation of motives extrinsic to itself; by im
pulses from evil spirits ; as also by the Spirit of God :
it might assume the "form of godliness," without
° Aquin. Prima Ildae, qu. cxn. art. i. Donum autem gratia?
excedit omnem facultatem naturae creatae, cum nihil aliud sit,
quam qutsdam participatio divina natures, quae excedit omnem
aliam naturam : et ideo impossibile est, quod aliqua creatura
gratiam causet. Sic enim necesse est, quod solus Deus deificet,
communicando consortium divinae naturae, per quandam simi-
litudinis participationem ; sicut impossibile est, quod ahquid
igniat, nisi solus ignis.
P I Cor. XV. e8pawi ylveade, dperaKivryroi, — agreeably to Aris
totle's description of the virtuous character, fiefiaias, dpeTaKivijras ,
e'xav, one, not to be changed by any disturbing force from its
present course.
1 Acts xvii. 28. ev airy yap g£>pev, Kai KivovpeBa, Kai evpev.
o 3

198 LECTURE IV.
" the power r." But, when the work of Grace was
complete in the soul, the form of godliness was the
Energy of power coming down from the Father of
lights and Author of all goodness.
Accordingly, by the Schoolmen, the natural powers
and capacities of men are regarded as the materials
on which the Divine Grace operates. The freewill
of man, as we shall see hereafter, is not impaired
by this supernatural action s. Their idea rather is,
that the will of man thus obtains its proper free
dom, is enabled to act freely, unimpeded by those
obstacles which the corruption of nature places in
its way. Still, the notion throughout, on which they
proceed, is that of material impulse, of gradual pro
gress and alteration, from a state of alienation to
one of holiness and perfect conformity with God.
To turn, however, from these speculations, in
themselves, to the view of the Divine Agency, which
the study of them brings before us.
First, I would observe, the importance of the con-
r 2 Tim . iii. 5 • ex0VTes pop<j>a>o-iv eiaefielas, ttjv he hvvapiv avTrjs fjpvrj-
pevoi. The notion of Energy may also be perceived in the language
of St. Paul ; as in Eph. iii. 20. " the power that worketh in us" —
Trjv hvvapiv ttjv evepyovpevnv ev fjplv — Also Eph. i. 1 1. " who work-
" eth all things after the counsel of his own will" — toO ri rravra
evepyovvros Kara ttjv [3ov\r)v tov 6e\rjpaTOs avTov.
s Si bene considerentur quae dicta sunt : aperte cognoscitur,
quia cum aliquid dicit Sacra Scriptura pro gratia, non amovet
omnino liberum arbitrium, neque cum loquitur pro libero arbitrio
excludit gratiam, &c. Anselm. De Concord. Grat. et Lib. Arb.
Op. torn. iii. p. 278.

LECTURE IV. 199
sideration, that the theory of the Divine Predestina
tion, on which our doctrinal statement is founded, is
a much more simple one than is commonly supposed.
It is not at all concerned with explaining the origin
of Evil. It is only a theory of God's mercy in Christ,
deduced from its originating cause in the Being of
God. I have already pointed out this. I repeat it
now, as it is a view of the subject on which I am
desirous of fixing your attention. A theory of Re
probation is, on the other hand, a theory of the
origin of Evil; and, so far therefore from being
deducible from our doctrinal statements on Predesti
nation and Grace, is the very doctrine to which these
statements are opposed : unless we are to suppose
that a philosophical theology, in which the framers
of our Articles had been trained, had no influence
on their minds. But the exact accordance of our
Article on Predestination, with what appears the
true Scholastic notion of the subject, is, to me, ample
evidence, that this notion was the doctrine de
signed. I am not prepared, at the same time, to vindi
cate those statements in their theoretic points, as
the proper way in which the Divine Predestination
and Grace should be apprehended by the Christian.
These are truths, it cannot be too often repeated,
which concern more the heart than the intellect;
and, in defining which accordingly, every attempt,
however exactly and piously worded, must fail ;
much more, any theory of them drawn from ante
cedent speculations on the Nature and Will of God.
o 4

200 LECTURE IV.
To Scholasticism indeed, though the theories o#
Predestination and Grace, which it taught, are of
a less complex form than is commonly supposed,
we may trace the origin of those idle questions,
with which this department of Theology has been
vexed ; such as, whether Predestination is certain ;
whether there is Assurance of salvation ; whether the
number of the Elect is fixed x ; whether all are pre
destined. These, and similar questions incidental
to the general inquiry, have been naturally laid hold
of by theologians, following the example of the Doc
tors of the middle age, from whom they received
the speculation itself. And this effect shews the
evil of any speculation at all on the subject. It
only marks out the lines of future disputation. If
these truths are to be defined, the only legitimate
mode is, the laborious, historical, experimental one5
formed on a comprehensive and accurate study, un
der the guidance of that selfsame Spirit, whose ways
we are exploring, of every fact of Nature and Scrip
ture, and the collection of these into a general law
of the Divine Procedure. But this is the work of
a Christian life ; it is a process of induction which
can only be carried on, where there is a disposition
x The different opinions on this point, were: i. that as many
should be saved of men, as had fallen of angels ; 2. as many of
men, as of angels who had stood in their obedience ; 3. as many
of men, as of fallen angels ; and besides, as many, as the whole
number of angels created. Aquinas refers to these different
opinions, and wisely concludes, that the number of the elect, to
be placed in supreme happiness, is known to God alone. Sum.
Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxiii. art. 7.

LECTURE IV. 201
"and an activity, in doing the Divine Will, and obey
ing the Divine Motions. Otherwise we are but
tracking the arrow through the air, or the keel of
the vessel through pathless waters.
But the assertion of them in the theoretic form,
as primary truths concerning the Divine Being, can
never be free from objection. We have then, as it
were, placed in our hands, the great Original Reasons
of things — the first definitions, from which all other
truths are, of course, conceived to be deducible ; and
nothing inconsequent to them can, without the
greatest difficulty, be admitted. Whatever we do
then concede to the independent perceptions of our
reason, it is with a kind of resignation to a mystery
that overwhelms the faculties — a resignation, very
different from that of the heart bowed down before
God. The truths, theoretically stated, are so es
sential to the very idea of God, that we adopt them
immediately, as self-evident axioms ; and we expect,
in the theology raised upon them, the demonstrative-
ness of truths deduced from unquestionable pre
mises. The dominion of a Logical Theology is
here, accordingly, particularly to be dreaded. Its
delusions are fostered, by the nature of the prin
ciples themselves, on which it is here exercised.
Experience has shewn, how ready the minds of men
are, even at this day, to treat the question of Divine
Agency, as a matter pregnant with consequences, or
inferences, rather than as one of simple, moral acqui
escence and obedience. Even the piety of men turns
from its own proper task, to minister to the appe-

202 LECTURE IV.
tite of speculation. The desire to establish the name
of God, as first in the thoughts, involves them in
paradox on every subordinate subject. Let it then
be examined by such persons, whether, little as it
may have been thought, they have not been pur
suing the necessity and cogency of logic, in their
theological opinions ; whether the notions of Divine
Agency, on which they so insist, are not merely
the connexions of conclusions and consequences with
assumed hypotheses and definitions.
With respect then to the doctrines expressive of
Divine Agency, I would observe, as I did of those
concerning the Trinity, the difficulties belonging to
them arise from metaphysical speculations. Here,
they are the result of the primary ideas, which the
mind combines together in its complex idea of God.
Or, it would be more correct, perhaps, to speak of
them, as the result of these several ideas in them
selves ;— as of priority, necessity, power, will ; all
mere abstractions of the mind, and, as such, capable
of being discerned in their consequences and contra
dictions ; but very fallacious tests of what is con
clusive, or inconclusive, in facts out of the region of
the mind itself. The whole philosophy of the
Schools on the subject of Divine Agency, let it be
remembered, is founded on an application of pro
cesses in the mind to processes in nature. And our
technical language on the subject has been inherited
from the Schools. I only wish it then to be con
sidered, whether our difficulties may not be as-

LECTURE IV.
cribed to our false philosophy more than to our
Religion. Could we read the language of the Apostle Paul,
on which so much stress is commonly laid, as de
cisive of this question, — without prejudice, — without
thinking of the volumes of controversy which have
been employed on it, or the arguments that we have
heard, — I feel persuaded, that we should draw no
speculative doctrines of Divine Predestination and
Grace from his Epistles. We should only see the
Apostle declaring the same fact, which all Nature
and Revelation proclaim ; that our God is a " God
" very nigh unto us ;" whose goodness is as un
changeable as his Being ; and who will surely per
fect those counsels of love, in which he gave his
Son, from everlasting, for the salvation of man. St.
Paul's references to the Divine Agency are all of
this character. They suggest to us thoughts of
God, on all occasions of our life, in all difficulties of
our temporal and spiritual condition. Are we de
jected and despairing of our spiritual life? " God,"
we are assured, "will not forsake his elect, whom He
" hath foreknown." He has blessed us ; He has
mercifully revealed his salvation to us : we have an
earnest then, that He, who is unchangeable, has not
lightly begun a good work in us, but will most
surely accomplish it. " Why art thou so disquieted,
" my soul ?" says the anxious inquirer. " Hope
" thou in the Lord," is the answer ; " He is thy
" helper and defender :" " a very present help in
" time of trouble." Ascribe your salvation to God,

204 LECTURE IV.
and you rest on a rock which the rains and the
storms shall assail in vain. Are we again proceed
ing on our way cheerfully in the hope of everlasting
life ? " Work out your salvation with fear and
" trembling, for it is God that worketh in you, both
" to will and to do." Be encouraged to proceed ;
for you are armed with a strength not your own,
and a work that is of God, cannot come to nought ;
and yet " with fear and trembling ;" for the respon
sibility of a work to which God has set his hand, is
an heavy one, — that should make the heart serious
amidst its gladness. These are the words, with
which one Christian would naturally comfort and
encourage another. And such, accordingly, may
well be conceived the stress of the Apostle's asser
tions respecting Grace and Predestination. It is
the Charity that " never faileth," which he is in
culcating throughout, where many have errone
ously thought that he was proclaiming the wonders
of the Divine knowledge. Banish the scientific no
tion of Predestination and Grace ; for nothing can
come of it, but the confidence of mere reason, and a
false enthusiasm, that fashions the idol before which
it prostrates itself. Take up the truths as the Di
vine Law of Love, and you will find in them some
thing more than that fixedness and quiescence, which
is sought in the abstractions of Theory ; you will
find rest and peace to the soul in Jesus Christ.

LECTURE V.
THE PELAGIAN CONTROVERSIES.
JUSTIFICATION.

SUMMARY.
Truths of Divine and Human Agency necessarily qualify each
other — Human Agency, as viewed in the Scholastic system, the
continued action of the First Cause — Justification, the law of
Divine Operation in the Salvation of Man- — Sketch of the Chris
tian scheme involved in this principle — Theory of Human
Agency concerned first in accounting for Resistance to the Di
vine Will — Difficulty, as felt in ancient philosophy, was to re
concile the fact with the certainty of Science — Schoolmen adopt
Aristotle's practical views of human nature — Application of the
term Con-uption founded on his physical philosophy — Theory of
the Propagation of Sin maintains the universality of the prin
ciple of Corruption — Objections of Pelagius and Celestius to this
theory — Error, both of the Orthodox and of the Pelagians, in
speculating on the nature of Original Sin — Concupiscence — the
application of this term to Original Sin, derived from ancient
divisions of the soul — Materialism involved in the Specula
tion. — Doctrine of Original Sin, the counterpart to the doctrine
of the Incarnation — Disputes between the orthodox and the
Pelagians turn on the force of the terms Nature and Person —
Connexion between the heresies of Nestorius and Pelagius —
Distinction between the effect of Adam's sin, and the sin of
subsequent parents on their posterity — View of the Christian
life, as a change, coincides with this theory of Original Sin —
Faith, the infused element of the new life — Doctrinal statements
of Justification by Faith, to be interpreted by the light of
Scholastic notions involved in it — Scholastic Notion of Free
will, not opposed to Necessity, but to the Force of sin, in en
slaving the will — Introduction of the theory of Justice into the
Christian Scheme — Notion of Merit to be understood in con
nexion with this theory; as also of Merit of Condignity, Merit
of Congruity — Peculiar views of Repentance, as a compensa
tion for offence — of Punishment and Satisfaction, as applied to
the Sacrifice of Christ — of Self-Mortification and Supereroga
tion — drawn from this theory of Penal Justice.
Ineflficacy of Repentance to remove guilt, and need of Atone
ment, illustrated by these speculations — Debasing effect of Scho
lastic theory of Expiation — True view of Human Agency to be
found in simple practical belief of the Atonement — Union of
Strength and Weakness, implied in this doctrine, coincident
with facts of human nature — Mischievous effect of speculative
discussion of the subject — Moderation and forbearance of lan
guage on the subject most accordant with the spirit of Pro
testantism.

John I. ia, 13.
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to
become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his
name : which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the
flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

0<nn be eXafiov avrov, %ba>Kev avTois k£ovcr[av reKva &eov
yevicrdat., toZs mvTevovo-iv els to Svop.a avrov' ot ovk ff aip,a-
T(av, ovbe e*c 6e\tfp.aTos crapKOS, <?n8e kK 6eArjp,aTos avbpos, aAA'
ek ©eoS kyevvr\Or]o-av.

Quotquot autem receperunt eum, dedit eis potestatem
filios Dei fieri, his, qui credunt in nomine ejus, qui non ex
sanguinibus, neque ex voluntate carnis, neque ex voluntate
viri, sed ex Deo nati sunt. Lat. Vuxg.

LECTURE V.

I HE consideration of our theological language on
the subject of Divine Agency, has tended to shew,
that the peculiar technical forms of these doctrines
were impressed on them by the ancient Logical Phi
losophy ; from the necessity, as it was supposed, of
tracing the series of effects in the conduct of man,
to some primary efficient cause, the origin of the
motion towards eternal happiness, in the soul of the
sinner. I now come to those views of Human
Agency, which are contained in the doctrines of
Original Sin, Faith, Merit, Repentance, Atonement.
And, with respect to these also, I am concerned to
point out, both, how they arose out of the established
method of Philosophy in the middle age, as ques
tions to be determined, and what are the theories
involved in their expression.
In a systematic Theology, these two classes of
doctrines necessarily qualify each other. The views,
either of Divine or of Human Agency, as they
are dogmatically stated, involve ideas which in
clude, or exclude, ideas in those of the opposite class.
If, for instance, the Divine Predestination is stated
strongly, as the everlasting purpose of God, by
which the soul of the sinner is freely justified ; — true
as the fact is here intended to be described, yet, by
inference from this assertion, we destroy the power
v

210 LECTURE V.
of man in the work of his justification. Or if, on
the other hand, the truths of man's free agency are
premised in all their proper force ; the abstract state
ment involves the denial of the sole power of God.
The perception of such consequences acts on the
mind of the framers of Systems of Theology ; and,
according to the view predominant in their own
creed, they place in the foreground the doctrines,
from which the notions that they would inculcate
may be logically deduced. Such is the nature of all
dogmatic statements on these subjects, and which
necessarily arises from the speculative force of the
terms in which the doctrines are conveyed a.
Such, however, was the mode in which the doc
trines, now under our consideration, received their
original form. They stand forth, to the view of
our speculative reason, with a point and precision
given to them by the action of disputation. They
excite in us the idea of accuracy of thought, of de-
finiteness of conception ; and we contemplate them
with a fearful suspicion, lest we should err to the
right hand, or to the left, in our mode of embracing
them. In order, indeed, to the systematic perfection of
the Scholastic Theology, it was necessary to adjust
the speculative views of the truths of Human Agency,
to the previous theories of the Divine. It was essen
tial to this logical method, that they should appear
strictly the consequences of the former assumptions.
a Note A. Lect. V.

LECTURE V. 211
That they were the physical consequences, or natural
effects, of the Divine Efficiency, was already ap
parent from the very method of their deduction.
We were led up to consider them in God as in their
real cause. But when the facts of Divine Agency
were expressed in propositions, they were subjected
to the test of logical disputation ; and it was neces
sary therefore, to be able to demonstrate the logical
connexion of the two classes oi propositions, no less
than the physical connexion of the two classes of
facts, respecting Divine and Human Agency.
Looking to these two circumstances, we shall see
the occasion of the peculiar mode of statement
of Original Sin, Faith, Merit, and other doctrines,
in which the work of man is contemplated in con
nexion with the work of God ; and which, together,
constitute the whole Law of the Divine Life of man,
characterized by the term Justification.
In pursuing the present subject, though we are
immediately employed in considering the condition,
sentiments, and actions of man, it is Divine Agency,
we must observe, that we are tracing throughout :
otherwise, we shall lose the real solution of the
dogmatic language, on the several points touched
in the controversies on which we are now engaged.
For such, it should be remembered, is the nature of
the Theology which has descended to us, as mem
bers of the Western Church. It is the Science of the
Divine Being ; in our present subject more parti
cularly, an application of the principles of the Divine
p 2

212 LECTURE V.
Knowledge, to the revealed economy of the world.
All that we call human agency, is, in the expression
of Scholasticism, the " Highest Cause," acting by
" secondary" causes. The expression, secondary
causes, is familiar to us, but it is strictly Scholastic :
it guards the notion of the sole proper agency of
God. This notion of the Divine Being was the very
essence of Scholasticism — at once its theory and its
practice. The Theology of the Schools, as the sub
tile instrument of a Theocratic Power, addressed
itself to the study of the principles, by which it
could command the elements of social order ; to the
development of that Primary Energy, which ani
mates and controls the restless course of human
operation. Its ambition was, to place the first link
of the golden chain, from which the heavens and
the earth were hung, in the intellectual grasp of
the ruler of the Church ; from whom the subject-
faithful should devoutly receive the law of action
and belief.
Whilst therefore those portions of the Pelagian
Controversies, on which I am now entering, may, by
way of distinction, be classed under the head of
Human Agency, and some, perhaps more properly,
under the head of Divine Agency in connexion with
Human ; yet the whole inquiry is a prosecution of
the subject of the former Lectures, and more parti
cularly of the last. It is the Divine Energy that
we are still employed in investigating, — the operation
of that " Pure Act," in scholastic phrase, as it
works in the actions of man. The Schoolmen, in-

LECTURE V. 213
deed, proceeding in regular series, have traced the
Divine Energy through the nature and actions of
Angelic Beings ; and so brought the speculation
down to the agency of man. The intelligence and
will of angels, and their power of good and evil in
the world, are discussed with the same minuteness
of speculation, as other parts of their philosophy ;
and in strict accordance with the working out of
their whole system b. Nor is even this part of their
system without its interest, in the history of the
notions now entertained, on the influence of good
and evil spirits, and on the Fall of Man. But the
more immediate importance of the views opened, in
their speculations concerning Human Agency, calls
for the direction of our attention to these exclu
sively, on the present occasion.
Justification, then, (for under this general head
may be classed all those doctrines which more im
mediately concern the agency of man,) is, in the
Scholastic view, the general law, according to which,
the Divine Energy operates, or takes effect, in the
salvation of man. It is described, by Aquinas, as
" the Effect of Grace Operating." It is analogous,
in the Divine Life of man under the influence of
Grace, to the law of Virtue in the natural and moral
life of man. And the way in which this appears,
is, that we require some supernatural means, in
order to that supernatural End, which Christian
b Anselm has a Treatise, De Casu Diaboli, in which he spe
culates concerning the will of the Evil Spirit.
P 3

214 LECTURE V.
salvation — the final fruition of God — holds out to our
attainment. It is the Divine Goodness indeed, ac
cording to the Scholastic Philosophy, which we in
stinctively aim at, in our natural pursuit of happi
ness ; as I lately pointed out. Evidently, however,
man, as also all creatures throughout the world,
attain to the Divine Goodness naturally, only so
far as their constitution admits. The tree cannot
reach a stature, or a beauty of foliage, for which
there is no provision in its nature. Nor can the
moral agent exceed the bounds, which have been
assigned to his capacities in adaptation to his pre
sent state. But everlasting happiness, consisting in
the enjoyment of the immediate presence of God, is
a thing entirely disproportioned to our present fa
culties and capacities. No natural law of adjust
ment of our internal powers can suffice for this
transcendant object. Supposing our present capa
cities enlarged and improved, by discipline and cul
tivation, to their utmost perfection, we must still
conceive them deficient, when we look to the im
mensity of the object for which they are destined.
It is plain, therefore, that mere moral cultivation is
not the whole law, by which the eternal perfection
of man's nature is to be attained. Some other
principle must be concerned in bringing about the
result. There can be no rule of intrinsic propriety
or fitness here. It must be a gifted righteousness,
by which we tend towards such a perfection of
being. Justification, accordingly, is the general law, as I

LECTURE V. 215
have said, by which the Divine Energy developes
itself in the human agent. It comprehensively de
notes the effect of grace in its whole process ; as it
regenerates, sanctifies, and glorifies the soul of man.
The same process, indeed, may, as I have before
observed, be called Sanctification ; as referred im
mediately to the Holy Spirit dwelling in the heart
of the faithful. But the term Sanctification does
not express the moral agency, in the nature of man,
by which the Final End is attained. And this seems
to be the reason, why the Schoolmen have been so
diffuse on the idea of Justification ; and why Sanc
tification has remained, more a word of piety and
feeling, than a technical term of Theology.
It is then, in the Analysis of Justification, that we
must explore the principles of Human Agency, re
cognized in the philosophical theology of the schools.
The divergency of the law of Divine Agency into
the several principles of the Human Constitution, as
they were understood and reasoned upon in the phi
losophy of the times, will disclose to us the views of
the Schoolmen on the questions of Human Agency ;
and account for many expressions on the subject in
our systematic theology.
Taking then the Scripture facts : that mankind
is in a fallen, degraded state ; that this state is not
an accidental one, attributable to any particular ge
neration of men, or period of the world, but that it be
gan with the beginning of our race ; that it is a state
p 4

216 LECTURE V.
of moral disorder, offensive to God, and excluding
from his favour ; that we are therefore in a state of
danger, as well as of incapacity of happiness ; that,
however, God has interposed, in mercy, to save us
from this danger, and retrieve this incapacity, by
giving his Son Jesus Christ to die for us, whose
death is our death unto sin, and his resurrection our
resurrection to holiness and life everlasting; that
Repentance and Faith are the great means, by
which the benefits of his Passion are brought home
to those to whom they are revealed ; that much ac
cordingly is left to us to do, amidst all our natural
weakness and helplessness ; — taking, I say, these
facts, as a general account of what the Scripture
includes under Justification, let us examine into the
action of the Scholastic Philosophy on the doctrines
raised on them.
The difficulty which meets the speculator on
Human Agency, in its connexion with the Divine,
in the first instance, is, to account for the principle
of Resistance to the Will of God, which the facts
exhibit. It is not simply a Theory of the Origin
of Evil that is here required. This inquiry is satis
fied to a certain point, in the Christian scheme of
Salvation ; so far as it ascribes the first act of sin,
and the actual sins of all men, to the instrumentality
of the Evil Spirit c. This circumstance answers the
c Deus est universale principium omnis interioris motus hu-
mani : sed quod determinetur ad malum consilium voluntas
humana, hoc directe quidem est ex voluntate humana, et dia-

LECTURE V. 217
question, how sin and death came into the world.
But it leaves unexplained the fact, that the will of
man does not invariably fulfil the Will of God ;
that, instead of tending naturally towards that good
which God designs in his creation, it has a dispo
sition and bent towards evil. In the account of this
fact must lie the proper, efficient cause of that evil,
which has ensued, and ensues, from the temptations
of wicked spirits. These temptations only present
an occasion of falling. The cause, or motive prin
ciple, of the disorder and misery of the world, must
be traced to the will of man himself.
The root of the difficulty was, that it seemed im
possible to conceive any Will whatever, as inclined
to evil. It was essential to the very nature of Will,
according to the established philosophical opinion,
as I stated in my last Lecture, that the object of
Will should be good ; and, according to the theo
logical philosophy, that this object should be ex
clusively the Divine Goodness.
Whilst a difficulty of this kind could not escape
the penetrating research of the ancient philosophers,
the difficulty to them arose principally from their
abstract notions of Science, rather than from ethical
theory. It was the immutability of Science, which
they were anxious to maintain. They could not
conceive any force in the mind, capable of counter-
bolo, per modum persuadentis, vei appetibilia proponentis.
Aquin. S. Theol. Prima Ildae, qu. lxxx. art. i. — Sap. 2. Invidia
diaboli mors intravit in orbem terrarum, is frequently quoted to
this purport.

218 LECTURE V.
acting that of first, fixed principles. They were
anxious to reduce morality to a theoretic precision.
But the observed discrepance between the specula
tive and practical conclusions of men, shook their
fundamental positions respecting the certainty and
imperiousness of Science. Socrates, accordingly, at
once denied the fact, that Evil was voluntarily
chosen in any case. Aristotle, however, with a more
practical wisdom, took the fact as he found it ; con
tenting himself with an analysis of it into the gene
ral laws of our nature involved in it ; — the existence
of propensities, neutral in themselves, but suscepti
ble of good or evil ; and varying, according to their
exercise, in combination with the rational principle ;
so that inordinate, disproportionate indulgence of
them, had the power of deteriorating the moral na
ture, and depraving the Will. Whence, he drew his
outlines of Virtue from a theoretic state of man ;
from that superinduced constitution of our internal
nature, in which all the propensities were conceived,
in perfect adjustment to the real value of their ob
jects ; and thus coincident with the principle of
Reason ; when the Will that is, was firmly and in
variably towards good.
The Scriptures gave the Christian Philosopher a
clue to the interpretation of this fact, so far as they
gave a history of the first transgression, and de
clared its perpetuity and universality in the world.
But they gave no particular account of the mode, in
which the moral disorder of the world was pro
duced, or of what had rendered it inveterate in the

LECTURE V. 219
race of man. They only so far gave the material of
future speculation on the subject, as they asserted,
that man came perfect from the hands of the Crea
tor, being formed in the Divine Image ; and that his
iniquity was a subsequent, acquired condition of
being. The Schoolmen set themselves to explain
both the origin and the perpetuity of the evil ;
adapting to this purpose the physical and ethical
theories of Aristotle.
The perfect man of the philosophers' theory, be
came, in their system, man as originally created in
his physical and moral integrity of being : when all
the internal principles were in their due proportions
to each other, and to the final cause, or End, of the
whole, the Divine Goodness. Man, as he is seen in
the world, was man in a state of deficiency, or of
privation of original righteousness, or justice ; of
that state, namely, in which all the principles were
in their due subordination to God ; or, to state it
more in the phraseology of the Schools, rightly or
dered towards the Supreme Good.
The adoption of this view of Human Nature by
the Schools, is the point which immediately calls
for our notice, as it explains the word Corruption,
in its application to the evil of our moral condition.
It is a term of ancient philosophy, denoting the dis
solution of the internal nature of a thing — the un
doing of its actual constitution — not the annihi
lation of a nature, as we are apt to suppose. It is

220 LECTURE V.
opposed to Generation, or Production, signifying,
that man, as he is evil, is not the work of God, but
is unmade, as it were, in what he had been made by
God ; that he has lost that proper form, in which he
had his being in the intellect and will of Godd- We
could not, for instance, apply the word to the noxious
disposition of a brute-animal, since there is no de
struction of principle in this case e. The violence of
the brute is part of its original constitution, of the
form of its being. It only applies to the circum
stances of a creature, in which a different nature has
existed, and has undergone alteration, or become
degenerate. It is, in itself, no account of an evil,
more than of a good disposition. It is simply the
transition into another nature or form : and it only
obtains a bad sense from the theological notion, that
what has passed from that form in which it came
from the Creator, must have lost in excellence and
worth. In its general use, however, in the ancient
physics, it may denote the transition into a nobler
nature, as well as into an inferior ; as into the form
of the tree from the corruption of the seed f.
Original Sin, accordingly, is always defined by
the Schoolmen in negative terms, as a want of ori-
d Corrupta, id est, amittentia formam suam. — Aquinas, Sum.
Theol. Prima Ildae, qu. cxix. art. i .
e Aristot. Ethic, vii. et alib.
f St. Paul's words in i Cor. xv. 36. are clearly founded on
this philosophical notion : only, to give a rhetorical point to his
argument, he substitutes the word cwroOdeij, instead of that pro
perly expressing corruption.

LECTURE V. 221
ginal justice, carentia justitice originalis ; or an in-
ordinateness of the desires ; or, as in our IXth arti
cle, a fault, and depravation of nature, vitium ac de-
pravatio natures. The last, indeed, is the most truly
technical description of it ; expressing, accurately,
the peculiarity of the theory, on which the doctrinal
statement of Original Sin has been founded.
This theory of the Evil of the world involved
also other theories of the same Logical Philosophy.
The universality of the principle was to be demon
strated. How could it apply, it would be argued, to
the case of the infant soul, snatched out of the ac
tual pollutions of the world, as the tender lamb of
his flock taken up by the shepherd into his own
bosom ? The theorist, not content with referring to
the Redeemer's love, as the simple earnest of the
blessedness of the little innocent, sought how to con
nect this fact with the universal need of redemption.
It was to be brought, therefore, under the theory of
Original Sin. This occasioned the introduction of
the term Propagation into the account of the origin
of evil. If the corruption of nature descended by
" propagation," then would it exist even in the
guileless infant. And the theory, as thus stated,
would be the logical correspondent to the doctrine of
Grace. If on the one hand all were under Grace ;
if it was God that worked all in all ; on the other
hand all would be concluded under Sin. An uni
versal cause, identical in all instances, would be ex
hibited on each side ; a principle of Life and a prin-

LECTURE V.
ciple of Death, acting invariably, and communicating
their nature to the multitude of individuals s.
The Pelagians, however, were not satisfied with
this account of the matter. Admitting that evil ex
isted in the world, and that the transgression of
Adam had been injurious to his posterity ; they still
denied its transmission, in the way of an hereditary
taint. Pelagius believed, as fully as his opponents,
that mankind were in a worse state, in conse
quence of the first sin ; but, looking to the moral
nature of man, and finding that neither praise nor
blame was given for what we are by nature, but for
what we do, he held, that, as virtue was not born
with us, so neither was vice*1. He contended, ac
cordingly, for a moral influence of the prevarication
of Adam on his posterity ; that the first sin was
hurtful to the human race ; not by propagation, but
by example ; non propagine, sed exemplo ; not be
cause they who were propagated from him, drew
from him any vice, any fault ; but because all that
have afterwards sinned, have imitated him, the first
g Concedat Jesum etiam parvulis esse Jesum, et, ut per eum facta
omnia fatetur, per id quod est verbum Deus, ita etiam parvulos
ab eo salvos fieri fateatur, per id quod est Jesus, si vult esse ca-
tholicus Christianus. Sic enim scrip turn est in evangelio : " Et
" vocabunt nomen ejus Jesum ; Ipse enim salvum faciet popu-
" lum suum :" in quo populo sunt utique et parvuli. Salvum
autem faciet a peccatis eorum. Sunt ergo et in parvulis pec-
cata originalia, propter quae Jesus, i. e. Salvator, possit esse et
ipsorum. — Augustin. De Nupt. et Concup. lib. II. ad fin.
h Apud August. De Peccat. Orig. lib. II. p. 217.

LECTURE V. 223
sinner1: and that infants were not in the same state
as Adam before transgression ; because he was capa
ble of obeying a precept, whilst they had not, as yet,
the exercise of free-will. Celestius, in like manner,
rested the corruption of our natui'e on moral grounds ;
arguing that sin was not born in us, but was the
fault of the Willk. Only he went further than his
master, in refusing to anathematize those, who said,
that the sin of Adam was hurtful to himself alone ;
and in asserting, still more expressly, that no infant
was under the obligation of original sin.
Though the language of the Pelagians did not
adequately express the inveteracy of that sinfulness
of human nature, which Scripture and the world de
clare with one voice; we must allow, I think, that
their grounds were right, so far as they attempted to
give a moral account of the fact ; and that their oppo
nents were wrong, so far as they attempted to give a
physical or material account of it. The notion of
Augustine, indeed, corresponded with the Platonic
notion of good and evil, as abstract, a priori grounds

i Pelagius may have been led to this mode of expression by a
study of ancient philosophy. We may perceive something like
the contrast between the Pythagorean pipyo-is and the Platonic
pede^is in the opposing theories. The orthodox account for the
universality of evil by " participation" of the common nature ;
the Pelagians, on the principle of " similitude," or imitation.
k Omne malum quod peccatum definitur, asseritis, non in
natura, sed in sola voluntate consistere, &c. Augustin. Contr.
Julian, lib. III. p. 323. — Quia non naturae delictum, sed volun
tatis esse demonstratur. Celestius, ap. August, de Pec. Orig. II.
p. 256. torn. VII.

224 LECTURE V.
of right and wrong in human conduct; as what
constituted, by the participation of them in each in
stance, the actual good and evil of the world. The
notion of the Pelagians was in accordance with that
of Aristotle ; who held, that we were endued with
capacities of virtue and vice, but that virtue and
vice, moral good and moral evil, were only the re
sults of acting, of exercising those capacities well or
ill. Their theory of human sinfulness sufficiently
accounted for the actual sins of men. It shewed
how our nature might be depraved or improved ;
that its actual depravation consisted in transgres
sions, like those of the First Parent ; but it left
unexplained the tendency to sin existing in human
nature ; a fact evidenced in the difficulty of re
sistance to temptation ; in the self-denial which
right conduct exacts ; — " the law warring in the
" members," as the Scripture calls it. The follow
ing evil example, the assimilating of ourselves to
the first transgressor, is only one mode by which
this evil tendency finds its way into our conduct,
and betrays itself. In itself it is something beyond,
and more intimate with our feelings. It had been
well, if the orthodox had contented themselves with
the name of Original Sin, to designate this moral
fact ; and whilst they disclaimed the Pelagian theory
of Example, or Imitation, as inadequate to the solu
tion of the fact, themselves abstained from speculat
ing concerning it. But disputation called upon them
to define and pronounce. They thus essayed, what
neither Scripture had authorized, nor human reason

LECTURE V. 225
could reach : — to explain the mode of human cor
ruption ; to analyze, by language, the thing denoted
by the term Original Sin, when the only subject
before them was a general fact, requiring to be
simply and clearly stated.
The positive manner, in which Augustine declares
the transmission of the material element of corrup
tion from Adam to the whole race of mankind, laid
the groundwork of the scholastic discussions on the
subject. The idea that prevails throughout these,
is, of a positive deterioration of the carnal nature —
that, which, according to ancient philosophy, was
the seat of the " affections and lusts," — the " con-
" cupiscible part of the soul." This part of the soul
was considered as intermediate to the material and
the purely intellectual; and as inseparable from
matter ; whilst the intellect alone was the immortal
spiritual principle. In the language of ancient phi
losophy, it was spoken of, as at variance with the
intellect ; in a state of disobedience and faction
against the authority of the higher part of our na
ture ; as the corruptible principle, that weighed
down and impeded the immortal intellect. It was
also conceived to be that part of the soul, in which
the weakness of man — his want of self-command —
is exhibited ; and in which were to be explored
all those facts, which declare the inconstancy and
mutability of human will1. This principle, then,
1 Aristot. Eth. vii.
Q

226 LECTURE V.
in the constitution of our nature, presented a basis
for the physical speculations of the Schools, con
cerning the corruption of man. We may trace
this connexion of ideas in the word "passion-"
which, though properly equivalent to " affection," or
" feeling," has acquired, in modern ideas, the sense
of an " evil affection ;" evidently derived from the
practice of considering our nature as having its evil
resident in the affections m. The expressions of St.
Paul, conveying his ideas of the actual depravity of
man, in terms of the established philosophy of human
nature, were eagerly laid hold of, as confirming this
theory of the seat of human frailty. His denoting
our corruption, as " the flesh lusting against the
" spirit, and the spirit against the flesh," corresponds
with the struggle, conceived by the philosopher be
tween the antagonist principles of our nature ; and
implies also the intimate connexion of the affections
with the flesh n.
It was stated, accordingly, that the flesh, the con-
cupiscible part of our nature, was vitiated by the
m Passio, in lingua Latina, maxime usu loquendi Ecclesiastico,
non nisi ad vituperationem consuevit intelligi. Augustin. De
Nupt. et Concup. lib. II. E. p. 280. torn. VII.
Passiones irascibilis ad passiones concupiscibilis reducuntur,
sicut ad principaliores, inter quas concupiscentia vehementius
movet, et magis sentitur, ut supra habitum est. Et ideo concupis
centia attribuitur tanquam principaliori, et in qua quodammodo
omnes alias passiones includuntur. Aquinas, S. Theol. Prima
Ildae, qu. lxxxii. art. 3. in discussing the question, Utrum origi-
nale peccatum sit concupiscentia ?
n They are Xdyoi evvKoi, " principles inhering in matter," ac
cording to Aristotle. De Anima, lib. I. c. 1 .

LECTURE V. 227
sin of the first man; the soul itself not being con
taminated, as being distinct from the fleshly prin
ciple. A deep wound was inflicted, it was said, by
the malice of the Devil : the material idea still, we
may perceive, running through the description : that
wound, being sin, was fatal to our very life. By
this sin, our nature being changed for the worse,
not only became sinful, but even propagated sin
ners. The evil, indeed, was not a substance in it
self; to assert this, would have been Manicheism ; it
was a vitiation of the original flesh, transmitted like
hereditary diseases which shew themselves in the
body °. It was remitted in baptism to each indivi
dual; the condemnation was removed, by the re
mission of sins, through Christ, obtained in that
sacrament. But the evil in itself — the Concupis
cence p in which it existed — still remained in the
material nature derived from Adam, and sustained
its noxious vitality in the successive generations of
men i.
o August. De Nupt. et Concup. lib. II. H. p. 279. torn. VII.
P The Schoolmen differ as to the point whether Original
Sin is Concupiscence, or simply the Privation of original justice.
See the disputes between the Dominicans and Franciscans at
the Council of Trent. Fra Paolo's History, translated by
Courayer, lib. II. p. 273. — I take on this point, as on every other
concerned in the present inquiry, what appears to me the pre
valent view, — the notion which runs through the system;
though the particular definitions of it may differ.
1 Aristotle was aware of the fact, that the nature of man is
subject to hereditary influences ; as he remarks, that children
appear to derive something from their parents, [imoXavovTa,]
in his Politics, lib. VII. c. 16; but he has not speculated
about it.
Q 2

228 LECTURE V.
Our Church, happily, has avoided that extreme
dogmatism on the subject, which the scholastic phi
losophy instances; and which some of her own mem
bers would elicit from her language. We find, indeed,
the terms of the schools adopted in the Article on Ori
ginal Sin, and a train of thought on the subject follow
ing their speculations. But, in speaking of Original
Sin, it does not expressly assert its descent in the way
of propagation; it affirms only the general law under
which all sons of Adam are born into the world. It
does not, in fact, define the nature of the thing, though
it appears to do so in terms : it only lays down its
effects, their depth, and their universal extent. It
is impossible, at the same time, to deny, that its lan
guage on the subject bears the impress of the scho
lastic theories. And those expositors of her doc
trine, who would draw from this article a sentence
of what is called the " total corruption" of our na
ture, appear to me to take an improper advantage
of those theoretic expressions r. They are, probably,
not aware, that they are carrying back the doctrine
of the Church into the realism of the scholastic phi
losophy. For what else is the description of a total
corruption, but a material theory of the nature so
r The strength of the expressions (quam proxime, and " very
" far gone") is to be estimated, by their opposition to that tran-
scendant holiness, which human nature may be conceived to
possess, whilst as yet instinct with original righteousness, and
the perfect image of Divine goodness. Compare the fallen con
dition of man with the scholastic notion of his first state ; and
no words can be strong enough, to tell the depth to which he
has fallen.

LECTURE V.
corrupted, as of a mass which has undergone a dis
solution and internal alteration, so as to be no longer,
in any respect, what it was ? though even under
this point of view, the modern speculator has ex
ceeded the philosophical basis of his doctrine, in
making the privation total, which the Schools speak
of as only partial s.
The Schoolmen, however, have not hesitated to
speak expressly on the subject in terms of Ma
terialism. They describe the corruption of our
nature as the material cause of sin. They speak
of all men being in the first man : and explain it by
saying, that, whatever is in human bodies, existed
" materially and in the way of causation," in the
first man. For Adam, according to Peter Lombard,
transmitted a portion of his substance to his de
scendants, which has continued the same, only being
augmented in bulk by food, without receiving any
external addition ; and being continued downwards
from him by successive multiplications of itself1.
» Note A. Lect. V.
t Quibus responderi potest, quod materialiter atque causali-
ter, non formaliter, dicitur fuisse in primo homine, omne quod
in humanis corporibus naturaliter est, descenditque a primo pa-
rente lege propagationis, et in se auctum et multiplicatum est,
nulla exteriori substantia in id transeunte ; et ipsum in futuro
resurget. Fomentum quidem habet a cibis, sed non conver-
tuntur cibi in humanam substantiam, quae scilicet per propaga-
tionem descendit ab Adam. Transmisit enim Adam modicum
quid de substantia sua in corpora filiorum, quando eos procre-
avit ; id est, aliquid modicum de massa substantiae ejus divisum
est, et inde formatum corpus filii, suique multiplicatione, sine
rei extrinsecae adjectione, auctum est : et de illo ita augmentato
Q3

230 LECTURE V.
The identity of the sinful principle was thus strictly
maintained by them, in the sense of an original,
invariable matter, reproduced under the infinite
variety of individual forms in which it was con
tained. This notion, partly physical and partly logical, is
the application of Aristotle's principles of Matter,
Form, and Privation. It proceeds on the assumption,
that there is some common Nature in all things that
we designate material ; and that this common nature
is only diversified externally by the various forms
with which it is invested. It continues in all things,
under all their transmutations or transitions, sus
ceptible of every modification which the perpetual
flux of sensible things superinduces. Hence, evi
dently, the immortality and invariableness of the
principle of corruption ; the poison wears not out ;
the tyrant never dies ; for it bears a charmed exist
ence ; amidst the fluctuations and revolutions of
generations, it preserves its sullen stability and
vigour. It is probable then that Pelagius and Celestius
intended only to oppose this material theory; and
to explain the fact of Human Sinfulness, as I
have said, on moral grounds. In the fact itself, as
appears, they did not differ from the orthodox : so
aliquid inde separatur, unde formantur posterorum corpora : et
ita progreditur procreationis ordo lege propagationis, usque ad
finem humani generis. Itaque diligenter ac perspicue intelli-
gentibus patet, omnes secundum corpora in Adam fuisse per
seminalem rationem, et ex eo descendisse propagationis lege.
Pet. Lombard. Sentent. lib. II. dist. 30.

LECTURE V. 231
far that they were acquitted of heresy, both at Rome
and at Jerusalem. But the acute logic of the African
divines traced their explanations to the consequences ;
and their influence was interposed to maintain the
uniformity of doctrine in the Church.
To form a right conception of the doctrine of
Original Sin, we should view it together with the
doctrine of the Incarnation, which is its exact coun
terpart. In the theory of the Incarnation, our Lord
is described as assuming to his Divinity, not any
human being in particular, but manhood, human
nature itself. He was made " man of the substance
" of his mother ;" yet without sin, — without the cor
ruption derived to all other sons of Adam, not con
ceived, as He was, by the immediate operation of the
Holy Spirit. Much subtile disquisition was em
ployed to shew, how the nature, which He inherited
from Adam, was not corrupted ; but such as it ex
isted before the transgression of Adam. The will
therefore, it was argued — the principle of motion —
in him was perfectly just and good. It was in his
power, accordingly, to generate others like himself;
as it was, in the corrupt will of Adam, to generate
others in the likeness of his corruption. To this
purport were interpreted the words, being " born in
" Christ," being " born of God." In each case ac
cordingly, both in the benefits of the Incarnation
and the Evils of the Fall, all men were collectively
regarded as one man ; and the blessing and the curse
descended, by vital communication, with the heads
0. 4

232 LECTURE V.
of the race : realism representing each Christian as
having a proper physical identity, in the unregenerate
state, with Adam ; in the regenerate, with Christ.
Such undoubtedly was the Scholastic notion funda
mentally, both of the effects of the Fall, and of the
Incarnation. This view exactly accords with the
Theory of Grace, which I before stated. It was the
Will of God, bringing those, whom He had chosen
in Christ, to Himself. This blessed effect took place,
when, by the process of justification, the sinner was
incorporated into the body of Christ, and made one
with Christ.
The disputes indeed between the Pelagians and
the Orthodox, when traced to their real origin, were
disputes as to the force and propriety of the terms
Nature and Person, in their application to moral
facts. The ostensible difference was concerning
Grace ; to what periods of the Christian progress
in justification, the description of the operation of
Grace was appropriate. The Pelagians did not
deny that Grace was necessary to the Christian life :
at what time the Divine Operation properly as
sumed the name of Grace, was the principal ques
tion with them. But, if we examine the disputa
tions themselves, they turn upon the point, whether
Sin is a quality of nature, or an accident of per
sons. The Pelagian account, however, of human
depravity, clearly did not correspond with the doc
trine of Grace connected with the Incarnation. The
Pelagians, therefore, were regarded as denying that

LECTURE V.
grace with which their theory of corruption did not
logically correspond. Both Pelagius and Celestius
disclaimed the imputation ; but the logical conse
quence was sufficient for a conviction of heresy. The
orthodox, on the other hand, clung to the term Na
ture, as indispensable to the theory of Grace. They
confessed, indeed, that sin originated in the will of
man : for, to have denied this, would have been to
shake their whole theory of Divine Agency. But,
in order to secure, as it were, a raft on which the
noxious contagion might float down the stream of
human generation, they insisted on the term Nature
as the only proper designation of the moral fact u
It is the same philosophy which has occasioned
the distinction of Sin into Original and Actual :
the term Actual expressing the personal develop
ment of that sin, which is conceived antecedently to
exist in the common nature of all men, and in each
individual, consequently, as participating that com
mon nature.
The apparent connexion of the heresies of Nes-
torius and Pelagius further illustrates this point.
We find at the same Council of Ephesus, at which
Nestorius was condemned, Pelagianism also attract
ing notice x. There was an evident correspondence
between the two heresies in this respect ; that they
were both disputes about the notions attached to the
Terms Nature and Person. Nestorius, in .denying
" See Anselm. De Cone. Virg. et Pec. Orig.— Note B.
x Note C.

234 LECTURE V.
that the Virgin Mary was the mother of God>, and
thus separating the personality of Christ as man,
from his personality as God, gave ground for the
supposition, that Christians were not born of God —
made one with the Father and the Son — in that
intimate sense which the orthodox doctrine implied.
Nestorius, however, appears to have differed from
the orthodox principally in this ; that he viewed dis
tinctions, which the orthodox regarded as different
Natures, under the notion of different Persons.
Pelagius, on the other hand, making Original Sin a
matter of personal distinction, abandoned that unity
of nature, in which the invariableness of Human
Corruption was conceived to consist.
We may further see the importance of the dis
tinction between Nature and Person, in regard to the
doctrine of Original Sin, in the Scholastic explana
tion of the reason, why the First Sin only trans
mitted its effects to the posterity of Adam ; why
subsequent sins, or even those of a man's immediate
Parents, are not equally injurious in their conse
quences. It was contended, in answer to such ques
tions, that it was only the nature of the species,
and not the individual peculiarities, that could be
transmitted from generation to generation. The
first sin of Adam deprived human nature of its ori
ginal justice,— altered its natural constitution ; — but
not so the subsequent sins either of Adam or of
y To state it more correctly, he objected to the word Bcotokos,
Deipara, as applied to Christ.

LECTURE V. 235
others : these were merely personal ; did not alter
the general nature once corrupted z.
It was a consequence of this notion of Original
Sin, that the elements of the Christian Life should
be, in the strictest sense, a change, a transformation,
a renewal. It was necessary that we should be " born
" again." To counteract that living death within
us, a new life from God must be imparted. Hence
that view of Faith, in the scholastic system, as an
" Infused principle." " As in Adam all die, so in
" Christ shall all be made alive." All were corrupted
in the flesh by Adam's transgression ; all must be
quickened by the righteousness of Christ. If we
regard this reasoning as a description of conjoined
events in each case, it is undoubtedly scripturally
just. The connexion of the universal ruin of man —
whatever may be the nature of that ruin — with the
sin of the first transgressor ; and the connexion of
universal salvation — whatever may be the nature of
that salvation — with the righteousness of Christ; are
facts, which the word of truth has inseparably bound
together. The logical deduction, however, of one
from the other, is what I am now pointing out.
The state of man, under Original Sin, being that
of a Privation, he was without that perfect consti
tution of his nature, in which all his principles were,
in proportion to each other, and rightly ordered to
the final end of them all — the Divine Goodness. This
z Aquinas, S. Theol. Prima Ildae. qu. lxxxi. art. i and 2.
—Note D.

236 LECTURE V.
inherent evil must be remedied by the presence of
some effectual antidote. Scripture fully revealed
that antidote in the perfect righteousness of the Son
of God. But, how to apply that righteousness to
the individual sinner — how to exhibit its power of
transforming and renewing the fallen nature of man
— was the question. Here, too, Scripture provided
an answer to the real difficulty. It has told us, that,
" by grace ye are saved through faith, and that not
" of yourselves ; it is the gift of God :" that those
who " believe, and are baptized, shall be saved."
Faith, then, as emanating from the grace of God, and
having for its principal object the righteousness of
Christ, is the new principle of life in man. Bap
tism indeed is requisite as the " sacrament of faith,"
— as the mystical act of the new birth ; at once the
visible and spiritual incorporation with Christ. But
Faith must first come down from above to the soul,
and turn it towards God. It is the principle by
which the Life and Immortality of the second Adam
are generated in the soul. It is the grace of Christ,
by which, antecedently to any acts of the Chris
tian life, a spiritual power is given to the soul,
and the heir of corruption becomes the child of
Godz. It is important to observe accurately this physical
notion of Faith, as an infused principle, the origin
of a new life ; because it serves to account for that
z Gratia Christi traducitur in omnes qui ab eo spiritualiter
generantur per fidem et baptismum. Aquin. S. Theol. Prima
Ildae, qu. lxxxi. art. 3.

LECTURE V. 237
priority, which is ascribed in such strong terms, in
our Articles, to Faith, among the acts of the Chris
tian life. On this view of the case, it appears as
inconsequent and absurd to suppose, that any Chris
tian works can be performed without Faith ; as to
suppose that the natural actions of life can be per
formed before the principle of life exists in us.
" Whatever is not of faith" is then literally " of sin."
It proceeds from that nature in which the seed of
corruption exists with unchecked influence — from
" the natural man," which has already displeased
God in our first parent, and cannot please God under
any modification, but in itself must deserve the
wrath of God. Even works that might be called
good, as they result from Nature, have then the
nature of sin, peccati rationem habent, — belong to
that unregenerate principle which is called Sin, — and
come into the estimate of our natural disability to
please God. Scripture, indeed, asserts the difficulty,
the folly, the sinfulness of any endeavour to work
out our own salvation on our own strength ; and
therefore lays such stress on the principle which
sends us to the altar of the Cross. But not em
ploying definitions in its delivery of divine truth,
it avoids that paradoxical air, which appears in all
systematical developments of the nature of Faith.
There is one passage, in which it seems to give
a logical account of Faith, in the Epistle to the
Hebrews ; where Faith is described, as " the sub-
" stance (hypostasis) of things hoped, the evidence
" (elenchus) of things not seen." But even here,

238 LECTURE V.
when the Apostle is speaking in the terms of a
logical philosophy, it is not speculative truth that
he is engaged in treating, but practical. He is giving
that idea of Faith, which may excite in his brethren
a principle of conduct, exceeding the narrow range
of present things, and expanding itself to those
nobler views opened by a revealed hope to the Chris
tian eye.
Some judgment may be formed, from these con
siderations, to what extent the difficulties attending
the notion of Faith, and of Works done before Justi
fication, may be attributed to the abstract theories
preserved in the technical language of Theology.
And I would draw attention to those theories, there
fore, as solutions of the difficulties ; and as among
the illustrations of the important fact, that there
exist perplexities in Theology, which do not involve
real scriptural difficulties : there arising necessarily
a stiffness and positiveness of doctrine, from the
very nature of systematic statements.
What strivings, indeed, and heart-burnings would
have been saved to the Christian world, had the
proper negative notion of Faith been strictly guarded:
had Faith been cherished in the heart, simply, as the
heaven-sent keeper of God's own sanctuary there, to
drive away the proud imaginations of the worldly
spirit, and to still the anxieties of the contrite, self-
despairing soul. In this sense, Justification by
Faith only is the sum of Christianity. View the
truth in this broad historical form ; and then, to add
to the assertion of it, the necessity of conditions, is

LECTURE V. 239
to counteract the proper efficacy of Jesus Christ.
But, throw the great Christian Fact into the form
of a dogma, and it is immediately acted on by the
philosophy of language. It becomes matter of in
quiry, what Justification is, what Faith is ; and dis
tinctions are introduced, to obviate consequences from
this or that statement. Hence too, the importunate
comparison between Faith and Works, as to their
relative importance a.
Faith, being regarded as the infused principle of
a new life, does not supersede the natural faculties
of man, nor does it destroy the inborn principle of
corruption. The infection of evil is in the flesh,
and there, as the School Divines explicitly assert, it
remains, even in the regenerate. The divine seed is
in the higher spiritual part of our nature, and is
a new power by which the subjugation of the cor
rupt passions of the inferior part, the lusts of the
flesh, is gradually accomplished. By faith in Christ,
through baptism, being born of God, we need still
to grow in that life, to proceed from our state as
babes in Christ, to the measure of the stature of the
fulness of Christ. It is by this procedure, through
the continued assistances of grace, that, as we become
stronger in the Lord, the offending Adam within
us becomes weaker ; our holiness and our security
a From the scholastic distinction between Implicit and Ex
plicit Faith, we may trace the assertion, that the "Fathers
" looked not for transitory promises," &c. The invariableness
and sameness of the object of Faith was thus maintained.

240 LECTURE V.
increasing together. So far then from man's free
will being impaired, by the divine life thus growing
within us, under the blessing of Him who first gave
it, our freewill is in reality established. Our con
dition, antecedently to these influences, is one of
slavery ; we are sold under sin — in bondage to the
lusts of the flesh : we could not then do what we
would, and we did what we would not. But having
received the new creation in Christ, we commence
the mastery of the rebellious passions ; and so long
as the spiritual life is cherished within us, our
power daily increases.
This then is the scholastic notion of free-will. It
means a liberty from compulsion, as distinct from
a liberty from necessity b. When the Schoolmen
assert, in the language of our Article, that we have
no power without the grace of God preventing us,
that we may have a will, and working with us when
we have that will ; they mean that we cannot be said
to be free to will or to do what we design, so long
as we are in the mere state of sons of Adam ; that
our real power is that command of the passions in
obedience to the will of God, which the new life of
Faith brings with it. Thus the responsibility of
man, instead of being lessened by the consideration
of the Divine Influence on his soul, is, in fact, in
creased ; agreeably to the scripture-declaration that,
" to whom much is given, of him much will be re-
" quired." In the state of nature, we are powerless
b Libertas a, coactione, and libertas a necessitate. — Note E.

LECTURE V. 241
against the assaults of temptation — under grace the
means of victory are placed in our hands.
It appears, that our Article on Free-will is framed
with the same view ; to declare, I mean, that our
proper responsibility, as Christians, commences at the
time of our receiving divine assistance. We are apt
to suppose, that free-will consists in the circumstance
of originating our own purposes ; in not being ac
tuated by any thing extrinsic to ourselves. This,
at least, is not the accurate theological sense of the
term. It is here the actual power, viewed in itself,
at the moment of exertion ; the power shewn in
doing what we wish, or of doing otherwise, what
ever may have been the inducements to this or that
mode of action previously. And this power, evi
dently, is increased, by whatever removes obstacles,
by whatever strengthens the reason, and enforces
the dictates of conscience.
In carrying on our estimate of the effect of the
Scholastic Philosophy on the scheme of human
agency, involved in our theological language, we
should bear in mind the view of human responsi
bility, which is given under the analogies of Scrip
ture. We are described, as subjects owing certain
duties of allegiance to a king, — as soldiers enlisted
under the Captain of Salvation, — as servants having
certain services to perform for a master, — as la
bourers having certain works to execute for an em
ployer. By these several analogies does the Gospel
strikingly depict to us the condition, under which,
it

242 LECTURE V.
we are placed in the world. The principle through
out is, that our thoughts, our actions, our works,
are dues that we owe to God ; — that we are not
properly our own ; — that our time and industry are
not at our own disposal ; — but that we are under an
obligation of working for Him who has bought us,
redeeming us from the captivity into which we had
been sold, and now employing us in his own ser^
vice. Judaism had already taught mankind to re
gard God as a Governor, dispensing rewards and
punishments to men, as his subjects, according to
the works performed in his service ; as they kept,
or broke, his commandments, statutes, and ordi
nances. To this description of human agency, in
relation to God, Christianity succeeded. A principle
of obligation was adopted in the Gospel scheme, ana
logous to that of the Jewish. The service of the
Israelite was due, because God had brought them
out of the land of bondage, and settled them in his
own land, Himself the founder of the colony. The
service of the Christian was due, because Christ
had interceded for them — had won them out of the
hand of the enemy, and given them both liberty and
life. Hence the language of that great Christian
rule : " When ye shall have done all those things
" which are commanded you, say, We are unprofit-
" able servants, we have done that which was our
" duty" — o i<f>u\op.ev — which was owing from us,
to do.
Under such a scheme of human agency, the cha
racter of Justice would be the natural and compre-

LECTURE V. 243
hensive description of right conduct. Men would
be led to inquire, what the Lord had required
of them, — by what inducements he had called upon
them to obey, — by what punishments he had threat
ened disobedience; and in regard to themselves, how
far they had fulfilled their task, how far they might
aspire to his rewards, or had subjected themselves
to his punishments. The estimate of these circum
stances appeals to our sense of Justice; to that virtue
which dispenses to each his due, both relatively to
himself and to other members of the same commu
nity ; and which presupposes an authority by which
its awards may be distributed and enforced.
Judaism accordingly inculcated this leading notion
both of Divine and Human Agency. The Israelite
was never suffered to forget, that Jehovah was a
just God, the Judge of the earth. He was taught
to examine himself ; whether he had done justly —
what was the righteousness of his conduct — whether
he had incurred Divine Displeasure by any defect
of his duty, or might hope reward from his obe
dience. The Lord reasons with him, whether the
Lord's " ways are not equal, and the ways of his
" people unequal:" whether " the Judge of all the
" earth" would not " do right." Agreeably to this,
Christ is "the Lord our Righteousness," or "the Lord
" our Justice:" and the Apostle speaks of God having
shewn his justice in the act of justifying sinners
through Christ. We trace, indeed, the same idea
in some of the principal terms of Christianity, evi
dently drawn from legal or equitable proceedings
r 2

244 LECTURE V.
in the dispensing of Justice ; as in the terms, Me
diator, Advocate, Intercessor, Justification, Remis
sion, Pardon. It runs through the whole of St.
Paul's exposition of the state of man under the
Gospel. The introduction of the notions of Merit and
Demerit into Theology, is to be explained on this
principle. Original Sin, being a fault of nature,
could not indeed, as such, be a personal fault ;
and yet it subjected the individual man to the
punishment of sin ; in itself deserving God's wrath
and damnation. The guiltiness of the nature in
volved in it the demerit of the person. Thus, even
those who had not personally sinned after the simi
litude of Adam's transgression, stood personally un
holy in the sight of God, and obnoxious to punish
ment b : the offending nature cried aloud for the
Divine Wrath. Nor could the Christian, in the
most advanced state of Justification, be regarded
otherwise than as personally sinful and unholy ;
because it is his being essentially and virtually in
Christ — his being " accepted in the beloved" — that
entirely constitutes his meritoriousness. Though the
act of sin may have passed away, the guiltiness still
remains ; and even his case therefore is one of de
merit. For there is this difference in regard to the
application of the merits of Christ to the Christian ;
that a personal merit does not result to him indi-
b Punishment, pcena, as distinct from guilt, culpa. We see
this distinction referred to in our XXXIst Article, — '* in remis-
" sionem poenae aut culpae."

LECTURE V. 245
vidually, from his union with Christ ; as a personal
demerit does to the son of Adam, from his being in
Adam. The natural unholiness in which he stands
before God, excludes the idea of any personal merit
in him, whilst, by grace, he is admitted to the
glorious privilege of the sons of God. Eternal life
remains the gift of God ; for the regenerate Chris
tian has still the guilt of that sin, whose wages are
death. We attach, at present, an exclusive idea to the
term Merit, different from that properly belonging
to it as a technical term of Theology. We are apt
to regard it as denoting, strictly, praiseworthiness,
moral title to reward. We should revert rather
to its original meaning, which is to be sought in its
connexion with the ancient theories of Justice. It is
hence that it has been introduced into the account
of Justification. Now the notion of Justice, we
know, according to the ancient philosophy, was fun
damentally political. It was conceived to have place
only among the members of the same community,
personally equal among themselves, and acting under
a common authority. It was the rule by which the
respective claims of individuals so circumstanced
might be adjusted. In order to that comparison
which such an adjustment of claims requires, some
common measure is required ; and this, as applied
to each, is the "worth," or merit of the indi
vidual, the value of his services. Now the first
application of the term merit to Christian Theology,
appears to have been exactly of this nature. The
R 3

246 LECTURE V.
great Christian society was viewed by the speculator,
in its relation to God as its Governor and Judge.
The principle, which Human Authority can apply
only to external actions, was applied to the invisible,
internal principles of our nature, cognizable by the
Divine Authority. It began to be considered what
man had done, or could do, in the way of claim on
the Justice of God. Then the doctrine of Original
Sin came into the consideration on the one hand —
that of the Incarnation and Righteousness of Christ
on the other; — and the estimate of Merit accordingly
was to be drawn from a comparison of what man
now is, at once a Fallen and a Saved creature, with
what he once was, when perfect from the hands of
his Maker. From this comparison would result the
conclusion, that man could have no merit whatever
in the eye of God. Then only could he earn the
reward of happiness, when all the principles of his
nature, as originally constituted, tended towards
that Divine Goodness which was their real End.
Now he entered on his career of service a debtor to
the Justice of God, not a claimant on it. He had
only merited Punishment by his intrinsic delin
quency. But, in the righteousness of Christ, a title
to reward was found. The submission of Christ
to the Divine Will had been voluntary; He had
earned a recompence for services given to God, with
out a previous debt of service unpaid ; and an abun
dant reward was bestowed on Him, overflowing with
Divine goodness to the sons of his Love.
The expressions, Merit of Condignity, Merit of

LECTURE V. 247
Congruity, if examined on this ground, resolve them
selves into less exceptionable modes of describing
Human Agency in the work of Justification, than
they appear at first sight. With the practical evil
of so characterizing any actions of man, I am not
now concerned. But their theoretic truth is to be
seen, in their consistency with the philosophical no
tion of Merit, as the measure of political justice, and
the theological description of it, as the effect of co
operating grace. For, whilst it is his own gifts,
which God rewards in those whom He accepts in
Christ, He cannot be otherwise than just in bestow
ing these rewards. This requires that the rewarded
should be brought under the notion of worthiness c ;
and should thus have merit of condignity; relatively9
that is, to God, as a just Judge. Such was the doc
trine understood in those words of St. Paul: " Hence-
" forth there is laid up for me a crown of righteous-
" ness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall
" give to me in that day d." Merit of congruity, on
the other hand, is the work of the Christian viewed
relatively to the mercy of God. If God, that is,
mercifully rewards, then there must be, as a cor
respondent to this excellent mercy on his part, a
c " Whoever has Grace," Aquinas says, " is on that very
"¦ account worthy of eternal life." Quicunque enim gratiam ha-
bet, ex hoc ipso dignus est vita aeterna. Summ. Theol. Prima
Pars, qu. xxiv. art. 4.
^ 2 Tim. iv. 8. Trjs hiKaiotrivns o~Te(pavos, ov dwohaa'ei poi 6 Kvpios
ev eKeivrj t§ Tjpepa, b hUaios KpiTr/s. Aquinas, S. Theol. Prima
Ildae, qu. cxiv. art. 3.
R 4

248 LECTURE V.
congruity, or suitableness, in the person to whom it
is vouchsafed. The two expressions are correlatives
to the Grace of God viewed as the gift of a just and
merciful Judge e.
The doctrine of Repentance, as exhibited in the
Theology of the Schools, also takes its expression
from Aristotle's Theory of Justice. Aquinas places
it under the head of Commutative Justice, or that
exercise of Justice by which due compensation is
awarded for an offence committed. It is the poena,
the satisfaction, or requital, due for the offence, vo
luntarily taken on himself by the offender, as dis
tinct from the infliction of it by a judge. And the
indispensable necessity of it is rested, by Aquinas,
on this ground ; because an offence against God is
in direct opposition to Grace : the goodwill of God,
the only cause of goodness in man, is turned from
the offender ; and God cannot remit the offence
without a change of will, which in Him is impos
sible. The offender therefore must himself be
turned towards God, by a detestation of the past
sin, and a resolution of amendment.
In the consideration, however, of this doctrine, we
may observe a striking difference in comparison with
others relating to human agency. To the reduction of
the subject under the head of Penal Justice, may be
e The proper sense of Merit may be seen in that fine expres
sion of Tacitus ; — iisque virtutibus iram Caii Caesaris meritus.
Agricola, c. 4. — Note F.

LECTURE V. 249
ascribed, in great measure, the unscriptural notions
and unholy practices which grew up in the Church,
in regard to the expiation of offences, and their re
spective criminality. The word poena alone gave
opportunity for introducing into religion, all the
subtile casuistry and technical distinctions of Civil
Law. Hence too the sacramental character with
which Repentance has been invested under the name
of Penance f, the application of a penal code of re
ligion demanding the ministrations of the priests.
Thus the subject of Repentance, instead of taking
its place by the side of Faith, in the discussions
of the Schoolmen, is passed over as a doctrine
of the Gospel, with slight notice. But, as a Sacra
ment, and a ritual of punishment, it obtains a full
consideration. We may perceive the effect of this
mode of treating the subject in our Articles : there
being none expressly on the doctrine of Repentance ;
whilst there is reference to the questions raised on
the subject by the Scholastic philosophy, in the
Articles which speak of Penance, Purgatory, and
Masses.
f The translation of the Latin Vulgate has here sanctioned a
most important deviation from the simplicity of the Greek ori
ginal, in the use of the terms pcenitentiam agite, for the simple
peravoeire. e The expression of Aristotle, KoXdo-eis elo-iv larpeiai rives, was
adapted to the explanation of the efficacy of suffering to expiate
guilt. See Aquin. Summ. Theol. Prima Ildae, qu. lxxxvii. art. 7.
— unde non habet simpliciter rationem pcenae, sed medicinae.
Nam et medici austeras potiones propinant infirmis, ut conferant
sanitatem, &c.

250 LECTURE V.
The application of the term Punishment to the
sacrifice of our Saviour, belongs to the same philo
sophy. It was contended, that an offence being an
act of the will, must also be removed by the will ;
that, whatever indulgence the will had allowed itself,
the same ground must be recovered by suffering;
that thus the equality of justice might be main
tained. Hence it would be construed, that the
passion of our Lord, being accepted by God as the
means of human salvation, must be a punishment
(poena) sustained by Him, equivalent to the delin
quency of sinful man. And this further accounts to
us for the theological use of the word " Satisfac-
" tion." It declares the sufferings of Christ to be the
voluntary payment, on his part, of what was other
wise not owing from Him, to the Divine Justice s.
Hence too would arise the notion, that self-morti
fication would recommend us to the favour of God :
in fact, that, the more voluntarily such chastise
ment of ourselves was undertaken, the more effec
tual would be the compensation for offence.
Hence, also, the fond impiety of Supererogation.
The compensation might be supposed to exceed the
weight of the offence, where the depth of the sor
row for personal Sin might produce an excess of
personal infliction. And it might be concluded, that
this excess, beyond the requisitions of justice, would
redound to the remission of the offences of others h.
s Note G.
h Aristotle's idea of taking from the " gain," of the offender,
and adding this difference to the " loss" of the sufferer, and

LECTURE V. 251
The Reformation opposed a practical check to
these refinements of Christian truth. It was an
energetic practical amendment that was here needed.
And our Church, accordingly, has here declared
against the abuses, which had perverted the doc
trine of Repentance ; instead of addressing itself to
the decision of the speculative nature of Repentance
considered as a doctrine of the Gospel.
It is to be remarked, however, how strongly the
inefficacy of Repentance to wipe away guilt, and re
store the sinner to his lost state, has impressed the
minds of those, who have thought on human nature
with any depth of philosophy. It is of little pur
pose, to urge the natural placability of the Divine
Being, his mercy, his willingness to receive the peni
tent. God, no doubt, is abundantly placable, merci
ful, and forgiving. Still the fact remains. The
offender is guilty : his crime may be forgiven, but
his criminality is upon him. The remorse which
he feels — the wounds of his conscience — are no fal
lacious things. He is sensible of them, even whilst
the Gospel tells him, — " Thy sins be forgiven thee —
" Go, and sin no more." The heart seeks for re
paration and satisfaction : its longings are, that its
sins may be no more remembered, that the cha
racters in which it is written may be blotted out.
Hence the congeniality to its feelings of the notion
of Atonement. It is no speculative thought which
then taking the mean, in order to obtain the equality of justice,
pervades the speculation. — Note H.

252 LECTURE V.
suggests the theory : speculation rather prompts to
the rejection of it : speculation furnishes abstract
reasons, from the Divine Attributes, for discarding
it as a chimera of our fears. But the fact is, that
we cannot be at peace without some consciousness
of Atonement made. The word Atonement, in its
true, practical sense, expresses this indisputable fact.
Objections may hold against the explanations of the
term ; they are irrelevant to the thing itself denoted
by the term. Turn over the records of human
crime ; and, whether under the forms of supersti
tion, or the enactments of civil government, the fact
itself constantly emerges to the view. All concur
in shewing, that, whilst God is gracious and merci
ful, repenting Him of evil, the human heart is in-
, exorable against itself. It may hope — tremblingly
hope — that God may forgive it, but it cannot forgive
I itself. This material and invincible difficulty of the case,
the Scripture Revelation has met with a parallel
fact. It has said, we have no hope in ourselves ;
that, looking to ourselves, we cannot expect hap
piness ; and, at the same time, has fixed our atten
tion on a Holy One who did no sin ; whose perfect
righteousness it has connected with our unrighte
ousness, and whose strength it has brought to the
evil of our weakness. Thus Christ is emphatically
said to be our Atonement ; not that we may attri
bute to God any change of purpose towards man by
what Christ has done ; but that we may know, that
we have passed from the death of sin to the life of

LECTURE V. 253
righteousness by Him; and that our own hearts
may not condemn us. " If our heart condemn us
" not," then may we " have peace with God ;" but,
without the thought of Christ, the heart, that has
any real sense of its condition, must sink under its
own condemnation.
The bane of this philosophy of expiation was,
not that it exalted human agency too highly, but
that in reality it depressed the power of man too
low. It was no invigoration of the mind, no cheer
ing of the heart, to masculine exertion, in working
out the great work of salvation, by exaggerated, yet
noble, views of what man could accomplish. But it
checked the aspirings, both of the heart and of the
intellect, by fixing them at a standard, that had only
the mockery of Divine strength, and not the reality.
It brought men to acquiesce in a confession of im
potence, without carrying them at once to the throne
of Grace. The ecclesiastical power stood between
the heart and heaven. Atonement was converted
into a theory of Commutation degrading to the ho
liness of God, whilst it spoke the peace of God in
terms of flattering delusion to the sinner. The value
of confessions and rites of penance was acknow
ledged ; and, accepting this vain substitute for that
assurance of Atonement, which alone can satisfy the
longing soul with goodness, men looked no further :
their proper power was exchanged for a servile de
pendence on the ministrations of the priest — the
presumed all-sufficiency of a man like themselves.

254 LECTURE V.
On the other hand, the true scriptural practical
view of Human Agency is to be seen in the great
truth of Atonement, simply believed and acted on,
without the gloss of commentators, or the refine
ments of theorists. These are but attempts to
weigh the ocean in the hollow of the hand. Take
the truth simply, and what does it mean but that
God is infinitely just and merciful, visiting iniqui
ties to the third and fourth generation, and yet
shewing mercy to thousands — that we cannot please
Him by our works, or our sacrifices, or our prayers,
but yet we can do all things, by Christ strengthen
ing us, working for us, offering Himself for us, pray
ing for us. The doctrine declares to us at once
how much is out of our power, and yet how much
is in our power. And, by combining these two ap
parently contrary facts in one scheme of human
agency, it imparts to us the true secret of our Power
against the temptations and dangers of the world.
For, let it be considered, whether it is not pre
cisely by such a combination of strength and weak
ness, that ability and success in worldly conduct are
attained. Every one, who attentively considers the
state of the case, must perceive that Revelation has
only extended to the spiritual world two classes of
facts evidenced in the natural. In every exercise of
our minds, in every action or event, are we not
conscious that much is left in our own power? Do
we not see the fact strikingly displayed in the con
duct of men whom we call great ; whose greatness
evidently consists in this, that, by dint of their

LECTURE V. 255
intellect and moral energy, they bring the train of
events into their own power, exercising an arbitrary
influence over the voluntary actions of other men ?
But again, on the other hand, do we not find, also, a
stint and a bound put to this our intrinsic power ?
It is equally apparent, that the issues of events are
not in the hand of the thinker, or the counsellor, or
the agent. There is something like a chain of causes,
in the connexion of circumstances themselves — some
thing of an involuntary process in the association
and current of our own thoughts. So real is all
this, — (and this is the point particularly to be ob
served in illustration of Human Agency, in con
nexion with the Divine,) — that our actual power, in
each instance of exertion, depends in great measure on
our assumption of this fact — the fact, that things are
not in our power ; and our adaptation, consequently,
of our conduct to it. For thus we see even the great
men of the world have chiefly owed their failure to
the circumstance; that they overlooked this clear
fact : their former success emboldening them to an
exclusive trust in their own power, and closing their
eyes to the commanding influences out of their own
sphere of action k. Thus are energy and repose,
intrepidity and diffidence, magnanimity and humility,
at once, inculcated on us in the course of nature.
We cannot sleep nor stop, thinking that the con
trolling Power by which events are disposed, will
work without us : we cannot lean on our own ac-
k Hence prosperity was represented in ancient mythology,
as provoking the envy of the Gods.

256 LECTURE V.
tivity, trusting that we can work without the power
from above. Whoever duly estimates these things,
will readily see that Scripture enforces on us no
strange thing, when it tells us, that we are " saved
" by grace," that " our sufficiency is of God ;" and
again, he who " doeth the will of God, is accepted by
" him," and that every man shall receive according
" to his works."
But whoever acknowledges both these principles
as the complex Law of Actions under both the
spiritual and natural government of God — will, at
the same time, see that the truths of human sinful
ness, of Repentance, of Atonement and Satisfaction
made for sin, are only varied expressions of this
great law; as being declarations of the weakness and
the strength of man : — the union of strength and
weakness, constituting his real power in the events
of time — his justification in eternity.
Disputation, however, as we have seen, has not
suffered the plain method of Religion to take its
course. Speculative statements have been made;
and from these, certain consequences have been de
duced : and the Scripture has been searched to
verify these deductions. In the pursuit of these
discussions, a technical phraseology has been intro
duced : and, to systematize the whole, definitions
and explanations have been drawn from the phy
sical and moral sciences, and woven into Theology
by the subtleties of Logic.
The Reformation, by the blessing of God, has
cleared away, from a large portion of Christendom,

LECTURE V. 257
those practical mischiefs, of which the speculations
on the nature of justification were, partly the cause,
and partly the palliation. We still, however, feel
the effects of them in the discussions which abound
among Protestants, on the questions arising out of
this subject. Unscriptural practices were to be as
sailed, against men who possessed an admirable art
of polemical defence ; and by men who had sat at the
feet of the Doctors of the Schools. It is nothing
strange therefore, that the truth, so maintained,
should bear the scars of the conflict through which
it had to struggle. It is nothing strange, that the
dialectical spirit should have survived among Pro
testants, even on the very points on which Pro
testantism took its firmest stand.
It is worthy of our remark, that those Protestants
who have advanced to extremes in opposing the
errors of Rome ; both, those who have opposed
them on the ground of Superstition, — and those
who have been unreasonably jealous in the cause
of Reason, — have adopted more of the specula
tive method connected with those errors, than the
more moderate reformer. For what is all that ac
curacy and positiveness, with which some persons
state their views of Justification, but the point and
precision of theory ? What is all that profession of
Rational Religion, with which some maintain the
natural efficacy of Repentance, but a dogmatism
founded on theory ? We may learn, from these ex
tremes, that, the more indistinct our language is on
this sacred subject, — the less of theoretic principle it

258 LECTURE V.
embodies in it, — the more closely do we imbibe the
true spirit of Protestantism ; — the more faithfully do
we walk in the path of that Holy Spirit, whose
" ways are in the deep," and whose " footsteps are
" not known."

LECTURE VI.
MORAL PHILOSOPHY OF THE SCHOOLS.

SUMMARY.
No proper Moral Philosophy in the Scholastic System — Con
fusion of moral and religious truth injurious to both — Instance
in Paley's Moral Philosophy — Moral Truth at first taught on the
ground of Authority — Platonism influential in blending it with
Theology — Influence of Christian literature, the Sermons, and
legends of the Saints, Ambrose's Treatise *' On the Offices of
" Ministers," Gregory's *' Morals," Boethius' '* Consolation of
" Philosophy" — Ethical science corrupted by being studied with
a view to the power of the Clergy.
Schoolmen systematize ethical precepts drawn from practice
of the Church — The Treatise " Of the Imitation of Christ" —
Plato's theological account of the Chief Good combined with prac
tical detail of Aristotle's Ethical Theory — Scholastic moral sys
tem a development of the Divine Energy in man's internal nature
— Aristotle's notion of Happiness accordant with this view —
Scholastic gradations of moral excellence to be traced to this
fundamental idea — Hence, also, the importance attributed to
the life of contemplative devotion — The doctrine of Perfection
— Distinction of Counsels and Precepts — Outline of this double
morality seen in the Aristotelic notion of an Heroic Virtue —
Coincidence of Aristotle's theory of Good-Fortune with the
superhuman virtue of the Scholastic System — Connexion of
ethical doctrine of the Schools with notion of Original Sin —
Mortal and Venial Sins — Proper ground of this distinction —
Division of Virtue into Theological and Moral, and into Infused
and Acquired — Doctrine of Gifts.
Origin of questions in Modern Moral Philosophy to be traced
to scholastic discussions — Instance in the idea of Moral Obli
gation — Extreme opinions as to the relative importance both of
Theology and Ethics — Proper province of Ethics, inquiry into
the principles of Human Nature — Revelation only gives new
objects to those principles — Importance of regarding the Science
of Ethics as in itself independent of Religion.

S 3

Matt. XIX. 16, 17.
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master,
what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life ?
And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good ? there
is none good but one, that is, God : but if thou wilt enter
into life, keep the commandments.

Kai Ibov, ets irpoireXOav, elirev avn3* AtSaVxaXe ayaOe, tL
ayadov 7101770*0), tva r>(o> £0)771' aldvwv ; O be elnev a*ura" Tt p.e
Xiyeis ayadov ; ovbels ayados, el /X77 eh, 6 &eos. Et be 0e\et,s
elo-ekdeiv els rqv £m\v, T-qprjo-ov rhs evroXds.

Et ecce, unus accedens, ait illi ; Magister bone, quid boni
faciam, ut habeam vitam aeternam ? Qui dixit ei : Quid me
interrogas de bono ? Unus est bonus, Deus. Si autem vis
ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata. Lat. Vulg.

LECTURE VI.

1 COME now to take a more intimate view of the
Scholastic Philosophy — its mode of treating the Law
written in our hearts, and the influence which it has
exercised on the frame, and the language, of Morals,
in modern times. This is a department of the in
quiry, not only possessing the highest interest in
itself, and demanding for its own sake a much
greater attention than it has yet received, but strictly
belonging to the history of our theological language.
The intellectual and moral instincts of man were
regarded, by the School-Divines, as the materials on
which the sacred elements of divine truth were to
act; and, by this action, to assimilate them to the
Divine Nature. It was not an operation merely in
the way of instruction, of elevation of sentiment,
of purification of feeling, that was here understood ;
but an identification, if I may so say, of the divine
things, with the purer and nobler principles of our
nature. The truths of Revelation were to be steeped
into the heart. And the inquiry, therefore, into the
Philosophy of Human Life, was pursued by them,
as containing the elements and the development of
their theological system. It is, in fact, Moral Theo
logy, rather than an account of man's moral nature ;
so that, whilst real truths of morality are alleged,
the truths, as such, are overlooked : the illustration
of the given Divine Theory is all that is sought in

264 LECTURE VI.
them. It is the Life of God in the soul of man,
that is presented to our notice.
The close connexion of Theological and Moral
Truth, has been of serious injury to both depart
ments of human knowledge. The assertion may
seem strange ; but, when it is fully considered, it
will, I think, appear; that Theology and Ethics are
entirely distinct in their nature, — in the principles, I
mean, on which they are based ; and that, therefore,
to mix up principles of the one with principles of
the other, must tend only to confusion of thought
and speculative error on each subject. That they
are closely connected in their results and applica
tions, must be fully admitted. But this connexion
is only like that of Mathematics with Physics, or
Anatomy with Medicine : both, that is, must be
taken into account, in the practical application of
one or the other. In speculation however, and in
their theories, they are perfectly distinct.
I. In Theology, human nature is regarded under
a single point of view, that of its relation to the
Author of its existence. The office of Theology is
to solve such questions as these ; which cannot but
occur to every thoughtful man, as he contemplates
himself amidst the vast scenes of the universe :
Whence am I ? What is my nature and condition
here ? What my connexion with the past and
with the future ? Why am I sensible of so much
pain or of so much pleasure? What is the great'

LECTURE VI. 265
end of all these various connexions and relations
of events, so entangled and perplexed with each
other, and yet, amidst all this apparent disorder, so
instinctive with design, and order, and uniformity ?
Theology, accordingly, takes man under its survey
as a whole. It is not as an intellectual being, or as
a moral being, simply, that it regards him, but as a
compound of natures ; the compound being that he
really is, in his animal life, as well as in his life of
thought and action : and so proceeds to inform and
guide him in those high truths, of which this com
plex system demands the resolution. It acquaints
him, that he is the creature of a benevolent and
wise God, — that he is living under divine govern
ment, — that he is in a state of discipline, — that his
natural weakness has been provided for by divine
intercession, — that all things are working together
for good ; giving him supernaturally so much of the
history of God's special providences, as may be ne
cessary to pierce through the gloom of the present
world, and lift up his eyes to the sanctuary, from
which alone help can come down to him.
II. Moral Philosophy, on the other hand, surveys
human nature in its moral and intellectual consti
tuents, as they are related and combined principles
of action. Every action that we see outwardly, —
every judgment that we exercise within ourselves, —
every feeling, as we indulge or control it, — presents
a moral phenomenon demanding explanation. The
questions that arise here, are : Is there any common

266 LECTURE VI.
principle, which may give us the Law of these vari
ous facts ? What is that principle ? Is it instinc
tive, or factitious ? or is it, in the result, an intel
lectual perception, or a sentiment of the heart, or
both united ? These, and other such questions, are
what properly engage the moral philosopher. But
here, it must be seen, we are concerned only with a
particular class of facts, and that a very different
one from the theological. The inquiry is bounded
by a far narrower horizon. The relation of parts,
in the internal structure of our moral nature, is
what now occupies the attention. It is the little
world within us that we are examining: and we are
endeavouring to ascertain the springs which set it
in motion, and the end to which all combine. The
extent of Moral Philosophy, indeed, embraces the
views of man's social and religious nature ; and, in
these respects, it seems a science of greater compre
hension, than according to the limits which I have
stated. But these views belong to the same funda
mental principle, the science of man in his internal
nature : since the social and religious instincts are
as much parts of that nature, as those which more
immediately respect the individual.
It is clear, that, if principles of one kind of know
ledge be applied to the facts of another, only con
fusion and error must result. The application is
purely hypothetical, though the principles themselves
may be perfectly true. This is readily acknowledged
in the case of mere sciences. Every one now sees,

LECTURE VI. 267
that mathematical theories can be of no avail, to in
terpret the nature of physical facts. But it was not
so obvious to the ancient philosopher, who constructed
his system of the universe on mathematical or logical
data, nor to the physiologists who united medicine
with geometry. Nor does it now appear inconsistent
to many, to blend together principles of Theology
and Morals. The close connexion of these, in their
application, is the fallacy that misleads such persons.
But a combination of results is, evidently, a very
different thing from coincidence in principles. An
example may illustrate this. Paley has endeavoured
to combine the separate principles of Ethics and
Theology, in his Moral Philosophy. He was not
satisfied with that kind of certainty, which moral
truths appeared to possess. Probably, as a mathe
matician, he exacted, for his own satisfaction, some
firm principle, from which the rules of morality
might be deduced with logical precision. Sound
philosopher as he was practically, he still aimed at
a theoretic demonstrativeness in ethical science, of
which all sciences conversant about facts must, by
their very nature, be incapable. What, then, has
been the consequence of this attempt to establish
morality on an immovable basis? Instead of es
tablishing morality, it has, in reality, weakened the
theory of moral truth. The whole of morality, ac
cording to his view, resolves itself ultimately into
Religion. The theological principle, on which he
bases his system, — the duty of conformity to the Will
of God, — is perfectly just and true in itself. But, in

268 LECTURE VI.
making that principle a ground of morality, he has
destroyed the independent character, and, with this,
the philosophical truth, of Ethics, as a science of
human nature. The broadness of the principle
tramples upon the little world of principles, which
lie within man himself. It has been often argued ;
that, if the theory of Paley were acted on simply,
evil might be done with a view to a good result :
there is, in fact, no such thing as evil in itself, as
there is nothing good in itself, where the tendency
of actions is the criterion of their worth. The only
error which can be committed then, is a speculative
one, — that of not having generalized sufficiently, so
as to see, that the conduct pursued, is not, in fact, the
Will of God ; as not being conformable with the
general law of the Divine procedure. It must be a
return to the consideration, whether evil is not
something resting on its own grounds, independently
of the mere tendency of actions, that can check the
agent, in following up the theological principle by
immoral, practical consequences. Paley himself has
ingeniously argued against this construction ; and
successfully; so far as to shew, that the immoral con
sequences do not logically follow from his theory.
It must be admitted, that no action, conformable to
the Will of God, can, as such, in any case be pro
ductive of Evil. If we assume conformity to the
Will of God, as a definition of right, nothing evil
can be inferred from it. But the logical consist
ency is not the point in question. The test of the
theory is, its adaptation to human nature. And its

LECTURE VI. 269
erroneousness is sufficiently shewn, by its tendency
to mislead even the wish to do good. It is the mis
take of acting upon an anticipated result, out of our
own power ; when the very attainment of that result
is, a consequence of having acted previously accord
ing to the laws of our nature. Religion, in truth,
begins where morality ends. Let each action be
done as it is morally right. We are encouraged
then to proceed, for we are sure that it has the
sanction of God. Whatever may be the immediate
effect of it, we know that God will ultimately re
ward it. Whatever may be its intrinsic imper
fection, we rely on his mercy in Christ, and the
grace of his Spirit, to give it a worth not its own,
and consecrate it to the doing of his Will.
The source of that confusion of Theology and
Morals, which I have noticed, is to be traced back
to the origin itself of Moral Truth : first of all, in
its being handed down in the forms of maxims and
proverbs, the traditional wisdom of other days.
Moral truths thus rested, in the first instance, on
Authority; being propagated from age to age, as
venerable precepts of immemorial usage, or as the
sacred sayings of some reputed sage. This mode
of their reception imparted to them more of a re
ligious, than of a philosophical, character. They
would carry with them something of that awe,
which the mystery of their origin, and the names
of ancient sages, could not but awaken in the mind.
Particularly, when moral truths were conveyed,

270 LECTURE VI.
amidst the political regulations, and the rewards
and punishments, of civil enactments, — as they are
found in the Pentateuch, and in the extant Polities
of early legislators or philosophers, — men would be
induced to regard morality as a matter of ordinance ;
as what exacted their obedience ; rather than as the
internal discipline of their affections.
In the next place it should be observed, that, so
far as morality was reduced to any system in the
ancient philosophy, it was not exempt from that in
discriminate endeavour at scientific exactness, which
corrupted the other branches of philosophy. Until
the time of Aristotle, indeed, it appears to have been
strictly included among the number of demonstrative
sciences. For even Socrates, with all his practical
excellence as a moralist, still considered Ethics as
on a footing with arts and sciences — as what re
quired only to be known, in order to be fully pos
sessed — and as what might be acquired by mere
instruction. Aristotle, with a much more sagacious
sense, exposed the fallacy of this prevalent idea,
and set the example of a truly practical system of
Ethics. But his system did not become the popular
philosophy of Greece. His writings being long lost
to the world soon after his death, the more es
tablished system of Plato maintained its ground on
this, as on other points of philosophy. This system,
which was chiefly an expansion and adjustment of
the Pythagorean speculations, perpetuated that mys
tical form in which the great Master had delighted

LECTURE VI. 271
to invest his theories. According to the Platonic
doctrine, morality was based on immutable specula
tive principles, the abstract species, the real con
stituents, according to his view, of every thing de
nominated good. This was to take morality out of
the sphere of man's moral nature, and place it in a
kind of philosophical pietism. He rejected, accord
ingly, the notion, that man was the " measure" of
moral excellence, and admitted no standard of human
perfection below that of the Deity Himself. His
religion and his morality, following the Pythagorean
train of thought with little variation, coincided in
the maxim, that the business of man was the Imi
tation of God. Thus was the confusion of ethical
and theological truth begun in that method of phi
losophy, which first obtained the sanction of the
Christian Church. The principle of the Imitation
of God, so elevating in its conception, and so ac
cordant with the language of Scripture, being found
in the volumes of philosophy, — a precedent was es
tablished, for conjoining the two classes of truth in
one promiscuous speculation.
It is thus that Augustine speaks of Plato's sys
tem of morals, as the only one compatible with
Christianity. Having alluded to the different opin
ions concerning good, which made man himself, more
or less, the seat of good : " let all these," he says,
" yield to those Philosophers, who have said not
" that man was happy, in enjoying the body, or in
" enjoying the mind, but in enjoying God a"  who
J August. De Civ. Dei, lib. VIII. c. 8.

272 LECTURE VI.
have " determined, that the end of good is, to live
" according to virtue ; and that this result could be
" to him only, who had the knowledge and imitation
"of God b."
The same tone of thought runs through the Greek
Fathers. The noble and seductive language of Plato,
respecting the Chief Good, was too strong a tempta
tion to be resisted by the ingenuity of the philoso
phical Christian, accustomed to the theoretic spirit
of the ancient masters, and anxious for some fixed,
eternal ground, on which moral truth might be
rested. The metaphysical abstraction of Plato was
thus, with the universal assent of the Schools, em
bodied in the Christian truth of the living God ; at
once the object of devout contemplation, and the
immutable principle of Ethical Inquiry.
The state of literature in the Western Church,
after the period of Augustine, to the close of the
VIHth century, was such as to confirm the con
nexion already established between Theology and
Ethics. The compositions of this time were all of
a theological cast. Sermons, and legends of Saints,
constituted the mental employment of those, who
were the oracles of knowledge to the Christian
world. And the Sermons of this period, it should
be remarked, were not of a controversial character,
directed to the establishment of points of doctrine,
but chiefly moral reasonings and exhortations. If
b August. De Civ. Dei, lib. VIII. c. 9.

LECTURE VI. 273
we look, for instance, into those of Cesarius c, the
most eminent of the Bishops of Southern Gaul
during the first half of the VI th century, — and which
are a highly favourable specimen of the literature
of that day, — we find them consisting of argu
mentative expostulation on the conduct of Chris
tians. The legends of the Saints, the romance of
religion, as we may term them, are also practical
appeals to the Christian world, — endeavours to in
terest either the imagination, or the feelings, in the
energetic pursuit of religious action. Throughout
all this period, accordingly, the intermixture of
theology and ethics was proceeding. From the
adoption, by the Clergy, of the language of ethical
exhortation, in the service of religion, the truth,
which cultivates the sentiments and rectifies the con
duct, was confounded with that which regenerates
and quickens the soul. The same cause, which, in
the first dawnings of ethical science, had acted in
obscuring its philosophical character — its reception
in an authoritative form — also acted powerfully
within the Church. Moral truth was received from
the lips of the venerated ministers of the divine
word, and imbibed rather, as the precious dews of
heaven falling on the passive soil, than as the heart of
one man pouring itself out on the heart of another.
The Latins, indeed, were not altogether without
some elementary ethical treatises in their own lan-
<• Cesarius, Bishop of Aries from A. D. 501 to 542; born
in 470. His Sermons are printed in an appendix to the Sermons
of Augustine, in torn. V. Oper. ed. fol. 1683.
T

274 LECTURE VI.
guage. The " Offices" of Cicero appear to have
been familiarly known to them. But they were not
satisfied to derive precepts of morality from a heathen
source. They seem to have been fearful of detract
ing from the intrinsic authority of Scripture morals,
if they conceded any originality of thought to heathen
precepts of duty. Where they acknowledged the
correctness of such precepts, they insinuate, at the
same time, that it was a wisdom borrowed from the
Christian Revelation. Ambrose, accordingly, com
posed a treatise, in three books, after the plan of
Cicero's Offices, on the " Offices of Ministers ;" sub
stituting the hopes and sanctions of the Gospel for
the worldly principles of the Roman philosopher,
and the examples of Jewish and Christian devotion
for those of Greek or Roman virtue. The work,
as is indicated by its title, was designed exclusively
for the Clergy d. But the treatise which obtained the
greatest popularity, if we may judge from its fre
quent quotation in the Scholastic writings, was
" The Morals" of Gregory the Great. Gregory was
a fierce opponent of secular learning ; and, like Am
brose, was only desirous of supplying the studious
Clergy with a manual of ethical instruction, which
should supersede the reading of a work of heathen
literature. This was no proper attempt, therefore, to
d Augustine characterizes this work thus, in writing to Je
rome: — nisi forte nomen te movet, quia non tarn usitatum est
in ecclesiasticis libris vocabulum Officii, quod Ambrosius noster
non timuit, qui suos quosdam libros utilium preeceptionum ple-
nos, de Officiis voluit appellare. Epist. XIX. Oper. Tom. II.
p. 24. ed. 4to.

LECTURE VI. 275
establish a Science of Morals. It was only a trans
fusion of theological doctrine into the technical
phraseology of the Ancient Ethics : in itself utterly
barren of all sound instruction as to the foundation
and nature of human duties. Consequently, it only
promoted the confusion, already begun, and sanc
tioned by the practice of the Church, between moral
and religious truth ; as embodying that confusion in
a text-book, and consecrating it by the authority of
a high ecclesiastical name.
Nor ought the mention to be omitted in this
place of the well-known treatise of Boethius, on
the " Consolation of Philosophy." It may be de
scribed as a manual of philosophic devotion ; the
effusion of the piety of an elegant mind, grateful for
those literary delights, which had soothed its anxie
ties, and strengthened its resignation. It is import
ant in the history of the ethics of the Schools ; as it
is a work, which attracted the study of the scholastic
theologians, serving as the basis of elaborate com
mentaries: and it tended, accordingly, to promote and
establish that contemplative religious character, with
which the moral philosophy of the Schools was tinc
tured at its outset.
But what contributed, perhaps, more than any
thing to this confusion of Theology and Ethics,
was, the spiritual power, which the Latin Church
had been acquiring, more and more, throughout this
period, over the consciences of men. The Church
became the dupe of its own ambitious pretension.
The laity were brought into captivity to the impe-
T 2

276 LECTURE VI.
rious sense of their spiritual leaders; from whom, not
only the theories of the faith were to be sought ; but
also the practical doubts, the heresies of conscience,
were to obtain their answer. The exigencies of such
a complex and subtile government demanded its own
peculiar code of spiritual legislation. A system of
moral rules was required, which should be in strict
accordance with the theocratic principle, in which
the power of the Clergy consisted. They must be
such, whose lines should continually terminate in
some religious object, and mingle the passiveness of
the votary with the active obedience of the subject.
They must be enforced by rewards and punishments,
to sustain the idea of subjection to the spiritual
guide ; and these rewards and punishments must be
such, as the spiritual arm alone could administer.
But the rules and sanctions of conscience, when thus
applied, would evidently lose their nature, as simple
laws of morality. Whatever validity they pos
sessed, would result from the principle of spiritual
subjection ; from the notion, that they were pre
scribed by a Power which held the soul in its grasp.
And the assumption of this power, by the Clergy,
made them, as I have said, the dupes of their own
pretension. As they mistook subtilty of speculative
distinctions for theology, so they also mistook casu
istry for moral philosophy, and the indulgences and
penances of spiritual discipline for Religion.
The monastic institutions, in themselves an effect
of the confusion of theology and morality, tended,
in their turn, to foster that confusion. The mix-

LECTURE VI. 277
ture of ritual and moral precept in these institu
tions, and the blending of the whole under the name
of Religion ; — so that those who lived under these
systems, obtained the exclusive appellation of the
Religious; — must have forcibly cemented the two
ideas of virtue and holiness, as representations of
one and the same principle. The devoutness, the
submissiveness, the self-annihilation of the holy re
cluse, commanded the attention of the world; and
naturally became, in the popular estimate, equiva
lents for the self-examining conscience and internal
convictions of right.
The fact, indeed, is, that the right of private
judgment, in morality, was as effectually excluded
by the spiritual power of the Church, as it was in
articles of faith. Both the rule of conduct, and the
rule of belief, were to be received implicitly. The
questioning of the heart, and of the intellect, were
equally superseded. The whole came to this, that
Christian perfection was reduced to the surrender of
the will; so that nothing enjoined by the command of
a religious superior, was either wrong or impossible6.
The labours of the Schoolmen, in Morals, gave a
speculative harmony and perfection to the system
which had grown out of the practice of the Church.
In constituting an exact science of Theology, it was
their part to collect the fragments of ethical juris
diction, which lay scattered in the sermons, and le-
e Note A. Lect. VI.
T 3

278 LECTURE VI.
gends, and institutions, and discipline of the Church;
and to mould them, in accordance with the language
of Scripture, and the theories of their theology.
Professed works of ethics were composed by some
of them : and commenting on the Ethics of Aristotle
became part of the labours of the Schools. But,
though this exercise of powerful minds on moral
truth, could not but elicit some scattered lights on
the subject, ethical science may still be regarded as
having slumbered through the darkness of the middle
age. The proper character of it, indeed, is seen in
the devotional work which appeared in the XVth
century, the celebrated treatise by Thomas a Kem-
pis, of the " Imitation of Christ." This work was
a vigorous effort of that moral study which had
been cultivated in the Church, to extricate itself
from the fetters of a systematic theology ; a disen
gagement, as it were, of the spirit of the theological
morality, from the forms in which it had been em
bodied. Its great popularity marks, both the bent
which previous ethical systems had given to the
general taste, and the intrinsic defects of them. It
was the ethics of religion that men wanted : and, at
the same time, they wanted the pure substance with
out the technical alloy, with which it had been con
founded. To proceed, however, in giving an account of the
peculiar character imparted to ethics by the method
of the Schools, — I would observe, in the first place,
that here also, as in the purely speculative part of their

LECTURE VI. 279
system, they united the precision and detail of Ari
stotle's ethical system, with the fundamental doctrines
of Plato. They have taken, that is, as their great
principle, Plato's theological account of the Chief
Good. It is established as their point of outset, that,
as the inquiry is into the end of all human actions,
the mind must first lay hold of that principle itself,
— that great end, or Chief Good. On the participation
of this, must depend the goodness of all particular
actions. And a collection of moral rules, accordingly,
directed to the good or happiness of man, would be
deducible as consequences from this their general
idea or constituent nature.
But, to the Christian moralist, this Chief Good
could be no other than God Himself, as revealed in
the Scriptures. Indeed, the Scriptures themselves
suggested, in some passages, a view of God in accord
ance with this notion ; as where the Psalmist says :
" whom have I in heaven but thee ? and there is
" none upon earth that I desire beside thee ;" and
in the passage which I have already read : " there
" is none good but one, that is, God."
Whilst, then, the notion of God, as the Chief Good,
had been originally received into the Church, inde
pendently of Aristotle's Philosophy, the peculiar
modification of that notion by the Schoolmen was
obtained from the physical theory of Aristotle, which
I had occasion to describe in a former Lecture. I
pointed out, that, according to Aristotle, it was the
pure principle of Excellence and Beauty that gave
T 4

280 LECTURE VI.
its perfection to each existing thing : at once the
motive principle, and final cause, of all the activity
of Nature ; and therefore characterized by him, as
Energy, intrinsic Activity, or, in the Scholastic
translation of the expression, " Pure Act."
The theories of Divine and Human Agency, as I
have endeavoured to shew, were applications of this
Principle of Energy to the Divine dealings mani
fested in the salvation of man. It remained yet to
develop its workings in the internal mechanism of
man's moral nature ; to illustrate here also, that
God was all in all ; realizing, by His vital operation,
the harmony and perfection of the various powers
of the soul.
How readily the Ethical System of Aristotle fell
into this theoretic mould, will appear, if due con
sideration be given to the language, in which Ari
stotle himself has expressed his notion of Human
Happiness. His description of it, as Energy, is
evidently not an accidental one, but in strict unison
with his physical doctrine. He has in view the
idea of the soul's exerting itself by natural efforts,
in order to the full development of its powers, and
attainment of the End of its Being ; when it should
have infinitely approximated to, and identified itself,
as it were, with, that divinity with which it is instinct.
Such, indeed, is his account of Pleasure ; which he
considers as the indistinct, unconscious pursuit of a
divine principle, with which all things are, more or
less, instinctively animated. His theory of Happi-

LECTURE VI. 281
ness sought only how to conspire with, and aid, these
natural tendencies existing in the human soul ; so
that in each instance of action, in every perception
and thought, this pleasure might be attained ; and
nature thus wrought to its utmost perfection.
Transfer this doctrine of the Philosopher to the
Christian Schools, and you have the notion incul
cated in the Ethics of the middle age, of the funda
mental principle of morality. God is conceived to
be the moving cause of all that effort, which the soul
puts forth in reaching after happiness. It is the
operation of Divine Goodness, which sets in motion,
and carries forward, and invigorates the soul, in
order to its perfection of being.
The coincidence of the ideas of Virtue and Powerf,
in their Ethical System, is an illustration of this
notion. For, according to such a philosophy of
Human Actions, Virtue would be that state of the
soul in which all its faculties were fully exerted :
in which there was, not only a tendency towards the
Chief Good, but a vigorous and invariable cooper
ation with the Divine Energy — a command, or
power, established by the higher principles of our
nature, over the inferior animal propensities.
From this complex notion of the Chief Good, both
as the Deity Himself, and as essentially Energy, or
Operation, we may trace those gradations of moral
f The word divapis is frequently translated by Virtus. The
Divine Attribute of " Power," is expressed both by Virtus and
Potentia. Our familiar use of the word " virtually," is an illus
tration of the same point.

282 LECTURE VI.
excellence which the ethical discipline of the Latin
Church has established.
First, we may remark, Happiness was placed out
of the confines of this present world. It could only
be sought by abstraction, by self-denial, and a pro
cess of devotedness to the One Supreme Good. The
body was an incumbrance to the soul, impeding
its motions towards the Principle of Life and Joy,
and obscuring its perceptions of its real happiness.
Self-denial would, on such a view of the case, con
sist in the mortification of the body; not in the
command of the passions, amidst the various occu
pations of life, but in renouncing those occupations
altogether — not in disclaiming our own righteous
ness — not in living to men as to God — but in living,
as out of the world, and to God alone. This is
clearly the effect of holding forth the Deity as the
real object of attainment ; to be reached by efforts
of ardent exertion, and by expansion of the powers
of the soul beyond their present limits. The
soul becomes virtually its own divinity, when the
Deity, towards whom its desires are thus strained, is
regarded, in this physical sense, as the great end of
its pursuit. Hence the distorted and discoloured
view, which human life exhibits by the light of such
a theory. The blessings which God has scattered
around us, to cheer us on our way, and the active
occupations, with which He would have us con
tribute to the mutual benefit of each other, lie in
deep shadow, as regions which the sun of heaven
never visits.
Under such a theory, we need not wonder at the

LECTURE VI.
rise of mysticism, or any of the extravagancies of
fantastic piety. So long as the attainment of God
is proposed as a process of spiritualization, it is
perfectly natural, that, in minds of an enthusiastic
or melancholy temperament, a violent effort should
be made to realize at once, or approach as nearly
as possible, the ultimate end of the aspirant soul.
The Love of God becomes the sole exclusive prin
ciple of action, not as it is the bond of peace and of
all virtues, but as it is in itself the most intense
expression of the soul's effort — the condensation of
all the affections and desires into one divine ardour.
The frenzied self-devotion of those saints of the
East, who passed their lives on pillars or in caverns,
and the Quietism s of Fenelon, were only various
instances of the same principle carried to its full
extent, under different modifications of personal cha
racter and circumstances.
Again, we may observe the influence of Aristotle's
notion of "Energy" in the speculations by which
the Latin Clergy established the superiority of that
mode of Life to which they were themselves de
voted, and in the estimation of which, among the
members of the Church, their spiritual influence
s The rjpepla of the intellect, according to Plato and Aristotle.
— So Duns Scotus, Sent. III. dist. xxviii. fol. 56. Licet ergo so
lum infinitum bonum quietet voluntatem ; et hoc in quantum
infinitum bonum : non tamen oportet quodlibet bonum finitum,
secundum gradum suum in bonitate, magis et minus quietare :
quia isti gradus sunt accidentales per comparationem ad ex-
trinsecum quietandum.

284 LECTURE VI.
depended. If Happiness was Energy, — the more in
tensely, and the more purely, the soul might be ex
erted, — the fuller, and the purer, would be the hap
piness attained ; the more nearly would the soul be
brought to the fruition of God. But no other state
of life presented such opportunities ; in no other
employment was the action so uninterrupted, as in
that of the speculative theologian. We find, in
fact, the very same arguments employed by them,
in asserting the godlike preeminence of the thought
ful solitary above the rest of mankind, which are
alleged by Aristotle in favour of the Theoretic Life
over the Practical1-. The Philosopher, having proved
that happiness was, by its nature, " Energy," was
obliged to explain this idea, consistently with the
acknowledged superiority of the intellectual nature
of man. He insists, accordingly, that the occupa
tions of the mind were no less really practical, than
the business of active life ; that the philosopher was
as completely energetic in his pursuits, as the man
who took a more personal part in the concerns
of social life. So that, perfect happiness, according
to Aristotle, consisted at once in leisure and in ac
tivity — in that state of life, consequently, which com
prized both ; where no worldly avocations should
interfere, no pressing calls of personal, or social, de
mands on the time and thoughts, should disturb the
busy tranquillity of the intellect1. This was pre-
h Aquin. S. Theol. Prima Ildae, qu. clxxix. clxxx. clxxxi. —
Note B.
' Aristot. Ethic. X. Polit. VII. 3. Mag. Mor. I. 35.

LECTURE VI. 285
cisely such a defence, as would serve the cause of
the scholastic theologian. He must command the
admiration and respect of mankind, as leading a
life to which few could attain ; as having approxi
mated, during his earthly career, to the sublime
purity, of which the full attainment was necessarily
reserved for a higher state of being; when the body
should no longer cloy and weigh down the soul.
He required to be regarded by mankind in that
point of view, in which his participation of a com
mon corrupt nature should least appear, — in which
the divine principle of pure and ceaseless energy
should be evidently predominant k.
Hence was established the doctrine of Perfection.
The Christian, who, by cooperating with the in
fused principle of grace, should cultivate the divine
principle within him, would regularly advance to
ward that End or Chief Good — the Deity — which
was the consummation of his being. The religious
devotee, intent only on the immovable End of all
human exertions, and not disquieting or interrupt
ing his own progress by vain pursuit of the mutable
goods of life, would reach the ultimate object, his
perfection, by the most compendious process. The
more he lived in theory, the more would the theory
of human perfection be realized in him. For here
also Aristotle's philosophy of nature served the
purpose of their speculation. In assigning the
different classes of Being throughout the universe,
k See Hooker, Eccl. Pol. B. I. s. ii. p. 256 — 261. 8vo.

286 LECTURE VI.
their degrees of approximation towards the uni
versal End which actuated their motions, he ar
gues, that those are the highest and most ex
cellent natures, which attain the ultimate End by
the least effort ; tending immediately, without any
disturbance or variety of movement, towards the
Divine Principle. What the heathen Philosopher
applied to the visible luminaries of the heavens,
was transferred by the Christian speculatist to the
invisible hierarchy of the angelic host, and from
them, in succession of order, to the saints of God
on earth. Angels and holy men accomplished, by
direct and immediate methods of operation, the at
tainment of the Sovereign Good ; which others
reached only by circuitous and interrupted ways,
and by a multitude of repeated endeavours.
To support this theory of Perfection, many of
our Lord's expressions were adduced : such as ; " if
" thou wilt be perfect, go, and sell all that thou
" hast, and give to the poor ; — be ye perfect, as your
" Father in heaven is perfect; — I have many things
" to tell you, but ye cannot bear them now" — that
is, as it was interpreted, " not in your present im-
" perfect state." His declaration also concerning
some, who had " made themselves eunuchs for the
" kingdom of God's sake," was cited to the same
purport. As evidences again of the same point,
those texts were adduced which speak of the per
fection of Charity, or the Love of God. Charity,
according to this theory, is that which at once unites
the soul to God ; bringing the individual, in whom
it dwells, into direct contact with the End of his

LECTURE VI. 287
pursuit. St. Paul, therefore, might be conceived to
have justly pronounced, that charity was greater
than faith and hope : and St. John to have expressed
the same truth, when he says ; " that perfect love
" casteth out fear ;" — and whosoever abideth in love,
" abideth in God, and God in him."
Two different tracks of Life were thus pointed
out to the pursuit of men by the Moral Theology
of the Schools ; — the direct and immediate, but strait
path of spiritual abstractedness ; and the indirect
and vulgar road through the impediments of worldly
occupations : — the one adapted for those higher na
tures, for whom the restraints of law were not de
vised, — in whom the divine principle predominated,
— in whose hearts the thrones of spiritual power
were erected : the other, the walk of inferior souls,
blest indeed with divine influence, but still engaged
in the commerce of the world, and needing the
further aid of admonition and direction from their
spiritual superiors. Each mode of life, consequently,
had its correspondent Rule. The perfect life was
that which conformed to the loftier principle of the
Divine Counsels; whilst the imperfect, that of the
mere proficient — of him who was content to tread
the humbler path of duties of indispensable neces
sity — was ordered by the Divine Precepts K The
former would be a system of conduct, derived from
1 Aquinas Summa Theolog. Prima Ildae, qu. c. art. 2. Et ideo
manifestum est, quod lex divina convenienter proponit praj-
cepta de actibus omnium . virtutum : ita tamen quod quae-
dam, sine quibus ordo virtutis (qui est ordo rationis) observari

LECTURE VI.
that state of intimate communion with God, in which
the divine life of the soul consisted ; — rules drawn
from the relation of Friendship ; — the fulfilment of
duties not obligatory in themselves : whereas the
latter — the life of Precepts — would be a system of
conduct accordant with that state of remoteness
from the Divine End, in which the less holy stood ;
and a law derived, accordingly, from the strict re
quisitions of Justice.
Do we not recognize here the double morality of
heathen philosophy, — the strict right, — the wise
man of the Stoics, — in the perfect Christian ; the
proprieties, or offices, as they were called, in the
imperfect services of the ordinary Christian, who,
whilst mixing in the concerns of the world, yet pur
sues right to a certain extent, according to his capa
city of attainment m
The outline, however, of this artificial and enthu
siastic distinction may be traced in the ethical sys
tem of Aristotle himself. Aristotle has clearly
placed the perfection of man's nature out of the
non potest, cadunt sub obligatione praecepti : quaedam vero,
quae pertinent ad bene esse virtutis perfectae, cadunt sub ad-
monitione consilii.
m Thus Ambrose, in his Treatise of Offices, expressly says :
Hoc etenim Karopdapa, quod perfectum et absolutum officium
est, a vero virtutis fonte proficiscitur. Cui secundum est com
mune officium, quod ipso sermone significatur non esse arduae
virtutis ac singularis, quod potest pluribus esse commune ....
Alia igitur prima, alia media officia. Prima cum paucis, media
cum pluribus .... Duplex enim forma perfectionis : alia me-
dios, alia plenos numeros habens : alia hie, alia ibi : alia se
cundum hominis possibilitatem, aha secundum perfectionem
futuri. De Offic. Ministr. lib. III. c. ii. p. no.

LECTURE VI. 289
sphere of the strictly moral duties. He has spoken.
of a Virtue beyond the natural capacity of man ;
and which he designates an heroic or divine Virtue,
as contrasted with the Vice, that degrades man be
low the standard of Human Vice ". In asserting
also the preeminence of the purely intellectual life,
in the scale of moral excellence and happiness, he
reduces the moral virtues to a degree of worth,
which may very naturally have promoted the scho
lastic theory of a twofold Virtue. The virtues,
simply ethical, he describes, as necessary to the in
tellectually happy man, that he may do his part as
man ° — may live as a man amongst men. Reflected
in the Christian mirror, this picture, from the hand
of the philosopher, represents the ascetic pietist, de
scending from the lofty region of devotional con
templation, to the ordinary duties of the weaker and
less spiritual brother.
There is a curious passage, indeed, in one of his
ethical works, in which Aristotle expresses himself
still more strongly on that kind of excellence, which
is attained, not by dint of human exertion, or by the
regular use of the faculties, but is the result of an
immediate Divine impulse p. In his system, this
Divine impulse is, simply the instinctive force
>» This is illustrated by the fact, that the first step, in a pro
cess of Canonization, is a sentence from the Pope, declaring that
the candidate for saintship had practised Christian virtue in
gradu heroico.
« AerjO-erai ovv rav toioutwv npos ro dvBpwreveadai. Ethic. X. C. 8.
p Note B. U

290 LECTURE VI.
of Nature, operating in such cases not by the or
dinary course : and he refers to it, as an account
of what is called good-fortune, or success dispro-
portioned to the apparent means employed. This
description became, in the scholastic system, the
triumphant career of the holy man under the in
fluence of Divine Grace, realizing a perfection of
conduct, that transcends the power of human prin
ciples. Connecting, again, this notion of superhuman virtue
with that of the principle of Corruption, the Original
Sin of man's nature, we see the peculiar complexion
of the Virtue, to which the Schoolmen gave the
highest place in the rewards of heaven. It was the
Virtue of Conquest, — that by which the fuel (fomes)
of Concupiscence — the lust of the flesh — was sub
dued and quenched. For this was the earthly prin
ciple, — that which turned away the soul from God ;
the direct contrary, therefore, to the principle of
Grace, by which the soul is turned to God. If
one was the greatest virtue, the other would there
fore be the greatest vice. Hence, the rigid rule of
a life of celibacy was established, as the perfection of
morality. And hence, chiefly, that inveterate pre
judice, by which we are disposed even now, to iden
tify moral purity with the converse of sensuality;
overlooking other principles of our nature, no less
difficult and no less necessary to be controlled, in
order to right conduct and happiness.
The distinction of Sins into Venial and Mortal,

LECTURE VI. 291
is deduced from the same notion of the Chief Good.
Since the whole excellence of the Christian life con
sisted in its direction towards God, as the ultimate
object of all its aims ; whatever tended to withdraw
the soul from this direction, tended towards the
death of the soul; or, in the language of the Schools,
was a mortal sin. Whatever, therefore, touched the
fundamentals of belief, or any express disobedience
to the commands of God, was, as they described it,
an " inordinateness" of the affections; it rendered the
desires " inordinate" — put them out of that course,
in which they were rightly ordered towards God.
Sins of unbelief, of heresy, contumacy in error, im
penitence, rejection of the spiritual authority of the
Church, were therefore mortal sins. Venial Sins,
on the contrary, were such as were committed in
the inferior path of Christian discipline ; such as
occurred by the force of temptations, acting on the
concupiscible part of our nature. The heart might
be right towards God, and therefore guiltless of
offences destructive to the soul in themselves. Yet,
so far as these offences turned the soul towards the
changeable goods of the world, they were sins in
jurious to the Christian progress and aim. They
came into the class of Venial, on the ground, that
here the religious principle was not deficient ; and
the circumstances, accordingly, under which they
were committed, might be taken into consideration
as excuses. These were the sins of frailty and in
firmity, occasioned by the conflict between the evil
desires remaining from Original Sin, and the Divine
v 2

292 LECTURE VI.
principle infused into the soul by Grace. In the
development of this part of their ethical system, the
observations of Aristotle on the force of the desires
in counteracting the reason, and on the voluntary
nature of actions, were their chief guide and autho
rity. The degrees of extenuation, or indulgence, to
different offences in the Venial class, are ascer
tained by the principles of his philosophy.
The whole consideration of this subject may
be regarded indeed, as the popular ethics of the
Schools ; as a system of condescension to the weak
nesses of the subject-disciple; by which, at the same
time, the power over his conscience was artfully
maintained. The rule, in itself, is a just and sound
one, when confined to its proper exercise. Its sphere
is, in the intercourse of thought between man and
man ; to regulate the judgments which each passes
on the conduct of another. Indulgence becomes, on
this ground, the strict law of right. A sense of our
own infirmity, a consideration of the condition of
man in the world, of our imperfect knowledge of
the heart, a genuine fellow-feeling, are the great
principles which here must guide our moral de
cisions. And the several decisions of the heart,
framed on these principles, constitute a tacit code
of Venial offences, known by the name of Candour,
or Equity, or Kindness, or Good-will. The Scho
lastic philosophy converted this law, with great ad
dress, to the service of the ecclesiastical power.
To the same principle may be traced the divisions

LECTURE VI.
of Virtue, into Theological and Moral, and into In
fused and Acquired. The theological virtues are
Faith, Hope, and Charity ; each of which has God
Himself for its object ; Faith, it is stated, having
respect to the Divine Truth, Charity to the Divine
Goodness, Hope to the greatness of the Divine Om
nipotence and Kindness. The Moral Virtues are
those, by which the nature of man is regulated with
respect to human things. These are comprehensively
denoted by the Schoolmen, under the name of The
Four Cardinal Virtues ; agreeably to the arrange
ment in the Morals of Gregory, and which seems
indeed the most ancient division of Virtue ; — Pru
dence, Justice, Fortitude, Temperance i. These, to
gether with the theological virtues, making up the
mystical number of seven, (which their method de
lighted in tracing out in different objects,) com
prized all the various duties belonging to man, as
he respects " God, his neighbour, or himself." We
readily see the connexion of the Theological virtues,
with the perfection of the Speculative Life. Such
a system left scarcely any place for the simply Moral
virtues ; so far as these were employed in the lower
sphere of merely human duties. These virtues, how
ever, were consecrated to the divine service, by the
distinction between Infused and Acquired Virtue.
Acquired Virtue was the simple result of our na
tural instincts, cultivated by exercise and matured
<1 Schoolmen refer to Wisdom viii. 7. If a man love right
eousness, her labours are virtues : for she teacheth temperance
and prudence, justice and fortitude.
U 3

294 LECTURE VI.
into habits. But Infused Virtue was, the same
moral qualities perfected in us by Divine influence :
the theological virtues, in themselves, the gifts of
God, being the principles of the Infused virtues, in
like manner as the natural instincts are the princi
ples of the Acquired virtues. As the Acquired vir
tues, then, fitted men for human affairs ; so the In
fused virtues, it was represented, qualified men to
be " citizens of saints and domestics of God." Their
system, we find, provided for the growth and ex
pansion of the seed of divine grace — the element of
the heavenly life in the human soul — in a manner
analogous to the improvement of our natural moral
instincts ; by accessions, that is, of the same kind
to the original principles. The soul proceeded in the
divine fife, as in the moral ; increasing in favour
with God, as, according to the theory of Aristotle,
it advances in its natural conquest over the passions.
A still further distinction of moral excellence was
derived, from the Scripture-declaration of the mani
fold offices of the Holy Spirit, in the sanctification of
the human heart. These were the qualities of wis
dom, science, understanding, counsel ; — the effects of
the Holy Spirit on the rational principle of the soul :
fortitude, piety, fear — the effects of the Holy Spirit
on the affections. They were denominated the Seven
Gifts of the Spirit ; the enumeration being drawn
from that passage of Isaiah, which declares the Spirit
of the Lord, as " resting," and " as the Spirit of
" wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel

LECTURE VI. 295
" and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the
" fear of the Lord." As Gifts they differed from the
Infused Virtues, in being higher means of perfection,
immediate divine instincts, — dispositions prompting
to follow the divine motions, and carrying man at
once to acts beyond those of human virtue.
In the further development of their Ethical
System, the Schoolmen closely follow the method
of Aristotle's Ethics throughout. Aquinas, in par
ticular, has illustrated the application of Aristotle's
principles to Christian morality, with an admirable
comprehension of the subject, and sometimes, with
a knowledge of human nature, which, though briefly
and darkly intimated, has scarcely been surpassed
by the modern philosopher. On the moral por
tion of his great argument, he seems to feel his
strength more than elsewhere ; and, though still
encumbered with the armour of his technical sys
tem, exerts a more independent power. For,
though he explains the formal divisions of Virtue
received in the Church, he still pursues the in
quiry into all the different heads of Aristotle's more
copious enumeration, and shews their consistency
with the tenour of Christianity. This portion,
indeed, of the labours of Aquinas, is particularly
interesting to the inquirer into the history of Moral
Philosophy, and of its connexion with Theology. It
shews to what extent, our phraseology on moral sub
jects, has been derived from the Latin versions of
Aristotle's expressions of moral ideas; and how
u 4

296 LECTURE VI.
deeply we are indebted to the Scholastic Philosophy,
for its transfusion of the valuable theories of that
philosopher, into this department of science.
By looking, indeed, to this source, we find the
origin of the whole of the questions which have
engaged the attention of the modern ethical philo
sopher, as well as of our ordinary language on
moral subjects. The question of the nature of
Moral Obligation, and the very use of the term Ob
ligation, are derived from this source. It is strictly
connected with that view of Justification, which I
endeavoured to explain in my last Lecture. In con
sequence of Original Sin, man comes into the world
a debtor to Divine Justice. He is under an obliga
tion to punishment, on account of his deficiency from
that form of Original Justice, in which he rendered
to God all that service of love, which the great good
ness of God demanded. Hence our terms, due, and
duty, as employed to express right conduct. But
the use of these words has created, at the same time,
a speculative difficulty, which does not properly be
long to the subject. Philosophers, we find, have
been anxious to solve the question, — why man is
obliged to the performance of right; and have
sought, accordingly, for some enforcement of virtue,
beyond the simple fact, that virtue is a perfect law
in itself. Religionists, accordingly, have drawn down
an unnecessary force from the law of God, considered
as the rewarder and punisher in a future state ; whilst
the irreligious have had unholy recourse to the arm
of social power. The truth is, that the term Obliga-

LECTURE VI. 297
tion is a religious one ; introduced into Morality by
that peculiar connexion, which the speculative Theo
logy of the Schools established, between Religion
and Morality. The Divine Law, the principle of the
Divine Being Himself, was to be traced downwards
in its operation on fallen man ; and its powerful ef
ficacy was to be asserted, as well as its transcendant
goodness, in the blessing, and in the vengeance, with
which it was accompanied.
The subject on which I have been discoursing, is
much too large even to be touched adequately, in
the compass of a single Lecture. My object, how
ever, is chiefly to point out the origin of that pre
judice, by which the distinct provinces of Theology
and Morality have been popularly confounded : and
I therefore confine myself to such a view of the Scho
lastic Ethics, as exhibits its connexion with Theology.
It is in this respect, that the ethical system of the
Schools has been injurious to Moral Philosophy;
whilst it has conferred important benefit, as I have
observed, by its introduction into modern language
of the practical science of Aristotle ; — an effect,
that each individual has unconsciously experienced,
in the tone which education and society have given
to his mind. What is more familiar to us, I may ask,
before we have begun to reflect on the words which
we employ, than to speak of the motives and the
ends of actions ? But, in using these terms, we are
speaking in the theories of what we are apt to re-

298 LECTURE VI.
gard, as an absurd and exploded philosophy, of no
interest to ourselves.
It is to the technical language, indeed, of the
School-Ethics, that we may ascribe the extrava
gance of those Modern Philosophers, who have re
duced all actions to the necessity attributed to mo
tion consequent on impact, or to the results produced
by the powers annexed to material nature. The
origin, indeed, of this modern " necessity," is pre
cisely the realism of the Schools. Actions have
been analysed mentally into motives and ends, and
this mental distinction has been converted into forces
and effects. Consequently, the very distinction be
tween rational and material agents has been con
founded, by such a mode of philosophizing. For it
is the characteristic of the former, that they are
agents in themselves, — endued with a principle of
motion intrinsically, in their own nature, — and there
fore spontaneous and variable in their course of
action : — whilst the latter, having no such principle
in themselves, depend for their actions on their re
lations to other objects.
The influence of the scholastic blending of Theo
logy and Ethics is evidenced in the very general
confusion of thought still observable on this point.
There are two extreme opinions on the subject : that
on the one hand, which regards ethical principles, as
unholy and forbidden ground to the Scriptural re
ligionist; as enervating and debasing the sacred

LECTURE VI. 299
truth ; that on the other hand, which considers
no system of religious truths obligatory on the be
lief and the conduct, unless it can be reduced to
some principle of our moral nature. Evidently,
the limits, and proper department, of these two
great portions of our moral instruction, are not
attended to, in these extreme views. Too much is
ascribed to Theology in the one, too much to Mo
rality in the other. According to the former, we
can do nothing to the glory of God, unless his glory
is the object immediately present to our thoughts in
each action. According to the latter, the truth of
human nature is disparaged, by the endeavour to
kindle the natural sentiments of the heart with the
celestial fire of the altar. The distinct provinces of
intellectual and revealed knowledge have often been
remarked, with a view to silence the objections of
such speculators. But I think this account of the
matter by no means meets the difficulty of the case,
which arises as much from an improper estimate
of the moral, as of the intellectual powers ; and that a
further answer to it should be sought, in a just view
of the relation of Moral Philosophy to Theology.
Morality then, it should be observed, is the sci
ence of our own internal nature. It ascertains all
those principles by which we are actuated in our
sentiments and conduct, and establishes the general
law in which they all agree. Its office is throughout
one of discovery. The existence of these principles
is assumed ; and the facts, both of our observation
and our consciousness, are examined, with a view to

300 LECTURE VI.
their discovery. But all these inquiries are only
satisfied to lead to another, which is quite beyond
the province of the moralist to answer, as to the
ultimate reference of all this complex machinery
which we have been studying ; whether it is a whole
in itself, or there is something beyond it, in which
it originated, and to which it tends. The Christian
Revelation has answered this, by shewing the refer
ence of these principles to the invisible, eternal
world ; giving us an account of their origin in the
dispensations of Providence, and the ultimate effect,
in a future life, of their present observed tendencies.
We should observe, then, that it is only results of
which Revelation informs us, the ultimate relations
and effects of what we have already ascertained, or
are able, by inquiry of ourselves, to ascertain. It
is highly important to observe this ; because our
popular language on the subject confounds the dis
tinction, between the principles of our conduct and
the results to which they tend. We are apt to
speak of Religion, as supplying fresh motives of con
duct. But, in fact, the principles of our moral na
ture are the motives, the only motives to actions,
as, to use an imperfect analogy, the springs and
wheels of a machine are the motives to its action :
and the truths of Christianity are presented to those
principles, as objects towards which they should
tend. There is thus infinite room for addition to
our actual moral improvement, by the presentation
of new and more glorious objects to our moral prin
ciples ; whilst, at the same time, there is no addition

LECTURE VI. 301
of even a single new moral fact to the history of our
internal nature. Results may be unfolded to us,
utterly beyond the reach of all conclusions from
observation and consciousness ; and these results
may open objects to our faith, and, through faith,
to all the principles of our nature ; whilst the prin
ciples themselves are unchanged, and unchangeable,
so long as man, and the world around him, are what
they are.
But this confusion of results with the motives of
conduct takes place, when the religious principle is
substituted as the spring of action : as, when it is
argued, that no action can have any moral value,
except it be done immediately, and exclusively, on a
motive of glory to God. The glory of God supplies,
indeed, the great religious centre of our actions :
they are incomplete and irreligious, if they terminate
in worldly objects. But our actions must still be
performed according to the laws of our nature. They
must originate within us ; they must be morally
right in themselves, in order to their sanctification
in the great object, which Religion holds out to our
view. Christianity, in fact, leaves Ethical Science, as
such, precisely where it found it : all the duties which
Ethical Science prescribes, remain on their own foot
ing ; not altered or weakened, but affirmed and
strengthened by the association of Religion. And, so
independent is the Science of Ethics, of the support,
and the ennobling, which it receives from Religion,
that it would be nothing strange, or objectionable, in

302 LECTURE VI.
a Revelation, were we to find embodied in its lan
guage, much of the false Ethical Philosophy, which
systems may have established i. This, I conceive,
would appear to those, who bear in mind the real
distinctness of Religion and Moral Science, nothing
more objectionable, than the admission into the sa
cred volume of descriptions involving false theories
of Natural Philosophy. There is greater affinity to
revealed truth in the nature of Moral Philosophy ;
because it has, in common with Religion, the hap
piness of man for its object : but a coincidence of
object is different from an actual agreement in the
means employed. Holiness, separation from the
world, devotion, stillness of the thoughts and the af
fections, are the means of Religion : — Ethics are all
activity, all business. Neither will answer the pur
pose of the other : both are indispensable to the per
fection and happiness of human nature.
Let those, then, who would endeavour to substitute
one for the other, either Theological Truth for Moral,
or Moral for Theological, reflect whether they are
not bringing into competition two classes of truth
which have no rivalry with each other. Let them
think, whether religion may not be true and obli
gatory, though it may touch on points beyond the
sphere of their moral anticipations: and whether the
<l In consequence of incorporating all Science with Theology,
and making Theology itself a Science, the notion arose, that
nothing could be true in any science that was not accordant
with the Scripture. — Quicquid enim in aliis scientiis invenitur,
veritati hujus scientiae repugnans, totum condemnatur ut falsum.
Aquin. Summ, Theolog. Prima Pars, qu. i. art. 6.

LECTURE VI.
theory of morality may not remain, amidst all the
light of Revelation, a valid philosophy of life, soli
citing in itself, their earnest study, in order to a right
appreciation of religious truth. Nothing is more
wanted in these days, than an accurate acquaintance
with the truths of Ethics, to disperse the clouds,
which the prejudices of theological theory spread
over human nature. Doctrines in Religion are ad
vanced, which could not hold their ground for a
moment, if Moral Philosophy were duly studied, and
its truths were practically applied, as a basis of
Christian truth. It would be seen, that, in many
instances, men were maintaining positions at vari
ance with indisputable facts of the human consti
tution, and rashly overthrowing, at once, the evidence
and the application of the sacred truth which they
would advocate.

LECTURE VII.
THE SACRAMENTS.

x

SUMMARY.
Doctrine of the Sacraments a continuation of the Scholastic
scheme of Divine Agency — Separate nature of the soul and
body assumed throughout the speculation — The Sacraments
viewed as the means of supporting and renovating the life of
the Soul — General notion of them founded on the belief in
secret influences — Belief in Magic auxiliary to this notion —
Connexion of Sacramental Influence with the doctrine of the
Incarnation — Agitation of the subject in the IXth century in
connexion with Alexandrian Philosophy — Difference of opinion
as to whether the Sacraments were signs or instruments — Pre
cision of language respecting the Eucharist in particular — Pre
eminence assigned to this Sacrament attributable to the esta
blished theory of Sacramental Influence — Doctrine of Intention
— Question of the effect of the Vice of the Minister on the
efficacy of the Sacrament — Notion of impressed Character at
tributed to some of the Sacraments — Evident superiority of
Baptism and the Eucharist in comparison with the rest — Rough
form of the early Controversies on the Sacramental Presence of
Christ — The terms Substance and Species not taken at first
in a strict metaphysical sense — Aristotelic Philosophy of Mat
ter and Form, Substance and Accident, introduced to perfect
the theory of the Sacraments — This exemplified particularly in
Transubstantiation — Connexion of this doctrine with the power
of the Church enforces the assertion of the mystical virtue of
the consecrated elements — Physical theory of Transmutation
applied to the establishment of the Presence of Christ — Con
nexion with this, of the notion of the mysterious efficacy of
certain words — Realism involved in the further use of the no
tions of Substance and Accident in the account of Transub
stantiation — The theory of the doctrine at variance with popular
representations of it.
General reflections on the abuse of the doctrine of the Sacra
ments in the Scholastic System — its repugnance to the spirit of
Christianity — Necessity of vigilance against the temptations to
refinement on this subject.

x 2

Luke VIII. 43—48.
And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years,
which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither
could be healed of any, came behind him, and touched the
border of his garment : and immediately her issue of blood
stanched. And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all
denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master,
the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou,
Who touched me ? And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched
me : for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me. And
when the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trem
bling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him
before all the people for what cause she had touched him,
and how she was healed immediately. And he said unto
her, Daughter, be of good comfort : thy faith hath made
thee whole ; go in peace.

Kai yvvrj ovcra kv pvaei a'lparos amb kr&v bdbeKa, rjns els
larpovs irpoo-avaXcaaaaa o\ov tov /3lov, ovk loyyaev v-n oib-
evbs OepaiTevdrjvai, -npocreXdovcra omuBev, fptyaro tov Kpaaire-
bov tov IparCov avrov' Kai rrapaxprjpa ierrr] r\ pvtris tov a'ip.aros
avrrjs. Kai ehrev 6 'I-qaovs' Tis 6 a\jrApi,ev6s p.ov ; 'Apvovpk-
vav be ir&vriov, elnev 6 Ylerpos, Kai ot per avrov' 'Ema-Tara,
ot o)(\ol avvexovai ere Kai aarodXC^ovo-i, koI Xeyets' T£s 6 a\fr&-
pevos pov ; 'O be 'l-qcrovs elrrev "Hi/faro pov tis' eya> yap eyviav
Mvap.LV k£e\dovcrav arts kpov. 'Ibovaa be fj yvv-q on ovk e\a6e,
rpep.ovaa rjXde, ko.1 irpocnreoWcra avr&, bi f/v alriav rjyjraro av
rov arrriyyeiXev avr& kvdmov rravrbs tov Xaov, ko.1 a>s lAO-n
•napa)(p?\p.a. 'O be eiirev avrfj- ®dpo-ei, dvyarep' rj it Carts <tov
aeaatKe o*e. iropevov els elprjvrjv.

Et mulier quaedam erat in fluxu sanguinis ab annis duo-
decim, quae in medicos erogaverat omnem substantiam suam,
nee ab ullo potuit curari : Accessit retro, et tetigit fimbriam
vestimenti ejus: et confestim stetit fluxus sanguinis ejus.
Et ait Jesus : Quis est qui me tetigit ? Negantibus autem
omnibus, dixit Petrus, et qui cum illo erant: Praeceptor,
turbae te comprimunt et affigunt, et dicis : Quis me teti
git? Et dixit Jesus: Tetigit me aliquis; nam ego novi
virtutem de me exiisse. Videns autem mulier quia non la-
tuit, tremens venit, et procidit ante pedes ejus : et ob quam
causam tetigerit eum, indicavit coram omni populo, et quem-
admodum confestim sanata sit. At ipse dixit ei : Filia,
fides tua salvam te fecit; vade in pace. Lat. Vulg.

LECTURE VII.

THE preceding views of the Scholastic system
have presented the action of a subtile system of
Materialism, commencing with the Divine Grace
infused into the soul, and working itself out by the
various principles of human nature. The Will of
God, regarded as the primary cause of all activity,
has been traced, as it takes effect in the operations
of the Christian soul, and raises up the fallen child
of Adam to the perfection of the sons of God.
It can hardly have escaped observation, that, in
the course of these explanations of the process of
Grace, an entire distinctness has been assumed for
the soul, as the living and thinking principle of
man's nature. It was the established doctrine, that
the soul was infused into the body, as I have before
observed. The body, or the flesh, was conceived
to be fitly disposed for the reception of the soul ;
and then the soul, being infused, gave the form
of Human Nature. An evident reason of this
opinion is to be seen in the anxiety to maintain the
proper incorruptibility of the soul. If the soul were
not generated, it could not be corrupted. It might,
indeed, be infected ; be subjected to guilt and punish
ment by its union with a corrupt flesh ; but, being
created fresh by the hand of God, immediately, in
each instance of a human being, it was, in itself, a
divine principle, independent of the corruptible body
x 3

310 LECTURE VII.
with which it was associated. Hence it was said,
that original sin produced a deformity of the soul.
It destroyed that due constitution of the principles
of man's fleshly nature, which disposed it perfectly
for the reception of the soul. The expression itself
of Form, as applied to the soul, was derived from
Aristotle ; the separate creation, and infusion of it
into the body, were modifications of the Platonic
theory of its preexistence. The Scholastic doctrine,
combining both these principles, made the ground
work of a system, which developed the process of
the soul towards a state, when the flesh should no
longer be an obstruction to its energy, and it should
appear in its proper nature and perfection, as the
form of the human being.
This notion of the separate existence of the soul
has so incorporated itself with Christian Theology,
that we are apt, at this day, to regard a belief in it
as essential to orthodox doctrine. Even in main
taining that such a belief is not essential to Chris
tianity, I may incur the appearance of impugning
a vital truth of religion. I cannot, however, help
viewing this popular belief as a remnant of scho
lasticism. I feel assured that the truth of the Resur
rection does not depend on such an assumption ;
that the Life and Immortality of man, as resting on
Christ raised from the dead, is a certain fact in
the course of Divine Providence ; whatever may be
the theories of the soul, and of its connexion with
the body.
Accordingly, instead of a general simple acknow-

LECTURE VII. 311
ledgment of the Salvation of the Gospel, we have
seen, how the process of Grace has been traced by the
Latin theologians, as it repairs the natural defects
of the soul, and brings it into union with Christ a.
The theory of the Sacraments, on which I now
enter, proceeds on the same view of Human Salva
tion. It is an account of the application of the
Passion of Christ to the healing of the soul — a col
lection of remedial measures, by which its languors
and infirmities may be relieved and strengthened.
The Incarnation of Christ is regarded as the pri
mary efficient cause of health to the soul : dispensed
by the several Sacraments as the instrumental and
secondary causes. As the Incarnation itself was an
union of the Divine Word with human nature, so
the Sacraments, according to the theoretic view of
the Scholastic philosophy, were mystical unions of
words with sensible things, by which the real Pas
sion of Christ was both signified and applied to the
soul of man — the visible channels, through which
virtue was conveyed from Christ Himself to his
mystical body, the Church.
The doctrines of Original Sin and of the Incar-
a What our Lord says, in answer to Martha's declaration,
" I know that he shall rise again," when he proclaims Himself
the Resurrection and the Life, is to this point. The Jews,
then, entertained a philosophical belief of a future state. Our
Lord tacitly reproves an assurance on such grounds, by his
strong reference to Himself; " / am the Resurrection and the
"Life; whosoever believeth in me, shall live, though he die,"
&c. — Note A. Lecture VII.
x 4

312 LECTURE VII.
nation represented mankind under two extremes of
individuality : as one with Adam in sin ; as one
with Christ in perfect righteousness. An account
was wanted of the union of these two extremes — a
bridge, by which the mind might pass from one
theory to the other. This was presented in the
doctrine of the Sacraments. They brought the two
extremes into connexion. They connected fallen
man with regenerate man, marking, as it were, the
several stages of transition, from the state of cor
ruption to that of glory. Theologians have not been
content to rest on the simple fact of the Divine
Ordinance, appointing certain external rites as es
sential parts of Divine service on the part of man,
available to the blessing of the receiver. But they
have treated the Sacraments as effusions of the vir
tue of Christ, physically quickening and strengthen
ing the soul, in a manner analogous to the invigor-
ation of the body by salutary medicines.
The word Sacrament itself, as understood in the
Latin Church, is founded on this notion. Though
derived from the military oath of the Romans, and
so far bearing the mark of that derivation, as it
denotes a solemn pledge of faith on the part of the
receiver, — in its established theological use it corre
sponded more properly with [xvo-Typiw of the Greeks.
It expressed, at first, accordingly, any solemn, mys
terious truth of Religion ; and afterwards, by the
usage of the Schools, was appropriated to those acts
in particular, by which grace was conceived to be
imparted to the soul, under outward and visible

LECTURE VII. 313
signs. The definition indeed, given in the Catechism
of the Church of England, is exactly what the Scho
lastic theory suggests ; so far, at least, as the lan
guage of it characterizes the nature of a Sacrament.
It is, in the subsequent application of this definition,
that the Church of England has modified and im
proved on the fundamental idea of the Scholastic
doctrine ; whilst the idea itself is preserved, as being
part of the very texture of technical theology b.
It was, however, in just logical connexion with
this theory, that the Latin Theology deduced the
Seven Sacraments of the Church of Rome. They
are applications of the Passion, or the Priesthood of
Christ, as it is otherwise expressed by the School
men c, to Christians, either individually, or as mem
bers of the Christian Society. On the first ground,
the rites of Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist,
Penance, Extreme Unction, obtain their sacramental
nature ; on the latter, the rites of Orders and Ma
trimony come into the same estimate. The great
Christian community, both as a whole and in its parts,
must be kept animate with the Divine Grace flowing
from Christ its head , Baptism confers the grace of
Regeneration, the new spiritual life, by which man
becomes the child of God. Confirmation gives the
increase of that Life. By the Eucharist it is
t> Invisibilis gratiae visibile signum, is the usual definition of
a Sacrament in the school-writers. The words are drawn from
Augustine. — Note B.
c Ad primum ergo dicendnm, quod per omnia Sacramenta
fit homo particeps sacerdotii Christi, &c. Aquin. Sum. Theol.
III. Pars, qu. lxiii. art. 6.

314 LECTURE VII.
strengthened and vivified : by Penance, recruited
from the effects of sin : Extreme Unction removes
the last relics of the sinful nature, preparing the soul
for its departure. These, then, are the influences of
Christ's passion on Christians, in their personal ca
pacity. But the Christian Society needs to be sup
ported, both in its natural and in its spiritual exist
ence. The grace annexed to Matrimony supports
the natural life, in order to the spiritual ; since the
Christian must first be born into the world, that he
may afterwards be regenerated in Christ. The sa
crament of Orders, analogous to Matrimony in the
spiritual community, is the grace of Christ's pas
sion, continuing the vital succession of Ministers,
the living instruments, through whom all grace is
imparted to the Church d.
Rightly, then, to understand the doctrine of the
Sacraments in general, we must look to the theory
of secret influences on which it is based, the mys
terious power, conceived to belong to certain things,
or actions, or persons, of effecting changes not cog
nizable by the senses, and changes, as real as those
apparent to observation. It is true indeed, that,
in the Christian application of this theory, the
power was not conceived to belong intrinsically to
the things themselves. They were only subordi
nate, instrumental causes, by which the Divine
Agency accomplished its ends. Christ was held
to be the sole primary cause of Grace, however
d Note C.

LECTURE VII. 315
given. In this respect, the mystical philosophy of
secret agents in nature was christianized. But,
though it might thus be denied, that any proper
efficacy was attributed to the symbol employed in
the administration of a Sacrament, still its power of
communicating grace instrumentally, was asserted in
the strongest manner. Illustration was drawn from
the manner in which any instrument of art per
formed its work. The artist, or workman, was
properly the executor of it, as the designer of the
result : the instrument executed it, according to its
adaptation, as an instrument, to produce the result e.
The general belief in Magic, in the early ages of
the Church, may sufficiently account for the ready
reception of such a theory of Sacramental influence.
The maxim of Augustine, Accedit verbum ad ele-
mentum, et fit Sacramentum, appears to be, in fact,
an adaptation of the popular belief respecting the
power of incantations and charms, to the subject
of Religion. The miracles themselves, indeed, of
our Saviour were supposed to act in this manner,
even by those who did not impute them to the
agency of evil. His word, or His touch, was sought
for by persons acknowledging in faith the reality of
his mission. " Say in a word only," said the Cen
turion, " and my servant shall be healed." The
woman, who forced her way through the crowd,
fully trusted that she should be made whole, if she
could touch but the hem of the garment of Jesus.
And our Saviour, whose condescension was shewn
e Note D.

316 LECTURE VII.
even to the prejudices of his faithful followers, often
accompanied the working of his miracles with sig
nificant actions. In the instance of the woman, in
deed, thus suddenly cured, He is described as having
perceived that some one had touched Him, by the
fact, that virtue had gone out of Him ; — a mode of
speaking, characteristic of the prevalent idea con
cerning the operation of Divine Influence, as of
something passing from one body to another.
The physical philosophy received in the Schools,
was in itself favourable to this doctrine of sacra
mental efficiency. Nature being regarded as a sys
tem of powers inherent in matter, it would be easily
conceived, that these powers might be secretly di
rected by that Sovereign Will which gave them
being. As they operated visibly in various ways
through the Divine Word, so they might also act
invisibly for the production of spiritual effects. The
Word which spoke things into being, could surely
influence the mode of their operation.
This doctrine, however, of the Sacraments ap
pears to have subsisted in the Church without ques
tioning, and consequently without much precision
of opinion on the subject, until the agitation of the
controversies respecting the nature of Christ e. These
<* Ratramn was engaged in a controversy on the manner
of Christ's Birth. Paschase also wrote on the same point in
opposition to Ratramn. The coincidence of this controversy
with that on the Eucharist, further illustrates the connexion of
the points disputed in each. — Note E.

LECTURE VII. 317
would evidently affect the notion of a communicated
virtue derived to the powers of nature from his
Person. If, according to Nestorius, God and man
were not united in one Person in Jesus Christ, it
might naturally be inquired, whether the " Virtue
" of his Passion," obtained sacramentally, flowed
from the Divinity or from the Humanity ; since his
Passion was thus considered as distinct from his
Divine Nature. Accordingly, at the Council of
Ephesus, two opinions on this article were con
demned : one asserting " the flesh of the Son of
" man," to mean some one among men, into whose
flesh and blood the earthly substance of bread should
be changed ; the other asserting, that the individual,
whose flesh and blood should have this salutary
efficacy, should be some eminently holy person — the
temple of God — in whom God should dwell in the
truest sense f. Whether, indeed, such opinions were
actually held in the form here stated, may be doubted.
But it seems evident, from the notice itself of dif
ferent opinions on the Eucharist in the time of Nes
torius, that the popular notion of sacramental in
fluence, was affected by his theory of the Incarna
tion. The communication of secret virtue by the
sacramental symbol, seemed to be broken in its first
link, if the Divinity were separated from the Hu
manity of Christ: and speculation exerted itself to

f I have taken this account from Lanfranc, De Corp. et Sang.
Domini, c. xvii. p. 242. Oper. — Note F.

318 LECTURE VII.
find a stay, on which the sacred chain might be
fastened. Afterwards, the Alexandrian Philosophy, as re
vived by Erigena, seems once more to have
awakened the opinions of speculative men on the
question of Sacramental influence. The Eucharist
again, as the most complex subject of disquisition,
was the point of the general question, to which at
tention was particularly directed. There is no ex
tant work of Erigena on the subject, though we
find allusions, in subsequent writers, to his doctrine,
set forth, as it seems, in some express treatise. There
remain, however, other treatises of the same period,
those of Paschase and Ratramn, of which I have
had occasion to speak before : and these, though
entirely confined to a discussion of the Eucharist,
indicate a general agitation of the question concern
ing the manner, in which grace was communicated
by the Sacraments. That inquiry should have been
directed to the presence of Christ in the consecrated
bread and wine, seems to have been only accidental,
from the circumstance, that the celebration of the
Eucharist was more identified with Divine worship
than the other Sacraments.
It appears that the Alexandrian Philosophy re
vived the question, by removing all actual power
from nature, and reducing all natural effects to the
sole agency of the Deity. There would be, accord
ing to this philosophy, no real instrumentality in
the Sacraments. All would be the immediate action

LECTURE VII. 319
of the Deity. The virtue attributed to the sacred
symbols would therefore vanish. They would not
contain Christ's passion by real participation in
themselves. They could only act as the representa
tives, or signs, of his presence, not as the causes, or
instruments, of his operation on the soul.
The popular and orthodox doctrine, however, was,
that the Sacramental influence was a power of cau
sation. Accordingly at this period, when disputation
began again to be the pastime of theologians, the
notion was strenuously opposed, that the Sacrament
of the Eucharist was a sign only, and not the actual
presence of the crucified body of Christ. The or
thodox, indeed, maintained that it was a sign, so
far as it consisted of visible symbols ; but they
further contended, that a real efficacy must be im
puted to the operation so signified. The collision,
however, of adverse statement, forced them into a
precision of language, which, probably, but for the
force of controversy, would have had no place in
this department of theology. It is no inconsider
able evidence of this observation, that the precision
of language has occurred on that particular Sacra
ment, which was the immediate matter of discus
sion, — the Eucharist. The nature of Christ's pre
sence in Baptism might have been attempted, no
less, to be defined : but here the point is left com
paratively open to opinion ; whilst, respecting the
Eucharist, the path of orthodoxy is rigidly marked
out to the disciple of the scholastic theology.
The opposition of controversy, whilst it led the

320 LECTURE VII.
orthodox to assert an actual presence of the incar
nate Christ, under the sacramental symbols of bread
and wine, made them charge their adversaries with
holding the Sacraments to be only signs, — memo
rials of Christ's passion, and not the actual oblation.
And this may account for the pointed expression
in our Article, that " the Supper of the Lord is not
" only a sign of the love which Christians ought to
" have among themselves, but rather is a Sacrament
" of our Redemption." In denying an actual com
munication of Christ to the sacred emblems, it be
came necessary to guard against the construction
of asserting a merely commemorative rite, and thus
evacuating the Sacrament of its holy burthen of
Grace. For neither Ratramn, in opposing the doc
trine of Paschase, nor afterwards Berenger, in ad
vocating the views of Erigena against Lanfranc s,
appear to have held, that the Eucharist was nothing
more than a sign. Ratramn, indeed, distinctly as
serts a real presence, though he does not admit a
presence of the crucified body of Christ in the con
secrated bread and wine. It is a real and true pre
sence that he asserts ; — the virtue of Christ acting
in the way of efficacious assistance to the receiver
of the Sacrament. The Church of England doc
trine of the Sacraments, it is well-known, is founded
on the views given by this author. Cranmer and
Ridley are said to have studied his work together
and to have derived their first ray of light on the
subject from that study b.
e Note G. h Note H.

LECTURE VII. 321
The relative importance of the Eucharist, in com
parison with the other Sacraments, and, indeed, with
the whole doctrine and ritual of Christianity, in the
system of the Church of Rome, may be drawn from
this primary notion of sacramental efficiency. It
may well be asked, why this sacred rite should
stand so preeminent in the scheme of Christianity.
I do not say, that it ought not to hold a principal
station among the observances of a holy life. But
it is the doctrinal supremacy given to it, to which
I refer. View it, as it exists in the Roman Church,
and it is there found absorbing into it the whole, it
may be said, of Christian worship. There, the
ministers of religion seem to be set apart chiefly for
this sacred celebration : it is the spiritual power of
their office — the essence of their priesthood. If we
ask then, why this particular Sacrament should have
attained this superiority over all other rites of Chris
tianity, we may find an answer in the Scholastic
theory. Whilst the other Sacraments, recognized
by that theory, participate of the virtue of Christ's
passion, this is the passion itself of Christ, — the
whole virtue of his priesthood mystically repre
sented and conveyed. The priesthood of Christ
comprehending in it the whole of Christianity, the
rite by which that priesthood was especially signi
fied, would become the great act of human ministra
tion, when the notion was once established of an
instrumental causality attached to the use of the
sign. The importance which this Sacrament ob
tained, appears, accordingly, to have increased, in

322 LECTURE VII.
proportion as controversy more explicitly shaped
the doctrine, giving a greater point and boldness to
the assertion of a real oblation of Christ. It was
freely admitted, that Christ was offered once for all
on the Cross ; that henceforth He is seated at the
right hand of the Divine Majesty, to die no more.
But the sacrifice performed by the priest was still a
real offering of Christ ; as being the appointed chan
nel, through which the expiatory virtue of the Great
Sacrifice descends in vital efflux from the person of
the Saviour '.
The necessity of a general " Intention" on the
part of the priest administering a Sacrament, to " do
" what the Church does, and intends," by that Sa
crament, is founded on the same mystical construc
tion of the rite, as an actual communication with
Christ Himself. Inanimate things, so far as they
act instrumentally in communicating the virtue of
Christ's passion, act simply according to the laws of
their nature, moved by the impulse given to them
externally. But the human agent, the animated in
strument15 of the sacramental Virtue, being in him
self a principle of motion, operates by the moral,
and therefore variable, power of freewill, in pro
ducing the mystical result. This doctrine led, of
course, to many questions on the point ; such as,
whether the forgetfulness of the Priest, the omission
of any expression, the variation of words in the
form of consecration, would affect the validity of the
1 Note E. k Aristotle's ep^rvxov opyavov.

LECTURE VII. 323
Sacrament. These difficulties, however, were skil
fully evaded, by resolving the personal individuality
of the Priest into the general abstract personality of
the Church. As officiating in the Sacrament, he
appeared in the person of the Church. The ques
tion then only was, whether the general intention
of the Church was fulfilled in the act of consecra
tion. Whatever arose from the mere person of the
priest as an individual man, could not vitiate the
rite1. Hence, though the nature of man, as a volun
tary agent, was included in the theory of the Sa
craments, the personal vice of the officiating mi
nister could not impede the due consecration of the
rite. The Church itself could not err. He there
fore, in whom the person of the Church was
vested, if only it was his design to act in that ca
pacity, and to do the work of the Church, could
not fail in the performance of the rite. The mys
tical virtue was brought down to the sacred ele
ment, though the lips were unholy that pronounced
the transforming benediction. Thus it was argued,
the baptism of Judas was valid, because it was per
formed with the authority of Christ ; whilst the
baptism of John was not valid, as not being the act
of the Church m.
We are ready, indeed, ourselves to admit, that
the vice of the Minister does not impede the effect
of the Sacrament. For it is evident, that, where
the Faith of the receiver is the true consecrating
i Note F. m Note G.
Y 2

324 LECTURE VII.
principle, — that which really brings down Christ to
the heart of each individual, — the personal delin
quency of him who administers it, cannot deteriorate
the Sacrament itself. There seems, indeed, scarcely
sufficient reason for the introduction of an express
article on the subject, when it is once fully understood
on Protestant grounds. We see, however, the occa
sion of it, in the Scholastic theory of the Sacraments.
The immediate occasion, indeed, in the case of our
Articles, was, the canon of the Council of Trent upon
the subject. But the importance attributed to the
point by so distinct a notice of it, belongs to the re
condite philosophy of sacramental influence. An
authority and sanctity were to be maintained for the
Church, as the sole and certain instrument of sa
cramental grace, against all objection to the indi
vidual agents, to whose hands her rites should be
intrusted. It was an admirable expedient, indeed,
of ecclesiastical policy, thus to rest the power of the
Church on the purity and indefectibility of an ab
straction. Religious imagination was sustained on
the picture of the Church, as the great Mother of
the Faithful, cherishing her beloved children in her
pure bosom ; whilst her many-handed agents in the
world were securing their hold on the consciences
of men, by- that prerogative of veneration which
they enjoyed in her person". Realism here be-
n We should observe the confusion of ideas prevalent in the
early Church on the subject of Baptism. The Church was con
sidered as " the body of Christ." The Church also was " the
"* mother of the faithful." Hence, being baptized, and being

LECTURE VII. 325
came an effectual means of power. The Clergy
being regarded in their collective character, as re
presentatives of the person of the Church, exhibited
an uniform, undying, principle of operation. The
stability and eternity of a Theory were substituted
for the variable and conflicting views in religious
belief and action, which the actual facts of the
Church presented.
The same principle was applied to the body of
the Faithful at large; as, for instance, in the ad
ministration of Baptism to Infants, the scholastic
ground on which the validity of such baptism is
asserted, is, that the Faith of the Church is ac
cepted, instead of that of the individual0. The
will of the Infant is incapable of putting any bar
to the reception of the rite ; and the intention of
the Church therefore, it is alleged, fully avails in
its behalf.
Such, then, is the characteristic idea which per
vades all the Sacraments, according to the enume
ration of them given by the School-authors, and
adopted by the Church of Rome. But it should be
remarked, that of the seven, whilst all were held to
made a " member of the body of Christ," and being " incor-
" porated" into the Church, became equivalent expressions.
Hence too the Church was said to " generate" sons by baptism.
Augustin. contr. Donatist. I. c. 10. et alib.
° By Canon XIII. of Sess. VII. of the Council of Trent, the
Faith of the Church is stated to be the ground on which infants
are baptized. This accords with the language of Augustine. —
Note H.
Y 3

326 LECTURE VII.
be means of Grace, and divinely instituted, the two,
which we hold exclusively as Sacraments, were
considered as of more imperative obligation on the
Christian world at large. Baptism, Confirmation,
and Orders, indeed, were distinguished from the
rest in this respect ; that they were conceived to im
press a Character on the Soul — an indelible mark,
by which the Soul is consecrated to the service of
God. Hence it was maintained that these rites
could never be repeated. Though Baptism might
have been administered by the hands of a heretic,
yet, if the rite had been performed, it was enough.
The Christian " character" had been impressed, and
the baptized was already a member of the Church.
Cyprian, in his zeal against heresy, had main
tained the contrary ; requiring, that those who had
been baptized by heretics should be rebaptized by
the orthodox i'. But the opposite doctrine pre
vailed in the Church, and was established by the
authority of Augustine. It gave, in fact, to the
Church a power over all who had once been bap
tized, whether within or without her pale ; so that
the spiritual terrors might be applied to such per
sons, to compel them to the faith in which they had
been baptized i. We may perceive a trace of the
P Note I.
1 See this in the Council of Trent, Sess. Sept. de Bapt. — Si
quis dixerit hujusmodi parvulos baptizatos, cum adoleverint in-
terrogandos esse, an ratum habere velint, quod Patrini eorum
nomine, dum baptizarentur, polliciti sunt, et si se nolle respon-
derint, suo esse arbitrio relinquendos, nee interim poena ad
Christianam vitam cogendos, nisi ut ab Eucharistise, aliorumque

LECTURE VII. 327
scholastic doctrine of " impressed character," in the
scrupulous care shewn by our Church in the Bap
tismal Service, to ascertain whether Baptism has
been already performed rightly ; and in the provi
sion (itself a scholastic one) of conditional Baptism,
in cases where doubt may exist of its previous due
administration r.
The doctrine of Baptism, indeed, was what na
turally attracted the attention of the Church in the
early ages. Its connexion with the doctrine of Ori
ginal Sin brought it into prominent notice, during
the Pelagian Controversies. And, before the rise
of these controversies, we see the extravagant opin
ion entertained of its sacramental power, in the prac
tice of delaying the reception of it until the approach
of death s. So that the indispensable necessity of
Baptism had been established, before the period of
Scholasticism. Both Pelagius and Celestius main-
Sacramentorum perceptione arceantur, donee resipiscant, ana
thema sit. Canon xiv.
r It is suggested by the Cardinal Caietan, in his commentary
on the Summa of Aquinas, Hda Ildse, qu. i. art. 3. ed. Antuerp.
s Augustine's account of the delay of his own baptism illustrates
this. Feeling himself dangerously ill in his youth, he eagerly
demanded baptism. He recovered ; and it was postponed, for
the reason that, if he should live, he would contract fresh im
purity. — Et conturbata mater carnis meas, quoniam et sem-
piternam salutem meam carius parturiebat corde casto in fide
tua, jam curaret festinabunda, ut sacramentis salutaribus ini-
tiarer et abluerer, te Domine Jesu confitens in remissionem pec-
catorum, nisi statim recreatus essem. Dilata est itaque mun-
datio mea, quasi necesse esset, ut adhuc sordidarer, si viverem;
quia videlicet post lavacrum illud, major et periculosior in sor-
dibus delictorum reatus foret. Confess, lib. I. c. 11.
Y 4

LECTURE VII.
tained the necessity of Baptism. The orthodox dif
fered from them, in asserting that, without baptism,
none could be saved. It was allowed, indeed, by
the Schoolmen, that the wish (votum) to receive bap
tism might avail, in a case of impediment to the
actual reception of it : as also in regard to the Eu
charist. The blood of martyrdom too was supposed
to flow with regenerating efficacy. For thus had
the holy Innocents been baptized in blood : the
sword of the murderer consecrating them to the
Saviour, for whom they unconsciously suffered.
But, as no wish, or vow, of receiving the rite could
be conceived by the Infant, it was impossible that,
dying unbaptized, — humanity may shrink at the
recital of such a tenet, — it could escape the punish
ment due to Original Sin.
The Eucharist also, though not regarded of the
same absolute necessity as Baptism, was a rite,
which could be omitted, with safety, by none who
were capable of desiring it. In fact, these two or
dinances, amidst all the scholastic subtleties with
which they are surrounded, bear evident marks
of being considered, as of an higher origin, and a
more divine import'- They are clearly the Sacra
ments of the primitive Church, whilst the rest have
( Unde manifestum est, quod sacramenta ecclesiae specialiter
habent virtutem ex passione Christi, cujus virtus quodammodo
nobis copulatur per susceptionem sacramentorum. In cujus
signum, de latere Christi pendentis in cruce, fluxerunt aqua et
sanguis, quorum unum pertinet ad baptismum, ahud ad eucha-
ristiam, quae sunt potissima sacramenta. Aquin. Summa Theol.
Illtia Pars, qu. lxii. art. 5.

LECTURE VII.
obtained that rank through the ingenuity of theo
logians, seeking to give a numerical perfection to
their system in all its parts, and to trace out a
minuteness of correspondence in the Sacraments to
the Seven Virtues, and Seven Gifts of the Spirit.
Peter Lombard, I believe, was the first who assigned
that number to the Sacraments u.
The controversies of the IXth and Xlth centuries
exhibit the theory of the Sacraments, in what may
be called an unfinished state. They are only the
commencement and outline, of what was afterwards
worked out by the introduction of the philosophy
of Aristotle into the subject. The disputes had
been, whether there was a real Divine efficacy in
the consecrated symbols themselves, so that they
were no longer the same as before consecration ; or
whether they remained the same in themselves, and
yet possessed a mystical efficacy, in the act of being
received. The point in controversy is, in what sense,
the words " really" and " truly" are to be under
stood, when affirmed of the presence of Christ. Both
parties affirm that Christ is really and truly present in
the Eucharist ; both affirm that a change is worked
on the Bread and Wine by consecration, so that they
then are verily and indeed the Body and Blood of
Christ. But on one side it is denied, that this re
ality and truth are to be sought in the Bread and
u The question of the Number of the Sacraments was one of
considerable perplexity at the Council of Trent. Courayer,
translat. of Sarpi, torn. I. p. 376.

330 LECTURE VII.
Wine ; or that the change is a physical one, though
real as to efficacy or virtue. On the other side, it
is contended, that this reality and truth of the Di
vine presence, must be in the consecrated elements
themselves ; or otherwise they are mere signs with
out any latent virtue. But in this case, the Sacra
ments of the New Law, (as the Christian sacraments
were termed, in contrast with the types and ordi
nances of Judaism,) would be inferior to those of
the Old Law. For the latter, it was admitted,
were the shadows of Christ — they contained Christ
in the way of anticipation : — whereas the latter
would be thus reduced to empty Signs.
The word Substance, we may observe, was em
ployed in these controversies ; but it was not used
in that exact metaphysical sense, in which we find
it employed in the Trinitarian controversies, or
which it acquired in the course of the Scholastic
discussions. The Latins of the IXth century were
infants in philosophy, compared with their pre
decessors of the IVth century. They understood,
accordingly, at this period, by Substance, chiefly the
gross idea, which we commonly attach to the term,
when we speak of the Substance of any thing, mean
ing the principal or most important part of it. The
idea of Substance, as the support or basis of acci
dents, was not familiarly recognized, it seems, by
the Latin of the middle age, until the revived study
of Aristotle had once more restored it to that sense.
The like observation is to be made with regard
to the word Species, as it was employed in the sacra-

LECTURE VII. 331
mentarian controversies of the IXth and Xlth cen
turies. It was not then restricted to a metaphy
sical sense, but rather simply expressed the physical
objects themselves, to which it was applied. The
species of bread and wine, that is, were not the
abstract natures of bread and wine, but the com
pound things themselves, as really existing. The
term, as introduced into this subject, was derived to
the Latin Church, not from philosophy, but from
the ordinary forms of Roman exaction of tribute ;
according to which, certain articles were to be fur
nished to the government in the species — the arti
cles themselves — as distinct from their equivalent in
money x.
It remained then for later discussion, for the rest
less, penetrating spirit of Scholasticism, to analyze,
by the philosophical power of language, the oper
ation of Grace in the Sacraments. The subtile spe
culations about matter and form, substance and
accident, were accordingly introduced, to establish
and perfect the theory of instrumental efficiency
ascribed to the rites themselves. And it is upon
these speculations that the doctrine of the Sacra
ments, and in particular of Transubstantiation, is
maintained in the Church of Rome even now ;
amidst all the accessions of light from improved
science, which the world has obtained since the days
of Scholasticism. A review of any of the defences
of Transubstantiation, which have been put forth in
x Note I.

LECTURE VII.
the course of the last few years, will convince any
one how completely bound up with the theories of
substance and accident, and matter and form, that
tenet is ; and that, consequently, the tenet and the
theories must be false or true together. But if, as
is the fact, those theories are mere assumptions in
physics, not resting on observation, but distinctions,
existing only in the mind, and applied to the ana
lysis of external objects ; it must appear, that the
process of Transubstantiation is entirely an as
sumed one, and that it ought to be discarded as an
idol, at once, of religion and of philosophy.
We hear it sometimes stated, as if Transub
stantiation were a dogma suddenly introduced into
the Church; — as if Innocent III. and the IVth
Lateran Council, had, by the declaration of the ar
ticle, accomplished a triumph over human reason
and sound religion. But this appears to me a very
mistaken view of the doctrine. It has a much deeper
origin ; growing, in fact, out of the natural Realism
of the human mind. It was a gradual extension of
the same principle which corrupted the doctrines
of the Trinity and of Divine Grace, to the doc
trine of the Sacraments. The principle floated down
the stream of the philosophical Theology of the
Schools ; and, from time to time, fastened itself round
each projecting point that met its course. That
the doctrine of the Eucharist in particular, should
have been the principal occasion of the speculation
concerning the Sacraments in general, may be ac
counted for, in the importance which that Sacra-

LECTURE VII. 333
ment had assumed in the practice of the Church.
The sacrificial character of the Church-minister was
especially involved in it. And the leading Clergy,
accordingly, were peculiarly sensitive to any opin
ion, which seemed to examine too closely, the mi
raculous virtue claimed for the rite. From the
time of Erigena, there had been constant endea
vours, to attain more exact ideas of the nature of
the sacrifice performed in the Eucharist, on the one
part ; whilst, on the other, a fear lest the authority
of the Church should be shaken, called forth de
fenders of the miraculous import of the consecra
tion. The treatise of Paschase was a bold attempt
to settle the doubts and speculations of the time, by
a strong and confident assertion of the power as
sumed for the ministration of the priest. It did not,
however, settle the question even in the Church
itself. Not only did Ratramn freely discuss the
mode of Christ's presence ; but differences of opinion
must have existed generally, when we find Leothe-
ric, Archbishop of Sens, charged with heterodoxy on
the subject, in the very commencement of the Xlth
century ; and afterwards, in the course of the same
century, Berenger appearing the forward advocate
of the moderate doctrine >'. The obstinacy, indeed,
with which Berenger resumed his profession of the
obnoxious opinion, argues the general interest taken
in the question, as also the support and countenance
which he must have obtained from others, agreeing
in his views, though not equally ready to encounter
y Note J.

334 LECTURE VII.
the persecution, attendant on a more open dissent
from the orthodox rule.
When the Schools took up the formal discussion
of the doctrine of the Sacraments, the general the
ory was to be adjusted to those views of the Eu
charist, which the progressive realism of orthodoxy
had created. It was to be shewn, how the actual
conversion of the Bread and Wine into the Body
and Blood of Christ took place, according to recog
nized physical principles, the supposed agents in
producing the result.
I have already had occasion to point out the
extent, to which the theory of Transmutation was
carried in the physical system of Aristotle. It was
conceived to be a sufficient account of all the variety
of appearances which Nature exhibits. The forms
of things were continually coming and receding in
the ceaseless flux of sublunary nature ; contraries
expelling contraries ; whilst a common matter sub
sisted, the same in all things, and becoming all
things, as the various forms of things successively
acted on it. I have pointed out all this nearly in
the same manner before. But the notions of Form
and Matter require to be more particularly noticed,
in reference to our present subject, in their con
nexion with the mystical philosophy of the Divine
Word. A Christian Philosopher could not adopt
such a theory of Nature, (for in itself it was strictly
atheistic ; it described Nature as an omnipotent en
ergy in itself, working out its own instinctive ten-

LECTURE VII. 335
dencies,) without modifying it by the principles of
his Theology. He did not therefore conceive these
forms, in nature, to be independent of the Di
vine Reason or Word. Interpreting those passages
of Scripture which speak of things made by the
Word of God, as denoting expressly the creative
efficacy of the Second Person of the Trinity, he
connected the communication of forms to matter
with the Word of God throughout ; that is, he
conceived the Divine words uttered, to carry that
mystical creative force, which belonged to the Divine
Word as existing in the Trinity z. Hence it was,
that certain words, accompanying the celebration of
a Sacrament, were said to be the Form of the Sa
crament. In a manner analogous to the original
formation of all things by the Divine Word acting
on matter, it was conceived, that the sacred words
pronounced by the Priest came with power to the
element or matter, and imposed on it a mystical or
sacramental forma. Thus a Sacrament has been
described as consisting of matter and form : — the
matter being the water, or the bread and wine ;
or, in Confirmation, the chrism ; in Penance, the
contrition of the penitent: the form, the particu
lar words of consecration uttered by the priest.
Hence, too, the use of the word Element itself, to
denote the consecrated bread and wine ; these being
viewed, like the four imagined elements of the ma-
z Aquinas, Sum. Theol. Illtia Pars, qu. lxxviii. art. 4. — Note K.
a The priest is therefore said, conficere Sacramentum.

336 LECTURE VII.
terial world, as the bases of the sacred natures into
which they were transformed. A certain matter
and certain form are thus considered as indispens
able to a Sacrament b.
This part of the theory of Transubstantiation
applies to all the Sacraments in common. But it
did not fully explain that point in which the Eu
charist differed from all other Sacraments, as being
the whole virtue of Christ's priesthood, whereas the
others were only participations of that virtue. It
was to be further shewn, therefore, with regard to
this, how the esse, or substance, of Christ, was
brought down to the consecrated elements. This
was, in fact, the establishment of the term Transub
stantiation as the orthodox language of the Latin
Church. Christ had been asserted to be substan
tially present in the Eucharist during the contro
versies of the IXth and Xlth centuries. But, as I
observed, the term Substance was not yet commonly
interpreted in its proper metaphysical sense. The
increasing acquaintance with Aristotle's Philosophy
subsequently to that period, both demanded and
suggested a further and more minute explanation.
The term Substance now came to be viewed in
its logical and metaphysical sense, as the support of
accidents, — as that nature of a thing which may be
b Hence the inquiries in our Baptismal Service. " With
" what matter was this child baptized?" " With what words
" was this child baptized ?" " Because some things," it is said,
" essential to this Sacrament may happen to be omitted through
" haste."

LECTURE VII. 337
conceived to remain, when every other nature is re
moved or abstracted from it — the ultimate point
in analysing the complex idea of any object. The
term Accident, on the other hand, denotes all those
ideas which the analysis excludes, as not belonging
to the mere Being or Nature of the object.
But by the fallaciousness of Realism, both Sub
stance and Accident being understood to denote parts
in the physical composition of bodies, the applica
tion of this doctrine to the presence of Christ in the
Eucharist, was naturally suggested. If Substance
and Accident were parts of things, they might be
conceived in a state of separation. The substance
of any thing might be present, whilst the accidents
were absent : and the substance of one thing might
be changed for the substance of another, whilst£the
accidents remained.
It being admitted, then, that there was a trans
forming power in the words of Consecration ; whilst,
at the same time, it was evident, that no visible or
sensible change was wrought on the bread and wine ;
it was urged, that the change had taken place in
the substance of the sacred elements. The Substan
tial Forms of bread and wine were no longer in ex
istence, at the instant that the words of Consecration
were completed ; but they were displaced by the Sub
stance of Christ. The accidents of bread and wine, —
the taste and colour, and other such qualities, — were
not supposed, indeed, to be in Christ " as in their
" subject;" though they evidently remained after
the change of the substance, to which they had be-
z

338 LECTURE VII.
longed. In general, however, the accidents are re
presented, in the mystical phraseology of Platonism,
as outward veils, under which the real spiritual sub
stance of Christ is latent z.
This explanation raised a number of minute ques
tions, as to the mode of coexistence of accidents with
a substance not belonging to them, and of their ex
istence out of a subject ; as to whether the accidents
of the bread and wine possessed the power of nourish
ing; and the like. The discussion of such points ex
actly suited the genius of the Scholastic Philosophy,
and at length matured the theory of the Eucharist,
as professed in the Latin Church, under the name
of Transubstantiation.
In no point is the prodigious influence, which the
Scholastic Philosophy has had on the world, more
apparent, than in this particular article. Antece
dently to experience, we might have regarded it as
impossible, that a doctrine so abstruse, — so remote
from religion when viewed in its source, — not ap
pealing to any sentiment of the heart, — not capti
vating the judgment by the sublimity of its con
ception, — should have become a corner-stone of
faith to a large proportion of the Christian world.
I do not speak of its absurdity ; for it is clearly not
z The ingenuity with which the scholastic system is brought
into unity, should not pass unobserved here. As Christ has
not, in the scholastic view of the Eucharist, the forms of flesh
and blood, it might seem that Transubstantiation did not pre
serve the man. Still this could not be the case ; since it was
determined that forma substantialis hominis is anima rationales.

LECTURE VII. 339
absurd, if, by that expression, we mean its incon- !
sistency with reason. It is, on the contrary, per
fectly consistent with reason, if we grant the hypo
theses in philosophy on which it is founded. And,
even in those hypotheses themselves, there is nothing
intrinsically absurd. We can only say, with our
present light in physical science, that they are un
philosophical and untrue. The abstruseness of the
speculation is what I remark, considered together
with its popularity. It proves, how entirely sub
jugated the human understanding has been, to the
imperious reason of the Church-leaders of the middle
age. The doctrine was shaped to meet the cavils
and disputations of the spiritual body among them
selves, that no dissentient leader of a party might
produce schism in the Church ; but that, whilst the
living oracles of faith all spoke one language, a de
lusive consistency might pass for the singleness of
truth with the multitude of the faithful. If the
disputatious leader of opinion were silenced, it was
enough to secure the assent of the sequacious herd
of believers. Sometimes, indeed, expedients were
adopted to interest the imagination in favour of the
dogma, by descriptions of miraculous appearances of
flesh and blood, or of an infant, in the celebration of
the Eucharist a. But the resort to these methods
of proof, shews, that the doctrine of Transubstan
tiation, in its speculative form, was not adapted to
conciliate the attention of the vulgar, but rather the
logical armour of the Church, in its contests with
**• Note K.
z 2

340 LECTURE VII.
logical opponents. For these alleged miraculous
appearances were at variance with the proper spe
culative notion of the Real Presence. These led
the people to believe, that it was the passible body
of Christ locally present in the elements : whereas
the philosophical doctrine was, that the substance
of Christ only was present — that nature by which
He is the Christ ; and which might be represented
in an infinity of instances, whenever the sacrifice of
the Eucharist should be offered ; without being mul
tiplied in itself, or without being broken and divided
in itself, however the consecrated elements should
be physically separated into parts. The proper doc
trine of the Real Presence was a logical unity — an
ens unum in multis; — an idea, quite beyond the
reach of the unscientific intellect. The violence
again with which the Cartesian philosophy was at
tacked, still further shews how closely implicated
was the doctrine of sacramental influence with the
ancient metaphysics. That philosophy was no di
rect attack on Transubstantiation : but as rejecting
the Aristotelic theory of Matter and Form, and
therefore evidently militating with the established
notion of Transubstantiation, it had to bear the
brunt of opposition from the Schools. The polemi
cal discussions which it occasioned, are monuments
of the keen anxiety, with which the shadowy out
works of the doctrine were guarded, against the
assaults of a novel method of philosophy. Had the
doctrine been simply rested on the Divine Word, it
would have had nothing to fear; but, cased as it

LECTURE VII. 341
was in metaphysical armour, it sensitively shrank
from collision with the weapons of an Ideal Philo
sophy b-
Briefly, however, to review in conclusion that
doctrine of the Sacraments, which we have been
considering. It appears, that the simplicity of Scripture truth has
been altogether abandoned, in the endeavour to raise
up, on the solemn ordinances appointed by our Lord,
for the edification, and charity, and comfort of his
Church, an elaborate artificial system of mystical
theurgy. In the views of the Scholastic system
which have previously occupied our attention, the
Divine Being and Agency were the leading ideas.
God Himself was displayed as the great subject ; —
his power, wisdom, and goodness, as developed in
his own Being, and as diffused in the works of his
Providence and Grace. The speculation was human;
but the burthen of it was divine. But, though it is
the same thought prolonged here also, it must be ob
served, that the divine argument here is subordinate
to the human agency involved in it. The history
of the Sacraments, in the Scholastic system, is, God
working by the instrumentality of man. The theory
is of the divine causation ; but the practical power
displayed, is, the sacerdotal : the necessary instru
ment for the conveyance of Divine Grace, becoming
in effect the principal cause.
Surely it requires no research into ecclesiastical
b Note L.
z 3

342 LECTURE VII. m
history or philosophy, to see that so operose a sys
tem is utterly repugnant to the spirit of Christianity.
Contemplate our Saviour at the Last Supper, break
ing bread, and giving thanks, and distributing to
his disciples ; and how great is the transition from
the institution itself to the splendid ceremonial of
the Latin Church ? Hear Him, or his Apostles,
exhorting to Repentance ; and can we suppose the
casuistical system to which the name of Penance has
been given, to be the true sacrifice of the broken
and contrite spirit ? Or, if we think for a moment
of Jesus Christ, taking the little children in his
arms, and blessing them, and declaring that " of
" such is the kingdom of God ;" and then revert to
the minute inquiries, as to the state of infants dying
unbaptized ; — do we not seem, to have exchanged
the love of a Brother, for the cold charities of
strangers to our blood, not knowing the heart of
man, and dealing out a stinted measure of tender
ness, by the standard of abstract theory, and the
law of logical deduction ?
Thanks to the Christian resolution of our Re
formers, they broke that charm which the mysti
cal number of the Sacraments carried with it, and
dispelled the theurgic system which it supported.
We are not, perhaps, sufficiently sensible of the ad
vantages, which we enjoy through their exertions in
this respect — exertions which cost them so many
painful struggles, even to the bitterness of death.
They have taken our souls out of the hand of man,
to let them repose in the bosom of our Saviour and

LECTURE VII. 343
our God. We have been enabled thus to fulfil the
instruction of Scripture, to " come boldly to the
" throne of Grace," and ask of Him who gives liber
ally, and denies to none. The perplexities and dis
tress of heart, of which we have been relieved, none
perhaps can now adequately conceive. We must
ask of those, who have experienced the false comfort
of that officious intercession of the sacramental sys
tem of the Latin Church. They will tell us, that,
under that system, they knew not the liberty of the
Gospel. They were unhappy without resource. Their
wounds were opened, but there was none to heal c.
But, though we are free from the yoke which
the Sacramental ritual imposes on members of the
Roman Communion, we still require watchfulness
against the temptation to refine on the subject, and
lest we enslave ourselves to a kind of priestcraft
in our own minds. The tendency to raise questions
about Baptism, in modern times, is an evidence of
this spirit of refinement. Men are not content with
the simple declarations; — "Repent, and be bap-
" tized :" — " Except a man be born of water and the
" Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God :"
" Go, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
" name of the Father, Spn, and Holy Ghost :" —
nor will they acquiesce in the duty of conforming
their practice to these Scriptural injunctions. But
it is thought by some, that the question must
further be decided, whether Baptism is in all cases
equivalent to Regeneration. They propose a ques-
c Note M.
z4

344 LECTURE VII.
tion, that is, as to the intrinsic efficacy of the
rite; — a difficulty, which practical Christianity by
no means calls upon us to decide, and the decision
of which, after all, can be only speculation. In
regard, indeed, to both the Sacraments, singleness
of heart is the only human means that we pos
sess, of apprehending their true import. " He
" which hath said," observes Hooker, " of the one
" Sacrament ; ' Wash, and be clean ;' hath said con-
" cerning the other likewise ; ' Eat, and live.' If
" therefore," he continues, (I quote his words for
their general application to the whole subject of
the Sacraments,) if " without any such particular
" and solemn warrant as this is, that poor distressed
" woman, coming unto Christ for health, could so
" constantly resolve herself; ' May I but touch the
" ' skirt of his garment, I shall be whole ;' what
" moveth us to argue of the manner how life should
" come by bread ; our duty being here but to take
" what is offered, and most assuredly to rest per-
" suaded of this, that, can we but eat, we are safe ?
"... What these elements are in themselves, it
" skilleth not ; it is enough, that to me which take
" them, they are the body and blood of Christ : his
" promise in witness hereof sufficeth : his word he
" knoweth which way to accomplish : why should
" any cogitation possess the mind of a faithful com-
" municant, but this ; O my God, thou art true ! 0
" my soul, thou art happy d ?"
d Eccl. Pol. V. 67.

LECTURE VIII.
NATURE AND USE OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY.

SUMMARY.
Examination of the nature and use of Dogmatic Theology sug
gested by previous inquiry — Confusion of thought on the subject,
evidenced in popular statements of the relation between Faith
and Reason — also in attempts to settle the necessary points of
belief — Discussion of the Scholastic principles : i . that whatever
is first in point of doctrine is therefore true ; and 2. that the
logical consequence of any doctrine is necessarily true — The
former principle, a remnant of Scholastic view of Theology as a
demonstrative science — Universality and ubiquity of belief no
tests of divine truth — The principle only true when strictly con
fined to Scripture facts — Contrast of the earlier and later Chris
tian writers in the tradition of doctrine — The preference for
earliest authorities inconsistent with the principle which es
tablishes doctrines by logical consequences — Symbolical nature
of language in its application to Theology — Unscriptural doc
trines must result from the method of logical deductions — Ne
cessity imposed in such a case of answering all objections —
Impossibility of maintaining thus the principle of Authority —
Progressive accumulation of doctrines by such a mode of pro
ceeding — Truth of Fact confounded with Truth of Opinion in
the Scholastic method — No dogmas to be found in Scripture
itself — Dogmas therefore to be restricted to a negative sense,
as exclusions of unscriptural truth — Articles and Creeds not
necessarily to be dispensed with, because imperfect — Their de
fence however not to be identified with that of Christianity —
Use and importance of Dogmatic Theology to be drawn from its
relation to Social Religion.
Sum of the whole inquiry — Present interest of it — Scholas
ticism the ground of controversial defence to the Church of Rome
— Remnants of it in Protestant Churches in the state of Con
troversy, and in the importance attributed to peculiar views of
religious truth — Result of the examination sufficient to prove
the force of Theory on our Theological language — The impres
sion from this fact not to be transferred to the revealed truths
which are real parts of sacred history — Real beneficial effect of
honest search into the truths of Divine Revelation.

Jeremiah XXIII. 28.
He that hath my word, let him speak my word faith
fully. What is the chaff to the wheat ? saith the Lord.

nsrrnN pi^-no jtom •nai -sat" toa i-cn "ibJmi
t— lv v — - aw: * t; ¦¦ — : - • ¦ t : ¦••—:—

Qui habet sermonem meum, loquatur sermonem meum
vere. Quid paleis ad triticum ? dicit Dominus. Lat. Vuxg.

LECTURE VIII.

THE examination in which I have been engaged,
involves the consideration of two principles of Theo
logy : 1. That whatever has been originally esta
blished in Religion is true ; whatever is subsequent,
or may be shewn to have arisen at any particular
period during the progress of the Gospel, is cor
rupt ; 2. That whatever may be deduced by ne
cessary inference from any established proposition,
must also be true. These principles were employed
by the School-divines in two ways : either to prove
the affirmative of any point ; or to demonstrate the
erroneousness of any assumed truth. I purpose now
calling your attention to a discussion of these fun
damental principles ; and, from this discussion, to
deduce the nature and use of Dogmatic Theology.
The consideration of our Religion, under this last
point of view, is naturally brought before the mind,
by the inquiries which I have been pursuing into
the effect of Scholasticism on our theological lan
guage. For the question arises : If a technical
statement of the Sacred Truth necessarily involves
so much of human theory — if, as has been shewn,
the Christian doctrines, in their mode of expression,
carry so much of the speculation of an antiquated
philosophy ; — how far are all human formularies of
faith to be admitted ; and what is the ground, on

350 LECTURE VIII.
which they rest their pretension to be received by
the Scriptural Christian ?
The discussion on which I am now entering, is
an arbitration of the point, where Divine Truth
ends, and Human Truth commences ; or, where
the certainty of Divine Fact ceases, and the pro
bability of Opinion takes its rise, in matters of Re
ligious belief and conduct. For it is the confusion
of the limits of these two things, that brings per
plexity into the subject ; occasioning fallacious in
ductions from one ground of assent to the other.
The dialectical theologian calls upon us to receive
his sentences, as the voice of God which none can
gainsay ; building the necessity of pious submission
on the theoretic necessity of demonstrative argu
mentation : or, on the other hand, he appeals to our
reason, and insists on our accepting, as irrefragable
conclusions, what no conclusion of reason can es
tablish, and what ought to rest solely on the autho
ritative Word of God.
Hence it is that writers, in different ages of the
Church, have been so often employed in debating
the respective provinces of Faith and Reason. A
confusion of thought has been constantly prevalent
on the subject. The very circumstance of treating
Faith and Reason as distinct principles, is an evi
dence of this confusion : as if the assent to Divine
Truth could be an act of Faith, in any way distinct
from an act of Reason. The mischief of such a
statement of the case is, indeed, too apparent from

LECTURE VIII. 351
experience. The indolent, or the sensitive, mind,
readily seizes on a distinction, which, to the one,
saves the trouble of thought* and diligent examin
ation, — to the other, supplies a pious sentiment for
the acceptance of any wild, or even repulsive doc
trines of religion. To say; this is of Faith, — that is
of Reason, — peremptorily silences all suspicions and
misgivings of the judgment and the heart. Persons
are thus led to overlook the analogy of God's deal
ings with his creatures ; and to imagine, that the
truths of the world of Grace are to be received
and judged, by a different set of principles from
those which are applied to the ordinary providences
of God. On this hypothesis, there is nothing so
extravagant that may not be admitted as part of
Divine Truth. Indeed, the more extravagant any
proposed doctrine is, the more attractive should it
be, on such a principle, to the religious inquirer:
since it is then, a more striking exemplification of
the contrast supposed between truths of Faith and
Reason. Many a devout and excellent mind, I fear,
has been seduced from sober religion, by this specu
lative distinction between Faith and Reason : or, at
least, where fanatical doctrine has been adopted, it
has furnished a defence, against which, all attempts
to convince of error have been necessarily unavailing.
What, however, has been at bottom the real object
of all these inquiries, is, to ascertain the distinction
between dogmas and facts of Religion. Men have
found both rested on the same footing. They have

352 LECTURE VIII.
felt perplexed at the evident discrepance between the
two things so associated ; and their prejudices, not
suffering them to make the requisite separation, they
have applied themselves to laying down limits, be
yond which human reason could not proceed. Thus
it is sometimes stated, that Reason is concerned
about the evidence of Religion, Faith about the
things revealed; — a distinction, which leaves the
real matter of dispute altogether untouched ; since
it is about the various things themselves proposed
to our belief, that we want a criterion. It appears
to me, that such a mode of stating the case is further
highly objectionable ; on the ground that we may
be thus led to ascribe to Tradition the authority of
Scripture, and to receive the Truth of Man, with
the deference due only to the Truth of God.
The want of a proper satisfaction on this ques
tion, is evidenced also in the floating state of opinion,
as to what doctrines are to be regarded necessary
to be believed and professed, and what may be vari
ously held without danger to salvation a- The dis
putes on these points are remnants of the scholastic
spirit, which reduced all religion into theoretic dog
mas. The comparative importance of theories may
be reasonably examined ; for, as such, they may be
viewed in their relations and consequences. The re
lation of any particular theory to the Divine Being
a See Bramhall's " Schism Guarded," Works, fol. 1677. pp.
400 — 402. — Stillingfleet's " Rational Account," &c. Works, fol.
1709. vol. iv. pp. 51 — 54. — Note A. Lecture VIII.

LECTURE VIII. 358
immediately, or its consequence as affecting our pri-
mary notions of the Divine Being, will, of course,
render that theory one of principal importance; that
is, in religious conduct, of indispensable necessity in
order to salvation. But, when we have once sepa
rated matters of religion into simple facts divinely
revealed, and theories of divine truth founded on
those facts ; there can be no question of relative
importance in what we receive as purely divine.
The theology resulting from such an estimate, is
either altogether entirely worthy of our acceptance,
or is open to the strict examination of our reason
as to its probability. Between facts, all of which
are admitted to be real signatures of God in his
dealings with man, there is no comparison, no
choice. All must be equally received and followed
as true. It is not for us to decide, what instances
in the display of God's providences, are more or
less important. To overlook any one in the con
struction of a religious system, would be as unphi
losophical as it would be impious. But, so far
as doctrines are deductive statements — conclusions
drawn from the facts, or words, of Divine Reve
lation, — they may be examined by that reason
which deduces them. It being granted that they
follow from the data of Scripture, it is to be seen,
whether they are such as ought to have been de
duced ; whether they have the support of evidence,
from their general accordance with Scripture, — from
the concurrent opinion of the wise and the unpre
judiced, — and from other considerations of this kind.
a a

354 LECTURE VIII.
And the degree of evidence, resulting from such
considerations, must decide the theological truth and
relative importance of such conclusions.
Let us inquire then, in the first instance, into
that principle of the Scholastic Theology : — that
whatever is originally established as a point of doc
trine, is therefore true ; whatever has subsequently
arisen, is corrupt b : — and let us see, whether it has
not had a considerable influence in producing that
confusion of thought, which we find existing on the
subject of Dogmatic Theology.
Justly to examine this principle however, let us
take it as it is stated by the great authority on this
point, Vincent of Lirins : according to whom the test
of orthodoxy is ; that a doctrine should have been be
lieved in all places, and in all times, and by all menc;
and any doctrine accordingly, which does not bear
these marks of catholicity, must be heretical.
Now it appears to me, that the principle itself,
current as it is in the language of Protestants,
is a relic of that Philosophy, which sought, with
such anxious search, for a speculative certainty to
b TertuUian states it thus, using it as a decisive argument
against the heretic : Hanc regulam ab initio Evangelii decucur-
risse, etiam ante priores quosque hasreticos, nedum ante Praxeam
hesternum, probabit tam ipsa posteritas omnium hsereticorum,
quam ipsa novellitas Praxeas hesterni. Quo perasque adversus
universas heereses, jam hinc praejudicatum sit ; Id esse verum,
quodcumque prius, id esse adulterum quodcumque posterius.
Adv Prax. II. p. 501 .
c Commonitorium, p. 317. ed. Baluz. Quod ubique, quod sem
per, quod ab omnibus, creditum est.

LECTURE VIII. 355
moral facts ; finding no rest until it had reduced the
variable truth connected with human life, to the
same exactness which belongs to truth purely me
taphysical. The eternity and immutability attri
buted to the theorems of science, would, in such a
state of philosophy as that of the primitive and
middle ages of the Church, seem to be still more
appropriately the characteristics of that Wisdom
which descended from above. For the wisdom given
by Revelation was, as I have throughout been en
deavouring to shew, conceived, in the theory of the
Schools, to be a demonstrative science, established
by necessary links of dependence on primary truths
concerning God. Theology, accordingly, was a sci
ence on a footing with other sciences, or rather with
what we now call the exact sciences, as contrasted
with sciences resting on observation and experience.
But an assumption of the nature of Theology so
erroneous, naturally led to the assumption also of a
test of its truth, founded on the fundamental miscon
ception. The universality, and the ubiquity of be
lief, were thus applied to the case of theological
doctrine, as equivalents, in this instance, to the
eternity and immutability of the principles of scien
tific demonstration. These views of divine truth
were, at least, approximations to the certainty be
longing to pure science. And hence the truth which,
in its proper nature, and in order to its due recep
tion, appeals to the candour, the fairness, the piety
of the individual Christian, was brought under the
iron sway of speculative argumentation. In short,
a a 2

356 LECTURE VIII.
the belief of man, the rebellious, uncontrollable prin
ciple of his nature, was subdued to that passive
obedience which the imperative force of reason in
itself exacts.
But it is only an assumption, as I further would
proceed to shew, that universality and ubiquity are
thus made the tests of religious doctrine. No uni
versality or ubiquity can make that divine, which
never was such. It is a mere prejudice of veneration
for antiquity, and the imposing aspect of an unani
mous acquiescence, (if unanimous it really be,) which
make us regard that as truth, which comes so recom
mended to us. Truth is rather the attribute of the
few than of the many. The real Church of God
may be the small remnant, scarcely visible amidst
the mass of surrounding professors. Who then shall
pronounce any thing to be divine truth, simply be
cause it has the marks of having been generally or
universally received among men ?
If we go back to the primitive age of Apostles
and Evangelists, the acknowledged inspired teachers
of our Religion, who received their instructions by
the hearing of the ear and the seeing of the eye,
and the handling of the Word of Life, and to whom
God spoke in the thoughts of their hearts; there
can be no doubt that the principle holds to the
fullest extent. To doubt it then, is to raise a ques
tion, whether there has been a case of inspiration,
or to what extent inspiration may be regarded as
a ground of authority. Assuming, however, that
there is a clear case of inspiration established in re-

LECTURE VIII. 357
gard to our sacred Books, — that they are a com
plete volume of inspiration, — and that this inspiration
extends to all matters pertaining to the kingdom of
God, which we are concerned to know, — it follows,
that whatever is recorded in those books is indis
putably true; and that nothing independent of these
books, or not taken from them, can possess the same
authority, — not to say in degree only, — but even in
kind. For this is divine truth ; whatever is dis
tinct from it, is human. So that, in the history of
doctrines, when we look to their Scriptural source,
we may affirm, that whatever is first is true, what
ever is of a subsequent period is corrupt.
But, the moment that we step out of this sacred
inclosure, the maxim proves to us a most fallacious
guide. In fact, the reverse of it is much nearer to
the truth. For, if we consider what the state of
things was, when the first inspired teachers disap
peared from the world, we shall find it extremely
adverse to the maintenance and propagation of the
truth as it was purely inspired.
Take first into view the novelty of the case. The
new leaven of divine truth was just infused into the
mass of complex human opinions ; those opinions,
the results of associations and habits, not only di
versified in themselves, but fundamentally heathen
or Jewish, discordant with the spirit of the Gospel.
What chance could a pure religion have had in
such a state of things, of being generally simply
received, as a collection of divine truths? Would
not those obstacles, that we know to have existed
a a 3

358 LECTURE VIII.
in the minds of the Apostles, antecedently to their
divine illumination, exist at least equally in the
minds of first converts, not enjoying the like illu
mination from above ? The ear of the world was
not attuned to the songs of Sion ; and, though in
some honest and good hearts, finely sensible to the
touch of the Holy Spirit, they may have awakened
concordant emotions, yet, in very many instances,
the immortal sounds would be lost in the dissonant
murmurs of irreligious thoughts and feelings. To
suppose it otherwise, is to go against the analogy of
all similar cases. It is to suppose, that knowledge
could be obtained without previous training; that
the air of divine truth could be commonly breathed,
amidst an atmosphere charged with heathen pro-
faneness, and the carnal prejudices of Judaism.
But, not to dwell on these presumptions of the
state of the case ; what is the fact, when it is dis
passionately considered, as to the immediate suc
cessors of the Apostles ? Take even the very period
when the Apostles themselves were teaching ; when
the Holy Spirit Himself went about with those
chosen vessels of divine truth, putting into their
hearts and mouths what they should say. At this
very period, the most wild theories were incorpo
rated with Christianity: the hearer of an Apostle
sought to obtain from him with money the power
of the Spirit, the strength itself of the Apostle's
labours in the Gospel. But to come to the period
of the Apostolic Fathers. Whatever praise we may
assign to them for their ardour and firmness as be-

LECTURE VIII. 359
lievers, can we justly ascribe to them the merit of
accurate expositors of Christian Truth ? Imparti
ality, I think, requires us to say otherwise. Were
we to endeavour, indeed, to form a system of divi
nity out of these writers, it would be found neces
sary to explain away many of their positions and
expressions, in order to bring them into accordance
with the admitted truths of Scripture. As evidences
of the essence and spirit of the Gospel, as it was
handed down from its outset, they are invaluable ;
as testimonies of the earnestness of individuals, — of
their Christian character and Christian hopes, — the
writings are also highly interesting and important :
but as authorities decisive of what is true or what
is false in theological statement, they are in reality
less valuable than the writings of a subsequent age.
The remark may be extended to the Fathers of
the IHrd and IVth and Vth centuries, in compa
rison with each other. Compare TertuUian at the
end of the Und century, with Augustine at the end
of the IVth, and this difference is readily perceiv
able. In TertuUian, we see nothing of the deliber
ation, the accuracy, the thoughtful sedulity of Au
gustine ; but he at once rudely throws out his
thoughts, as if dealing blows on his adversary, and
caring nothing but for the force with which he
strikes. Augustine is strenuous in his dogmatism ;
but he is prudent at the same time, subduing the
vehemence of the personal combatant, into keeping
with the art of the theological diplomatist. Whilst,
•then, from TertuUian, we should gather many ex-
a a 4

360 LECTURE VIII.
pressions of Scriptural truth inconsistent with the
truth itself; in Augustine, the systematic caution
with which he writes, acts in some measure as a
security against such a perversion. And the later
writer, accordingly, is the more authentic oracle of
what is true, or what is false, in theology, than the
earlier. The Montanism, indeed, of TertuUian has
served as a practical caution against the abuse of
his authority. Otherwise, perhaps, we should have
seen his doctrines quoted with that reverence, which
prejudice ascribes to his place in the roll of ecclesi
astical tradition. Justin Martyr and Origen, at the
distance of about an hundred years from each other,
are instances to the same point. Origen had a far
more capacious mind than the Syrian martyr — a
far greater penetration of thought ; — combining a
philosophical power of discerning analogies with an
acuteness of logical deduction. Origen, no doubt,
must be read with a very severe scrutiny : we must
be ever on our guard against the enthusiasm of spe
culations, raised on the stores of a vast erudition,
and tinged with the many-coloured hues' of Oriental
and Greek philosophy. But, at the same time, he
is, I conceive, a much more important author than
Justin, the nearer to the Apostolic times, in order
to the decision of a disputed point of theology. The
comparison, indeed, of Justin and Origen illustrates
the case forcibly ; since, in respect of piety and
Christian feeling, both have powerful claims on our
love and veneration. Both were sincere Christians
in their writings and in their actions. And yet,

LECTURE VIII. 361
viewing them as equal in this respect, we cannot
rest on the authority of Justin, with the confidence
due to the inquisitive spirit of Origen.
And yet I do not mean that either Augustine or
Jerome, or any other ecclesiastical writers, are, be
cause they are later, more truly excellent as Church
authorities. I speak only relatively, as examining
the position, whether the most ancient are, as such,
the most valid authorities in doctrine. The later
writers have, indeed, their peculiar danger — the
danger arising from their greater art and tact in
the management of controversy.
It was only, indeed, about the commencement of
the IVth century, that Christians began to appear
at the Schools established by the Emperors. And
it is from that period that Christian Literature pro
perly commences. Previously it was heathen phi
losophy, accommodated to the delivery of Christian
Truth : so that from those who undertook the de
fence or explanation of Christian doctrines, the Truth
received a large portion of alloy in its transmission.
Consequently the earlier Fathers are, in reality, much
less instructive than the later.
There is one excellence that they possess in the
contrast with the later, — a far more valuable excel
lence indeed than that of mere exactness of theo
logical statement, — the greater piety, and Christian
spirit, of some of the primitive Christian Fathers, as
compared with some of the later, whose authority is
chiefly employed in the Church. Had the reverence
to antiquity been rested on this ground, no com-

362 LECTURE VIII.
plaint could have been made. It is, as if we were
drinking of the pure fountain, near its rise, before it
was rendered turbid in its passage into the world.
For the same reason, the errors of the primitive
Fathers are much less dangerous in their effect
than those of their successors. Their errors are left
loose and indefinite on the surface of their Christian
system. The Fathers of the IVth century incor
porated their errors with the Gospel itself. But
practical Christianity, and dogmatic Christianity, are
two very different things. And conclusions belong
ing to the one, have been improperly transferred to
the other.
Not only again was the early Christian literature
generally defective; but the language itself, in which
Christian doctrines should be expressed, was yet to
be formed. The terms in which the truth was to
be appropriately signified, required to be acted on
by the force of usage, like all other significant ex
pressions. It was yet to be ascertained, what proper
meaning the tacit convention of theological writers
should affix to them. The latitude with which some
of the most important terms of Theology, as sub
stance, nature, person, were used in the earlier
writers, is a sufficient evidence of this. None, in
deed, of the strictly technical terms may be said to
have been settled in their use, until controversy had
given them their mould and temper. To seek, ac
cordingly, among the earlier Fathers of the Church,
for authorities by which conflicting doctrines may
be decided, is often only to embarrass ourselves with

LECTURE VIII. 363
an unsettled phraseology; or to extort from words a
sense which they could not have at the time when
they were written. The method, like the torture of
the ancient judicial investigations, forces the indi
vidual expressions thus examined, to confess what
they do not mean, — to disburden themselves of a
burden, with which they have not been charged d-
From these considerations it may be concluded,
that the principle is at least a very doubtful one,
which would lead us to ascribe any peculiar au
thority in the decision of religious truth, to the
declarations of the primitive Christian writers ;
Christian writers, I say, as distinct from the In
spired Authors, to whom alone that deference is due.
But, have the advocates themselves of this prin
ciple adhered to it in fact ? Have they not rather
completely departed from it, in their adoption of
that other principle of their theology ; that whatever
is logically deducible in the way of consequence
from any given divine truth, must also be true ?
Let us then proceed to examine this point, both in
itself, and in its connexion with the other assump
tion of Scholasticism.
That the principle in itself is most fallacious,
must appear from what I have, on a former occa
sion, stated, respecting the nature of a Logical Theo
logy. It was shewn, that the terms of all theological
propositions are mere assumptions in their applica
tion to Theology, — a symbolical language, derived
" Note B.

364 LECTURE VIII.
from the operation of the mind about the objects of
the natural world. Hence it is evident, that con
clusions drawn from these terms, are nothing more
than further connexions of that symbolical language :
and that there the 'proper use and application of
them is terminated. The interpretation of them to
denote new facts in the Divine scheme of things,
is perfectly arbitrary ; as hypothetical, indeed, as
if we had at once assumed the facts themselves
to which we apply them. It is like starting from
an inaccurate algebraic statement, and working
out results by the established rules of calculation.
It is like making every circumstance in an emblem
or metaphor, the ground of scientific deduction.
Only the delusion of applying an ingenious instru
ment to the solution of the case, makes the ap
parent solution seem satisfactory. The cogency
and perspicuity of logic are mistaken for the certain
and clear discovery of religious truth. This ob
servation cannot be too much insisted on; as the
practice is, by no means, restricted to the days of
scholasticism ; but is to be met with every day, both
in writings and in conversation. We cannot be too
often reminded, that the terms employed in theolo
gical discussion are no classifications of theological
ideas and terms. They are simply the superscrip
tions, or labels, by which we denote several classes
of facts, respectively placed under them, as it were.
This is the nature of language as applied to nature.
Still more so is it, when language is applied to
Theology.

LECTURE VIII. 365
In the scholastic ages, indeed, theologians looked
more to the consequence than to the position itself.
The method of theology then pursued, being essen
tially argumentative ; the deep-thoughted eye learned
to dive to the lowest point of any given principle,
and, with unwearied vision, to seize the most remote
deductions, as if they were present on the surface.
The heretical disputant in vain fluttered and shifted
his position. The serpent-gaze of the subtile logi
cian was still watching the tendency of all his efforts,
and bound him by an irresistible fascination to the
spot from which he was anxious to escape.
It is this circumstance, it may be remarked by
the way, which renders it so very difficult to ascer
tain the precise shades of opinion, by which differ
ent heresies are distinguished. Consequences have
been imputed as principles of belief; and the dis
putants on each side not questioning the fairness of
the imputation, an ambiguity has resulted in regard
to the original tenets opposed.
But the great mischief of adopting this rule in
Theology, appears in the fact, that no purely Scrip
tural truth can be maintained consistently with its
admission. The theologian who is influenced by it,
will be ever solicitous against exposing his doctrine
to the censure of the captious objector. What a
temptation then is here, to the minute adjustment
of doctrines to the cavils of the theorist? The pain
ful pursuit of the dogmatist will be to attain that
precise form of expression, which shall obviate, as
far as possible, every objection that may be raised

366 LECTURE VIII.
from the existing state of knowledge in the different
departments of science. He must be prepared to
shew, that this, or that notion, is implied, or ex
cluded, in his doctrine, as the case may require.
Nor is this all. He must be further able to de
monstrate, that his collection of doctrines coheres
as a system ; that no assertion is made on one
head, that may not be strictly reconciled with an
other, and with every other. Here again, then, his
mind must be kept intent on a process, very dif
ferent from that of the mere follower of Revela
tion. He must be engaged in giving a theoretic
perfection to his enunciations of the sacred truth ;
in regulating the terms of one proposition, so as to
accord with the terms of another; and that the whole
system may appear compacted of harmonious parts.
Such a theology is inevitably driven to abstrac
tions — to the subtile inventions of the mind itself —
in its statements of Scripture-truth. The simple
facts of Revelation must, by their nature, be open
to objections, and, it may be said, to unanswerable
objections ; because these facts belong to an order
of things, of which we do not directly know the
general laws. The more indeed we approximate
to a knowledge of these general laws, the more will
such objections disappear. But as we never can ar
rive, in this state of our being, at a proper know
ledge of them ; numerous anomalies, the evidences
in truth of our real ignorance of the subject, must
always exist. For, what is the explanation of an
objection but a demonstration, that an apparent

LECTURE VIII. 367
anomaly resolves itself into some general fact better
known f It is only where the mind has exactly
framed to itself the ideas comprized in any given
doctrine, or expression of doctrine, that it can de
monstrate the inconsequence of all objections what
ever. Objections may be equally futile against the
bare revealed facts : but they cannot be decisively
proved to be so ; since the facts are not founded
on any precise estimate of ideas involved in them :
and in regard to these, therefore, objections may be
suffered to stand, without any detraction from our
theology. The case, on the other hand, of a meta
physical theology imperatively demands their solu
tion. Is it then for a moment to be supposed, that
the simplicity of the Faith can be held, where
such a principle of Theology is recognized ? Is it
not evident rather, that the Faith, as it is in Christ,
must be corrupted ? The conclusions of human
reason will naturally be intruded on the sacred
truth. The fact will be accommodated to the
theory : and exactness of theological definition will
usurp the place of the plain dictates of the Holy
Spirit. The instances adduced, in the course of the present
Lectures, of the Scholastic mode of establishing doc
trines, abundantly illustrate these observations. The
principle of Consequences was, indeed, the life and
soul of the Scholastic system, as such. Scholasticism
only adopted the principle of Authority, so far as it
artfully insinuated itself into the established Church

368 LECTURE VIII.
system ; maintaining the unity and infallibility of
the Church, amidst its own unauthorized, adven
turous theology d.
For we may observe how impossible it was,
to adhere to the simple principle of authority in
fact, whilst theological truth was pursued by pro
cesses of argumentation. A system of truth so
formed would necessarily be progressive. Fresh
objections against particular parts of the system
would arise from time to time, as the state of know
ledge varied, and as curiosity was attracted to points
of controversy. But it was not competent to the Scho
lastic theologian, to avoid the determination of such
questions. He was assailed within his own terri
tory. His own arms were hurled against him. His
logical theology could no longer stand, if the hostile
consequences were not fenced off. The necessity of
the case would call upon him constantly to proceed
in the decision of questions ; and thus to add to his
number of doctrines ; until at length he would be
found, far to have exceeded the narrow base of the
prescriptive Theology with which he commenced.
Hear the testimony of Augustine to this effect :
" Many things," he says, " were latent in the Scrip-
" tures ; and, when heretics were cut off, they agi-
" tated the Church of God with questions. The
d The principle of authority (to adopt an illustration sug
gested by a friend) acted as the barrier in the lists of ancient
tournaments. The combatants might use every art and device
within the lists : but when either of them was pressed against the
immovable fence, he was not allowed any attempt to break
through or overleap it : he must surrender, or perish.

LECTURE VIII. 369
" latent things were opened, and the Will of God
" was understood. . . . Many therefore, who were
" excellently qualified for discerning and handling
" the Scriptures, were latent in the people of God,
" and did not assert the solution of difficult ques-
" tions, when no calumniator threatened. For, was
" the subject of the Trinity perfectly treated, before
" the barkings of the Arians ? Was the subject of
" Repentance perfectly treated, before the opposition
"of the Novatians? So, neither was the subject of
" Baptism perfectly treated, before the contradiction
" of the rebaptizers, who were put out. Nor con-
" cerning the very unity of Christ were the state-
" ments exactly drawn out, until after that the se-
" paration began to annoy the weak brethren. So
" that those who had the skill to treat and resolve
" these points, to prevent the perishing of the weak
" thus solicited by the questions of the impious,
" drew forth, and made public, by discourses and
" disputations, the hidden things of the Law e."
It is expressly acknowledged, we find, that doc
trines grew under the hands of disputants : that even
the most sacred articles of the Trinity, and of the
Incarnation, only gradually reached their perfect
dogmatic expression. I might multiply quotations
to the same purport, from various writers of the
Scholastic age. I may, indeed, sum them up by
stating it as their uniform confession, that the
speculations of " heresy," — in other language, the
conclusions of human reason, — forced the Church
e August, in Psalm. LIV. torn. vm. p. 177. quarto ed. — Note C.
Bb

370 LECTURE VIII.
into successive adoptions of additional doctrinal
statements ; that is, unless a particular enunciation
of sacred truth had been sanctioned by the Church
on each occasion, " the calumny of heretics could
" not have been quieted f."
That articles, indeed, might become doctrines at
one time, which had not been so at another, is ad
mitted, in the distinction drawn by Aquinas between
what is heresy, and what is not. The same opinion,
if held antecedently to the determination of the
Church, would not be heretical : it was so, when
once the Church had pronounced s.
It appears, then, that the Church-leaders, in the
endeavour to maintain at once an authoritative and
an argumentative Theology, incurred the error of
confounding truth of Fact with truth of Opinion.
It is the nature of the truth of Fact, to admit no
additional certainty from the progress of discussion.
If a fact, indeed, is questionable, then may discus
sion, and subsequent inquiry, establish it with an
evidence, which it did not appear originally to pos
sess. Such a fact partakes of the nature of the
Truth of Opinion. But the facts of the Scripture-
records are assumed not to belong to this class, by
all who acknowledge the divine character of our
*f Note D.
S Non enim, ut quisque primum in fide peccarit, hsereticus
dicendus est; sed qui, Ecclesise auctoritate neglecta, impias
opiniones pertinaci animo tuetur. Catechism, ad Partithos, p. 80.
Roma;, 1761. — Note E.

LECTURE VIII. 371
sacred books. Any fact, therefore, that is found
expressly written in the Bible, must be regarded, by
virtue of its sole and primary existence there, to be
ascertained with an evidence to which no further
proof can add reality. We may indeed, and we
often do, bring confirmation to Scripture-facts, by
historical or philosophical evidence. But this is
always done on the assumption for the purpose
of argument, that the fact so established is antece
dently questionable ; and with the view of proving
the divine authority of the whole Revelation. Take
the fact as a portion of an authentic history of
God's providences; and it appears to the eye graven
with an iron pen on the rock, in characters as bold
and strong as the rock itself. But the Truth of
Opinion is of a nature to be modified, and improved,
and established, by the course of time, — by the pro
gress of civilization, and arts, and knowledge, — by
accessions of experience, — by the conflict of judg
ments. Here also there is occasion for personal in
fluence and authority, in guiding the minds of indi
viduals. It would be quite unreasonable in mat
ters of opinion, for those duly conscious of their
own disadvantage for the formation of just views,
whether from natural incapacity, or the want of
experience, or defect of skill in any particular sub
ject, to reject the conclusions of the wise and the
experienced. As the great philosopher himself ob
serves; "one ought to attend to the undemonstrated
" assertions of the wise, more than to the demon-
" strations of others." It is essential indeed to the
n b 2

372 LECTURE VIII.
truth of Opinion, that it be held as variable ; that
one should be always open to new light, — to new con
viction. Whereas a fact of the Gospel is such, that,
were an Angel from heaven to preach to us any
thing different from it, our ears must be stopped to
the sound ; we must reject it as untrue.
Now the Scholastic Philosophy, in its construction
of a theological system of Christianity, necessarily
overlooked this very important distinction. It boldly
stepped beyond the bare facts of Scripture, in the
assumption of theoretic conclusions from them, as
the principles of its theology ; and then retired upon
the authority of that Scripture, from which it had
presumptuously departed ; demanding the certainty
of fact, for the dictates of progressive, varying,
opinion. Had it called upon the Faithful to respect the
learning, the zeal, the piety, the candour of the
Master in Theology ; had it insisted on a patient,
docile hearing of opinions, hoary with age, and con
secrated by venerable names in Church-History ; it
would have recognized a sound theory of Tradi
tion h- But we should not then have had dogmas
intruded into the place of Religion, and arbitrations
of doubts forced on the conscience of believers, as
the voice of the Holy Spirit speaking by the minis
ters and stewards of the divine mysteries.
It might have been supposed, that the very discus-
h Reasonings from authority, when thus regulated, are coin
cident with probabilities. See the opening of Aristotle's Topics.
The word evho^ov expresses such coincidence.

LECTURE VIII. 373
sion of religion in the form of doubts, would have
palpably shewn the impropriety of proposing truths
so obtained, as matters of Revelation ; since the
truths of religion were thus exhibited as appeals to
the reason of man. A doubt is, by its nature, rela
tive to human reason ; and the settlement of it by
argument, is a simple decision of human reason. If
the conclusion be received on the authority of the
reasoner in his sacerdotal character ; the previous
doubt and the argumentation are perfectly irrelevant.
So anomalous, indeed, is the mode of proceeding
in the Scholastic development of Christian Theo
logy, that it is only capable of solution, as appears
to me, from the fact noticed at the commencement
of these Lectures ; that the Scholastic system was a
prolonged struggle between Reason and Authority.
The effort throughout is, to maintain both princi
ples. But the method of Theology being originally
founded in speculation and resistance to mere au
thority, we find traces of this beginning, in the com
promise of principles which the maturity of the
system displays. It is ratiocination that triumphs ;
and Logic domineers over Theology.
The previous discussion has, I trust, prepared
the way for the conclusions, which I wish now to
submit to your consideration, as to the nature and
use of Dogmatic Theology.
It is evident, I think, from the inquiry which I
have been pursuing, on the whole, as well as more
immediately from the preceding observations, that
B b 3

374 LECTURE VIII.
the doctrinal statements of religious truth, have
their origin in the principles of the human intellect.
Strictly to speak, in the Scripture itself there are no
doctrines. What we read there is matter of fact :
either fact nakedly set forth as it occurred ; or fact
explained and elucidated by the light of inspiration
cast upon it. It will be thought, perhaps, that the
Apostolic Epistles are an exception to this observ
ation. If any part of Scripture contains doctrinal
statements, it will, at any rate, be supposed to be
the Epistolary. But even this part, if accurately
considered, will not be found an exception. No one
perhaps will maintain, that there is any new truth of
Christianity set forth in the Epistles ; any truth, I
mean, which does not presuppose the whole truth
of Human Salvation by Jesus Christ, as already
determined and complete. The Epistles clearly im
ply that the work of Salvation is done. They
repeat and insist on its most striking parts ; urging
chiefly on man, what remains for him to do, now
that Christ has done all that God purposed in
behalf of man, before the foundation of the world.
Let the experiment be fairly tried : let the inve
terate idea, that the Epistles are the doctrinal por
tion of Scripture, be for a while banished from the
mind : and let them be read simply as the works of
our Fathers in the Faith — of men who are com
mending us rather to the love of Christ, than open
ing our understanding to the mysteries of Divine
Knowledge : and, after such an experiment, let each
decide for himself, whether the practical, or the theo-

LECTURE VIII. 375
retic, view of the Epistles, is the correct one. For
my part, I cannot doubt but that the decision will
be in favour of the practical character of them.
The speculating theologian will perhaps answer, by
adducing text after text from an Epistle, in which
he will contend that some dogmatic truth, some
theory, or system, or peculiar view of divine truth,
is asserted. But " what is the chaff to the wheat ?"
I appeal, from the logical criticism of the Apostle's
words, to their Apostolical spirit — from Paul philo
sophizing, to Paul preaching, and entreating, and
persuading. And I ask, whether it is likely that
an Apostle would have adopted the form of an epi
stolary communication, for imparting mysterious pro
positions to disciples, with whom he enjoyed the
opportunity of personal intercourse ; and to whom
he had already " declared the whole counsel of
" God ;" whether, in preaching Christ, he would
have used a method of communicating truth, which
implies some scientific application of language, — an
analysis, at least, of propositions into their terms, —
in order to its being rightly understood ? And I
further request it may be considered, whether it
was not, by such a mode of inference from the
Scripture-language, as would convert the Epistles
into textual authorities on points of controversy,
that the very system of the Scholastic Theology was
erected. Dogmas of Theology then, as such, are human
authorities. But do I mean to say by this, that
B b 4

376 LECTURE VIII.
they are unimportant in Religion, or that they are
essentially wrong, foreign to true Religion, and in
consistent with it ? I wish rather to establish their
importance and proper truth, as distinct from the
honour and verity of the simple Divine Word.
We have seen how Doctrines gradually assume
their form, by the successive impressions of con
troversy. The facts of Scripture remain the same
through all ages, under all variations of opinions
among men. Not so the theories raised upon them.
They have floated on the stream of speculation. One
heresiarch after another has proposed his modifica
tion. The doctrine, so stated, has obtained more or
less currency, according to its coincidence with re
ceived notions on other subjects, — according to the
influence possessed by its patrons, or their obstinacy
against persecution. Nearly the whole of Chris
tendom was, at one time, Arian in profession'. At
one time, Pelagianism seemed to be the ascendant
creed of the Church k. In such a state of things, it
was impossible for the Scriptural theologian, even
if not himself susceptible of the seductive force of
a Logical Philosophy, to refrain from mingling in
the conflict of argument. Orthodoxy was forced
to speak the divine truth in the terms of heretical
speculation ; if it were only to guard against the
novelties which the heretic had introduced. It was
the necessity of the case that compelled the orthodox,
as themselves freely admit, to employ a phraseology,
* Note D. k Note E.

LECTURE VIII. 377
by which, as experience proves, the naked truth of
God has been overborne and obscured.
Such being the origin of a Dogmatic Theology,
it follows, that its proper truth consists in its being
a collection of negations ; of negations, I mean, of
all ideas imported into Religion, beyond the ex
press sanction of Revelation. Supposing that there
had been no theories proposed on the truths of
Christianity ; were the Bible, or rather the divine
facts which it reveals, at once ushered into our
notice, without our knowing that various wild no
tions, both concerning God and human nature, had
been raised upon the sacred truths ; no one, I con
ceive, would wish to see those facts reduced to the
precision and number of articles, any more than he
now thinks of reducing any other history to such a
form. We should rather resist any such attempt as
futile, if not as profane: or, however judiciously
such a selection might be made, we should undoubt
edly prefer the living records of the Divine Agency,
to the dry and uninteresting abstracts of human com
pilers and expositors. But, when theoretic views
are known to have been held and propagated ; when
the world has been familiarized to the language of
these speculations, and the truth of God is liable to
corruption from them ; then it is, that forms of ex
clusion become necessary, and theory must be re
torted by theory. This very occasion, however, of
the introduction of Theory into Religion, suggests
the limitation of it. It must be strictly confined to
the exclusion and rejection of all extraneous notions

378 LECTURE VIII.
from the subjects of the sacred volumes. Theory,
thus regulated, constitutes a true and valuable phi
losophy, — not of Christianity, properly so called, —
but of human Christianity, — of Christianity in the
world, as it has been acted on by the force of the
human intellect.
This is the view which I take, not only of our
Articles at large, but in particular, of the Nicene
and Athanasian Creeds, as they stand in our Ritual,
or are adopted into our Articles. If it be admitted
that the notions on which their several expressions
are founded, are both unphilosophical and unscrip
tural ; it must be remembered, that they do not
impress those notions on the Faith of the Christian,
as matters of affirmative belief. They only use the
terms of ancient theories of philosophy, — theories
current in the Schools at the time when they were
written, — to exclude others more obviously injuri
ous to the simplicity of the Faith. The speculative
language of these Creeds, it should be observed, was
admitted into the Church of England as established
by the Reformers, before the period, when the genius
of Bacon exposed the emptiness of the system, which
the Schools had palmed upon the world as the only
instrument for the discovery of all Truth. At such
a time, accordingly, the theories opposed in the ori
ginal formularies of the orthodox, would be power
fully felt as real obstacles to a sound belief in Chris
tian Truths ; and the terms, declaring the orthodox
doctrine, would be readily interpreted by the exist
ing physical and logical notions. The minds of

LECTURE VIII. 379
men would be fully preoccupied with the notions of
matter, and form, and substance, and accident ; and,
when such notions had produced misconception of
the sacred Truth, it would be a necessary expedient,
to correct that misconception by a less exceptionable
employment of them \
If this account of the origin and nature of Dog
matic Theology be correct, surely those entirely per
vert its nature, who reason on the Terms of doc
trines, as if they were the proper ideas belonging to
Religion ; or who insist on interpretations of ex
pressions, whether as employed by our Reformers,
or the primitive believers, in a positive sense ; with
out taking into their view, the existing state of
theology and philosophy at the different periods of
Christianity. Creeds and Articles, without such pre
vious study, are as if they were written in a strange
language. The words, indeed, are signs of ideas to
us, but not of those ideas which were presented to
the minds of men, when the formularies were writ
ten, or when they were adopted by the Church.
But here the question may be asked, how far on
these grounds Creeds and Articles may be retained,
when the original occasion for them has ceased?
The answer of Hooker will readily occur to many ;
that, the occasion having ceased, it by no means
follows, that the statements themselves should no
longer be of use m ; a fact that may be illustrated
l Note F.
m Eccies. Polity, b. V. 42. p. 167, &c. vol. II. 8vo. ed. 1807.

380 LECTURE VIII.
by several analogies. But the case of Articles is a
peculiar one in this respect ; that the result itself is
conceived to be an evil, or, at least, an alternative
to avoid an evil : it being admitted to be better,
except by way of antidote against heretical doc
trine, that there should be no other Articles but
the Word of God itself. It appears to me, then,
that the occasion for Articles will probably never
cease. Were the Realism of the human mind a
transient phenomenon, peculiar to one age, or one
species of philosophy, and not, as is the fact, an
instinctive propensity of our intellectual nature ;
then it might be supposed, that the unsoundness of
a metaphysical and logical Theology being once
fully admitted, the cumbrous machinery might be
removed, and the sacred truth allowed to stand
forth to view, in its own attractive simplicity. But
such a result seems rather to be wished, and prayed
for, by a sanguine piety, than reckoned upon in
the humbling calculations of human experience.
In the mean time, it were well to retain, amidst
all its confessed imperfections, a system of tech
nical theology, by which we are guarded, in some
measure, from the exorbitance of theoretic enthtt-
siasm. It would be a rashness of pious feeling,
that should at once so confide in itself, as to throw
down the walls and embankments, which the more
vigilant fears of our predecessors have reared up
around the City of God. In the present state of
things, such a zeal for the Faith would look more
like the ostentatiousness of Spartan courage, than

LECTURE VIII. 381
the modest discipline of the soldiers of Christ, trust
ing in his arm for success, and yet availing them
selves of all natural means of strength, which their
reason points out.
The force, indeed, of History must always act on
a literary age ; and an influence is exercised, by
former speculators, on the opinions and conduct of
their successors. We cannot therefore conclude ;
that, because the original occasion of Creeds and
Articles has ceased, there are actually no existing
prejudices of a like kind, kept alive by the tradition
of former opinions, to be obviated by the like theo
retic statements.
At the same time, we must not suppose, that the
same immutability belongs to Articles of Religion,
which we ascribe properly to Scripture-facts alone.
As records of Opinions they are essentially variable.
It is no impeachment of their truth, to regard them
as capable of improvement, — of more perfect adapta
tion to the existing circumstances of the Church at
different periods. As to the difficulty and hazard
of any actual alteration, I have nothing to say. I
do not presume to say, that alteration is actually
required. I am merely addressing myself to the
general question, as to the capacity of improvement
in Church-Creeds and Articles, with the view of
suggesting a right theory of the subject. To deny
the essential variableness of such documents, is, to
admit an human authority to a parity with the au
thority of Inspiration. It is to incur the imputation,

382 LECTURE VIII.
which members of the Roman Communion have
sometimes brought against the Church of England ;
that, professing to make the Scriptures the sole Rule
of Faith, we have inconsistently adopted another
Rule of Faith in the deference paid to our Articles.
It is a temptation, indeed, to which the members
of any particular communion of Christians are pecu
liarly exposed — to identify the defence of the formu
laries of the Communion with the defence of Chris
tianity. It is like securing the fortifications of the
city, instead of looking to the strength and discipline
of its garrison as the main resource. As belonging
to a Communion, we must be able to shew that we
have good reason for our preference. And it is
enough for this purpose, to prove that our Church
is truly Scriptural in its basis, walking in the foot
steps of the Holy Spirit, and drinking of the pure
fountain of inspiration. This is the sole proper
notion of the infallibility of a Church. For it is an
infallibility not its own, but of God present with
it. We are not called upon, to defend every parti
cular expression which has been adopted into its
formularies. This would be, to make it infallible in
itself It would be to suppose, that a fortress, strong
in its internal resources, must fall, because some of
its outworks are not impregnable. And we may
find indeed at last, that, by such a proceeding, we
are tenaciously cleaving to means of defence, which
the present state of religion and knowledge entirely
supersedes : as we might suppose the inhabitant of

LECTURE VIII. 383
a castle fortified in feudal times, imagining himself
safe amidst his walls, against assaults from modern
inventions in the art of war.
The use and importance then of Dogmatic Theo
logy are to be estimated, from its relation to the
Social Profession of Christianity. It is, in regard to
Christianity, what political institutions are in regard
to the social principles of our nature. As these
principles are the real conservative causes of human
society; and political institutions are the supports
and auxiliaries ; so are the dogmas of Theology en
forcements by external barriers, of the saving, quick
ening truths of the Gospel. The imperfection of
man is equally the occasion of both. Were all men
just, the social instincts would develop themselves,
without the artificial methods of civil government.
So, were all the humble disciples of Christ, Christian
sentiment would speak in its own accents, and not
be constrained to learn the foreign tongue of tech
nical theology. The case appears to be this. The
agreement of a community in certain views of
Scripture-facts is presupposed. The problem be
fore the Dogmatic Theologian is, to preserve that
agreement entire ; to guard it from a latitudinarian-
ism which would virtually annul it ; and to prevent
its dissolution by innovators, either within or with
out the religious society. The anathemas of Creeds
and Councils can only be justified on this ground.
They are the penalties of social Religion. The
authority of the Church, which has prescribed any
particular collection of Articles to its members, by

384 LECTURE VIII.
the use of these invisible sanctions, calls upon them,
not to profess its doctrines lightly and unadvisedly ;
but to bear in mind the awful responsibility at
tached to matters of divine Revelation ; and that it
is about these they are engaged, when they set their
hand to Articles or any professions of doctrine.

I have now completed the inquiry which I pro
posed, into the influence of the Scholastic Philosophy
on our Theological Language ; at least to the ex
tent which the present occasion permitted ; and suf
ficiently, I trust, to the establishment of the fact;
that this Philosophy is the basis of all our most im
portant technical terms, and modes of thinking, both
in Religion and in Ethics. I have also, in this last
Lecture, discussed the principles of Authority and
of Reason, which the Scholastic system embodied in
itself ; and have endeavoured to draw the line of dis
tinction, between a legitimate combination of them
in a system of Dogmatic Theology, and that arrogant
method of universal speculation, which, commencing
with the confusion of all human truth, ends in the
confusion of Divine Truth with human.
Nor let it be supposed, that the speculative Theo
logy into which I have been examining, is a thing
of another day — a mere matter of curiosity to the
literary or ecclesiastical historian. I should have
failed indeed in the present attempt to bring the
subject before you ; if this should be the impression

LECTURE VIII. 385
from it. Scholasticism indeed has passed away, as
to its actual rude form, in which it appeared in the
middle age. But its dominion has endured. In
the Church of Rome, indeed, it still holds visible
sway ; clothed in the purple of spiritual supremacy,
and giving the law of Faith to the subject-con
sciences of men. Those who are at all acquainted
with the public documents of that Church, as esta
blished by the Council of Trent, or with its con
troversial writers, will attest the general observation;
that it is the metaphysics of the Schools, which form
the texture of the Roman Theology, and by which
that system is maintained. In the destitution of
Scripture-facts for the support of the theological
structure, the method of subtile distinctions and
reasonings has been found of admirable efficacy. It
eludes the opponent, who, not being trained to this
dialectical warfare, is not aware, that all such ar
gumentation is a tacit assumption of the point in
controversy ; or is perplexed and confounded by the
elaborate subtilties of the apologist. No argument
indeed from fact can suffice against the artifice of
distinctions. The expert metaphysician is ready
with some new abstraction, as soon as he is assailed
with an adverse position or consequence ; and the
objector feels himself entangled in meshes, against
which his strength, however superior, is wasted in
unavailing efforts. The resistance, which the Roman
Church has shewn against improvements in Natural
Philosophy, is no inconsiderable evidence of the con
nexion of the ecclesiastical system with the ancient
C c

386 LECTURE VIII. <**•
Logical Philosophy of the Schools. There has been
a constant fear, lest, if that philosophy should be
exploded, some important doctrines could not be
maintained n.
But, though the sorceries of the Scholastic Theo
logy have been dispelled where the light of Re
formation has been received ; yet the transformations
of religious truth, which they effected, could not at
once be reversed by the same effort of improvement.
The minds of men had been trained to think and
speak of divine things, in the idiom of Scholasti
cism. So that, not only the reformer in Philosophy,
but the reformer in Religion also, was compelled to
use the phraseology of. the system which he assailed.
Thus, through its technical language, has Scholasti
cism survived even in Protestant Churches. Clearly,
we may trace its operation in the controversies agi
tated among Protestants about Original Sin, Grace,
Regeneration, Predestination ; — all which, when
strictly considered, are found to resolve themselves
into disputes concerning the just limits of certain
notions, — into questions of the exactness of pro
posed definitions. So again, it is not uncommon
to find, even among our own * theologians, one
doctrine insisted on, as necessary to be admitted
in order to the reception of another. Original Sin,
for instance, is not unfrequently inculcated, as es
sential to be believed to the fullest extent, in order te
an acceptance of the truth of the Atonement : as if
the truth of either doctrine were a matter of logical
n Note G.

LECTURE VIII. 387
deduction, or dependent on the truth of the other :
whereas, in the correct view, each is an ultimate fact
in the revealed dispensations of God, resting on its
own proper evidence. Once acknowledging, indeed,
the reality of the Christian Revelation, we are bound
to refer the whole of Human Happiness to the me
diation of Christ; though the Scriptures had been
entirely silent respecting the fact of the intrinsic
sinfulness of man. And conversely ; we should have
been under an obligation of acting, as feeling our
selves under sin, and naturally incapable of hap
piness ; had the Scriptures simply stated our incapa
city and misery, without revealing the mercies of
the Atonement.
The real state of the case then is, that the spirit
of Scholasticism still lives amongst us : that, though
we do not acknowledge submission to its empire, we
yet feel its influence °.
At the time, indeed, when Luther raised his voice
against the corruptions sanctioned by the Roman
Church, the complaint was, that the spiritual lessons
of Scripture were become a dead letter. There were
however, even at that time, men of deep and fami
liar acquaintance with Scripture, the votaries of an
ardent and sincere piety. Their religion, however,
was inaccessible to the poor, and the illiterate, and
the busy. It was the privilege of the theologian, —
of the holy and speculative recluse. The mass of
° The practice itself of preaching from Texts of Scripture is
a remnant of Scholasticism. At the time of the Reformation
it was carried to the most absurd excess. — Note H.
c c 2

388 LECTURE VIII.
the people indolently, or superstitiously, reposed on
the sanctity of their Fathers in religion; and sought
their rule of faith and conduct, in devout attendance
on the vicarious ministrations of the man of God.
In a word, Religion was become a professional
thing. None could be truly and properly religious,
but those who were versed in the logic and casu
istry of a scientific theology. Therefore it was, that
Luther so vehemently proclaimed the great doc
trine of Justification by Faith alone ; setting himself
against that divorce of Theology and popular Reli
gion, by which the Gospel had in effect been unevan-
gelized and desecrated. And are there not still traces
amongst us, of a separation between the religion of
the few and the religion of the many? The delusion
indeed has passed away in its theoretic form ; that
true religion can consist in any thing but in holiness
of active life, — in an habitual conduct conformed to
the example of our Lord Jesus Christ. But the
principle of that separation, against which the Re
formation was directed, is still seen in that enthu
siasm, which, even in these days, loves to diffuse
itself in sentimental religion ; — which spends the
strength of devotion in holy thoughts, — the lux
ury, like the Scholastic Piety, only of the pure, the
cultivated, the sensitive, and the ardent mind. It
is now an enthusiasm of the heart, rather than of
the intellect. But the principle is still the same. Re
ligion is converted into Theological Contemplation.
The examination which I have been pursuing,

LECTURE VIII. 389
has led me over much entangled ground ; from
which I can hardly hope to have extricated myself,
in a way to satisfy the views, or scruples, of all
whom I address. But the peculiar difficulty of
forming just estimates of controversial statements,
— and of seizing the shifting lights of philosophical
theories, as they have passed over the truths of
Revelation, and given to them their various hue,
— will obtain for me, I trust, a patient and candid
construction of opinions expressed. It would ill be
come me, indeed, to dogmatize on a subject, in
which I am directly engaged in illustrating the
injurious effects of Dogmatism in Theology ; and
especially before an audience, from some of whom
I should rather expect the judgment of a point, than
endeavour to impose my own opinion. It must be
admitted, I think, on the whole, that the Force of
Theory has been very considerable in the modifica
tion of our Theological language. Aud I would
submit to your reflection, whether that force has
been sufficiently allowed for, either in our general
profession of Christianity, or in our controversies on
particular articles of Doctrine ?
But, however successfully I may have established
the desired conclusion ; there may, I fear, remain in
some minds, — where there has existed an indiscrimi
nate veneration of the names and terms attached to
Christianity, as of parts of the holy religion itself, — a
painful impression of mistrust, — a suspicious reason
ing with themselves ; that, either the argument must
c c 3

390 LECTURE VIII.
be erroneous, or they have followed cunningly-devised
fables — the imaginations of the sophistical wisdom of
this world — as the Gospel of Truth ? For the sake
of such persons, I would once more call attention to
the divine part of Christianity, as entirely distinct
from its episodic additions. Whatever may have been
the motives and conduct of successive agents em
ployed in its propagation from age to age ; whatever
may have been the speculations of false Philosophy
on the facts of Christianity ; those facts themselves
are not touched ; — they remain indisputable, so far
as any objections on such grounds can avail. These
facts form part of the great History of mankind :
they account for the present condition of things in
the world : and we cannot deny them without in
volving ourselves in universal scepticism. There
can be no rational doubt ; that man is in a degraded,
disadvantageous condition, — that Jesus Christ came
into the world, in the mercy of God, to produce
a restoration of man, — that He brought Life and
Immortality to light by his coming, — that He died
on the Cross for our sins, and rose again for our
justification, — that the Holy Ghost came by his
promise to abide with his Church, miraculously as
sisting the Apostles in the first institution of it,
and, ever since that period, interceding with the
hearts of believers. These, and other truths con
nected with them, are not collected merely from texts
or sentences of Scripture : they are parts of its re
cords. Infinite theories may be raised upon them ;
but these theories, whether true or false, leave the

LECTURE VIII. 391
1
facts where they were. There is enough in them
to warm and comfort the heart ; though we had
assurance of nothing more.
It is an excellent effect indeed of unprejudiced
theological study, — a reward, it may be called, of
our honesty in the pursuit, — that our sensitiveness
to particular objections diminishes, as we advance in
the investigation. If there are any therefore, whose
anxiety for the sacred cause has been awakened by
any observations in the course of the present Lec
tures ; I exhort them to proceed, fearless of any
ultimate shock to the real truth of Christianity by
the most searching investigation. The knowledge
of the speculations, which have mingled with the
statement of the truth, cannot but be, in the result,
of the greatest service. It will enable the theolo
gical student to see, that objections against the theo
retic parts of doctrines (and objections are prin
cipally of this kind) are no objections against the
fundamental doctrines themselves — the revealedfacts
— which are really and in themselves, independent
of those theories. And, — what is of even still greater,
far greater, importance to him as a Christian, — it
will inculcate on him candour, forbearance, charitable
construction of the views of others, an humble and
teachable disposition towards God.

c c 4

APPENDIX. NOTES.

APPENDIX.

LECTURE I.
NOTE A. p. 17-
I HAVE translated the following epistle of Jerome, wish
ing to give the general reader a more obvious view of the
style of intermingled address and authority which appears
in it ; and which affords a fair specimen of the general cha
racter of the writer : though it is impossible by translation,
to present a full idea of the art of the composition ; as the
very collocation of the words is studied, both to please the
ear and give point to the expressions.
Jerome*- to Damasush.
Since the East, jarred by inveterate fury of the people
among themselves, tears piecemeal the Lord's tunic " with-
" out seam and woven from the top;" and foxes exter
minate the vine of Christ0; so that, amidst " the broken
" cisterns that hold no water d," it may with difficulty be
discovered, where is the " sealed fountain, and the in-
" closed garden :" I have, therefore, thought it right to
consult the chair of Peter, and the faith approved by apo
stolic lips ; demanding my soul's food from the same source
now, whence formerly I took on me the vestments of
Christ e.
Nor, in truth, could the vast expanse of liquid element,
" Hieronymi Opera, ed. Erasmi, 1565. torn. II. p. 131.
b Damasus, a Spaniard by birth ; Bishop of Rome from A. D. 367 to
A. D. 384. Jerome had been his ecclesiastical secretary.
c Cantic. ii. 15. d Jerem. ii. 13.
e Alluding to his ordination at Rome, or more probably to his baptism
there.

396 APPENDIX.
and the interjacent length of lands, restrain me from
searching for the precious pearl. Wherever the carcase is,
there are the eagles gathered together. The patrimony
being squandered by an evil offspring, with you alone is
preserved uncorrupted the inheritance of the fathers. There
the earth with fruitful glebe returns an hundredfold the
pure seed of the Lord : here, overwhelmed in the furrows,
the wheat degenerates into darnel and wild oats. Now in
the West the sun of justice rises ; but in the East, that
Lucifer who had fallen, has placed his throne above the
stars. You are the light of the world ; you the salt of the
earth ; you the vessels of gold and silver : here the vessels
of clay, or wood, await the rod of iron and eternal con
flagration. Although therefore your greatness deters me,
still your kindness invites me. From a priest I ask the
victim of salvation ; from a shepherd the protection of the
sheep. Let invidiousness droop : let the ambition of the
Roman summit recede. It is with the successor of the
fisherman, and the disciple of the cross, that I am speak
ing. For my part, except as following Christ, I associate no
first f in communion with your Blessedness ; that is, with
the Chair of Peter : on that rock, I know, the Church was
built. Whoever without that house has eaten of the lamb,
is profane. If any one is not in the ark of Noah, he will
perish when the flood prevails. And because for my of
fences s, I have migrated to that solitude which parts Syria
from the adjacent Barbarian confines; and I am unable
always to ask the holy thingh of the Lord from your Sanc
tity, at such intervening spaces ; I therefore, follow your
colleagues here, the Egyptian Confessors ; and lurk, my
self a little bark, under ships of burden '. I know not
Vitalis; Meletius I reject; I am ignorant of Paulinusk.
f To shew that He did not give precedence to the Patriarch of Antioch.
g As doing penance by self-mortification.
h Erasmus explains this of the body of Christ, or the Eucharist.
' As contrasting his own affected littleness with the full-freighted sanctity
of the Egyptian monks.
k All, bishops of the Arian party at Autioch.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 397
Whoever gathers not with you, scatters : that is, who is
not of Christ, is of Antichrist.
Now therefore, alas! after the Nicene faith, after the
Alexandrian decree made in concurrence with the West,
the novel expression of three hypostases is exacted of me,
a Roman man, by the Arian Prelate and the people of the
Campe '. Who are the Apostles, I pray, that have handed
down such things ? Who is the new master of the nations,
— the Paul, — that has taught them ? Let us ask them ;
what they conceive can be understood by three hypostases.
Three persons subsisting, they say. We answer, that we
so believe. The sense is not enough ; they are importu
nate for the term itself: because some unknown poison
lurks under the syllables. We exclaim, if anyone con
fesses not three hypostases, or three enhypostata, — that
is, three subsisting persons, — let him be anathema. And
because we do not get words by heart, we are judged here
tical. If any one however, understanding by hypostasis,
usia, does not say, one hypostasis in three persons, he is
alien from Christ. Yet under this confession, we are,
equally with you, branded with the cautery of the Union m.
Determine if it is your pleasure, I beseech you ; I shall
not fear to say three hypostases : if you order it, let a new
faith he framed after the Nicene ; and let us who are the
orthodox confess in like words with the Arians.
The whole school of secular literature knows nothing
else by hypostasis, but usia. And who, I ask, with sacri
legious mouth will proclaim three substances. One and
sole is the nature of God, which truly is. For, what sub-
' The curve of the coast of Cilicia, so called.
ni The familiar name for Sabellianism. Union however scarcely gives the
same idea as the Latin Unio. The term Cautery is borrowed from the
practice of branding a mark on the young soldier. — So again he says iu au
epistle to the Presbyter Mark : Haereticus vocor, homusion prsedicans trini-
tatem. Sabellianse impietatis arguor ; tres subsistentes, veras, integras, per-
fectasque personas, indefessa voce pronuntians. . . . Quotidie exposcor fidem ;
quasi sine fide renatus sim. Confiteor ut volunt ; non placet. Subscribo ;
uon creduut. Opera, torn. II. p. 315.

398 APPENDIX.
sists, has not from any other ; but is its own. Other things
which are created, though they seem to be, are not; because
at one time they were not ; and that which has not existed,
may again not exist. God alone, who is eternal, — that is,
who has no beginning, — holds truly the name of Essence.
Therefore also to Moses from the bush, he says, " I am
" that I am ;" and again, " He that is sent me." There
existed truly then, angels, heaven, earth, seas. Yet how
does God vindicate to Himself properly the common name
of Essence? But, because that nature alone is perfect,
and one Deity subsists in three persons ; which truly ex
ists, and is one nature; whoever says, that three are, —
that is, that three hypostases are, — that is, usia; — under
the name of piety, attempts to assert three natures.
And if this be so, why are we by walls separated from
Arius ; when in perfidy we are coupled with him ? Let
Ursicinus n be joined with your Blessedness ; let Auxen-
tius" be associated with Ambrose. Far be this from the
Roman Faith. Let not the religious hearts of the people
imbibe so great a sacrilege. Let it suffice us to say; one
substance, three persons subsisting, perfect, equal, co-
eternal. Let there be no mention of three hypostases, with
your leave; and let one be held. It is of no good sus
picion ; since, in the same sense, the words are dissentient.
Let the traditional mode of belief suffice us. Or, if you
think it right, that we should say three hypostases with
their interpretations, we refuse not. But believe me, poison
lurks under the honey : an angel of Satan has transfigured
himself into an angel of light. They interpret hypostasis
well ; and when I say, that I hold what they themselves
expound, I am judged heretical. Why so anxiously do
they hold one word? Why do they lurk under an am
biguous expression ? If I so believe, as themselves affect
to think ; let them permit me also to speak their own sense
in my own words.
" An Arian competitor with Damasus for the papal see.
° Arian Bishop of Milan, predecessor of Ambrose.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 399
I therefore beseech your Blessedness, by the Crucified
One, the Salvation of the world, — by the homoousion Tri
nity, — to give me authority by your letters, either to for
bear saying, or to say, the hypostases. And lest perhaps
the obscurity of the place in which I am living, may es
cape your search, be so gracious as to transmit your writ
ings by your letter-carriers, to Evagrius, the presbyter, who
is well known to you ; at the same time, to signify with
whom I should communicate at Antioch : since the people
of the Campe, coupled with the heretics of Tarsus, are
only ambitious that, supported by the authority of your
communion, they may proclaim three hypostases in the
ancient sense.
NOTE B. p. 17-
After the death of Auxentius, the city of Milan was
thrown into commotion by the contending factions of the
Arians and the Orthodox ; each seeking to elect as suc
cessor to the see, a man of their own party. Ambrose ap
pears in the Church, in his capacity of Prefect of Italy, to
quell the disturbance : when suddenly, according to his
biographer Paulinus, the voice of an infant in the crowd
called out the name of Ambrose. The name was received
as an happy omen by the assembled multitude, and spread
from mouth to mouth, until the uproar of acclamation pro
claimed the choice of the people to have fallen on the Pre
fect himself. He leaves the Church, ascends the tribunal
of justice, and tries the constancy of his electors, as Pau
linus proceeds to relate, by a severity unusual in him, the
question by torture. Still the people continue their ac
clamations, " Thy sin be upon us ;" " Thy sin be upon
" us ;" — thus silencing any scruples of his conscience. He
attempts further to decline their importunity by flying
from the city at midnight ; and his escape being prevented,
afterwards conceals himself in a private house. But all
being unavailing, the reluctant Prefect at length con
sents to take on him the burden of the sacred office,

400 APPENDIX.
and ascends the step to the honours of his future saint-
ship. We may not unreasonably suspect in this instance, a
dissimulation like that of some civil rulers, who have de
clined in appearance, a proffered crown, the real object of
their ambition. This is the more likely, when we find,
according to the same authority, Probus, the Praetorian
Prefect, by whom Ambrose was sent to quell the com
motion at Milan, instructing him to " go and act, not as
" judge, but as bishop :" and hailing afterwards, in the
election of Ambrose, the fulfilment of his word P.
Ambrose himself thus speaks of his own election.
Quam resistebam ne ordinarer, postremo cum cogerer,
saltem ordinatio protelaretur ! Sed non valuit praescriptio,
prsevaluit impressio. Tamen ordinationem meam occiden-
tales episcopi judicio, orientales etiam exemplo, probarunt.
Et tamen neophytus prohibetur ordinari, ne extollatur su-
perbia. Si dilatio oKdinationi defuit, vis cogentis est: si
non deest humilitas competens sacerdotio, ubi causa non
hseret, vitium non imputatur. Ambros. Epistol. LXI1I.
Oper. torn. n. p. 1037-
Dicetur enim : Ecce ille non in ecclesiae nutritus sinu,
non edomitus a puero, sed raptus a tribunalibus, ahductus
de vanitatibus saeculi hujus, a praeconis voce ad psalmistne
adsuefactus canticum, in sacerdotio manet, non virtute sua,
sed Christi gratia, et inter convivas mensae caelestis re-
cumbit. Serva, Domine, munus tuum ; custodi donum
quod contulisti etiam refugienti. Ego enim sciebam quod
non eram dignus vocari episcopus ; quoniam dederam me
saeculo huic, &c. Ambros. De Pcenit. lib. II. Oper. torn. u.
p. 432.
Unus enim verus magister est, qui solus non didicit quod
omnes doceret : homines autem discunt prius quod doce-
ant, et ab illo accipiunt quod aliis tradant. Quod ne ipsum
quidem mihi accidit. Ego enim raptus de tribunalibus,
v Amhrosii Vii. per Paulinum. — The work is addressed to Augustine. Pau-
linus, the author, was a deacon, and notary, or secretary, to Ambrose.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 401
atque administrationis infulis, ad sacerdotium, docere vos
ccepi, quod ipse non didici. Itaque factum est ut prius
docere inciperem, quam discere. Discendum igitur mihi
simul, et docendum est ; quoniam non vacavit ante discere.
Ambros. De OJjficiis Ministror. I. c. 1.
The instance given by Gregory Nazianzen, of a similar
election, is the following one.
12s 8' els nXeCovs roi; br\pov biaipedevros, /cat dXXtav aXXov
rrpofiaXXopeviav , onep kv rots roiovrois <piXel avp/3aCveiv, as
eKaaros ervyev r\ (piXCas irpos rtvas eyinv, r\ Trpbs debv evXa-
fieCas, reXos avp<ppovriaas 6 bfjpos aVas, rbv rrp&rov Trap' avrols
eva, ftbo pev k£eiXeypevov , ovitto be no deCio fiairrCapan /ca-
reaeppayiapevov, tovtov a.K0vra avvapndaavres, Kai apa arpa-
TiwnKrjs xeLP°s avXXaj3opevrjs avrols rriviKavra kmbrjpovarjf
kirl rb ftrjpa edeaav, ko.1 rots kniaKonois irpoarryayov, reXeadrj-
vai re rj£Covv, Kai Kr\pv)(drp>ai, rreidol /3tai> avapCgavres' ov XCav
pev evraKTCos, XCav be niar&s /cat biarrvpas. Kqvravda ovk eanv
elirelv, ov nva evboKipdrepov kKeCvov, Kai deoaefieaTepov, bi-
ebei£ev 6 /catpos. rt yap yCverai ; ko.1 ttoi irporjXdev r\ ardais ;
e/3tao*6*?jo*az*, rjyviaav, aveKr/pv^av, rai rbv dpovov edeaav, xet/>'
pfiXXov, tj yvdpy, Kai biadeaei, irvevparos. k. t. X. Orat. XIX.
Mentioning a recurrence of these contentions, he adds :
Kai f; ardais rjv, oaio depporepa, roaovrto ko.1 aXoyairepa.
Ov yap rryvoelro ro virepaipov, &arrep 0118' ev aarpaaiv ijXios,
aAAa ko.1 XCav kirCbr)Xov r\v, rots re dXXois a-naai, Kai tov Aaoi?
pdXiara rcS kyKpCrio re ko! KaOapwrdria, oaov re rtepl ro firjpa,
Kai Saov kv rois Ka& rjpas Nafapatots* ecp ols I8et ras roiav-
ras 7J*po/3oAas Keladai povois, rj on p&Xiara' Kai ovbev av rjv
rats kKKXrjaCais /ca/coV aXXa prj rots evTropardrois re ko.1 bv-
varcordrois, rj <f>opq br\pov ko.1 aXoyCq, Kai rovriav avr&v pd
Xiara rots evcavordrois. vvv be Kivbvveva ras brjpoaCas apyas
evraKTiorepas irtoXapfidveiv r&v rjperepaiv, ats rj deia x<Vts
km(pripC(eTai,, ko! ^eXrCia r&v roiovrcav 8totKJirijv cpo/3ov, rj Xo-
yov. Orat. XIX. Oper. ed. Par. 1609. pp. 308. 310.
Jerome admits the right of the people to call to the
clerical office, when, in writing to Rusticus, he says : —
Dd

402 APPENDIX.
et te, vei populus, vei pontifex civitatis, in clerum ele
gerit. Hieron. ad Rustic. Monach. Oper. torn. i. p. 47.
NOTE C. p. 18.
The following passage gives a lively picture of the occu
pations of Ambrose.
Non enim quaerere ab eo poteram, quod volebam, sicut
volebam, secludentibus me ab ejus aure atque ore catervis
negotiosorum hominum, quorum infirmitatibus serviebat.
Cum quibus quando non erat, quod perexiguum temporis
erat, aut corpus reficiebat necessariis sustentaculis, aut lec-
tione animum. Sed cum legebat, oculi ducebantur per
paginas, et cor intellectum rimabatur, vox autem et lingua
quiescebant. Saepe, cum adessemus, non enim vetabatur
quisquam ingredi, aut ei venientem nuntiari mos erat, sic
eum legentem vidimus tacite, et aliter numquam : seden-
tesque in diuturno silentio, (quis enim tarn intento esse
oneri auderet?) discedebamus, et conjectabamus eum parvo
ipso tempore, quod reparandse menti suae nansciscebatur,
feriatum ab strepitu causarum alienarum, nolle in aliud
avocari, et cavere fortasse, ne auditore suspenso et intento,
si qua obscurius posuisset ille, quem legeret, etiam expo-
nere necesse esset ; aut de aliquibus difficilioribus discep-
tare quaestionibus, atque huic operi temporibus impensis,
minus quam. vellet voluminum evolveret; quamquam et
caussa servanda*: vocis, quae illi facillime obtundebatur, pot-
erat esse justior tacite legendi. Quolibet tamen animo
id ageret, bono utique ille vir agebat. Augustin. Confess.
VI. 3.
Ambrose however amply testifies to his own influence.
Quasi vero superiore anno, quando ad palatium sum pe-
titus ; cum praesentibus primatibus ante consistorium trac-
taretur ; cum imperator basilicam vellet eripere ; ego tunc
aulae contemplatione regalis infractus sim, constantiam
non tenuerim sacerdotis, aut imminuto jure discesserim?
Nonne meminerunt, quod ubi me cognovit populus paia-

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 403
tium petisse, ita irruit, ut vim ejus ferre non possent ;
quando comiti militari cum expeditis ad fugandam multi-
tudinem egresso obtulerunt omnes se neci pro fide Christi.
Nonne tunc rogatus sum, ut populum multo sermone mul-
cerem ? sponderem fidem, quod basilicam ecclesiae nullus
invaderet ? Et cum pro beneficio meum sit officium pos-
tulatum ; tamen quod populus ad palatium venisset, mihi
invidia commota est. In hanc igitur invidiam me redire
desiderant. Revocavi populum, et tamen invidiam non
evasi ; quam quidem invidiam ego temperandam arbitror,
non timendam. . . . Quid enim honorificentius quam ut
imperator ecclesiae filius esse dicatur ? Quod cum dicitur,
sine peccato dicitur, cum gratia dicitur. Imperator enim
intra ecclesiam, non supra ecclesiam est : bonus enim im
perator quaerit auxilium ecclesiae, non refutat. Epist. XXI.
Oper. torn. n. col. 871—873.
The whole epistle is worth attention, as an evidence of
the high tone which the Latin Church-leader could as
sume. In Epistle XXII. addressed to his sister, we have
an account of the finding of the bodies of the martyrs
Gervase and Protase, and of the wonder-working power
attributed to them, of such timely service to Ambrose in
the defence of his church at Milan.
NOTE D. p. 22.
The letter of Volusian to Augustine is chiefly remark
able, as shewing the easy familiarity with which doubts on
the most important doctrines could be proposed to Au
gustine without offence. This letter is that of a young
man, freely stating some difficulties started in conver
sation respecting the Incarnation, and asking a solution
of them from one, whose character and opinion were
felt to be entitled to entire respect. Jerome also was
open to inquiries from his followers and admirers ; as we
perceive from his epistles to Paula and Eustochium, dis
cussing scripture-difficulties. But he seems to have re
quired a more implicit devotion to his authority ; a refer-
D d 2

404 APPENDIX.
ence to him as to an oracle of scriptural interpretation,
and not merely the arbiter of controversy. Augustine
appears to great advantage, in point of affability and good-
humour, in the contrast with him, in the correspondence
which passed between them on Jerome's translation of
some passages of the Bible. Augustine addressed to him
three letters, before he could obtain an answer. In re
plying, Jerome complains of what Augustine had called
questions, as reprehensions of his works; and of the length
to which he must proceed, were he to answer them to his
wish. Praetermitto, he says, salutationis officia, quibus
meum demulces caput ; taceo de blanditiis, quibus repre-
hensionem mei niteris consolaril. Again, in a subsequent
epistle, charging Augustine with dispersing throughout
Italy some strictures on his translation of a passage in the
Epistle to the Galatians, he says : Nonnulli familiares mei
et vasa Christi, quorum Hierosolymis et in Sanctis locis
permagna copia est, suggerebant, non simplici a te animo
factum, sed laudem atque munusculos et gloriolam populi
requirente, ut de nobis cresceres ; ut multi cognoscerent,
te provocare, me timere ; te scribere ut doctum, me tacere,
ut imperitum ; et tandem reperisse qui garrulitati mese
modum imponeret, &c. r He entreats Augustine to let
him rest in his old age ; senem latitantem in cellula la-
cessere desine ; but tells him also that he still has power,
and may be roused to conflict. Augustine's reply, though
managed with art, is calm and softening. It appears, by
the subsequent correspondence, to have produced the effect
which he desired. The affectionateness of the character
of Augustine, is evident, from the manner in which he
speaks in his Confessions, of his mother, Monica, and of
his friends, Alypius and Nebridius.
NOTE E. p. 22.
I have already referred to the correspondence between
i Epist. XI. in Augustin. Oper. ed. 4to. torn. II. fol. 14.
' Epist. XIII. fol. 18.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 405
Augustine and Jerome. Augustine's name was known
throughout the whole world s. Questions were brought
to Jerome on various matters from Italy, from Spain,
from Africa, from Greece, from Gaul, and from the ex
tremities of Germany. Paulinus ', Bishop of Nola, was an
other principal link in the communication between mem
bers of the Latin Church in the IVth century. The case of
Vigilantius shews how quickly intelligence was conveyed
from remote places. A presbyter at the foot of the Pyre
nees ventures to declaim against the abuses which had
crept into the Church, against the honours at the tombs of
martyrs, against prayers for the dead, and the austerities
and frivolities which had usurped the place of Christian
discipline. Two neighbouring presbyters, Riparius and
Desiderius, send his writings through the hands of an
other brother, Sisinnius, to Jerome. The principles of
this reformer were not confined to himself, but were ad
vocated by some bishops, and the contagion appeared to
be spreading. The acrimony of Jerome was immediately
called into action ; and he pours forth a torrent of invec
tive, the fruit of a night's lucubration, against the un
happy Vigilantius, or " Dormitantius," as he parodies the
name. This letter, or pamphlet, was transmitted by the
same Sisinnius, who was employed by Jerome on other
occasions in the like service ; and who, proceeding first to
Egypt, would diffuse the intelligence also in that part of
the world".
The rapid circulation of the several epistles which passed
between Augustine and Jerome, is evident, from the no
tices of the circumstance which occur in the course of
themx. But the Pelagian Controversy is a still more
s Episcopus in toto orbe notissimus. Hieronym. Augustino. Ep. XI.
Augustin. Oper. 4to. torn. II. fol. 41.
t Paulinus, born A. D. 354 : died in 431.
" Adv. Vigilant. Hieronym. Oper. ed. Erasm. torn. II. p. 120.
x Thus Jerome refers to the circulation of the tracts of Ruffinus against
himself. Et unde oro te librorum tuorum ad me fam a pervenit? Quis eos
d d3

406 APPENDIX.
striking illustration of the fact. The occasion of the con
troversy is given by a monk of Britain. It is quickly
propagated in the cities of Africa, in Sicily, Rhodes, and
other islands of the Mediterranean. Orosius, a Spanish
presbyter, is sent by Augustine to Palestine, to Jerome,
to communicate with him on the subject. Pelagius and
Celestius are found pleading their cause successively at
Carthage, at Rome, and at Jerusalem. And throughout
the agitation of the subject, a quick succession of com
munications is kept up between Africa, Gaul, Italy, and
Syria. The messenger was always, I believe, one of the
clergy; and the journeys were not to be accomplished
without danger. Still there was no break in the chain of
correspondence. The travels of most of the leading men of the Church
of the IVth century, should further be noticed in reference
to this point. Athanasius is found in the West, Hilary of
Poitiers in the East. Augustine perhaps was an exception
after his succession to the see of Hippo. He says of him
self in comparison with others, in writing to his own peo
ple : Illud enim noverit dilectio vestra, nunquam me ab-
sentem fuisse licentiosa libertate, sed necessaria servitute;
quae saepe sanctos fratres, et collegas meos, etiam labores
transmarinos compulit sustinere ; a quibus me semper non
indevotio mentis, sed minus idonea valetudo corporis ex-
cusavity. Epist. CXXXVIII. Oper. torn. n. ed. 4to. fol.
198. His authority' was sufficiently powerful from his own
seat of government. This spirit of personal exertion de
scended to their successors in the Latin Church of the
middle age. It is surprising with what readiness distant
and perilous journeys were performed by Churchmen of
the Xllth and XHIth centuries. John of Salisbury de
scribes his own exertions in that way. Siquidem Alpium
Romae? quis in Italia, quis in Dalmatia disseminavit ? Apolog. adv. Ruffin.
Hieronym. Oper. torn. II. p. 231.
y His health had suffered from his labours as a rhetorician. Confess. IX.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 407
juga transcendi decies, egressus Angliam : Apuliam se-
cundo peragravi. Dominorum et amicorum negotia in
Ecclesia Romana saepius gessi : et emergentibus variis
causis non modo Angliam, sed et Gallias multoties cir-
cumivi z. NOTE F. p. 23.
Sulpicius Severus speaks of the number of nobles who
were in the monastery of St. Martin, near Tours.
Mollior ibi habitus pro crimine erat ; quod eo magis sit
mirum necesse est, quod multi inter eos nobiles habeban-
tur, qui longe aliter educati, ad hanc se humilitatem et
patientiam coegerant : pluresque ex his postea episcopos
vidimus a.
St. Martin himself had served as a soldier in his youth.
The old aristocratic classes, at the period of the Vth
century, were so reduced in numbers and influence and
character, that there was no counterbalancing power against
the Clergy. Whoever indeed of those classes possessed
any energy or ambition, found his only sphere of action in
the offices of ecclesiastical government. Prefects of pro
vinces, military commanders, men of landed property,
literary men, men of the world, some of these but newly
converted, became bishops. Concessions were even made
to their philosophical opinions, where it was desired to
obtain the support of a man of talent and reputation. The
case of Synesius is a striking illustration of this. He had
his objections even on the article of the Resurrection.
And he declines undertaking the office of a bishop, un
less he may be permitted to retain his philosophical
scruples. He will concur in the public services of Chris
tianity, provided he may philosophize according to his
own taste. The people of Ptolemais had elected him for
their bishop. He candidly states his sentiments on the
subject. He refuses to put away his wife, or to live with
her in secresy, on the ground that it would be an offence
z Metalogic. lib. III. p. 838. a Vit. B. Mart. u. 10.
d d4

408 APPENDIX.
against piety and morality. 'Ejuot rotyapow, 8 re debs, o re
vop.os, t] re lepa &eo<f>CXov xeLP> yuvaiKa kmbebcoKe. npoayo-
pev<o toCvw imaai, ko.1 paprvpopai, ois kyb) ravTr)s ovre dXXo-
rpuaaopai Kaddrra£, aire as poi)(os avrfj Xddpa avveaopai. rb
pev yap rJKiara evaefies, to be rJKiara vopipov dXAa fiovXri-
cropaC re /cat eii£opai avxyd poi irdvv /cat yjprjard yeveadai rtai-
bCa. He mentions also his fondness for sports, and his
aversion to the details of an official situation ; pathetically
lamenting over his loved dogs and his bow, which he would
be forced to relinquish. 'E-n-et /cat (piXoiraCypav h>v, os ye
rraibodev alrCav ea)(ov birXopaveiv re /cat irrnopaveiv nepa tov
beovros, avidaopai pev rt yap Kai rrddca, ras (piXrdras idvas
adr/povs 6pS>v, /cat ra Toga dpurr]biaraTa' KapTr)pr\aa> be, &v
kmrdrrr] deos' /cat puaocppovns &v, obvvtfaopai pev, avigopai
be, biKibCav, /cat rrpaypdrav, XeirovpyCav nva ravrrjv, el Kai
/3apelav, kKTTiprrXas rep 0«o* boy para be ovk k-nrjXvydaopai, ovbe
araaidaei p.01 it pos rrjv yX&rrav 17 yvu>p,-q. Willing however
as he is to make some sacrifices, he resolutely refuses,
we find, any compromise of his opinions. On this point
lie explicitly says : XaXeirov kanv, el p.7] Kai XCav dbvvarov,
els yjrvxnv 7a 0L' kmaTrjprjs els dsnobeigiv kXdovra boypara aa-
Xevdfjvai. olada b' on rroXXd cpiXoao<pCa rois dpvXXovpevois
Tovrois avnbbardrTerai boypaaiv. apeXei rr\v l/a/x'/jz' ovk df ia>aa>
rrore ai&paros varepoyevrj vopC^eiv rbv Koapov ov (prjaai ko.1
raXXa pepy) avvbiatpdeCpeadar ttjv Kada>p.iXr\pev7)V dvdaraaiv
lepov n Kai drsoppryrov rjyr\pai, ko.1 rroXXov beat rats tov rrXrj-
dovs vnoXrplreaw opoXoyrjaai. vovs pev ovv (piX6ao<pos krtoitrqs
tbv rdXrjdovs, avyyapel, rfj yjteCq rov \j/evbeadai. dvdXoyov ydp
kan cp&s rrpbs dXr/deiav, /cat oju.p.a rrpbs Xrjpr)V /cat dipdaX-
pbs els /ca/coz* hv dnoXavaeiev anXriarov cpcoros. fj rots 6<pdaX-
pi&ai to cr/coVos dxpeXipc&repov, ravrrj Kai rb ifrevbos ocpeXos
elvai rCdepai brjpia' ko.1 [iXafiepbv rr]v aXr/deiav rois ovk layyovai
kvarevCaai irpbs ttjv t&v ovraiv kvdpyeiav. el ravra Kai ot rrjs
Kad^ rjpcis lepa>avvrjs avyyapovaiv kpol vopoi, bvvaCpqv hv lepa-
a6ai, ra p.ev oXkoi <piXoao(p5>v, ra be efco (piXopvd&v el pr) bi-
bdaKatv, dAA' ovbe pev roi perabibdaKiav, peveiv be k&v krrl ttjs
¦n-poXrpfreias, el be (paaiv ovra> Seti* koI Kiveladai, /cat brjXov

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 409
etvai rbv lepea rats 80'fats, ovk av <f>ddvoipi (pavepbv kpavrbv
airaai Kadiards' brjpio yap Sr) /cat <piXoao<pCq, n npos dXXrjXa ;
T7jz* pev aXrjdeiav r&v deCav drtopprjrov etvai bet' rb be TrXrjdos
erkpas egeas beXraiz. Notwithstanding this avowal, he be
came afterwards Bishop of the new Cyrene, or Ptolemais.
We may observe the mixture of heathenism and Chris
tianity, of seriousness and frivolity, which appears in some
of the bishops of this period. Their civil stations, or their
talents, carried them to the post of dignity in the great
Christian society forming around them; but they were
still, in their pursuits and manners, the representatives of
a degenerate Greek or Roman civilization. Sidonius Apol-
linaris, Bishop of Auvergne A. D. 471, is a favourable spe
cimen of the superior clergy of that day. Succeeding to
a line of progenitors who had held high offices in the Em
pire, and son-in-law to the Emperor Avitus a, himself a pre
fect and patrician, he was elected to the episcopal dignity,
before he even belonged to the clerical order. His ele
vation however to the spiritual charge made no alteration
in the man. He pursued his favourite pastimes, his po
etical pleasantries, and his social diversions, with the same
good-humour and enjoyment as before. He has given in
deed, in one of his epistles, an amusing account how the
interval, in a long religious ceremony at the tomb of
St. Justus, was employed by himself and other ecclesi
astics, in lively conversation and in various games, among
which was that of the ball, (sphcerce,) in which he took
the leadb.
Of the sort of person required for a bishop in the West
ern Church, Sidonius gives an excellent idea in another
epistle, where he describes his selection of a person to
that office for the people of Bourges, who had placed
the appointment in his hands. The following passage of
1 Synesii ad Fratrem, Ep. CV. p. 386. ed. 8vo. Paris, 1605.
* Cui pater, socer, avus, proavus, prasfecturis urbanis, praetorianisque,
magistcriis palatinis, militaribusque, micuerunt. Sidonii Epist. III. p. 7.
" See his Epistle to Eriphius. Sidonii Oper. lib. V. p. 148.

410 APPENDIX.
the speech, which he reports to a friend as delivered by
him on the occasion, shews particularly that it was a man
of the world that was wanted. — Si quempiam nominavero
monachorum, quamvis ilium Paulis, Antoniis, Hilarionibus,
Macariis, conferendum, sectatae anachoreseos praerogativa
comitetur, aures ilico meas incondito tumultu circumstre-
pitas ignobilium pumilionum murmur everberat conque-
rentium : Hie, qui nominator, inquiunt, non episcopi, sed
potius abbatis complet officium ; et intercedere magis pro
animabus apud coelestem, quam pro corporibus apud ter-
renum judicem potest. Ad Perpetuum, p. 191.
NOTE G. p. 24.
Jam turn pium adolescentis animum offendebat mun-
dus, qui ea tempestate Christianos ethnicis habebat ad-
mixtos. Unde fieri necessum erat, ut qui Christum profi-
tebantur, plerique titulo magis quam vita essent Christiani :
et vere piis mentibus, pie vivendi votum adesset verius
quam facultas .... ad hasc clericorum et episcoporum sta-
tum, quod hos quoque volentes, nolentes, honos, opes, et
negotia mundi, involverent, ac transversos raperent, gravis-
simis periculis obnoxium esse. Et multorum vita displice-
bat, jam turn prisca ilia pietate sacerdotum ad tyrannidem
ac fastum degenerante. Hieronym. Vita per Erasm.
Et nunc, cum masime discordiis episcoporum turbari
aut misceri omnia cernerentur, cunctaque per eos odio, aut
gratia, metu, inconstantia, invidia, factione, libidine, ava-
ritia, adrogantia, desidia, essent depravata : postremo plures
adversum paucos bene consulentes, insanis consiliis et per-
tinacibus studiis certabant : inter haec plebs Dei, et opti-
mus quisque probro atque ludibrio habebatur. Sulpic.
Sever. Hist. Sacr. II. c. 41. ed. Clerici, 1709.
The bishops originally received the whole revenue of
the diocese, and dispensed a maintenance from it to the
presbyters ; — a circumstance, which kept the inferior
clergy in a state of great dependence on the superior; ren
dering their subsistence and comfort extremely precarious,

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 411
whilst it exposed them to suffer from the personal avarice
and luxurious expenditure of the bishop to whom they
happened to be subject. They could not quit the place
where they had been once appointed, and were completely
at the bishop's disposal. Council of Orleans, A. D. 511.
c. 14, 15. Council of Valentia in 524. c. 6.
The Abbot of Cluny, being requested to intercede in ob
taining a prebend for Astralabius, the son of Abelard, re
plies : Astralabio vestro vestrique causa nostro, mox ut
facultas data fuerit, in aliqua nobilium ecclesiarum prae-
bendam libens acquirere laborabo. Res tamen difficilis
est : quia, ut saepe probavi, ad dandas in ecclesiis suis
praebendas, variis objectis occasionibus, valde se difficiles
praebere episcopi solent. Abcelardi Oper. p. 345.
NOTE H. p. 27.
In rhetorica tamen sese studiosius exercuit, degustatis
omnibus, sed his praecipue quae propius ad earn conferant
facultatem, historia, cosmographia, et antiquitatis notitia :
partim quod intelligeret apud Latinos ad id usque temporis
pene infantem esse theologiam, et ob hanc causam per-
multos a divinorum voluminum abhorrere. lectione ; sperans
futurum, ut plures sacris Uteris delectarentur, si quis theo-
logias majestatem, dignitate sermonis aequasset : partim ut
esset aliquando quod ethnicis objici posset, Christianos ut
infantes et elingues despicientibus. Hieronym. Fit. per
Erasm.
Jerome has sketched the character of some of the
Latin writers in the following passage : Tertullianus cre-
ber est in sententiis, sed difficilis in loquendo. Beatus
Cyprianus instar fontis purissimi, dulcis incedit et placi-
dus ; et cum totus sit in exercitatione virtutum, occupatus
persecutionum angustiis, de scripturis divinis nequaquam
disseruit. Inclyto Victorinus martyrio coronatus, quod
intelligit, eloqui non potest. Lactantius quasi quidam flu-
vius eloquentiae Tullianae, utinam tam nostra confirmare
potuisset, quam facile aliena destruxit. Arnobius inae-

412 APPENDIX.
qualis et nimius, et absque operis sui partitione confusus.
Sanctus Hilarius Gallicano cothurno attollitur, et a lec-
tione simpliciorum fratrum procul est. Taceo de caeteris,
vei defunctis, vei etiam adhuc viventibus, super quibus in
utramque partem post nos alii judicabunt. Ad Paulinum,
Oper. torn. i. p. 104. NOTE I. p. 28.
In the West the monastic spirit was strongly counter
acted by social needs ; — by the necessity of combination
in order to mutual aid and protection. Monachism there
was in its institution essentially social. Not so in the
East, where it originated in an enervated state of society,
and acted as a relief to the more energetic spirits, from
the monotony and languor of ordinary life. Accordingly,
when the Latin world approached more nearly to that
condition, in which the Eastern portion of the Empire was
in the IVth century; — when civilization, that is, having
reached a certain point, began to degenerate in the West,
as in the Vlth and Vllth centuries ; — the monachism of
the West began to resemble more closely that of the East.
It was then adopted more as a resource from society ;
though still the social character originally impressed on
it, continued to modify it there.
The first impulse to monachism in the West appears to
have been occasioned, by the residence of Athanasius at
Rome, with two of the Egyptian monks in his train, and
by the publication of his Life of St. Antony. The popu
larity of this romantic piece of biography may give us a
fair idea of that state of religion, in which such puerilities
of narration could pass for the adventures of saintly chi
valry, or could be employed as stimulants to religious
action. Jerome's imagination readily caught the spirit of
this work, and diffused it in his own lives of Paul, Hila-
rion, and Malchus, so beautifully executed after the Atha-
nasian model. He was surrounded at Rome by a number
of matrons of noble rank, who waited on his teaching with

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 413
devout and fond attention. Marcella, one of these, was
the first to make the profession of a monastic life at Rome.
The example was followed by Paula, who founded the
monastery for men at Bethlehem, over which Jerome pre
sided; and three others at the same place for women c.
A monastery existed at Milan under Ambrose. See Hie
ronym. Fit. per Erasm. — Athanasii Fit. p. 36. Oper.
torn. i. Paris, 1698. — Augustin. Conf. VIII. c. 6.
NOTE J. p. 29.
Votorum nulla vincula, nisi quae sunt cujusque pure
Christiani. Denique si quem forte sui instituti poenitentia
cepisset, tota demum poena erat inconstantiae nota. Cu
jus rei si quis fidem requirat, legat Hilarionis vitam : legat
institutionem monachi ad Rusticum, et item ad Paulinum :
legat in epistola cujus initium : Audi filia : descriptum
triplex apud iEgyptios monachorum genus. Quin inter
alia praestabat et haec commoda illud vitae genus. Hujus
praetextu honestius licebat ad affinium et cognatorum vin-
culis temet excutere, gravi nimirum onere ei cui nihil dul-
cius ocio studiorum. Etenim qui monachum erant pro-
fessi, a publicis functionibus, a muniis et officiis imperialis
aulae, prorsus habebantur excusati. Postremo minus pate-
bant episcoporum quorundam jam turn insolentium tyran-
nidi. Jam hie titulus, nee a functione clericatus quicquam
remorabatur : et ex nullo ordine saepius deligebantur epi-
scopi. Nee aliud quicquam erat tunc monachi professio,
quam priscae liberaeque vitae meditatio, ac pure Christi-
anae. Hieronym. Vit. per Erasm.
Gregory Nazianzen thus describes the life of the Egyp
tian solitaries : Tots yap tepots Kai deCois r&v Kar * ' Aiyvnrov
c Jerome prettily describes his loved retreat : In Christi ergo villa, ut
supra diximus, tota rusticitas est. Extra psalmos, silentium est. Quo-
cunque te verteris, arator stivam tenens, alleluia decantat. Sudans messor,
psalmis se avocat, et curva attondens falce vinitor, aliquid Davidicum canit.
Haec sunt in provincia carmina ; has, ut vulgo dicitur, amatoriae cautioues.
Ad Marcellam. Oper. torn. I. p. 130.

414 APPENDIX.
{ppovriarripiois <j>kp<av eavrbv bCbcaaiv ol Koapiov }(a>pC{ovTes kav-
rovs, /cat rr)v epr\pov darra£6p.evoi, £5>ai de<£ iravreov p.aXXov
t&v aTpe<popevwv kv adpan' ol piev rbv -ndvrt] povabiKov re
Kai dpiKTov biadXovvres j3Cov, eavrois povois irpoaXaXovvres Kai
rco de£, /cat tovto povov Koapov eibores, '6aov kv Trj kprip.Cq,
yv<api{ovaiv, ol be vopav dydnrjs rfj KOivcovCq. arepyovres, kprjpiKoC
re opov /cat piydbes, rots p.ev dXXois redv^Kores dvdpdntois koX
irpdypaaiv, oaa kv peaio rrepupeperai arpofiovvrd re Kai arpo-
(iovpeva, Kai naCfyvra fjpas rots ay\iarp6(pois perafioXais, dX-
XqXois be Koapos ovres, /cat rj) isapadeaei r-qv aperrjv drryovres.
Orat. XXI. p. 384. ed. Paris, 1609.
NOTE K. p. 34.
The monasteries of Lerins and St. Victor, and the city
of Marseilles, were the great nurses of freedom of thought
at the period of the Pelagian controversy. It was in this
part of Gaul, as is well known, that Semi-Pelagianism
took its rise ; where, at least, from the influence of a more
cultivated and liberal taste, a reaction took place, after the
sentence of Augustine had been adopted in all its hardness
by the Church. It is curious, that the same portion of the
Gallic Church should have supplied the antagonist- state
ments to the extreme views of Augustine, which, in the
IXth century, sent forth the champions of his authority on
the question of Predestination. But we may observe that,
in both cases, the Southern Gauls advocated a freedom of
individual opinion against the arbitrary dictate of mere
authority. In the case of Semi-Pelagianism, Augustine's
decisions were not yet become a rule of faith ; and the
effort was to resist the imposition of them on the reason
of individuals. In the Predestinarian controversy, the op
position was to the Northern Church of Gaul, which had
crushed with the hand of power an individual of their
own body, on account of his having freely expressed his
opinions in regard to the views of Augustine. Augustine
indeed was now become an established authority of the

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 415
Church ; so that the vindicators of the right of reason ap
peared, accidentally, as the assertors also of the principle
of authority. NOTE L. p. 35.
John Scotus Erigena is one of the most remarkable per
sons in the history of the middle age. He was quite the
meteor of the IXth century; as no one of his contempora
ries appears to have approached him, in the depth of his
learning, or the acuteness of his philosophy. Nor has any
one had greater influence by his writings ; however he
may have been cried down by some of his own times,
who either envied his reputation, or were startled by the
strangeness of his theories. When his name had survived
that opposition, it was embalmed in honourable memory
as that of a Christian philosopher ; and the Church shewed
a disposition to claim him for its own d. He gave the
great impulse to that method of Translations, to which
the Latin literature was entirely indebted for what it
possessed of the Greek philosophy, by his translations
of the works attributed to Dionysius the Areopagite, and
the scholia of the philosopher Maximus. Two original
works of his are extant ; one a short tract on Pre
destination, (that referred to in the Lecture,) and a con
siderable treatise, intitled Uepl (bljaecav pepiapov, founded
chiefly on the writings of the Pseudo-Dionysius. We find
also a work on the Eucharist by him, alluded to by other
writers'3; and he is spoken of as the " patriarch" of the
d Arnoldus Wion de eo in Ligno Vitae honorifice meminit : notatque in
Martyrologio Romano quod excudebatur anno 1580, ei locum et decus suum
integrum constitisse, a quo tamen sequentes editiones martyrologii eum
penitus detraxerunt. Eo fato mihi natus fuisse Joannes videtur, ut hominum
de se judicia semper alternantia subiret. Anastasius Bibliothecarius virum
per omnia sanctum praedicat; alii ut mendacem, ineptum, dementem, hae-
rcticum differunt. Testimonia de Joan. Scot. Brig. De Divis. Natur.
ed. Gale, Oxon. — Baronius speaks of him by the terms sancta anima.
' Particularly by Berenger, in the following Epistle to Lanfranc.
Pervenit ad me, Frater Lanfrance, quiddam auditum ab Ingelranno Car-
notensi : in quo dissimulare non debui ammonere dilectionem tuam. Id

416 APPENDIX.
controvertists on that subject ; but doubts have been en
tertained whether he actually wrote any treatise on it.
The treatise on the " Division of Natures" is an ex
tremely curious monument of his peculiar genius, and of
the times when it was composed. It is perhaps the most
scientific development of the system of Pantheism which
has ever appeared. It regularly deduces all existence from
the reality of the Divine Being — the only Nature, accord
ing to him, that has any proper objective reality. Viewed
as a whole, it illustrates the vast, but delusive power of
the ancient metaphysics as an instrument of speculation :
the ingenuity and subtilty with which the thread of con
nexion is carried through the series of phenomena, giving
the plausibility of a real Divine Philosophy. The dryness
of the abstract disquisitions pursued in the work, requires
no ordinary patience of attention to go through its details.
But it is not unworthy of that attention, on the part of
those who would fully study the history of the human
mind, or the state of opinion in the Church of the IXth
century. It is composed in the form of a dialogue between
the Master and the Disciple ; the proper dialectical method
of philosophizing.
His great learning, particularly his knowledge of lan
guages, the Greek, the Hebrew, and the Arabic, appears
to have been acquired by travels. Ireland was in high
repute in his time for its learned men. But he was not
satisfied to learn there only, but visited every place, and
made inquiries of every one, where information might be
autem est, displicere tibi, imo haereticas habuisse, sententias Joannis Scoti de
Sacramento Altaris, in quibus dissentit a suscepto tuo Paschasio. Hac ergo
in re si ita est, Frater, indignum fecisti ingenio quod tibi Deus non asper-
nabile contulit, praeproperam sequendo sententiam. Nondum enim ideo
sategisti in divina Scriptura cum tuis diligentioribus. Et nunc ergo, Frater,
quantumlibet rudis in ilia Scriptura, vellem tantum audire de eo, si oppor-
tunum mihi fieret, adhibitis quibus velles vei judicibus congruis vei audito-
ribus : quod quamdiu non sit, non aspernanter aspicias quod dico, si haere-
ticum habeas Joannem, cujus sententias de Eucharistia probamus, habendus
tibi est haereticus Ambrosins, Hieronymus, Augustinus, ut de caeteris taceam.
Bulcei Hist. Acad. Par. torn. I. pp. 410. 507.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 417
obtained respecting works of philosophy. He is said to
have commented on both Plato and Aristotle. For his
interpretation of Aristotle, indeed, he has the express
praise of Roger Bacon.
William of Malmesbury has transmitted one or two
interesting particulars respecting this distinguished man.
He is described as a person of diminutive stature, and of
a lively, facetious disposition; living in great familiarity
with Charles the Bald. This last fact is shewn by the
following anecdotes.
Assederat ad mensam contra regem ad aliam tabulae
partem : procedentibus poculis consumtisque ferculis, Ca-
rolus fronte hilariori, post quaedam alia, cum vidisset Jo-
annem quiddam fecisse, quod Gallicanam comitatem offen-
deret, urbane increpuit, et dixit : " quid distat inter Sottum
" et Scottum?" Retulit ille solenne convitium in auctorem,
etrespondit: "tabula tantum." Interrogaverat rex de mo
rum differenti studio: responderat Joannes de loci distante
spatio. Nee vero rex commotus est ; quod, miraculo sci-
entiae ipsius captus, adversus Magistrum nee dicto insur-
gere vellet ; sic eum usitate vocabat. — Item cum rege
convivante minister patinam obtulisset, qua? duos pisces
praegrandes, adjecto uno minusculo, contineret, dedit ille
Magistro, ut accumbentibus duobus juxta se clericis de-
partiretur. Erant illi giganteae molis ; ipse perexilis cor
poris. Turn qui semper aliquid honesti inveniebat ut lae-
titiam convivantium excitaret, retentis sibi duobus, unum
minorem duobus distribuit. Arguenti iniquitatem parti-
tionis regi, " imo," inquit, " benefeci et aeque ; nam hic
" est unus parvus," de se dicens, et duos grandes pisces
tangens ; itemque ad eos conversus, " hic sunt duo magni
" clerici immensi, et unus exiguus," piscem nihilominus
tangens. Witlem. Malmesb. in lib. v. De Pontiftc. Jo.
Scot. Erig. De Divis. Nat. ed. Gale, fol. Oxon. 1681.

e e

418 APPENDIX.
NOTE M. p. 35.
The case of Gotteschalc exhibits a most gross instance
of persecution. He was a monk of the order of St. Bene
dict, and of the convent of Orbais, devoted to learning and
religious exercises, and especially studious of the writings
of Augustine. He was not ordained until his fortieth year;
and afterwards went on a pilgrimage to the shrines of the
Apostles Peter and Paul. On his return he visited the
house of a Count Everard, in Piedmont, where he met other
religious persons, who were hospitably entertained by the
Count according to the custom of the times. Among
these was Nothingus, Bishop of Verona. In a conver
sation with him, Gotteschalc entered on the question of
the Divine Predestination ; and contended that, according
to the doctrine of Augustine, there was a twofold predes
tination — a predestination to life, and a predestination to
death. This conversation was subsequently communi
cated to Hincmar, Archbishop of Rheims, the metropolitan
to whose authority Gotteschalc was subject. His doc
trine was condemned as heretical. According to the rule
of St. Benedict, he was sentenced to be scourged ; and
by a formal decree of a Council imprisoned, and bound
to perpetual silence. Durissimis verberibus te castigari,
et secundum ecclesiasticas regulas ergastulo recludi, auc-
toritate episcopali decernimus ; et ut de caetero doctri-
nale tibi officium usurpare non praesumas, perpetuum si-
lentium ori tuo virtute aeterni verbi imponimus : are the
words of the sentence against him. He was mercilessly
beaten, according to this sentence ; and in that exhausted
state, almost expiring, he was forced to throw into the
fire a defence of his doctrine, which he had prepared to
present in the next Council. The rigour of the imprison
ment was extended to the long period of twenty years.
But his mind was not to be subdued by these acts of
violence ; and he died in his prison, in the monastery of
Hautvilliers, a martyr to his opinions. The Church of
Lyons indeed did itself honour by its remonstrances against

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 419
the persecution of the unhappy monk ; but it had no power
to check them against the will of the imperious HincmarS.
NOTE N. p. 37.
Of the general restlessness of the public mind about
this period, we may form a fair estimate from the extent
of Abelard's popularity, amidst all the objections and
charges brought against him. The fact is thus noticed
by himself: Accidit autem mihi ut ad ipsum fidei nostrae
fundamentum humanae rationis similitudinibus disseren-
dum primo me applicarem, et quendam theologiae tracta-
tum de Unitate et Trinitate Divina, scholaribus nostris
componerem, qui humanas et philosophicas rationes requi-
rebant, et plus quae intelligi quam quae dici possent ef-
flagitabant : dicentes quidem verborum superfluam esse
prolationem, quam intelligentia non sequeretur, nee credi
posse aliquid nisi primitus intellectum, et ridiculosum esse
aliquem aliis praedicare, quod nee ipse, nee illi quos doce-
ret, intellectu capere possent : Domino ipso arguente quod
caeci essent duces caecorum. Quem quidem tractatum cum
vidissent et legissent plurimi, ccepit in commune omnibus
plurimum placere, quod in eo pariter omnibus satisfieri
super hoc quaestionibus videbatur. Et quoniam quaestiones
istae prae omnibus difficiles videbantur, quanto major ex-
stiterat gravitas, tanto solutionis earum censebatur major
subtilitas. Unde aemuli mei vehementer accensi Conci
lium contra me congregaverunt h, &c. The fact is further
shewn in the following observations, which occur in a
letter of consolation addressed to Abelard himself : Roma
suos tibi docendos transmittebat alumnos : et quae olim
omnium artium scientiam auditoribus solebat infundere,
sapientiorem te se sapiente transmissis scholaribus mon-
strabat. Nulla terrarum, nulla montium cacumina, nulla
concava vallium, nulla via, difficili licet obsita periculo, et
e Vindic. Prcsdest et Grat. Histor. et Chronic. Synops. in Collection of
Tracts of the IXth century, on Grace and Predestination, by Mauguin.
h Abalardi Opera, p. 20. 4to. Paris, 1616.
E e 2

420 APPENDIX.
latrone, quo minus ad te properarent, retinebat. Anglorum
turbam juvenum, mare interjacens, et undarum procella
terribilis, non terrebat ; sed omni periculo contempto, au
dita tuo nomine, ad te confluebat. Remota Britannia sua
animalia erudienda destinabat. Andegavenses, eorum edo-
mita feritate, tibi famulabantur in suis. Pictavi, Vvas-
cones, et Hiberi ; Normania, Flandria, Theutonicus, et
Suevus, tuum calere ingenium, laudare, et praedicare assi-
due studebat. Prseterea cunctos Parisiorum civitatem ha-
bitantes, et intra Galliarum proximas et remotissimas par
tes, qui sic a te doceri sitiebant, ac si nihil disciplinae non
apud te inveniri potuisset. Ingenii claritate, et suavitate
eloquii, et linguae absolutioris facilitate, nee non et scien-
tiae subtilitate permoti, quasi ad limpidissimum philoso-
phiae fontem iter accelerabant k.
It was evidently the support which Abelard obtained
from influential persons in the Church, that saved him from
the extreme violence of persecution. Securus est tamen,
observes Bernard, quoniam Cardinales, et Clericos curiae, se
discipulos habuisse gloriatur, et eos in defensione praeteriti
et praesentis erroris adsumit, a quibus judicari timere de-
buit, et damnari K
The Pope Celestine II. had been a pupil of Abelard.
Bernard addresses an Epistle to him, intimating that af
fection for the man ought not to extend to affection for his
errors m.
NOTE O. p. 37-
It was objected to Abelard, that there was no occasion
for such reasonings as his at that particular time, since
heretics were in a great measure repressed. He points
out, accordingly, that there was no lack of heresy to call
the attention of theologians even then ; indicating, m fact,
the rebellion which the system of the Church, at once
k Fulcon. Prior. Ep. ad Abmlard. Oper. p. 218.
1 Bernard. Ep. XIV. p. 299. Abaelardi Oper.
m Ep. XIII. p. 297. Abaelardi Opera.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 421
intolerant and speculative, had produced among both think
ing men and enthusiasts.
Nullos in tantam olim insaniam prorupisse haereticos
quisquam audierit, quanta nonnulli contemporaneorum nos-
trorum debacchati sunt : Tanquelmus quidam laicus nuper
in Flandria, Petrus Presbyter nuper in Provincia, ut ex
multis aliquos in medium producamus. Quorum quidem
alter, Tanquelmus scilicet, in tantam se erexerat dementiam,
ut se Dei filium vocitari atque decantari, et a seducto po-
pulo, ut dicitur, templum aedificari sibi faceret. Alter vero
ita fere omnem divinorum, sacrorum, et ecclesiasticae doc
trines institutionem enervarat, ut multos rebaptizari co-
geret ; et venerabile Dominicae signum crucis removendum
penitus censeret, atque altaris ; sacramentum nullatenus
celebrandum esse amplius astrueret. Sed nee magistros
divinorum librorum, qui nunc maxime circa nos pestilen-
tiae cathedras tenent, praetereundos arbitramur, quorum
unus in Francia, alter in Burgundia, tertius in pago Ande-
gavensi, quartus in Bituricensi, multa Catholicae fidei, vei
Sanctis doctrinis adversa, non solum tenent, verum etiam
docent". He proceeds then to state the several wild speculations on
the Trinity and the Incarnation started by these individuals.
Irregular but strong efforts were made at this period
towards a reform of the Church, as we may see from the
following passage ; in which no doubt a colouring has been
given to the circumstances, by the orthodox view of them,
and in order to prepare the scene for the introduction of
the Saint who works the transformation.
In partibus Tolosanis Henricus quidam olim monachus,
tunc apostata vilis, pessimae vitae, perniciosas doctrinas,
verbis persuasilibus gentis illius occupaverat levitatem, et
ut praedixit Apostolus de quibusdam, in hypocrisi loquens
mendacium, fictis verbis de eis negociabatur. Erat autem
hostis ecclesiae manifestus, irreverenter ecclesiasticis dero-
gans sacramentis pariter et ministris. Nee mediocriter in
» Aboslardi Introduct '. ad TheologAih. II. Opera, p. 1066.
e e 3

422 APPENDIX.
ea jam malignitate processerat. Sic enim de eo scribens
pater venerabilis ad principem Tolosanum, inter caetera
ait: "Passim inveniebantur jam ecclesiae sine plebibus,
" plebes sine sacerdotibus, sacerdotes sine debita reveren-
" tia, sine Christo denique Christiani; parvulis Christiano-
" rum Christi vita intercludebatur, dum baptismi gratia ne-
" gabatur. Ridebantur orationes oblationesque pro mortuis,
" sanctorum invocationes, sacerdotum excoinmunicationes,
" fidelium peregrinationes,basilicarum aedificationes, dierum
" solennium vacationes, chrismatis et olei consecrationes, et
" omnes denique institutiones ecclesiasticae spernebantur."
Hac necessitate vir sanctus iter arripuit, ab ecclesia re-
gionis illius saepius jam ante rogatus, et tunc demuni a
reverendissimo Alberico Hostiensi Episcopo, et legato se-
dis Apostolicas, persuasus, pariter et deductus. Veniens
autem cum incredibili denotatione susceptus est a populo
terrae, ac si de ccelo angelus advenisset. Nee moram facere
potuit apud eos, quod irruentium turbas reprimere nemo
posset, tanta erat frequentia diebus ac noctibus adven-
tantium, benedictionem expectantium, flagitantium opem.
Praedicavit tamen in civitate Tolosa per aliquot dies, et
in casteris locis, quae miser ille frequentasset amplius, et
gravius infecisset, multos in fide simplices instruens, nu-
tantes roborans, errantes revocans, subversos reparans,
subversores et obstinatos auctoritate sua premens et op-
primens, ut non dico resistere, sed ne assistere quidem et
apparere praesumerent. Caeterum etsi tunc fugit haereticus
ille et latuit, ita tamen impeditae sunt viae ejus et semitae
circumseptae, ut vix alicubi postea tutus, tandem captus
et catenatus Episcopo traderetur. In quo itinere plurimis
etiam signis in servo suo glorificatus est Deus, aliorum
corda ab erroribus impiis revocans, aliorum corpora a lan-
guoribus variis sanans.
Est locus in regione eadem, Sarlatum nomen est illi, ubi
sermone completo, plurimos ad benedicendum panes, sicut
ubique fiebat, Dei famulo offerebant. Quos ille elevata
manu, et signo crucis edito, in Dei nomine benedicens :

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 423
"In hoc," inquit, " scietis vera esse quae a nobis, falsa quae
" ab haereticis suadentur ; si infinni vestri, gustatis pani-
" bus istis, adepti fuerint sospitatem." Timens autem
venerabilis Episcopus Carnotensium magnus ille Gaufri-
dus, siquidem praesens erat et proximus viro Dei ; " si
" bona," inquit, " fide sumpserint, sanabuntur." Cui pater
sanctus de Domini virtute nil haesitans ; " non hoc ego
" dixerim," ait, " sed vere qui gustaverint sanabuntur : ut
" proinde veros nos et veraces Dei nuncios esse cognos-
" cant." Tarn ingens multitudo languentium, gustato
eodem pane, convaluit, ut per totam provinciam verbum
hoc divulgaretur, et vir sanctus per vicina loca regrediens,
ob concursus intolerabiles declinaverit, et timuerit illo ire.
Fit. S. Bernardi, lib. III. c. 5.
NOTE P. p. 39.
Non ideo Romam pergere volui, quod majores quaestus,
majorque mihi dignitas, ab amicis, qui hoc suadebant, pro-
mittebatur; quamquam et ista ducebant animum tunc
meum : sed ilia erat causa maxima et paene sola, quod au-
diebam, quietius ibi studere adolescentes, et ordinatiore
disciplinae coercitione sedari, ne in ejus scholam, quo ma-
gistro non utuntur, passim et proterve irruant; nee eos
admitti omnino, nisi ille permiserit. Contra apud Cartha-
ginienses fceda est et intemperans licentia scholasticorum.
Irrumpunt impudenter, et prope furiosa fronte perturbant
ordiuem, quem quisque discipulis ad proficiendum insti-
tuerit. Multa injuriosa faciunt, et mira hebetudine, et
punienda legibus, nisi consuetudo patrona sit °-
Sedulo ergo agere coeperam, propter quod veneram ut
docerem Romae artem rhetoricam, et prius domi congre-
gare aliquos, quibus et per quos innotescere coeperam ; et
ecce cognosco alia Romae fieri, qua? non patiebar in Africa.
Nam revera illas eversiones a perditis adolescentibus ibi
non fieri, manifestatum est mihi. Sed subito, inquiunt, ne
mercedem magistro reddant, conspirant multi adolescen-
° Augustin. Confess, lib. V. u. 8.
e e 4

424 APPENDIX.
tes, et transferunt ae ad alium, desertores fidei, et quibus,
prae pecuniae caritate, justitia vilis est P.
The violent disturbances which sometimes occurred
among the students, prove the imperfect state of the dis
cipline of the Universities of the middle age. The alarm
produced by a tumult at Oxford in the Xlllth century, when
the brother of the Pope's Legate was killed by a bowshot,
diminished the numbers of the University from 30,000 to
6000*1. In the election to professorships, there was often
the utmost contention of party-feeling. At Paris, for in
stance, the original custom had been for the different na
tions, (the students being distributed according to the
nations to which they belonged,) to elect a reader in
ethics, who held the office for two years. Launoy states
the reason for the alteration of the custom to have been,
the outrages committed at such elections. Sed propter
insolentias, perpetrataque in hujusmodi electione homici-
dia, cessavit talis lectio ; et, novo condito statuto, quilibet
Artium Regens specialem suis scholasticis facit ethicorum
lectionem, a quibus in fine cursus moderata pro labore suo
recipit stipendia r.
Yet, with all these irregularities, a strict obedience to
the word of a spiritual superior was both inculcated and
enforced. By the rule of St. Benedict, no difficulty, or
even impossibility, enjoined on any member of the frater
nity by the superior, was to be declined. He might humbly
and patiently represent the state of the case to the su
perior, without offering resistance or contradiction. But
if the prior still persisted in his order, the disciple was to
feel convinced that it must be so, and with trust in the
Divine assistance, must obey. His personal existence
was to be merged in that of the community. He was
neither to give, nor receive any thing, without the order
p Augustin. Confess, lib. V. c. 12.
1 Pegge's Life of Bishop Grossetete, p. 85 — Henry's History of Great
Britain, vol. IV. p. 478.
r Goulet. Parisiens. Theolog. in Launoii de Varia Aristotelis Fortuna,
c. 10. Par. 1662.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 425
of the superior, to whom he was to consider both his body
and his will as entirely subject3.
Such rules as these, it was found practicable to enforce.
There are many instances of their having been obeyed to
the very letter of the injunction. John Duns Scotus pre
sents a striking instance of the imperative force of such
obligations. In the year 1 308 he was lecturing at Paris.
He had retired to some fields out of the town with his dis
ciples, for the sake of recreation. Letters are brought to
him there from the Minister General of the Order of St.
Francis, to which he belonged, — obedientiales literce, as his
biographer expresses it, — desiring him to transfer himself
to Cologne. Immediately, with a blind and prompt obe
dience, caca et prompta obedientia, bidding farewell to
those present, he proceeds straight-forward on his way to
Cologne, without returning home to collect his books and
writings, or salute the brothers. Those that were present,
asked him, why he did not go to the Convent to bid fare
well to the brothers. His answer, adds the biographer, was
worthy of the man. " The Father-General orders to go to
" Cologne, not into the Convent to salute the brothers '."
NOTE Q. p. 39.
Jerome gives a satirical description of some of the
Clergy of his time.
Sunt alii, (de mei ordinis hominibus loquor,) qui ideo
presbyterium et diaconatum ambiunt, ut mulieres licentius
videant. Omnis his cura de vestibus, si bene oleant : si
pes laxa pelle non folleat. Crines calamistri vestigio ro-
tantur : digiti de annulis radiant : et ne plantas humidior
via spargat, vix imprimunt summa vestigia. Tales eum
videris, sponsos magis existimato, quam clericos. Ep. ad
Eustoch. Opera, torn. i. p. 144.
Sulpicius Severus speaks in the following terms of re
probation. s Reg. S. Bened. c. 68, c. 33.
* J. Duns Scoti Vita a Luca Waddingo. p. 11. Scoti Opera.

426 APPENDIX.
Et nunc, cum maxime discordiis Episcoporum turbari
aut misceri omnia cernerentur, cunctaque per eos, odio,
aut gratia, metu, inconstantia, invidia, factione, libidine,
avaritia, adrogantia, desidia, essent depravata : postremo
plures adversum paucos bene consulentes, insanis consiliis,
et pertinacibus studiis, certabant : inter haec plebs Dei, et
optimus quisque, probro atque ludibrio habebatur. Hist.
Sacr. lib. II. c. 51.
A little later, Sidonius Apollinaris, in giving an account
of the character and occupations of a country-gentleman
of his time, seems to have had a design of throwing censure
on some members of his own profession by the contrast.
The description in itself is beautifully executed, though
not without marks of the affectation of the writer. The
concluding remarks give the application : Qua industria
viri ac temperantia inspecta, ad reliquorum quoque censui
pertinere informationem ; si vei summo tenus vita ceteris
talis publicaretur. Ad quam sequendam, praeter habitum,
quo interim praesenti saeculo imponitur, omnes nostrae pro-
fessionis homines, utilissime incitarentur. Quia, quod pace
ordinis mei dixerim, si tantum bona singula in singulis
erunt, plus ego admiror sacerdotalem virum, quam sacer-
dotemu. Indeed in other passages he has not scrupled to cha
racterize some individuals by still more express deline
ation. For instance, in the following account of three
competitors for a vacant see.
Quae quidem triumviratus accenderat competitorum :
quorum hic antiquam natalium praerogativam, reliqua des-
titutus morum dote, ructabat : hic per fragores parasiticos,
culinarum suffragio comparatos, Apicianis plausibus inge-
rebatur : hic apice votivo si potiretur, tacita pactione pro-
miserat ecclesiastica plausoribus suis praedae praedia fore x.
The corruption was only aggravated by the state of con
fusion and ignorance which ensued in the following cen-
» Sidon. Apollin. Oper. lib. IV. Ep. IX.
* Lib. IV. Ep. XXV. p. 125. ed. Sirmond.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 427
turies. In the Xlth and Xllth centuries, it appears to
have reached its height, as is evidenced by numerous tes
timonies. Among these, I may select the following from
Abelard, a contemporary witness, and in himself, in great
measure, a type of the times in which he lived. — Quid
dicturi sunt quidam moderni sacerdotes in die judicii, qui
ordinem sacerdotalem susceperunt, sed inordinate vivere
non erubescunt ? Quidam vero in conviviis et potationibus
cum vulgo prorsus indocto, pravis moribus corrupto, tota
die sedent, fabulantur, et quae dicenda non sunt turpiter
operantur. Lanis gregis Dominici superbe vestiuntur, lacte
pascuntur, et oves fame et penuria verbi Dei moriuntur.
Transeunt festa, transit integer annus, quod nee unum ver
bum de ore ipsorum egreditur, quo plebs sibi commissa
erudiatur, de malo corrigatur, ad bonum revocetur, et in
bono confirmetur. Cotidie tamen se Deo praestare obse-
quium arbitrantes ; verba divinae laudis jubilant, immo si
bilant, et audientes, et intendentes sono vocis, gestu cor
poris scandalisant, non aedificant. . . . Sunt autem quidam
praedicatores, qui sicut zizania in agro Domini a Diabolo
sunt seminati, qui totum mundum cum suis philacteriis
peragrant, et indoctum vulgus et peccatis oneratum, ver
bis mendacibus beatificant, dicentes, " Pax pax, cum non
"sit paxy."
Erat autem Abbatia ilia nostra, ad quam me contuleram,
secularis admodum vitae atque turpissimae. Cujus Abbas
ipse, quo caeteris praelatione major, tanto vita deterior atque
infamia notior erat. Quorum quidem intolerabiles spur-
citias, ego frequenter atque vehementer, modo privatim,
modo publice, redarguens, omnibus me supra modum one-
rosum atque odiosum effeci z. . . . Me de alieno eductum
monasterio ad proprium remisit ; ubi fere quotquot erant
olim jam ut supra memini, infestos habebam ; cum eorum
vitae turpitudo et impudens conversatio me suspectum
penitus haberent, quem arguentem graviter sustinerent a.
y Abalardi Oper. p. 364. z Ibid. p. 19.
* Ibid. p. 25. See also John of Salisbury, Metalogicus, I. c. 4.

428 APPENDIX. r  *]
NOTE R. p. 41.
Launoy, in his treatise entitled De Faria Aristotelis
Fortuna in Academia Parisiensi, has given a collection of
citations from different authors who have reprobated the
Scholastic method of theology. He gives Luther's de
finition of Scholasticism : Scholastica Theologia est ea,
quae a Parisiorum Sorbona, mixtione quadam ex divinis
eloquiis, et Philosophicis rationibus, tanquam ex Centau-
rorum genere biformis disciplina, conflata est ; and, on the
other hand, that of Hangest, a theologian of Paris : Scho
lastica Theologia est divinarum Scripturarum peritia, re-
cepto quem Ecclesia approbat sensu, non spretis ortho-
doxorum Doctorum interpretationibus et censuris, ac in-
terdum aliarum disciplinarum non contempto suffragio b.
Speaking of Abelard to the Pope Innocent, Bernard of
Clairvaux says : Habemus in Francia novum de veteri
magistro theologum, qui ab ineunte aetate sua in arte dia-
lectica lusit, et nunc in Scripturis Sanctis insanit. Olim
damnata et sopita dogmata, tam sua videlicet quam aliena,
suscitare conatus, insuper et nova addit. Qui dum om
nium quae sunt in ccelo sursum, et quae in terra deorsum,
nihil praeter solum nescio quid nescire dignatur, ponit in
coelum os suum, et scrutatur alta Dei, rediensque ad nos
refert verba ineffabilia, quae non licet homini loqui. Et
dum paratus est de omnibus reddere rationem, etiam quae
sunt supra rationem, et contra rationem praesumit, et con
tra fidem. Quid enim magis contra rationem, quam ra
tione rationem conari transcendere ? Et quid magis con
tra fidem, quam credere nolle quicquid non possit ratione
attingere c ? NOTE S. p. 41.
Illius sententiae ventilatae sunt a concilio Romano quod
Alexander III. habuit. . . . Haec altercatio ad plures annos
b Cap. 12. 8vo. Paris, 1662.
c Bernardi Abbat. ad Innoc. Ep. XI. p. 277. Abaelardi Oper.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 429
duravit. ... Id demum consecuti sunt, ut ex Sententiis
Lombardi postea fieret indiculus nonnullarum quae minime
docerentur. Hae ad calcem Sententiarum designantur hoc
modo : Articuli in quibus Magister Sententiarum com-
muniter non teneturd.
Sub illud tempus Lutetiae fuit e Sancti Victoris caeno-
bio, Galterus prior, qui Petrum Abaelardum, Petrum Lom-
bardum, Petrum Pictavinum, et Gilbertum Porretanum,
haereseos insimulaverit, quod Trinitatis, et Divinae Incar-
nationis, mysteria, spiritu censerent Aristotelico e.
NOTE T. p. 41.
Ad annum 1231, Gregorius IX. provinciale Concilium,
quo proscribuntur Aristotelis opera, his verbis temperavit.
..." Ad haec jubemus, ut Magistri Artium unam lec-
" tionem de Prisciano, et unam post aliam, ordinarie sem-
" per legant : et libris illis naturalibus, qui in Concilio
" provinciali ex certa scientia prohibiti fuere Parisiis, non
" utantur ; quousque examinati fuerint, et ab omni erro-
" rum suspicione purgati. Magistri vero, et scholares
" theologiae, in facultate quam profitentur se studeant
" laudabiliter exercere : nee Philosophos se ostentent ; sed
" satagant fieri Theodidacti : nee loquantur in lingua po-
" puli, linguam Hebraeam cum Asotica confundentes : sed
" de illis tantum in scholis questionibus disputent, quae
" per libros theologicos, et Sanctorum Patrum tractatus,
" valeant terminarif." NOTE U. p. 41.
Albert and Aquinas have been thought to have been
excepted from this general regulation. But there is no
reason for such a supposition. They were probably pro
tected under the shelter of the Dominican Order to which
they belonged, and which the successive Popes were
disposed to favour, as a support to their own influence, in
*¦ Launoii de Var. Aristot. Fortun. p. 7 1 . ' Ibid. p. 69.
1 Rigord. in Vita Philip. August. Launoii de Var. Aristot. Fortun. c. 6.

430 APPENDIX.
those factious times, when the interests of the Italian states
were distracted between the civil and ecclesiastical powers.
But the true account of the case, in regard to Albert and
Aquinas, appears to be, that, until their writings appeared,
the proper philosophy of Aristotle, in physics and meta
physics, was not understood. These portions of his phi
losophy were known only under the disguise which they had
worn in the commentaries of the Arabians, and in their
amalgamation with the mysticism of the New-Platonic
School. Aquinas, indeed, particularly opposed himself to
the Averroism of his times : — the doctrines of the cele
brated Ebn Roshd, or Averroes, of Cordoba s, having
then obtained a considerable popularity among the spe
culating theologians of the Schools, in the want of more
immediate communication with works of Greek philo
sophy. NOTE V. p. 43.
This may be sufficiently seen from the following pas
sages. Hoc primum vestram sanctitatem monens et postulans,
ut doctrinam beatissimi Patris Augustini absque ilia du-
bitatione undequaque doctissimi, sanctarum Scripturarum
auctoritati in omnibus concordissimam ; quippe nullus Doc-
torum abstrusa earum scrupulosius rimatus, diligentius ex-
quisierit, verius invenerit, veracius protulerit, luculentius
enodaverit, fidelius tenuerit, robustius defenderit, effusius
deseminaverit; vestri Pontificatus tempore, commento quo-
dam impugnari non permittatis. Epist. Prudentii ad
Hincmar. Remens. et Pardulum Laudunens. Episcop.
A. D. 849. p. 1 1 h.
Relictis sacris authoritatibus ad dialecticam confugium
facis. Et quidem de mysterio fidei auditurus, ac respon-
surus quae ad rem debeunt pertinere, mallem audire ac
« He flourished in the Xllth century.
b In the collections of writers on Grace and Predestination of the IXth
century, by Mauguin, 2 vols. 4to. Paris.

NOTES TO LECTURE I. 431
respondere ' sacras authoritates, quam dialecticas rationes.
Verum contra haec quoque nostri erit studii respondere, ne
ipsius artis inopia me putes in hac tibi parte deesse : for-
tasse jactantia quibusdam videbitur, et ostentationi magis
quam necessitati deputabitur. Sed testis mihi Deus est,
et conscientia mea, quia in tractatu divinarum literarum,
nee proponere, nee ad propositas respondere cuperem dia
lecticas quaestiones vei earum solutiones. Etsi quando
materia disputandi talis est, ut hujus artis regulis valeat
enucleatius explicari, in quantum possem per aequipollen-
tias propositionum tego artem, ne videar magis arte, quam
veritate, sanctorumque Patrum authoritate, confidere. Lan
franc. De Corp. et Sang. Dom. c. 7- p- 236.
Even Erigena is obliged to speak with the greatest
deference of Augustine. Augustinus piissimus doctrinae
pater, pulcherrimum exemplar eloquentiae, acutissimus ve-
ritatis inquisitor, studiosissimus liberalium artium magis-
ter, providentissimus animorum excitator, humillimus per-
suasor. De Prcedest. c. 18.
NOTE W. p. 46.
Anselm, speaking of his own work, says : Quam ergo
saepe tractans nihil potui invenire me in ea dixisse, quod
non Catholicorum patrum, et maxime Beati Augustini,
scriptis cohaereat. Quapropter si cui videbitur, quod in
eodem opusculo aliquid protulerim, quod aut minus novum
sit, aut a veritate dissentiat; rogo ne statim me aut ut
praesumptorem novitatum, aut falsitatis assertorem excla-
met : Sed prius libros Beati Augustini de Trinitate dili-
genter perspiciat, deinde secundum eos opusculum meum
dijudicet. Prcefatio in Monolog.
So more expressly Peter Lombard says : Ecce tribus
illustrium virorum testimoniis, scilicet, Augustini, Hilarii,
atque Ambrosii, in eodem concurrentibus revelatione Spi-
ritus Sancti in eis loquentis, pie credere volentibus osten-
ditur, &c. Lib. Sentent. I. Dist. 19.

432 APPENDIX.

LECTURE II.
NOTE A. p. 57-
ON ore fjKpa^e ra fjperepa, Kai KaX&s etxei** rjviica to pev
irepiTrbv tovto /cat KareyXa>Triap,evov rrjs deoXoyCas ml evre%-
vov, ovbe mdpobov efyev els ras deCas avXds' dXXa ravrbv Jp>,
•Repots re rraCgeiv T-qv o-yfnv KXertrovaais r<5 rdxet rijs peradk-
aews, rj Karopyeiadai t&v Oear&v, navToCois Kai avbpoyvvois
XvyCapaai, Kai rrepl deov Xiyeiv n /cat aKOveiv Kaivdrepov Kai
rtepiepyov to be cnrXovv re Kai evyeves tov Xdyov evaejieia kvo-
p,C{ero. dtp' ov be 2efrot, Kai Uvppuves, koi f/ dvnderos yX&aaa
&airep rt voarjpa beivov /cat /ca/co?j6*es rats e/c/cXjjcrtats rip&v el-
aeipddpri, ko.1 r\ cpXvapCa rraibevais <lbo£e, Kai o (priai nepl 'A9rj-
vaCcav fi fiCfiXos r&v Updgeav, els ovbev &XXo evKaipovpev, q
Xiyeiv ri Kai aKO-vew Kaivdrepov. Greg. Naz. Orat. XXI.
AidirTve poi ras ez*crrdcrets, Kai ras dvndeaeis, rr\v viav ev-
aefieiav, ko.1 ttjv piiKpoXoyov aocpCav ko.1 bid-wrve itXeov, rj ra
t&v apaxyicov vqpara, pwCas pev Kparovvra, acprjgl be prryvi-
p.eva, ovrr<a Xeyco baKrvXois, ovbe aXXio nvi r&v fiapvrepoov aa>-
paTmv. lv bCbaaKe <po(3eladai povov, to Xveiv rr\v irCanv kv rois
ao(pCapaaiv ov beivbv fjTTTjdrjvai Xoy&, ov yap ndvriav 6 Xoyos'
beivbv be tJipunOrivai deorr\Ta, ndvrw yap f) kXirCs. Orat.
XXIII. NOTE B. p. 57-
With all his objections to subtilties in theology, Gre
gory Nazianzen still shews a disposition to encourage spe
culative questions, where they are proposed by the ortho
dox. In Oration XLV. Gregory praises Evagrius the
monk, for having sent some speculations and questions on
the subject of the Trinity, to him for solution. He as
sumes there the propriety of laying down a definition of
the Deity, and proceeding from that to the demonstra
tions : — 'O toiwv karl debs, irpdrepov v-noaTi]adp.eda' Kai elff
ovtods kill ras diroSetfeis d/cpt/3cos ijgop.ev. He professes also

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 433
not to rest the proof of his point on mere undemonstrated
faith, but on exact argument ; — Ov itCareas avarrobeCKrov
tyavraaCav drropCq rrjs arrobeCgews dXdyeos itpo'layopevos, ovbe
pvdav TtaXai&v paprvpCais to aadpbv rrjs neiroidriaeais eavrov
KaXvrrreiv ireip&pevos, aXXa tjp-qaeas d/cpt/3ow Karavo-qaei, Kai
Xoyiap&v dpddrryn, rr\v tov decopriparos irCarataiv els rovpcpaves
rtporidepevos.

NOTE C. p. 59.
Thus too, among the qualifications for the office of a
bishop enumerated in the Epistle to Titus, is this : that
he should be able to " convince the gainsayers," rois avn-
Xeyovras kXeyxeiv : an expression being also used here,
drawn from the art of the logician.
The use of the word epurdo) may be contrasted with alreca
in John xvi. 23. Kai kv kKeCvrj rfj rjpepq kpe ovk kpatrqaere
ovbev. dprjv, ap-qv, Xeyui vpiv Sn oaa hv alrr\ar\re rbv rrarepa
kv ra> ovoparC pov, bmaei vpiv. Also in v. 26. 'Ev kKeivrj rfj
fipepq kv r& ovdpari pov alrr\aeade' koX ov Xeya> vpiv, Sn kyib
kptorqaa rbv rtaripa wept vp&v. The one expression seems
properly to denote asking for information or- argument ;
the other, that a favour may be obtained. Other citations
occur to the same purport ; with the appositeness of which
we shall not so readily concur : as Jerome's appeal to the
opening of the book of Proverbs, which speaks of the
understanding of " discourses and artifices of words, pa-
" rabies, and obscure discourse, sayings and enigmas ;"
as descriptive of the office of dialecticians and philoso
phers '. Nor shall we be disposed to sanction an inter
pretation, attributed to Augustine, of our Lord's direction:
" ask, and it shall be given you ; seek, and ye shall find ;
" knock, and it shall be opened unto you," in the follow
ing manner : " ask by praying ; seek by disputing ; knock
"by asking, that is, by interrogating: — petite orando ;
i Hieronym. Op. torn. I. p. 326. Ep. adv. Mag. Orat. Rom
yf

434 APPENDIX.
" quaerite disputando ; pulsate rogando, id est, interro-
"gandoV
NOTE D. p. 60.
Clemens Alexandrin., Stromat. lib. I. referred to in Pe-
tavii Dogm. Theol. Prolegomena, c. 4. p. 13.
Ipsum quippe Dei filium, quem nos Verbum dicimus,
Graeci Xoyov appellant, hoc est, divinae mentis concep
tual, seu Dei sapientiam vei rationem. Unde et Augus-
tinus in libro quaestionum octoginta trium, capite quadra-
gesimo quarto : " In principio," inquit, " erat Verbum,
" quod Graece Ao'yos dicitur." Idem in libro contra quin-
que haereses : " In principio erat Verbum. Melius Graeci
" Ao'yos dicunt : Aoyos quippe Verbum significat et ratio-
" nem." Et Hieronymus ad Paulinum de divinis scrip-
turis. " In principio erat Verbum : Ao'yos Graece multa
" significat. Nam et verbum est, et ratio, et supputa-
" tio, et causa uniuscujusque rei, per quam sunt singula,
" quae subsistunt. Quae universa recte intelligimus in
" Christo." Cum ergo Verbum Patris Dominus Jesus
Christus Ao'yos Graece dicatur, sicut et ao<pCa Patris ap
pellator: plurimum ad eum pertinere videtur ea scientia,
quae nomine quoque illi sit conjuncta, et per derivationem
quandam a Ao'yos Logica sit appellata : et sicut a Christo
Christiani, ita a Aoyos Logica proprie dici videatur. Cujus
etiam amatores tanto verius appellantur philosophi, quanto
veriores sint illius sophiae superioris amatores. Quae pro-
fecto summi Patris summa Sophia, cum nostram indueret
naturam, ut nos verae sapientia? illustraret lumine, et nos
ab amore mundi in amorem converteret sui, profecto nos
pariter Christianos, et veros effecit philosophos. Qui cum
illam sapientia? virtutem discipulis promitteret, qua refel-
lere possent contradicentium disputationes, dicens; "Ego
" enim dabo vobis os et sapientiam, cui non poterunt re-
" sistere adversarii vestri ;" profecto post amorem sui,
k Abaelardi Epist. IV. p. 240. Opera, citing Augustin. de Misericordia. I
have not however been able to find any such passage in Augustine.

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 435
unde veri dicendi sunt philosophi, patenter et illam ra-
tionum armaturam eis pollicetur, qua in disputando sum-
mi efficiantur logici. . . . Quis denique ipsum etiam Do-
minum Jesum Christum crebris disputationibus Judaeos
ignoret convicisse, et tam scripto quam ratione calumnias
eorum repressisse : non solum potentia miraculorum, ve
rum virtute verborum fidem plurimum astruxisse ? Cur
non solis usus est miraculis, ut haec faceret, quibus maxime
Judaei, qui signa petunt, commoverentur : nisi quia proprio
nos exemplo instruere decrevit, qualiter et eos, qui sa
pientiam quaerunt, rationibus ad fidem pertraheremus ?
Abcelardi Ep. IV. Oper. p. 241 and 328.
NOTE E. p. 60.
Nihil ergo theologum impedire potest, quo minus sin-
cerae ac germanae philosophiae, et dialecticae, praesidiis,
munitiorem et ornatiorem habeat divinam scientiam. Sed
nee kpiariKqv illam et aocpiariKqv funditus aspernabitur : non
ut ea sic utatur, quomodo haeretici ac reliqui hostes eccle
siae, ad oppugnandam veritatem; sed ad propugnandam
potius ; et ad illorum perplexos nodos, ac laqueos ejusdem
unde implicati sunt, artis ope solvendos. Petavii Dog
mata Theol. Prolegomena, c. 4. p. 14.
Petau, in confirmation of the above, cites the following
passage of Damascenus.
lias yap rexvtrrjs Setrat Kai nv&v opydvoov rrpbs rr\v r&v dno-
reXovpevatv KaraaKevqv. npenei be /cat rjj (3aaiXibi &(3pais nalv
vTrqpere'iadai. Xd/3a>pev roivvv tovs bovXovs rrjs dXqdeCas Xo-
yovs, Kai rqv /ca/cc3s avr&v rvpavvqaaaav daej3eiav drrpa&peda'
Kai prj r<3 /caAxS /ca/cfis xpqaapeda' p-q rspbs k^andrqv r&v
arrXovarepaiv ttjv riyvqv r&v Xdymv perayeipia&peda' dXXa el
Kai prj belrai ttoikCXwv ao<piapdra>v f) dX-qdeia, rrpos ye ttjv t&v
KaKopd\cav, Kai rrjs \{revba>vvpov yvc&aevs dvarpoTtrjV rovrois
arroxprjadpeda. Damasc. Dialectic, c. 1.
To the same purport may be adduced what the Scho
lastics say of the mendacium officiosum. See Thomas Aqui
nas, Surnma Theol. Secunda Secundce, qu. ex. art. 2 et 4.
Ff 2

436 APPENDIX.
The question respecting the mendacium qfficiosum was
touched in a correspondence between Jerome and Augus
tine.
NOTE F. p. 61.
Xpio-r&i* be fiyvo-qKaaiv ov n al deiai Xeyovai ypacpat (q-
rovvres, &XX otto'iov ayrjpa avXXoyiapov els rrjv rrjs ddeorqros
evpedfi avaraaiv, cptAoTroVcos daKOvvres' Khv avrols irporeCvrj ris
p-qrov ypacpjjs de'iKrjs, k£erd(ovai norepov avvqppevov q bie£evy-
pevov bvvarai rroifjaai ayjjpa avXXoyiapov. KaTaKinovres be ras
ayCas rot) deov ypacpas, yecoperpCav kmTrjbevovaiV cos hv e/c rrjs
yrjs ovres Kai kK rrjs yrjs XaXovvres, Kai tov avadev kpxdpevov
dyvoovvres. 'EvKXeCbqs yovv rrapd naiv avr&v (piXorrovas yea-
/ierpetrat* ' ApiaroTeXqs be /cat ©eo'cppacrros davpd^ovrai' Ta-
Xr/vos yap tcrcos irto nvav /cat 'npoamive'iTai. oi be rats t&v
wnCarav reyvais els r-qv rrjs alpeaeais avr&v yviopqv diroxpd-
p.evoi, koi ry r&v adecov -navovpyCq rqv dirXriv t&v deCav ypa-
<p&v nCariv Kan-qXevovTes, k. t. X. Eusebius, Eccl. Hist.
lib. V. c. 28. p. 160. ed. Amstaslod. 1695.
NOTE G. p. 61.
Thus TertuUian : Miserum Aristotelem, qui illis dialec-
ticam instituit, artificem struendi, et destruendi, versipel-
lem in sententiis, coactam in conjecturis, duram in argu
ments, operariam contentionum, molestam etiam sibi ipsi,
omnia retractantem, ne quid omnino tractaverit. Hinc
illae fabulae. . . . Quid ergo Athenis et Hierosolymis ? quid
Academiae et Ecclesiae ? quid haereticis et Christianis ?
Nostra jnstitutio de porticu Solomonis est, qui et ipse
tradiderat, Dominum in simplicitate cordis esse quaeren-
dum. Viderint, qui Stoicum, et Platonicum, et Dialec-
tienra. Christianismum protulerunt. Nobis curiositate opus
non est post Christum Jesum, nee inquisitione post Evan-
gelium. Tertull. De Prcesc. Hcer. c. 7- p- 205.
The commentator on this passage of TertuUian refers to
Gregorius Bceticus Episcop. Elliberitan., who lived in
the minority of Valentinian III, during the government

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 437
of Placidia, and who was an opposer of Arianism, com
plaining of Aristotelis artificiosa argumenta : and again,
ubi nunc sunt ilia impia vestra sophismata quae Aristo
telis episcopi vestri magisterio didicistis. Ibid. p. 204.
Ambrose, alluding to the Arians, says : Omnem enim
vim venenoruin suorum in dialectica disputatione constitu-
unt ; quae philosophorum scntentia definitur, non adstru-
endi vim habere, sed destruendi. Sed non in dialectica
complacuit Deo salvum facere populum suum. Regnum
enim Dei in simplicitate fidei est, non in contentione ser-
monis. Ambros. De Fide, I. c. 5. Opera, torn. n. col. 451.
Paris, 1690.
Odiosum me mundo reddidit Logica. Aiunt enim per-
versi praevertentes, quorum sapientia est in perditione, me
in Logica praestantissimum esse, sed in Paulo non medio
criter claudicare ; cumque ingenii praedicent aciem, Chris-
tianae fidei subtrahunt puritatem : quia, ut mihi videtur,
opinione potius traducuntur ad judicium, quam experien-
tiae magistratu. Nolo sic esse Philosophus, ut recalcitrem
Paulo ; non sic esse Aristoteles, ut secludar a Christo.
Abalardi Ep. p. 308. Opera.
NOTE H. p. 62.
Philosophi autem qui vocantur, si qua forte vera et fidei
nostrae accommoda dixerunt, maxime Platonici, non solum
formidanda non sunt, sed ab eis tanquam injustis posses-
soribus, in usum nostrum vindicanda. Augustin. De
Doctr. CA. lib. II. fol. 14.
Sed ideo cum Platonicis magis placuit hanc causam
agere, quia eorum sunt literae notiores. Nam et Graeci,
quorum lingua in gentibus praeeminet, eas magna praedi-
catione celebrarunt: et Latini permoti earum, vei excel-
lentia, vei gloria, vei gratia, ipsas libentius didicerunt;
atque in nostrum eloquium transferendo, nobiliores clario-
resque fecerunt. De Civ. Dei, lib. VIII. c. 10.
Eligimus autem Platonicos omnium philosophorum me-
Ff 3

438 APPENDIX.
rito nobilissimos, propterea, quia sicut sapere potuerunt,
&c. De Civ. Dei, lib. X. c. 1.
Ubi autem commemoravi, legisse me quosdam libros
Platonicorum, quos Victorinus, quondam rhetor urbis Ro-
mae, quem Christianum defunctum esse audieram, in Lati-
nain linguam transtulisset, gratulatus est mihi, quod non
in aliorum philosophorum scripta incidissern, plena falla-
ciarum et deceptionum secundum elementa hujus mundi:
in istis autem omnibus modis insinuari Deum et ejus Ver
bum. Confess, lib. VIII. c. 2.
Profecto Theologi veteres omnes, qui et sacrosanctae
fidei jecerunt fundamenta, et Ecclesiam alte extruxerunt,
Divus Dionysius, Justinus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Ori-
genes, Cyrillus, Basilius, Eusebius, Theodoretus, Arnobius,
Lactantius, Augustinus, Ambrosius, alii plerique omnes,
quia scirent paueis mutatis Platonicos facile Christianos
fieri posse, (Augustini verbis utor,) Platonem, ejusque sec-
tatores hosce philosophos reliquis omnibus antetulerunt,
Aristotelem non nisi cum infamia nominarunt: quadrin-
gentis vero abhinc circiter annis, Scholastici theologi in
contrarium sunt annixi, Aristotelicis impietatibus pro fidei
fundamentis sunt usi. Excusatos eos habemus, quod Grae-
cas literas nescirent, illos cognoscere non potuerunt. Non
vero eos excusamus, quod impietati pietatem adstruere
sint conati. Fr. Patricii Ep. ad Gregor. XIV. Launoii
De Var. Aristot. Fortuna, p. 170.
NOTE I. p. 63.
We may see, from the following passage of John of
Salisbury, what was the original method of a Schola Gram-
maticce. Sequebatur hunc morem Bernardus Carnotensis, exun-
dantissimus modernis temporibus fons literarum in Gal
lia; et in authorum lectione quid simplex esset, et ad
imaginem regulae positum, ostendebat; figuras gramma-
ticae, colores rhetoricos, caviUationes sophismatum, et qua

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 439
parte sui propositae lectionis articulus respiciebat alias dis-
ciplinas, proponebat in medio ; ita tamen, ut non in sin
gulis universa doceret, sed pro capacitate audientium, dis-
pensaret eis in tempore doctrinae mensuram. Et quia
splendor orationis, aut a proprietate est, id est, cum adjec-
tivum aut verbum substantivo eleganter adjungitur, aut a
translatione, id est, ubi sermo ex causa probabili, ad alie-
nam traducitur significationem, haec sumpta occasione, in-
culcabat mentibus auditorum. Et quoniam memoria exer-
citio firmatur, ingeniumque acuitur ad imitandum ea quae
audiebant, alios admonitionibus, alios flagellis et poenis
urgebat. Cogebantur exsolvere singuli die sequenti ali-
quid eorum, quae praecedenti audierant ; alii plus, alii mi
nus; erat enim apud eos praecedentis discipulus sequens
dies. Vespertinum exercitium, quod declinatio dicebatur,
tanta copiositate grammaticae refertum erat, ut, siquis in
eo per annum integrum versaretur, rationem loquendi et
scribendi, si non esset hebetior, haberet ad manum, et
significationem sermonum, qui in communi usu versantur,
ignorare non posset. Sed quia nee scholam, nee diem
aliquem, decet esse religionis expertem, ea proponebatur
materia, quae fidem aedificaret, et mores, et unde, qui
convenerant, quasi collatione quadam, animarentur ad
bonum. Novissimus autem hujus declinationis, immo
philosophicae collationis, articulus, pietatis vestigia prae-
ferebat : et animas defunctorum commendabat, devota ob-
latione psalmi, qui in pcenitentialibus sextus est, et in ora-
tione dominica, Redemptori suo. Quibus autem indice-
bantur prseexercitamina puerorum, in ptosis aut poematibus
imitandis, poetas aut oratores proponebat, et eorum jube-
bat vestigia imitari, ostendens juncturas dictionum, et ele
gantes sermonum clausulas. Si quis autem ad splendorem
sui operis, alienum pannum assuerat, deprehensum redar-
guebat furtum : sed pcenam saepissime non infligebat. Sic
vero redargutum, si hoc tamen meruerat inepta positio, ad
exprimendam auctorum imaginem, modesta indulgentia
conscendere jubet, faciebatque, ut qui majores imitabatur,
Ff4

440 APPENDIX.
fieret posteris imitandus. Id quoque inter prima rudi-
menta docebat, et infigebat animis, quae in ceconomia vir
tus ; quae in decore rerum, quae in verbis laudanda sunt ;
ubi tenuitas, et quasi macies sermonis, ubi copia probabi-
lis, ubi excedens, ubi omnium modus. Historias, poemata,
percurrenda monebat, diligenter quidem, et qui velut nul-
lis calcaribus urgebantur ad fugam : et ex singulis, aliquid
reconditum in memoria, diurnum debitum, diligenti in-
stantia exigebat. Superflua tamen fugienda dicebat ; et ea
sufficere quae a claris authoribus scripta sunt. . . . Et quia
in toto praeexercitamine erudiendorum, nihil utilius est,
quam ei, quod fieri ex arte oportet, assuescere, prosas et
poemata quotidie scriptitabant, et se mutuis exercebant
collationibus. Metalogicus, lib. I. c. 24.
N-TTE J. p. 63.
Sed cum artium multa sint genera, ingenio phUoso-
phantis animi primje omnium liberales occurrunt. Hae
quidem omnes, aut Trivii, aut Quadrivii, ratione claudun-
tur : et tantam dicunt obtinuisse efficaciam apud majores,
qui eis diligenter institerant, ut omnem aperirent lectio-
nem, ad omnia intellectum erigerent, et omnium quaestio-
num quae probari possunt, difficultatem sufficerent. Ne
que enim doctore egebant in aperiendis libris, aut quae-
stionibus dissolvendis, hi, quibus aut ratio Trivii, omnium
sermonum, aut Quadrivii lex, totius naturae, secreta expo-
nebat. Jounn. Saresberiens. Metalog. lib. I. c. 12. p. 758.
The transition of this course of study into one vague,
superficial, logical philosophy is thus noticed by the same
author. Poetae, historiographi, habebantur infames ; et si quis
incumbebat laboribus antiquorum, notabatur; et non modo
asello Arcadiae tardior, sed obtusior plumbo, vei lapide,
omnibus erat in risum. . . . Fiebant ergo summi repente
philosophi : nam qui illiteratus accesserat, fere non mora-
batur in scholis ulterius, quam eo curriculo temporis, quo
avium pulli plumescunt. Itaque recentes magistri e scho-

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 441
lis, et pulli volucrum e nidis, sicut pari tempore moraban-
tur, sic pariter avolabant. . . . Ecce nova fiebant omnia :
innovabatur grammatica; immutabatur dialectica; contem-
nebatur rhetorica : et novas totius quadrivii vias, evacuatis
priorum regulis, de ipsis philosophiae adytis proferebant.
Solam convenientiam, sive rationem loquebantur ; argu-
rnentum sonabat in ore omnium ; et asinum nominare, vei
hominem, aut aliquid operum naturae, instar criminis erat,
aut ineptum minis, aut rude, et a philosopho alienum :
impossibile credebatur, convenienter,et ad rationis normam,
quicquam dicere, aut facere, nisi convenientis et rationis
mentio, expressim esset inserta. Sed nee argumentum
fieri licitum, nisi praemisso nomine argumenti. Ex arte,
et de arte, agere, idem erat. Metalogicus, lib. I. c. 3.
NOTE K. p. 66.
Sidonius Apollinaris, alluding to the studies of his youth,
makes no mention but of the Categories of Aristotle. Oper.
lib. IV. Ep. I. p. 85.
The Topics, among other treatises of Aristotle, though
existing in Latin Translation, had fallen into disuse at the
time of John of Salisbury. He observes : Cum itaque tam
evidens sit utilitas Topicorum, miror quare cum aliis a
majoribus tamdiu intermissus sit Aristotelis liber, ut om-
nino, aut fere, in desuetudinem abierit ; quando aetate nos
tra, diligentis ingenii pulsante studio, quasi a morte, vei a
somno, excitatus est, ut revocaret errantes, et viam veri-
tatis quaerentibus aperiret. Metalogicus, lib. III. c. 5. p. 859.
He speaks with great contempt of the logicians in
general of his day ; describing, how they wasted the time
of learners in the merely elementary part of logic, as on
the explanation of the Categories and the Introduction of
Porphyry. He quotes a remark of a professor of logic in
his time, who used to ridicule the prevailing practice of
commenting on these works ; but still was obliged to con
form to it, observing, that his school would be deserted,
were he to teach logic with the requisite simplicity of

442 APPENDIX.
address and ease. Deridebat eos noster ille Anglus
Peripateticus Adam, cujus vestigia sequuntur multi, sed
pauci praepediente invidia profitentur : dicebatque, se aut
nullum aut auditores paucissimos habiturum, si ea simpli-
citate sermonum et facilitate sententiarum dialecticam tra-
deret, qua ipsam doceri expediret. Habui enim hominem
familiarem assiduitate colloquii, et communicatione libro-
rum, et quotidiano fere exercitio super emergentibus arti-
culis conferendi. Sed nee una die discipulus ejusfui; ei
tamen habeo gratias, quod eo docente plura cognovi, plura
ipsius, quoniam aliud ratione consulta praeelegeram, ipso
arbitro reprobavi. Metalogicus, lib. III. c. 3. c. 5.
Yet at this very period Logic was the ascendant science,
so much that no educated person would allow himself
ignorant of it: — Omnes enim se esse logicos gloriantur,
non modo qui scientiam aliquibus superaverunt blanditiis,
sed et illi qui earn nondum salutaverunt a limine. Meta
logicus, lib. II. p. 787-
And what is still more surprising in such real ignorance
of the philosopher's own writings, Aristotle was professed
by all; as the same author observes : siquidem omnes Ari-
stotelem profitentur. Metalogicus, II. c. 19. Sicut enim
urbs Romam, Maronem Poeta exprimit, sic et Philosophi
nomen circa Aristotelem, utentium placito, contractum est.
Policraticus, lib. VII. c. 6. p. 424. Metalog. III. c. 7-
The objection then to Aristotle, indicated by the papal
decrees in the course of the Xllth and Xlllth centuries,
must be understood as referring to the physical and meta
physical treatises1. The words of the papal prohibition,
1 Jiu Boulay, Hist. Acad. Par. torn. 111. p. 82  These restrictions how
ever were afterwards relaxed, as Launoy distinctly shews. Anno 1366,
Cardinales duo cum ex auctoritate Urbani V. Parisiensem Acadeiniam re-
formarunt, Aristotelis libros paullo humanius adhuc tractavere. ... In hac
fortuna jam turn primum nominantur Aristotelis opera, quae legi permittun-
tur, immo ut legantur, de iisque interrogati scholares in examine publico
respondeant, statuitur. Quae vero non recensentur opera, ab Academiae scho
lis adhuc excludi non immerito creduutnr. Sunt autem in eorum nuinero,
quae de physico auditu inscribuntur. Ceteruin quin Cardinales reformationis

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 443
are: Non legantur libri Aristotelis de metaphysica et de
naturali philosophia, nee summae de iisdem, aut de doctrina
magistri David de Dinant aut Amalrici haeretici, aut Mau-
ricii Hispani. There had been a great deal of speculation
in the Church on physical questions, particularly relatively
to the nature of the soul. John of Salisbury says, he had
heard many discoursing on physics aliter quam fides ha-
beat. Then the introduction of the Arabian philosophy,
founded as it was on expositions of Aristotle, at the same
time perverting his sense, aggravated the theological dread
of his writings. A distinction appears to have been drawn
between Aristotelizing, as it was caUed, and expounding
Aristotle. Nullo pacto, says Thomas Campanella, speak
ing particularly of Thomas Aquinas, putandus est Aristo-
telizasse, sed tantum Aristotelem exposuisse, ut occurreret
malis per Aristotelem illatis, et crederem cum licentia
Pontificism. This difference partly accounts for the greater
authority of Aquinas's writings in comparison with Al
bert's. Albert's exposition of Aristotle is original dis
quisition on the several chapters, which he follows step by
step. Aquinas, on the other hand, expounds the text of
Aristotle by a running commentary.
NOTE L. p. 68.
The Arabian philosophers appear to have been made
known to the Christian world principally through the
labours of learned Jews, who subsisted eminently at that
time as a neutral element of communication between the
hujus auctores superioribus statutis derogaverint, negari non potest. Nam
in provinciali Concilio cavetur, ne quis eos Ubellos qui docebant Metaphysi-
cam, de cetera legere et scribere prcesumeret, vei uuocumque modo habere.
Inter decreta legati, qui sub Innocentio III. Parisiensem Academiam rede-
git melioreni in statum, prsecipitur, ut legantur Aristotelis libri de Dialec
tica tam veteri quam nova, sed ut non legantur libri de Metaphysica, et de
Naturali Philosophia. Hi vero Cardinales jubent ut liber Metaphysical, et
alia quffidam opera, quae ad Naturalem Philosophiam pertinent, legantur. Sed
iu hoc facto ex autiquis Patribus, quos sequerentur, nulloa, aut paucos ha-
buerunt. Launoii De Var. Aristot. Fortuna, t. 9.
rn Launoii De Var. Aristot. Fortuna, u. 7.

444 APPENDIX.
dissevered masses of mankind. Those habits of trade to
which their insulated situation in the midst of human so
ciety has ever reduced them, their knowledge of medical
science, for which they were particularly distinguished, and
their consequent acquaintance with the Arabic, the Greek,
and the Latin, — the sacred and the universal languages of
the Mahometan and the Christian worlds, — were the cir
cumstances which enabled them to act this part in the
history of literature. Several of them indeed were them
selves conspicuous as learned men ; as is evident from the
well-known instance of Moses Ben Maimon, or Maimoni-
des, in the Xllth century; and some wrote commentaries
on Aristotle11.
We find the names of some Christians mentioned as
translators of Aristotle, as Constantine the African in the
Xlth century, and Michael Scot in the commencement of
the XHIth ; and several others of less note. But these
probably were indebted to the assistance of Jews even in
the performance of their task; as the business of trans
lating was in itself a profession °.
The circuitous course by which the Aristotelic Philo
sophy was brought back to the Christian Church of the
West, is an extremely curious fact. By the occupation of
Constantinople during the first half of the XHIth century,
and the subsistence of a Latin kingdom in the Holy Land
during the Xllth and XHIth centuries, Latin colonies were
planted in the Eastern Empire : and on the other hand,
by the conquests of the Arabians in Africa and Spain, an
Oriental people were settled in the extreme West. Both
these events, by promoting general intercourse, greatly
facilitated the advance of literature, and in particular the
n Hinc est, quod pauci veri Judaei, hoc est qui non in parte aliqua credu-
litatis Saraceni sunt, aut Aristotelicis consentientes erroribus, in terra Sara-
cenorum inveniantur, de his qui inter philosophos commorantur. Tract, de
Legibus, by William of Auvergne, Bishop of Paris from 1228 to T248.
Oper. torn. I. p. 25.
o Michael Scotus, ignarus quidem et verborum et rerum, fere omnia qua
sub nomine ejus prodierunt, ab Andrea quodam Jucteo mutuatns est. Roger
Bacon, Opus. Maj. Prcefat. Jebb.

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 445
circulation of the Greek Philosophy. And the same cause
acted in restoring the philosophy of Aristotle, which had
originally recommended it to Christians ; the spirit of theo
logical speculation. The Nestorians, flying from persecution
into Persia and Mesopotamia, cherished, in those countries,
that fondness for philosophy, for which they had before been
distinguished. The Greek philosophy had been favourably
received in Persia from the time of Chosroes, with whom
the last philosophers of the schools of Athens obtained a
refuge. It happened that some fugitive Princes of the
Abassid line, driven from their home by the rival family
of the Ommiades, found a resource in their exile in at
tendance on the lessons of these philosophical Christians.
In their subsequent accession to the throne of Mahomet,
they carried with them to the seat of Arabian empire, the
taste for those studies which had relieved and ennobled
their days of exile. The Ommiades, driven in their turn
from the throne of the East, and escaping at last to the
shores of Andalusia, as Caliphs of the Western empire of
the Saracens, propagated in Spain that literature which had
now taken root in the parent country. A constant commu
nication appears to have taken place between the Eastern
and Western Arabians : — the philosopher of Cordoba tra
velling to Bagdad in quest of science ; as the learned Latin
would resort to Paris, and the most celebrated schools of
different countries. Thus may be accounted for, the large
infusion of Oriental philosophy into the science of the
Christians of the West. The Arabians both of Spain and
of the East cultivated with ardour an acquaintance with
the Aristotelic philosophy ; nearly on the same principle
which rendered that philosophy popular in the Latin
schools ; — its subservience as a method of abstract specu
lation, under the restrictions of a despotic authority in
matters of religious belief. But their study of mathe
matics and medicine led them also to attend, no less to the
physical treatises of Aristotle, than to the logical. And
thus, when their commentaries became accessible to the

446 APPENDIX.
Latins, a larger field of Aristotelic science was laid open
to the latter. We see the effect in the wider range which
scholasticism assumed from this period.
The question has been debated whether the revival of
philosophy in the West was owing chiefly to the Arabian
translations, or translations made immediately from the
Greek P. But the decision of the question is of little
consequence. It is evident, I think, that both channels of
communication contributed to produce the result. While
Christians resorted to Cordoba or Toledo, to imbibe the
mysterious wisdom of the Arabian Doctors ; active mea
sures were on the other hand taken for restoring the study
of Greek in the Latin schools. Philip Augustus estab
lished at Paris the Constantinopolitan college for the edu
cation of Greek youth : and Latin missionaries were sent
by Innocent III. in concert with the Count Baldwin, to
Constantinople i. The immediate object of these proceed
ings was, to promote a reconciliation of the Greek and
Latin churches. But they must have tended at the same
time, to encourage the knowledge of the Greek language in
the West. When we speak of the knowledge of Greek,
we must understand a more general knowledge among the
learned. For a partial acquaintance with the language
had always subsisted. There were Greek monasteries in
Calabria ; and in the South of France, at Aries and at Mar
seilles, there were a sufficient number of Greek traders to
be the occasion of peculiar charters : there was also a
Greek monastery at Auriol near MarseiUesr.
P The French Academy of Inscriptions recently proposed a prize for a
discussion of the questions bearing on this point : and the composition of M.
Jourdain, which obtained the prize, has been published under the title of
Recherches Critiques sur Page et l'origine des Traductions Latines d'Aris-
tote, &c. The author did not live to complete the publication ; and the
work appears in an unfinished state, more as a collection of materials for
the subject than as a regular dissertation. But it brings together much
valuable information, the fruits of great learning and research, on the state
of literature in the middle ages.
1 Jourdain, Recherches, &c. p. 51 — 53. r Ibid.

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 447
NOTE M. p. 69.
Du Boulay, having cited Bede's observation on Levitic.
c. 7- Humana doctrina, grammatica, aut rhetorica, aut
dialectica, ex quibus, in his quae de fide sentienda sunt,
nihil accipiendum ; — to shew, how averse theologians were,
at one time, to the application of the sciences to matters of
faith, adds, respecting the philosophy of Aristotle : Imo
nee in scholis liberalium artium admittebatur ; cujus loco
Lutetiae olim S. Augustini dialecticam praelectam vide-
mus, ut Odonis Cluniacensis exemplo clarum fit ; qui circa
annum 900, apud Remigium Antissiodorensem, qui tunc e
Remensi Schola Parisios reversus docebat, " dialecticam
" S. Augustini Deodato filio suo missam perlegit ;" ut le-
gitur in ejus vita. At hoc seculo, [XI0] occasione prae-
sertim Berengarianarum disputationum, coeperunt curiosi,
et maxime illi qui ei favebant, aut favere videbantur, Aristo
telis dialecticam in scholas inducere. Bulcei Hist. Acad.
Paris, torn. i. p. 349. NOTE N. p. 70.
Audio, quod tamen absque dubietate credere non pos
sum, quia RosceUnus clericus dicit in Deo tres personas
esse tres res ab invicem separatas ; sicut sunt tres angeli ;
ita tamen, ut una sit voluntas et potestas : aut Patrem, et
Spiritum Sanctum, esse incarnatum ; et tres Deos vere dici
posse, si usus admitteret. In qua sententia asserit, vene
rabilis memoriae Archiepiscopum Lanfrancum fuisse, et me
esse. Anselm. Ep. ad Fulconem Episcop. Belluacens.
Cum adhuc in Becci monasterio essem Abbas, praesump-
ta est a quodam clerico in Francia talis assertio : Si in
Deo, inquit, tres personae sunt, una tantum res; et non
sunt tres res unaquaeque per se separatim, sicut tres an
geli, aut tres animae; ita tamen, ut potentia et voluntate
omnino sint idem ; ergo, Pater, et Spiritus Sanctus, cum
FUio est incarnatus. Quod cum ad me perlatum esset,
incepi contra hunc errorem quandam epistolam; quam

448 APPENDIX.
parte quadam edita, perficere contempsi ; credens non ea
opus esse, quoniam et ille, contra quem fiebat, in Concilio
a venerabili Remensi Archiepiscopo Reynaldo collectos,
errorem suum abjuraverat. Anselm. De Incarn. Ferbi,
p. 34.
Hic contra egregium ilium praeconem Christi, Robertura
Arbrosello, contumacem ausus est epistolam confingere;
et contra ilium magnificum ecclesiae doctorem, Anselmum
Cantuarensem Archiepiscopum, adeo per contumelias ex-
arsit, ut, ad regis Anglici imperium, ab Anglia turpiter im-
pudens ejus contumacia sit ejecta, et vix turn cum vita
evaserit. . . . Hic, sicut pseudo-dialecticus, ita et pseudo-
christianus ; cum in dialectica sua nullam rem partes ha
bere aestimat, ita divinam paginam impudenter pervertit,
ut, eo loco quo dicitur Dominus partem piscis assi come-
disse, partem hujus vocis, quae est piscis assi, non partem
rei, intelligere cogatur. Ep. ad G. Parisiens. Episcop.
Abaelardi Oper. p. 354 '.
I have given these several extracts, in order to shew
the manner in which the theory of Nominalism was stated
by its opponents. The misrepresentation is evident : the
same style which infects all controversial statements in
questions of theology, is here instanced in a question of
philosophy. Opponents draw their consequences and con
clusions, and impute these to the maintainers of the point
which they would impugn. This creates the difficulty in
forming our views of the different shades of opinion on
this abstract question. The truth can never be fairly stated
where such principles actuate the controversialist, as the
fear, by an admission on one point, of producing a difficulty
in some other : as when, for instance, Anselm argues that
if Nominalism were true, Sabellianism must be true u.
s Council of Soissons, A. D. 1089.
t Wrongly attributed to Abelard; since Abelard was a disciple of Rosce
lin, and adopted Roscelin's theory, under a modification.
u Sed hffic ratio si vera est et rata, vera est haeresis Sabcllii. De Incarn.
Verbi, c. m. p. 3G.

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 449
The absurdity of such an argument indeed is evidenced, in
the opposite view taken by another arguer on the same
side, or even by the same arguer, when he has a different
object before him : as when we find a disciple of Nominal
ism characterized also as a tritheist, or as an Arian.
The reputed origin of the dispute is carried still further
back, from Roscelin, to John, surnamed the Sophist, a
popular teacher of the Xlth century, who, according to
Du Boullay, sophisticam vocalem esse disseruit; and to
the controversy between Lanfranc and Berenger x. The
Realism of Anselm was objected to also by another dis
putant, supposed to be a monk, by name, Gaunilo ; who
ably argues against him on that point in a short tract en
titled " Liber pro Insipiente," published in the works of
Anselm : and whose objections, as both modestly and
shrewdly urged, Anselm has carefully discussed. The
question probably had always existed from the time that
Logic began to be the leading study of the Schools ; as we
may see from the reference to it in the " Introduction" of
Porphyry ; and only attracted more general notice, when
heretical disputation employed the distinction of Nomin
alist and Realist, as an instrument for maintaining opin
ions in Theology.
NOTE O. p. 71.
The fullest account that we have of the different shades
of opinion classed under the extremes of Nominalism and
Realism is given by John of Salisbury. Metalogicus, lib.
II. c. 17- From what he has stated, the question was
evidently regarded entirely in a logical point of view, and,
by no means, in its actual philosophical importance, as a
speculation concerning the grounds of human knowledge.
Ockam himself appears rather to have had for his design
to spiritualize phUosophy ; by removing the supposition of
an objective reality belonging to general notions, or uni
versals, to lead the mind to the alternative of regarding
x Bulcei Hist. Acad. Paris, torn. I. p. 443.
Gg

450 APPENDIX.
all truth, as derived by immediate communication from the
Deity. NOTE P. p. 73.
Totutoiv be, o% orriadev fjKoXovdovv eKaKOVovres t&v Xeyo-
p.evo)v, rb pev ttoAii £evoi kq)aCvovro, otis ayei ef e/cdrepcoz* %6-
Xecav 6 Ilpcorayo'pas, 8t' coz* 8tef epyerai, K-qX&v rfj (pavfj, &anep
Optpevs' ot 8e, Kara ttjv (peov-qv 'knovrai KeKqXqpevoi. Plato.
Protagoras, Opera, torn. III. p. 96. ed. Bipont.
We have only to read the history of Abelard, to see the
parallel of the ancient Sophist in the Schoolman of the mid
dle age. His proposing on one occasion to give a theolo
gical disputation on any obscure passage of Scripture 7,
reminds us of the offer of the Greek Sophist to extemporize
on any given subject. His rivals in vain endeavoured to
silence him. His scholars, as he triumphantly declares
under all his persecutions, still adhered to him, wherever
he went : at Laon, at Paris, at his cell at the Abbey of St.
Denys, at his oratory in the wilderness, they still flocked
around him in increasing numbers. The scene at the last
place gives us a picture of the manners of the times. His
disciples formed a sort of encampment around him in the
open country, and continued to wait on his teaching amidst
great personal discomfort. NOTE Q. p. 74.
Tn the year 1339 the University of Paris condemned
the logic of Ockam, and interdicted the use of it as a book
of instruction. Bulcei Hist. Acad. Paris, torn. IV. p. 257-
Degerando, Hist. Compare'e des Systemes de Philosophie,
torn. IV. p. 597.
The great interest which the Carlovingian princes had
taken in the school of Paris, laid effectually the ground
work of its future preeminence in the literary and theolo
gical world. Soon after its institution, what was originally
only the " school of the palace" became the chief domicUe
y Epistolw, Opera, p. 8.

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 451
of the science of the middle ages ; so that instead of the
" school of the palace," the familiar expression then was,
as Du Boullay remarks, the " palace of the school." No
theologian regarded his education complete, unless he had
heard the distinguished lecturers at Paris. The theolo
gical influence of the University may be seen in the anxious
superintendence of successive Popes over the course of
education pursued there ; and in a particular instance,
when Innocent III. wrote to the University, requesting
they would send persons to Constantinople for the purpose
of converting the Greeks to the Latin faith z.
NOTE R. p. 74.
The Nominalism of Ockam corresponds very closely
with what is now designated by Conceptualism. He was
far from thinking, that the terms expressing general no
tions were merely flatus vocis, as Nominalism is repre
sented by Anselma. M. Degerando, in his Histoire Com
pared des Systemes de Philosophic, chap. 27, has given a
succinct and excellent view of his doctrine on this point,
in contrast with that of Duns Scotus. He remarks parti
cularly the philosophical character which the dispute had
assumed in the XlVth century. — Cependant, cette discus
sion avait un avantage marque1 sur la controverse qui s'elait
elevee du temps de Roscelin ; alors on n'avait guere em
ploy^ que des armes theologiques ; maintenant du moins
on discutait avec des principes rationnels une question phi-
losophique. Tom. IV. p. 580.
NOTE S. p. 77.
The following passage of Aristotle's Metaphysics gives
z Magistris et scholaribus Parisiensibus . . . supplicavit (Balduinus) ut vos
inducere ac monere apostolicis litteris dignaremur, quatenus iu Graeciam
accedeutes, ibi studeretis litterarum studium refbrmare, unde noscitur ex
ordium habuisse .... Universitatem vestram rogamus, &c. Letter of Inno
cent, dated June 1205, to the University of Paris. Jourdain, Recherches
&c. p. 52.
» De Incarn. Verbi, c. n. p. 36.
Gg2

452 APPENDIX.
the exact idea of what Christian Theology became in the
hands of the Schoolmen.
Errel 8' lori rts kiriarr/pri tov ovtos, rj ov /cat ^opurrbv,
k. r. X. ttepl to ywpl(TTbv apa ov Kai aKCvqrov, erkpa rovrtov
ap$orepa>v t&v kmaT-qp&v karC rts, etTrep mtdpyei rts ovaCa
roiavrq' Aeyw 8e xcapiarri /cat aK'ivqros. 07rep neipaaopeda bem-
vvvar Kai elirep karC rts roiavrri (pijais kv rots ovaiv, ivravd' &v
e'Cq irov /cat to delov Kai avrq hv elq rrpdrq Kai icvpicardrq dpx?J.
8?jAof roCvvv ort rpta yevq r&v deapqriK&v kmarTjp&v eari,
(pvaiK-q, padrjpariK-q, deoXoyiKq' j3eXnarov pev ovv rb r&v deo>-
p-qriK&v kiriarqp&v yevos' tovtiav b' avr&v f) reXevraCa Xeydelaa'
wept ro ripuarepov yap fan r&v ovnav fieXrCav be koi xetpui/
e/cdcrrrj Ae'yerat Kara ro o'tKelov kmar-qrov. Metaphys. lib.
XIII. cap. 7- p- 988. Duval.
Accordingly its scientific nature is thus set forth by
Aquinas :
Licet in scientiis philosophicis alia sit speculativa, et
alia practica, sacra tamen doctrina comprehendit sub se
utramque ; sicut et Deus eadem scientia se cognoscit, et
ea quae facit. Magis tamen est speculativa quam prac
tica : quia principalis agit de rebus divinis, quam de acti-
bus humanis, de quibus agit, secundum quod per eos ordi-
natur homo ad perfectam Dei cognitionem, in qua aeterna
beatitudo consistit. Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. i.
art. 4.
Haec scientia accipere potest aliquid a philosophicis dis-
ciplinis, non quod ex necessitate eis indigeat, sed ad ma-
jorem manifestationem eorum, quae in hac scientia tradun-
tur. Non enim accipit sua principia ab aliis scientiis sed
immediate a Deo per revelationem. Et ideo non accipit
ab aliis scientiis tanquam a superioribus, sed utitur eis
tanquam inferioribus et ancillis : sicut architectonicae utun-
tur subministrantibus, ut civilis militari. Et hoc ipsum
quod sic utitur eis, non est propter defectum, vei insuf-
ficientiam ejus, sed propter defectum intellectus nostri:
qui ex his, quae per naturalem rationem (ex qua procedunt
aliae scientiae) cognoscuntur, facilius manu ducitur in ea,

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 453
quae sunt supra rationem, quae in hac scientia traduntur.
Ibid. art. 5.
Sacra autem doctrina propriissime determinat de Deo,
secundum quod est altissima causa : quia non solum quan
tum ad illud quod est per creaturas cognoscibile (quod
philosophi cognoverunt, ut dicitur Rom. i. " quod notum
" est Dei, manifestum est illis ;") sed etiam quantum ad
id, quod notum est sibi soli de seipso, et aliis per revela-
tionem communicatum. Unde sacra doctrina maxime di
citur sapientia. Ibid. art. 6.
Omnia autem pertractantur in sacra doctrina, sub ra
tione ; Dei vei quia sunt ipse Deus : vei quia habent ordi-
nem ad Deum, ut ad priucipium et finem : unde sequitur,
quod Deus vere sit subjectum hujus scientiae. Ibid. art. 7-
Utitur tamen sacra doctrina etiam ratione humana, non
quidem ad probandum fidem ; (quia per hoc tolleretur me-
ritum fidei ;) sed ad manifestandum aliqua alia, quae tra
duntur in hac doctrina. . . . Et inde est, quod etiam auc-
toritatibus philosophorum sacra doctrina utitur, ubi per
rationem naturalem veritatem cognoscere potuerunt : sicut
Paulus Actuuni 17, inducit verbum Arati, dicens ; " sicut
" et quidam poetarum vestrorum dixerunt, ' genus Dei su-
" ' mus.' " Sed tamen sacra doctrina hujusmodi auctorita-
tibus utitur, quasi extraneis argumentis et probabilibus :
auctoritatibus autem canonicae scripturae utitur proprie et
ex necessitate arguendo : auctoritatibus autem aliorum
doctorum Ecclesiae, quasi argumentando ex propriis, sed
probabiliter. Innititur enim fides nostra revelationi Apo-
stolis et Prophetis factae, qui canonicos libros scripserunt,
non autem revelationi si qua fuit aliis doctoribus facta.
Ibid. art. 8.
NOTE T. p. 82.
It is worth while to compare the reception of the Pla
tonic theory of Ideas by two different philosophers of the
Schools — the one a Platonist, the other an Aristotelian.
Ideae quoque, id est, species vei formae, in quibus rerum
Gg3

454 APPENDIX.
omnium faciendarum, priusquam essent, immutabiles ra
tiones conditae sunt, solent vocari ; de quibus latius in
processu operis dicemus, testimoniisque sanctorum Pa
trum roborabimus : et nee immerito sic appellantur ; quo-
niam Pater, hoc est, principium omnium, in Verbo suo, uni-
genito videlicet Filio, omnium rerum rationes, quas faciendas
esse voluit, prius quam in genera, et species, numerosque,
atque differentias, caeteraque, quae in condita creatura, aut
considerari possunt, et considerantur, aut considerari non
possunt, prae sui altitudinem, et non considerantur, et ta
men sunt, praeformavit. Erigen. De Divis. Natur. II. p. 48.
Ad id quod objicitur de positione Platonis : dicendum ;
quod non talis fuit positio Platonis quam improbat Aristo-
teles. Sed Plato posuit formas quae sunt ante rem : et
principia rei in seipsis existere : et in ipsis sigillari res
sicut ad sigillum : nee posuit eas in mente divina, sed in
seipsis. Et hoc modo improbat Aristoteles earn. Et forte
Plato dixit verum. Necesse est enim principia esse prius
natura : et prius esse principia quam principiata. Unde si
formas sunt rerum principia, et esse formati ; et sunt, et
principia sunt, ante formata. Et si quaeritur ubi sint :
quaestio Porphyrii est : qui ita quaerit de universalibus et
primis principiis. Pro certo in suis principiis sunt : quae
sunt lumina et influentiae primae causae in intelligentias et
intelligentiarum orbes ; et orbium in elementa, et elemen-
torum in virtutes formativas seminum et generatorum. Sic
enim ex mente divina formae sive ideae prodeunt in ideata
sive formata. Et ideo dixit Plato quod procedunt sicut ex
quodam sigillo. Et hoc non negat Aristoteles : sed negat
quod formae sunt ante rem per seipsas, et secundum seip-
sas separatim existentes. Albert. Mag. in Sent. Tr. XIII.
qu. lv. fol. 124.
NOTE U. p. 84.
Discat primo psalterium ; his se canticis avocet ; et in
proverbiis Solomonis erudiatur ad vitam. In Ecclesiaste
consuescat, quae mundi sunt, calcare. In Job virtutis et

NOTES TO LECTURE II. 455
patientiae exempla sectetur. Ad Evangelia transeat, nun-
quam ea depositura de manibus. Apostolorum Acta et
Epistolas tota cordis imbibat voluntate. Cumque pecto
ris sui cellarium his opibus locupletaverit, mandet memo
riae Prophetas; Pentateuchum, et Regum, et Paralipome-
non libros, Esdrae quoque et Hester volumina. Ad ulti-
mum sine periculo discat Canticum Canticorum ; ne si in
exordio legerit, sub carnalibus verbis spiritualium nup-
tiarum epithalamium non intelligens vulneretur. Hiero
nym. Ep. ad Lcetam, Opera, torn. I. p. 57-
The whole epistle, though hreathing an intense fanatical
spirit, is an interesting document for the history of the
times. It has its excellences too as a composition. Se
veral of the passages are beautifully executed, exemplify
ing in their style that melodious rhythm in which Jerome
delights, and which is quite peculiar to him. Take, for
instance, the conclusion : Ipse si Paulam miseris, et ma-
gistrum, et nutricium, spondeo. Gestabo humeris ; bal-
butientia senex verba formabo ; multo gloriosior mundi
philosopho, qui non regem Macedonum Babylonio peri-
turum veneno, sed ancillam et sponsam Christi erudiam,
regnis ccelestibus offerendam.
Aquinas was employed in expounding the Canticles
almost with his dying breath, at the request of the monks
of the Convent where he lay ill.
NOTE V. p. 86.
Fiunt itaque in puerilibus Academici senes; omnem dic-
torum, aut scriptorum excutiunt syllabam, imo et literam ;
dubitantes ad omnia, quaerentes semper, sed nunquam ad
scientiam pervenientes : et tandem convertuntur ad vani-
loquium, ac nescientes quid loquantur, aut de quibus as-
serant, errores condunt novos, et antiquorum aut nesciunt
aut dedignantur sententias imitari. Compilant omnium
opiniones, et ea quae etiam a vilissiniis dicta vei scripta
sunt, ab inopia judicii, scribunt et referunt : proponunt
enim omnia, quia nesciunt praeferre meliora. Tanta est
Gg4

456 APPENDIX.
opinionum, oppositionumque congeries, ut vix suo nota
esse possit authori. Accidit hoc Didymo, quo nemo plura
scripsit, ut, cum historiae cuidam tanquam vanae repugna-
ret, ipsius proferretur liber, qui earn continebat. Sed nunc
multos invenies Didymos, quorum pleni, imo referti sunt
commentarii, hujusmodi Logicorum impedimentis. Recte
autem dicuntur oppositiones, quia melioribus studiis oppo-
nuntur : obstant enim profectui. Metalogicus, lib. II. c. 7-
Such is the sarcastic complaint of John of Salisbury in
the Xllth century. The subsequent state of Scholasti
cism was only a continued aggravation of this erroneous
method. Indocta putant omnia, says Erasmus of the later
writers, nisi centies inculcaris philosophum. Actum pu
tant de Christiana religione, si quis Aristotelis decreta
rejeceritb.
NOTE W. p. 88.
The different applications of the Scriptures have been
thus deduced by the Scholastic writers.
Auctor sacrae scripturae est Deus, in cujus potestate est,
ut non solum voces ad significandum accommodet (quod
etiam homo facere potest) sed etiam res ipsas. Et ideo,
cum in omnibus scientiis voces significent, hoc habet pro-
prium ista scientia, quod ipsae res significatae per voces,
etiam significant aliquid. IUa ergo prima significatio qua
voces significant res, pertinent ad primum sensum, qui est
sensus historicus, vei literalis. IUa vero significatio, qua
res significatae per voces, iterum res alias significant, dici
tur sensus spiritualis, propter quod sensus spiritualis super
literalem fundatur, et eum supponit. Hic autem sensus
trifariam dividitur. Sicut enim dicit Apostolus ad He-
braeos vii. " lex vetus figura est novae legis:" et ipsa nova
lex, ut dicit Dionysius in Ecclesiastica Hierarchia, est
figura futurae glorias. In nova etiam lege ea quae in capite
sunt gesta, sunt signa eorum quae nos agere debemus.
Secundum ergo quod ea sunt veteris legis, significant ea
b Hieronym. Ep. ad Ctesiph. Erasmi Scholia, p. 258.

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 457
quae sunt novae legis, sensus est allegoricus. Secundum
vero quod ea quae in Christo sunt facta, vei in his quae
Christum significant, sunt signa eorum quae nos agere de-
bemus, est sensus moralis ; prout vero significant ea quae
sunt in asterna gloria, est sensus anagogicus. Aquinas,
Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. i. art. 10.

LECTURE III.
NOTE A. p. 104.
X HE residence of Athanasius at Rome for so consider
able a portion of time, is a very important point in ecclesi
astical history. Who can say, how much the orthodoxy of
the Western Church may be attributable to that circum
stance? So restless a spirit, we may be sure, was not
unoccupied in the sacred cause during the interval. And
yet respecting any actions performed by him at that time,
there is a profound silence. Qui tantum otii nactus, (says
the biography,) quid gesserit, edideritve, altum ubique
silentium. But this silence is an extremely expressive
one. According indeed to his own account it was not an
indolent one. " Applying myself wholly to the Church,"
he says, " for of this only had I any thought, I enjoyed
" leisure for the councils : Kai rfj kKKXqaCq ra. Kar kpavrbv
" rrapadkpevos, tovtov yap povov poi (ppovrls rjv, kay6Xa(ov
" rats avvd£eai c." To a person, whose heart and eye
were alive to all that was passing in the Church at that
time, this leisure devoted to the councils must have been
a period full of reflection and instruction. To watch the
different leanings of controversy, the conflicts of private
and party feeling, the intrigues of ecclesiastical diplo
macy, the shifts of subtile argumentation, which were dis
played on the theatre of the public councils, was an effort
c Athanas. Ope?: torn. I. p. 297.

458 APPENDIX.
of attention not unworthy of the powers of Athanasius ;
nor could it be unproductive of results as to the future
decision of theological questions.
I do not observe it expressly said any where, that he
employed himself in learning the Latin language, though
Gibbon has so stated it. But I conceive the fact of his
learning the theological language of the Latin Church,
is borne out, by what Gregory Nazianzen has said of his
tact in reconciling the dissensions produced by a difference
of terms between the Greeks and Latins. Having touched
on the verbal variations which occasioned so much discord
in the doctrines of theologians, Gregory adds, concerning
Athanasius : Taw' ovv bp&v ko.1 aKovaiv 6 paKdpios e/cetz*os,
/cat a>s aXqd&s dvdpcoiTos tov deov, ko.1 peyas t&v \jn>x&v oIko-
vdpos, ovk (a-qdj} beiv ¦napibe'i.v ttjv aroirov ovtoo /cat dXoyov tov
Xoyov Kararop-qv, to be nap' eavrov (pdppaKOV, krrdyei r& d&-
pcaarrjpan. 7n3s ovv tovto rroiei; npoaKaXeadpevos djxcpOTepa
ra p-epq, ovnoal rrpqeos Kai <f>iXavdpcoTTb)s, Kai tov vovv t&v
Xeyop.evb>v d/cpt/3<3s kgerdaas, krreibr] avpuppovovvras eSpe, Kai
ovbev biear&ras Kara rbv Xoyov, ra dvopara avyxafrqaas, avv-
bei rots rrpdypaai. Orat. XXI. p. 396.
Some light is reflected on the character of Athanasius,
from the description of the Egyptian monks, Ammonius
and Isidorus, who accompanied him to Rome. The au
stere taste of Ammonius would not suffer him to look at
the memorials of the greatness of the city in her classic
times ; but the only attractions for him at Rome were
the shrines of Peter and Paul. So resolute too was he
against all worldly honour, even connected with spiritual
duties, that when on some occasion the episcopal dignity
would have been forced on him, he not only fled away,
but in order to disable himself for the office, (no maimed
person being admissible to the priesthood,) cut off one of
his ears. The other, Isidorus, it is added, was no less
conspicuous for piety and abdication of the changeable
things of the world d.
d Vita S. Athanasii, p. 36. Opera, Paris, 1698.

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 459
NOTE B. p. 106.
Dehinc post aliquot annos, cum Hincmarus in Ecclesia
Remensi vetustissimum et receptissimum hymni ecclesi-
astici hunc versiculum ; " Te Trina Deitas Unaque pos-
" cimus :" cantari vetuisset ; ipse Ratramnus volumine
non modicae quantitatis ad Hildegarium Meldensem Epi-
scopum edito, ex libris S. S. Hilarii et Augustini de Tri-
nitate veterem Ecclesiae traditionem confirmavit. Mau-
guin. Dissert. Hist. c. 17, cited in an edition of Ratramn's
treatise on the Body and Blood of the Lord, p. 18e.
Religiosi S. Benedicti diu multumque reluctati sunt huic
immutationi. Ibid. p. 29.
NOTE C. p. 108.
I give the following passage as an illustration of this
mode of philosophizing carried to its natural extreme.
Tanta enim, divinae virtutis excellentia, in futura vita
omnibus qui contemplatione ipsius digni futuri sunt, ma-
nifestabit, ut nihil aliud praeter earn, sive in corporibus,
sive in intellectibus, eis eluceat. Erit enim Deus " omnia
" in omnibus :" ac si aperte Scriptura diceret ; solus Deus
apparebit in omnibus. Hinc ait sanctus Job : " et in
" carne mea videbo Deum." Ac si dixisset ; in hac carne
mea quae multis tentationibus affiigitur, tanta gloria futura
erit, ut quemadmodum nunc nihil in ea apparet, nisi mors
et corruptio : ita in futura vita nihil mihi apparebit, nisi
solus Deus, qui vere vita est, et immortalitas, et incor-
ruptio. Ac si de sui corporis felicitate talem gloriam pro-
misit, quid de sui spiritus dignitate existimandum est ?
praesertim cum, ut ait Magnus Gregorius, Theologus, cor
pora Sanctorum in rationem, ratio in intellectum, intel-
lectus in Deum ; ac per hoc tota illorum natura in ipsum
Deum mutabitur. Joan. Scot. Erigen. de Divis. Natur.
lib. I. c. 11. p. 5.
« Bertram, or Ratram, concerning the Body and Blood of the Lord, in
Latin, with a new English translation, 8vo. London, 1688.

460 APPENDIX.
NOTE D. p. 1 10.
Sicut dicit enim Anselinus ; processio personarum est
ante processionem creaturarum, sicut causa ante effectum,
et sicut aeternum ante temporale, et sicut exemplar, ante
exemplatum. Albert. Mag. in lib. Sent. Tract. VII.
fol. 68.
Hoc expresse vult Dionysius in Ubro de divinis nomi-
nibus, cap. 4. tractans illud Apostoli Eph. iii. " Hujus
" rei gratia, flecto genua mea ad Deum Patrem : ex quo
" omnis paternitas in coelo et in terra nominatur." Dicit
enim : quod ex hoc accipiatur, quod omnis paternitas et
omnis filiatio, ex qua, et deorum parentes, et deorum filii
sunt, sive in coelo, sive in terra, est ex patriarchia et fili-
archia omnibus proposita. Hoc expresse probatur per illud
Esaiae lxvi. " si ego aliis generationem tribuo, ipse sterilis
" ero : dicit Dominus." Ibid. qu. xxx. fol. 69.
NOTE E. p. 111.
'Erreibri roiwv ov yvpvfj rrj ^nrxfi {&p.ev, dAA' warrep vito
napaneraapxiTi t& aapKia KaXvnropevrj fjp.&v ¦yjrvxv, vow p.ev
bp&vra Kai yvcoanKov. . . . avXeos npoaeXdapev rfj dXrjdeCq.
Damasceni Dialectica, c. 1 .
Among the doubts proposed by Albert on the question ;
Utrum Deus cognoscibilis sit, secundum quod est unus
Deus in tribus personis, is this : Et videtur quod sic.
Rom. primo capite; " Invisibilia Dei per ea quae facta intel-
" lectu conspiciimtur." Ibi glosa : invisibilia dicit, propter
Patrem : sempiterna virtus, propter Filium, divinitas, prop
ter Spiritum Sanctum : ergo ductu rationis philosophi cog
noverunt Deum unum in tribus personis. Summa, Tract.
III. qu. xiii. fol. 12.
NOTE F. p. 117-
Aquinas, discussing the question ; Utrum processio sit
in divinis ; and first, according to his usual plan, adducing
objections, and in opposition to these the text of John viii.

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 461
" Ego ex Deo processi," adds, in his Conclusion on the
point. Respondeo dicendum; quod divina scriptura in rebus
divinis, nominibus ad processionem pertinentibus utitur.
Hanc autem processionem diversi diversimode acceperunt.
Quidam enim acceperunt hanc processionem, secundum
quod effectus procedit a causa. Et sic accepit Arius, di-
cens, Filium procedere a Patre, sicut primam ejus creatu-
ram ; et Spiritum Sanctum procedere a Patre et Filio, sicut
creaturam utriusque. Et secundum hoc, neque Filius, ne
que Spiritus Sanctus, esset verus Deus; quod est contra id
quod dicitur de Filio, 1 Joan. ult. " ut simus in vero Filio
" ejus. Hic est verus Deus." Et de Spiritu Sancto di
citur, 1 Cor. vi. " nescitis quia membra vestra templum
" sunt Spiritus Sancti." Templum autem habere, solius
Dei est. Alii vero hanc processionem acceperunt, secun
dum quod causa dicitur procedere in effectum, in quantum
vei movet ipsum, vei similitudinem suam ipsi imprimit.
Et sic accepit Sabellius, dicens ipsum Deum Patrem Filium
dici, secundum quod carnem assumpsit ex Virgine : et
eumdem dicit Spiritum Sanctum, secundum quod creatu
ram rationalem sanctificat, et ad vitam movet. Huic au
tem acceptioni repugnant verba Domini de se dicentis,
Joan. v. " non potest Filius a se facere quicquam;" et
multa alia, per quae ostenditur quod non est ipse Pater qui
FUius. Si quis autem diligenter consideret, uterque acce
pit processionem, secundum quod est ad aliquid extra ;
unde neuter posuit processionem in ipso Deo.
Sed cum omnis processio sit secundum aliquam actio
nem : sicut, secundum actionem quae tendit in exteriorem
materiam, est aliqua processio ad extra: ita, secundum
actionem quae manet in ipso agente, attenditur processio
quaedam ad intra. Et hoc maxime patet in intellectu,
cujus actio, scilicet intelligere, manet in intelligente. Qui-
cunque autem intelligit, ex hoc ipso quod intelligit, proce
dit aliquid intra ipsum ; quod est conceptio rei intellectae
ex vi intellectiva proveniens, et ex ejus notitia procedens.

462 APPENDIX.
Quam quidem conceptionem vox significat ; et dicitur
verbum cordis significatum verbo vocis. Cum autem
Deus sit super omnia, ea quae in Deo dicuntur, non sunt
intelligenda secundum modum infimarum creaturarum, quae
sunt corpora; sed secundum similitudinem supremarum
creaturarum, quae sunt intellectuales substantias ; a quibus
etiam similitudo accepta deficit a repraesentatione divino
rum. Non ergo accipienda est processio, secundum quod
est in corporalibus, vei per motum localem, vei per actio
nem alicujus causae in exteriorem effectum, ut calor a cale-
faciente in calefactum : sed secundum emanationem intel-
ligibUem, utpote verbi intelligibilis a dicente, quod manet
in ipso. Et sic fides catholica processionem ponit in divi
nis. Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxvn. art. 1.
On the application of the terms Generation, Son, Spirit,
the following passages are explicit.
Sic igitur processio Verbi in divinis habet rationem ge-
nerationis : procedit enim per modum intelligibilis actionis,
quae est operatio vitae; et a principio conjuncto, ut supra
jam dictum est : et secundum rationem siinihtudinis ; quia
conceptio intellectus est similitudo rei intellectae ; et in
eadem natura; quia in Deo idem est intelligere et esse, ut
supra ostensum est. Unde processio Verbi in divinis di
citur generatio, et ipsum Verbum procedens dicitur Filius.
Ibid. art. 2.
Secundum autem operationem voluntatis invenitur in
nobis quaedam alia processio, scilicet processio amoris, se
cundum quam amatum est in amante, sicut per concep
tionem verbi, res intellecta est in intelligente. Unde et
praeter processionem Verbi ponitur alia processio in divi
nis, quae est processio amoris. Ibid. art. 3.
Processio igitur quae attenditur secundum rationem in
tellectus, est secundum rationem similitudinis ; et in tan-
tum potest habere rationem generationis, quia omne gene-
rans generat sibi simile. Processio autem quae attenditur
secundum rationem voluntatis, non consideratur secundum
rationem similitudinis ; sed magis secundum rationem im-

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 463
pellentis et moventis in aliquid. Et ideo quod procedit in
divinis per modum amoris, non procedit ut genitum, vei
ut filius ; sed magis procedit ut spiritus. . . . Et quia in
creaturis communicatio naturae non est nisi per genera-
tionem ; processio in divinis non habet proprium vei spe-
ciale nomen nisi generationis. Unde processio, quae non
est generatio, remansit sine speciali nomine : sed potest
nominari spiratio, quia est processio Spiritus. Ibid. art. 4.
Abundant passages might be adduced to the same pur
port from other Scholastic writers. In some, the analogy
on which the reasoning proceeds, is carried to the most
offensive excess. We find indeed the same language
adopted by the Church of Rome after the Council of Trent,
in the authoritative document entitled, Catechismus ad
Parochos ; which clearly recognizes this philosophy of the
subject as a sound theological view of it.
Oret tamen assidue, ac precetur Deum, et Patrem, qui
universa ex nihilo condidit, disponitque omnia suaviter,
qui dedit nobis potestatem filios Dei fieri, qui Trinitatis
mysterium humanae menti patefecit : oret, inquam, sine
intermissione, qui divino beneficio haec credit, ut, ali-
quando in aeterna tabernacula receptus, dignus sit qui vi-
deat, quae tanta sit Dei Patris fecunditas, ut se ipsum
intuens, atque intelligens, parem et aequalem sibi Filium
gignat; quove modo duorum idem plane et par charitatis
amor, qui Spiritus Sanctus est, a Patre et Filio procedens,
genitorem, et genitum, aeterno, atque indissolubili vinculo
inter se connectat; atque ita divinae Trinitatis una sit es
sentia, et trium personarum perfecta distinctio. Catechis
mus ex Decret. Concil. Trident, ad Paroch. Romae, 1761.
p. 18. quarto ed.
Yet with all this ratiocination on the subject, Aquinas,
it must be observed, expressly denies, as also Albert and
other scholastics do, that human reasonings can attain
to so high a mystery. In Question xxxn. art. 1, of the
First Part of his Summa, he discusses the point, whether
a knowledge of the Trinity could be ascertained by the

464 APPENDIX.
light of reason. He there states the value of reasonings on
the subject to be relative to those who already believe;
and that the speculation proceeds on the assumption that
the doctrine is authoritatively established. We see here
the scholastic principle, the combination, that is, of reason
and authority, (as I have pointed out in the preceding Lec
tures,) consistently supported. Reason is to be exercised
boldly in theological truth ; only with this reserve, that it
is subordinate to authority. Though by its adventurous
excursions it may supersede the simple statements of re
vealed truth, in pretension it is only the minister of the
divine word. We see also in this admission an evidence
of the origin of the logical theology, in the disputes agi
tated between the heretic and the orthodox, — between
parties, both acknowledging the inspiration of the Scrip
tures, but each anxious either to impose his own creed on
the other, or to resist the imposition on himself of the
creed of another. It was Reason maintaining its prero
gative, both under authority and against authority.
Thus Reason was in effect made supreme over the re
vealed truth. Hence too the distinction of a philosophical
and a popular belief, became a recognized principle among
theologians. I find this principle expressly sanctioned by
an eloquent modern philosopher, in reference too to the
very point which is the subject of the present note.
Mystere est un mot qui appartient non a la langue de la
philosophie, mais a celle de la religion. Le mysticisme
est la forme necessaire de toute religion, en tant que re
ligion ; mais sous cette forme sont des idees qui peuvent
etre aborde'es et comprises en elles-memes. Et, Mes
sieurs, je ne fais que repe"ter ce qu'ont dit bien avant
moi les plus grands docteurs de l'eglise, saint Thomas,
saint Anselme de Canterbury, et Bossuet lui-meme au dix-
septieme siecle, a la fin de YHistoire universelle. Les
grands hommes ont tente une explication des mysteres,
entre autres du mystere de la tres sainte Trinite ; done ce
mystere, tout saint et sacre qu'il etait a leurs propres

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 465
yeux, contenait des ide'es qu'il etait possible de degager
de leur forme. La forme symbolique et mystique est in-
herente a la religion ; elle est, dans le eas qui nous occupe,
empruntee aux relations humaines les plus intimes et les
plus touchantes. Mais, encore une fois, si la forme est
sainte, les ide'es qui sont dessous le sont aussi, et ce sont
ces id^es que la philosophie degage, et qu'elle considere
en elles-memes. Cousin, Introduction a VHisloire de Phi
losophie, 5e. Lecon, p. 19. Paris, 1828.
NOTE G. p. 117.
Amplius autem plurimi antiquorum Philosophorum po-
suerunt amorem Dei originale principium quorumcunque ;
Amor autem a voluntate minime separatur. Recitat si-
quidem Philosophus, 1. Metaph., Hesiodum et Parmeni-
dem, dicentes, amorem Deorum providentem omnibus esse
principium generationis universi: qui amor omnia condidit :
quem necesse est esse in entibus, et esse causam quae res
ipsas moveat et congreget. Bradwardin. De Caus. Dei,
lib. I. c. 9. p. 192.
It may be perceived, from the following passage of
Albert, that the notions of the Timaeus were accommo
dated by the scholastics to their theological system ; though
the necessity of maintaining the supremacy of Revelation,
required from them a disclaimer of the authority of Plato,
as original on the sacred subject to which they applied it.
Adhuc Plato in ultima parte Tymaei de thugatero, hoc
est, paterno intellectu, loquitur, et Filio logon, et matri-
cula : Patrem ergo et Filium cognovit. Et quia Pater et
Filius non nectuntur sine amore in Patre et Filio : nexum
cognovit utriusque : qui est Spiritus Sanctus : ergo et alii
cognoverunt. Ad aliud dicendum : quod Plato Patrem intellectum cre-
antem nominat : Filium autem mundum. Quem mundum
vocavit : eo quod a mundissimo exemplari exivit, arte
sc. Creatoris. Quem archetypum mundum dixit : matri-
culam autem vocavit materiam. Unde constat quod de
Hh

466 APPENDIX.
appropriatis, et non de propriis, loquitur: et ad produc-
tionem rerum hoc refert, et non ad processionem persona-
rum. Albert. Mag. Summa, qu.- xiii. Tract. III. fol. 13.
NOTE H. p. 122.
Materialism may be regarded as generally the doctrine
of the primitive Church. It accorded more with the po
pular view of future punishments which was originally
held : and it reserved to God himself more exclusively the
prerogative of spirituality. It was the creed of an unphi
losophical piety, vaguely and loosely conceived ; not an
ingenious theory, such as that which a false modern phi
losophy has devised. Were the material nature of the
soul denied, the infidel might argue against the possibi
lity of its undergoing those sufferings for sin which Chris
tianity denounces. Or man might be tempted to lift up
himself with pride, as little less than the Divine Being.
Thus TertuUian says : Nihil enim si non corpus. De
Anim. c. 7- n- 96. Omne quod est, corpus est sui generis;
nihil est incorporale, nisi quod non est. De Carne Christi.
Ut concedam interim esse aliquid incorporale, de sub-
stantiis duntaxat; quum ipsa substantia corpus sit rei cu-
jusque. Adv. Hermogen. c. 35. He even does not scru
ple to apply the word corpus to the nature of God. Quis
enim negabit Deum corpus esse, etsi Deus spiritus est ?
Spiritus enim corpus sui generis in sua effigie. Adv.
Prax. c. 7- — Jerome, alluding to the different opinions
concerning the nature of the soul, speaks of its propaga
tion in a manner analogous to the body, as the prevailing
tenet in the West. — Utrum lapsa de ccelo sit, ut Pytha
goras philosophus, omnesque Platonici, et Origenes, pu-
tant, anima; an a propria Dei substantia, ut Stoici, Ma-
nichaeus, et Hispaniae Prisciliani haereses, suspicantur; an
in thesauro habeantur Dei olim conditae, ut quidam eccle-
siastici stulta persuasione confidunt ; an quotidie a Deo
fiant, et mittantur in corpora, secundum illud quod in
evangelio scriptum est, " Pater meus usque modo operatur,

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 467
" et ego operor;" an certe ex traduce, ut Tertullianus,
Apollinaris, et maxima pars Occidentalium autumant, ut,
quomodo corpus ex corpore, sic anima nascatur ex anima,
et simili cum brutis animantibus conditione subsistant.
Hieronym. Marcellino et Anapsychice d.
Citations might be made from other writers to the same
purport. At length, about the commencement of the Vth
century, the Pelagian discussions, and in particular the po
sitive statement of the materiality of the soul by Faustus,
bishop of Riez, attracted the attention of philosophical
Christians to the point. The arguments of Faustus were
answered in a treatise by Mamertus Claudianus, a priest
of Vienne, and the most eminent philosopher of that day
in Gaul. About the same time the Greek philosopher Ne-
mesius, Bishop of Emesa, argued the incorruptible vitality
of the soul, in a work " On the Nature of Man." Then
also we find Augustine discussing the subject. His Ma-
nichean prejudices having leaned entirely on the side of
Materialism, when he became a catholic Christian, he was
naturally led to assert an opposite theory. In his dialogue,
De Quantitate Animce, he derives the origin of the soul
from God, and affirms its simplicity and immateriality.
So again in an epistle to Jerome, he says : Incorpoream
quoque esse animam, etsi difficile tardioribus persuaderi
potest, mihi tamen fateor esse persuasume. Platonism
was now the received philosophy of the Church : and the
necessity of arguing against the preexistence of the soul
was not so imperatively felt. Nemesius indeed expressly
teaches its preexistence. There seems therefore to have
been no objection to admitting the principles, from which
Plato drew his conclusions of the natural immortality of
the soul. Still speculation did not rest on the subject : as
we may perceive from the remarks of John of Salisbury. —
At physici, dum naturae nimium autoritatis tribuunt, in
autorem naturae, adversando fidei, plerumque impingunt.
d Ep. XXVII. torn. IT. August. Opera.
• Augustini Opera, torn. II. fol. 30.
H h 2

468 APPENDIX.
Non enim omnes erroris arguo; licet plurimos audierim, de
anima, de virtutibus et operibus ejus, de augmento cor
poris et diminutione, de resurrectione ejusdem, de cre-
atione rerum, aliter quam fides habeat, disputantes. Po-
licraticus, lib. II. p. 147.
NOTE I. p. 123.
Sed dicent forsitan : flatus utique ille non erat de sub
stantia humana, et tamen quasi suam ilium emittebat.
Quapropter docetur per hujusmodi Spiritus Sancti datio-
nem : quia cum dat Filius Spiritum Sanctum, dat et mittit
suum spiritum ; sed non de suae divinitatis essentia. Di-
cant igitur, si qui haec opinantur : quia, sicut flatus non
est humana natura cum emittitur ab homine, ita Spiritus
Sanctus non est divina substantia, cum datur vei mittitur
a Deo Filio ; quod nullus confitetur Christianus. Dicant
etiam cum audiunt : " Verbo Domini cceli firmati sunt, et
" spiritu oris ejus omnis virtus eorum :" si ibi non ne-
gant intelligendum per spiritum oris Domini, Spiritum
Sanctum, non ilium esse de essentia Domini, cujus oris
spiritus dicitur : quia spiritus qui ex ore solet hominum
procedere, non est de subtantia illius de cujus ore proce
dit, &c. Anselm. De Process. Spir. S. p. 130. Oper.
torn. III. ed. 1612. NOTE J. p. 126.
Gregory Nazianzen, having spoken of the Nature of the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, corrects himself with the
observation ; that " one should rightly say usia, essence,
" rather than Nature." Orat. XLV. p. '7 17.
Aquinas gives, as a reason for saying unius essentice
rather than unius natures, that things agreeing in any act,
for instance, all heating things, may be said to be of one
Nature, but things cannot be said to be of one Essence,
unless they have unum esse, one Being. S. Theol. Prima
Pars, qu. xxxix. art. 2.
On the same principle substantia was a still more apt

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 469
expression than essentia; particularly as substantia was
the logical term of the Latins for the ovaia of the Cate
gories.
NOTE K. p. 126.
This may be seen in the following, instances : — Idque
quo facilius intelligas ex teipso ante recognosce, ut ex
imagine et similitudine Dei, quam habeas et tu in temet-
ipso rationem, qui es animal rationale, a rationali scilicet
artifice non tantum factus, sed etiam ex substantia ipsius
animatus. TertuUian. adv. Prax. p. 503. Paris. 1675.
Quasi non sic quoque unus sit omnia, dum ex uno om
nia, per substantiae scilicet unitatem. Ibid. c. 2. p. 501.
Suscepturus etiam ipsas substantias hominis carnem et
animam. Ibid. c. 16. p. 509.
Quaecunque ergo substantia sermonis fuit, illam dico
personam, et illi nomen filii vindico. Ibid. c. 7- P- 504.
Quapropter tres substantiae sunt. Hilar. De Trin. IV.
c. 13, and August. De Trin. VII.
Hoc vero utcunque simile est, quia et veteres qui La-
, tine locuti sunt, antequam haberent ista nomina, qua non
diu est quod in usum venerunt, id est, essentiam vei sub
stantiam, pro his naturam dicebant. August. De Trin.
lib. VII. fol. 114. col. 1. Also lib. V. fol. 106. col. 3.
Nomen substantiae (cui respondet in Graeco nomen hy
postasis) communiter accipituf apud nos pro essentia.
Aquin. Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxix. art. 3.
Confirma, Domine, famulos tuos quos ex aqua et Spi-
ritu Sancto propitius redemisti, ut veterem hominem cum
suis actionibus deponentes, in ipsius conversatione viva-
mus, ad cujus substantiam per haec Paschalia mysteria
transtulisti. Extract from an ancient Gallic Missal {.
So in the Athanasian Creed, in the sentence, " God of
" the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds :
f Cited in an edition of Ratramn, on the Body and Blood of the Lord,
8vo. London, 1688. p. 479. It was the prayer, it is there observed, made in
the name of the new- baptized persons on the Friday in Easter week.
h b.3

470 APPENDIX.
" and man of the substance of his mother, born in the
" world," substance is clearly used in two different senses;
first to denote the essence of God, next to denote the fleshly
nature of the mother of Jesus Christ.
NOTE L. p. 128.
Synodi (Nicaenae) sensum Marcellus Ancyranus non per-
- cepisse fertur; sed, errore Sabelliano, consubstantiale sic
defendisse, ut personarum Trinitatem tolleret. Verum
auctor dissertationis ad Sabellii gregales, quae extat inter
opera Athanasii, admonet earn esse vim nominis, 6p.oovaiov,
consubstantialis, ut multorum secundum substantiam con
sortium efferat; et idcirco Sabellianos ei subrogasse, to
piovooijaiov, quod unius substantice significat. Particula
6p,ov, una, simul, inquit Epiphanius, Hcer. LXIX. c. 70,
ovx eva, aXXa bvo a-qpaCvei reAeta. Damasc. Dialectica,
c. 41. p. 44, note, Le Quien.
NOTE M. p. 129.
Olov kv fjXCois rpialv kxop.evois dXXqX<ov, /cat dStaordrots
oSo*t, p.Ca rov cpcoros avyKpaaCs re koI avvd<f>eia, is a com
parison of Gregory Nazianzen, in Orat. XXXVII, intro
duced by Damascenus, De Fid. Orthod. I. p. 140.
Videamus tamen, an in rebus creatis, quae et loci et
temporis, et compositionis partium, legi subjacent, inve-
niri possit aliquatenus, hoc quod negat in Deo. Ponamus
fontem, de quo nascatur et fluat rivus, qui postea colliga-
tur in lacum, &c. Anselm. De Incarn. Verb. c. 7- p- 40,
also De Process. Spirit, p. 132.
Exivit autem ex Patre, ut radius ex sole, ut rivus ex
fonte, ut frutex ex semine. Tertull. adv. Prax. lib. XXI.
also Hilar. Ex Oper. Histor. Frag. II. p. 646.
TertuUian uses the expressions; Trinitas per consertos
et connexos gradus a Patre decurrens — nee frutex a ra-
dice, nee fluvius a fonte, nee radius a sole, discernitur —
fons et fluvius duae species sunt, sed indivisae. Adv.
Prax.

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 471
NOTE N. p. 129.
Quaerunt autem quomodo in Deo, una penitus perma-
nente substantia vei essentia aliqua, ibi proprietatum sit
diversitas, secundum quas Trinitas personarum constat :
vei quomodo potest esse, ut cum unaquaeque ibi persona
sit Deus, nee tamen una persona sit alia, non etiam plures
Dii, sicut et plures personae sint dicendi. Aut quae sit
denique generatio Filii de Patre vei processio Spiritus ab
utroque. Quod quidem ut diligentius fiat, praemittendum
est, quot modis, Idem, et quot modis Diversum, accipiatur.
Tribus autem modis utrumque et fortasse pluribus dici
solet. Idem namque similitudine, idem essentialiter sine
numero, idem proprietate dicimus, &c. . . . Tribus etiam
modis solet diversum sumi; essentialiter scilicet, numero,
proprietate, seu diffinitione. Diversa namque essentialiter
dicimus, si eadem essentia quae est hoc, non sit illud ; et
si homo est, nullius essentia tanquam pars includatur, ut
manus et homo. Tunc vero etiam numero sunt diversa,
cum ita tota quantitate suae essentiae sunt discreta, ut in
computatione sibi queant admisceri, cum videlicet dicitur
unus, duo, tres, &c  Proprietate vero seu diffinitione
diversa sunt, quae licet habeant de se praedicari, cum es
sentialiter idem sunt, secundum proprios tamen status,
aliud est hujus proprium, et aliud illius, et singula propriis
diffinitionibus et in sensu diversis sunt terminanda. Abce-
lardi Introd. ad Theol. lib. II. p. 1076.
NOTE O. p. 130.
The theological vocabulary of the Latins appears not to
have been settled before the writings of Augustine. In
TertuUian great laxity of expression is observable. Even
in Hilary, the immediate precursor of Ambrose and Au
gustine in the Arian controversy, the terms are not used
with that precision which the captiousness of heresy after
wards enforced. Thus Hilary does not scruple to speak
of tres substantice, or to use person in the sense of nature;
Hh 4

472 APPENDIX.
and in general to conform himself more to the phraseology
of the Greek theologians, than the Latins after him could
venture to do. It was the object of Hilary, to mediate
between the Christian of the East and the West, and he
adopted accordingly a phraseology that might conciliate
both parties.
The work, De Synodis, of Hilary, is a curious illus
tration of the unsettled state of religious opinion in the
times when it was composed. It is throughout a con
ciliatory document — a rhetorical address to his episcopal
brethren of the West, to induce them to acquiesce in the
decisions of the several councils, by shewing how little in
reality the differences were. The attempt indeed is car
ried so far as to amount to a compromise of opinions.
NOTE P.p. 131.
The distinction rested principally on the coincidence of
the notions of " having" and " being," in their application
to the Deity. Thus Anselm observes.
Videndum igitur quomodo intelligendum sit, quando ilia
natura, quae est ipsa justitia, dicitur justa. Quoniam enim
homo non potest esse justitia, justitiam autem habere pot
est. Non enim intelligitur Justus homo, existens justitia,
sed habens justitiam. Quoniam igitur summa natura non
proprie dicitur justa, quia habet justitiam, sed existit jus
titia : cum dicitur justa, proprie intelligitur existens jus
titia, non autem habens justitiam; quare si cum dicitur
existens justitia, non dicitur qualis est, sed quid est ; con-
sequitur, ut cum dicitur justa, non dicatur qualis sit, sed
quid sit, &c. Monologium XV. p. 6. Oper.
Distinctio autem in divinis non fit nisi per relationes
originis. Relatio autem in divinis non est sicut accidens
inhaerens subjecto, sed est ipsa divina essentia : unde est
subsistens, sicut essentia divina subsistit. Sicut ergo dei-
tas est Deus: ita paternitas divina est Deus Pater, qui
est persona divina. Persona igitur divina significat rela-
tionem ut subsistentem ; et hoc est significare relationem

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 473
per modum substantiae, quae est hypostasis subsistens in
natura divina; licet, subsistens in natura divina, non sit
aliud quam natura divina. Aquin. Summa Theol. Prima
Pars, qu. xxix. art. 4.
NOTE Q. p. 133.
Sed quia nostra loquendi consuetudo jam obtinuit, ut
hoc intelligatur, cum dicimus substantiam; non audemus
dicere, unam essentiam, tres substantias, sed unam es-
sentiam vei substantiam, tres autem personas : quemad-
modum multi Latini ista tractantes, et digni authoritate
dixerunt ; cum alium modum aptiorem non invenirent,
quo enuntiarent verbis quod sine verbis intelligebant. .
. . . Tamen cum quferitur quid tres, magna prorsus ino-
pia humanum laborat eloquium. Dictum est tamen tres
personae, non ut illud diceretur, sed ne taceretur. . . .
Aut quoniam propter ineffabilem conjunctionem, haec tria
simul unus Deus, cur non etiam una persona, ut ita non
possimus dicere tres personas. ... An quia Scriptura non
dicit tres Deos ? Sed nee tres personas alicubi Scrip-
turam commemorare invenimus. An quia nee tres nee
unam personam Scriptura dicit haec tria, legimus enim
personam Domini, non personam Dominum, propterea
licuit loquendi et disputandi necessitate tres personas
dicere, non quia Scriptura dicit, sed quia Scriptura non
contradicit. . . . Quid igitur restat, nisi ut fateamur lo
quendi necessitate partita haec vocabula, cum opus esset
copiosa disputatione adversum insidias vei errores haereti-
corum. Cum enim conaretur humana inopia loquendo pro-
ferre ad hominum sensus, quod in secretario mentis pro
captu tenet, de Domino Deo creatore suo, sive per piam
fidem, sive per qualemcunque inteUigentiam, timuit dicere
tres essentias, ne inteUigeretur in ilia summa aequalitate
ulla diversitas. Rursus non esse tria quajdam non poterat
dicere ; quod Sabellius quia dixit, in haeresim lapsus est. .
. . Aut si jam placet propter disputandi necessitatem,
etiam exceptis nominibus relativis, pluralem numerum ad-

474 APPENDIX.
mittere, ut uno nomine respondeatur, cum quaeritur, quid
tria, et dicere tres substantias, sive tres personas, nullae
moles aut intervalla cogitentur, nulla distantia quantulae-
cunque dissimilitudinis, ut ibi intelligatur aliud alio, vei
paulo minus, quocunque modo minus esse aliud alio potest,
ut neque personarum sit confusio, nee talis distinctio qua
sit impar aliquid. . . . Ideoque dici tres personas vei tres sub
stantias, non ut aliqua intelligatur diversitas essentiae, sed
ut vei uno aliquo vocabulo responderi possit, cum dicitur,
quid tres, vei quid tria. Augustin. De Trin. lib. V. fol. 106.
VII. fol. 113, 114, VIII. fol. 114.
Ecce patet omni homini expedire, ut credat in quandam
ineffabilem trinam Unitatem et unam Trinitatem. Unam
quidem et Unitatem, propter unam essentiam ; trinam
vero et Trinitatem, propter tres, nescio quid : licet enim
possim dicere Trinitatem, propter Patrem, et Filium, et
utriusque Spiritum, qui sunt tres ; non tamen possum pro-
ferre uno nomine, propter quid tres, velut si dicerem prop
ter tres personas ; sicut si dicerem unitatem propter unam
substantiam. Non enim putandae sunt tres personae: quia
omnes plures personae sic subsistunt separatim ab invicem,
ut tot necesse sit esse substantias, quot sunt personae :
quod in pluribus hominibus, qui, quot personae, tot indi-
viduae sunt substantiae, cognoscitur. Quare in summa es
sentia, sicut non sunt plures substantiae, ita nee plures
personae. Si quis itaque inde velit alicui loqui, quid tres ;
dicet esse Patrem, et Filium, et utriusque Spiritum ; nisi
forte, indigentia nominis proprie convenientis coactus, ele
gerit aliquid de illis nominibus, quae pluraliter in summa
essentia dici non possint, ad designandum id quod congruo
nomine dici non potest ; ut si dicat, illam admirabilem
Trinitatem esse unam essentiam vei naturam, et tres per
sonas sive substantias. Anselm. Monologium, c. 76. Oper.
p. 22.
Unum enim sunt illi tres, id est, essentia divina. Unde
Veritas ait : " Ego et Pater unum sumus." Veruntamen
cum quaeritur, quid tres, vei quid tria; non de essentia

NOTES TO LECTURE UI. 475
quaeritur, nee ibi quid ad essentiam refertur. Sed cum
fides Catholica tres esse profiteretur, sicut Joannes in epi
stola canonica ait : " Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent
" de coelo :" quaerebatur quid illi tres essent, i. e., an es
sent tres res, et quae tres res, et quo nomine illae tres res
significarentur. Et ideo loquendi necessitate inventum
est hoc nomen persona ad respondendum, et dictum est
tres personae. Lombard, lib. I. dist. 25. p. 73.
Unde quibusdam visum est quod hoc nomen, persona,
simpliciter ex virtute vocabuli, essentiam significet in di
vinis, sicut hoc nomen, Deus, et hoc nomen, sapiens ; sed
propter instantiam haereticorum est accommodatum ex or-
dinatione Concuii, ut possit poni pro relativis. . . . Sed
haec non videtur sufficiens ratio : quia si hoc nomen, per
sona, ex vi suae significationis, non habet quod significet,
nisi essentiam in divinis, ex hoc quod dictum est tres per
sonas, non fuisset haereticorum quietata calumnia, sed ma-
joris calumniae data esset eis occasio. . . . Et secundum hoc
etiam dici potest, quod haec significatio hujus nominis (per
sona) non erat percepta ante haereticorum calumniam :
unde non erat in usu hoc nomen, persona, nisi sicut unum
ahorum absolutorum : sed postmodum accommodatum est
hoc nomen, persona, ad standum pro relativo, ex congru-
entia suae significationis : ut scilicet hoc quod stat pro re
lativo, non solum habeat ex usu, (ut prima opinio docebat,)
sed etiam ex significatione sua. Aquinas, Summa Theo-
log. Prima Pars, qu. xxix. art. 4.
NOTE R. p. 134.
Ad primum ergo dicendum ; quod ad exprimendam ve-
ritatem essentiae et personae, sancti doctores aliquando ex
presses locuti sunt, quam proprietas locutionis patiatur ;
Unde hujusmodi locutiones non sunt extendendae, sed ex-
ponendae ; &c. Aquinas Summa Theol.. Prima Pars,
qu. xxxix. art. 5.

476 APPENDIX.
NOTE S. p. 136.
Complures antiquorum, ut jam supra demonstravi, gene-
ratim loquentes, naturam docuerunt communem sic esse,
ut est quaelibet species individuis communicata pluribus ;
immo ovaCav nihil aliud esse, quam speciem ultimam.
Hinc autem consectarium hoc esse sane irapdbogov ostendi-
mus, uti plures homines numero, unam et eandem habeant
essentiam, ideoque ne homines quidem plurativo numero
dici debeant, sed unus homo. Quod etsi perabsurdum
videtur, et abhorrens a consuetudine communi; multi hoc
tamen asseverare non dubitant. Petav. Dogmata Theol.
de Trin. VI. c. 9. Curcellaei Oper. Amst. 1775. p. 883.

NOTE T. p. 137-
Oportet autem in his quae de Trinitate loquimur, duos
errores oppositos cavere, temperate inter utrumque proce-
dentes : sc. errorem Arii, qui posuit cum trinitate persona-
rum trinitatem substantiarum, et errorem Sabellii, qui po
suit cum unitate essentia? unitatem personae. Ad evitan-
dem igitur errorem Arii, vitare debemus in divinis nomen
diversitatis et differentiae, ne toUatur unitas essentiae.
Possumus autem uti nomine distinctionis, propter opposi-
tionem relativam. Unde sicubi in aliqua Scriptura authen-
tica diversitas, vei differentia personarum invenitur, sumi-
tur diversitas vei differentia, pro distinctione. Ne autem
toUatur simplicitas divinae essentiae, vitandum est nomen
separationis et divisionis, qua? est totius in partes. Ne au
tem toUatur aequalitas, vitandum est nomen disparitatis. Ne
vero toUatur similitudo, vitandum est nomen alieni et discre-
pantis. . . Ad vitandum vero errorem Sabellii, vitare debemus
singularitatem, ne toUatur communicabilitas essentiae divi
nae. . . Debemus etiam vitare nomen unici, ne toUatur nu-
merus personarum. . . Vitandum est etiam nomen solitarii,
ne toUatur consortium trium personarum. Aquinas, Sum
ma Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxxi. art. 2.

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 477
NOTE U. p. 138.
Vincent of Lerins gives the following account of the
opinion of Apollinarius, or Apollinaris.
Apollinaris vero in unitate quidem Trinitatis quasi con-
sentire se jactitat : et hoc ipsum non plena fidei sanitate ;
sed in Domini incarnatione aperta professione blasphemat.
Dicit enim in ipsa Salvatoris nostri carne, aut animam hu-
manam penitus non fuisse, aut certe talem fuisse, cui mens
et ratio non esset. Sed et ipsam Domini carnem non de
sanctae virginis Mariae carne susceptam, sed de ccelo in
virginem descendisse dicebat ; eamque, nutabundus sem
per et dubius, modo coaeternam Deo Verbo, modo de Verbi
divinitate factam praedicabat. Nolebat enim in Christo
esse duas substantias, unam divinam, alteram humanam,
unam ex patre, alteram ex matre : sed ipsam Verbi natu-
ram putabat esse discissam ; quasi aliud ejus permaneret
in Deo, aliud vero versum fuisset in carnem : at cum Veri
tas dicat ex duabus substantiis unum esse Christum, ille,
contrarius veritati, ex una Christi divinitate duas adserat
factas esse substantias. Commonitorium, ed. Baluz. p. 333.
The fear of assigning a quaternity instead of a trinity,
seems to have actuated other Christians also in their rea
sonings on the subject ; and to have made the orthodox
careful of protecting their doctrines on that point. A pas
sage of Ambrose will shew this.
Nee timeo ne tetrada videar inducere : nos enim vere
solam, qui hoc adserimus, colimus Trinitatem. Non enim
Christum divido, cum carnis ejus divinitatisque distinguo
substantiam : sed unum Christum cum Patre et Spiritu
Dei praedico, et illos magis, qui carnem Christi unius cum
divinitate ejus dicunt esse substantiae, tetrada inducere
demonstrabo. Non enim quod ejusdem substantiae est,
unus, sed unum est ; nam utique Filium ejusdem cum Pa
tre substantiae confitentes in tractatu concilii Nicaeni, non
unam personam, sed unam divinitatem, in Patre et Filio
crediderunt.

478 APPENDIX.
Ergo cum dicunt ejusdem carnem, cujus et Filius Dei
erat, fuisse substantiae ; ipsi, quod nobis objiciunt, ineptiis
vanae adsertionis incurrunt, ut dividant Christum. Itaque
quartum increatum, quod adoremus, inducunt, cum sola in-
creata sit divinitas Trinitatis. Ambros. de Incarn. c. VII.
Oper. torn. II. p. 721.
NOTE V. p. 140.
The illustration from the union of body and soul, to the
union of God and man in Christ, appears in Augustine's
writings ; and probably was adopted from him into the
Athanasian Creed. To take it in its proper force, it must
be viewed by the light of the theory already alluded to ;
which assumed the distinct formation of the soul and its
infusion into the body. For in this point of view, it cor
responds with the doctrine of the separate Divine nature,
associated with the separate humanity, in the person of
Christ. Those who acknowledged the former assumed
fact, might consistently admit the latter. To those, on
the other hand, who have no such theory on the nature of
the soul, the illustration applies only in the most loose and
general acceptation; as representing a case of our believing
in a mysterious combination of powers, to induce us to be
lieve another like inexplicable union. Strictly to speak,
however, the analogy, as it is stated, is entirely hypotheti
cal, and is calculated to pervert our notion of Christ.
NOTE W. p. 140.
The following passage of Anselm, bearing on the same
point, is a most striking instance of the manner, in which
the Christian doctrines have been made completely to de
pend on a certain school-system. According to Anselm,
it appears, that unless the abstract man was a reality, the
Incarnation could not be true.
Cumque omnes, ut cautissime ad sacrae paginae quaestio-
nes accedant, sunt coinmonendi, illi utique nostri temporis
dialectic! (imnio dialecticae haeretici, qui quidem non nisi fla-

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 479
turn vocis putant esse universales substantias, et qui colo-
rem non aliud queunt intelligere nisi corpus, nee sapientiam
hominis aliud quam animam,) prorsus a spiritualium quae-
stionum disputatione sunt exsufflandi. In eorum quippe
animabus ratio, quae princeps et judex omnium debet esse,
quae sunt in homine, sic est imaginationibus corporalibus
obvoluta, ut ex eis se non possit evolvere : nee ab ipsis
ea, quae sola et pura ipsa contemplari debet, valeat discer-
nere. Qui enim nondum intelligit, quomodo plures homines
in specie sint unus homo ; qualiter in ilia secretissima et
altissima natura comprehendet, quomodo plures personae,
quarum singula quaeque est perfectus Deus, sint unus Deus.
Et cujus mens obscurata est ad discernendum inter equum
suum et colorem ejus, qualiter discernet inter unum Deum
et plures relationes ejus. Denique qui non potest intelli
gere aliquid esse hominem nisi individuum ; nullatenus in
telliget hominem, nisi humanam personam. Omnis enim
individuus homo persona est. Quomodo ergo iste intelliget
hominem assumptum esse a Verbo, non personam, id est,
aliam naturam, non aliam personam, esse assumptam. An
selm. De Incarn. c. II. p. 35.
NOTE X. p. 141.
The logical difficulty in regard to the theory of the In
carnation was the reverse of that in regard to the Trinita
rian. In the general theory of the Trinity, the common
nature or idea was the given point : and the problem was,
how to deduce from that, the distinctions of Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit. In the theory of the Incarnation, certain
distinctions in Christ were the data ; and the problem was,
to find a common idea in which they should agree. As
concerning the Trinity, some erred in arriving at conclu
sions at variance with their data, by making too great a
difference between the persons of the Trinity; or destroyed
the distinctions by a too rigid deduction of the exclusive
notion of Divinity to the particular facts: — so in solving the
question of the Incarnation, some left the difficulty un-

480 APPENDIX.
explained, by making that common notion in which the dif
ferent characteristics of Christ should agree, a compounded
and imperfectly-united nature ; whilst others overthrew
the original assumption of certain distinctions, by con
founding them in one indistinct idea. The doctrine of the
" hypostatical union" was the expedient which met the
difficulty most satisfactorily ; giving at least that solution
of the case, which a logical theology demanded.
NOTE Y. p. 144.
Ad hoc autem quod nos reprehendunt, in symbolo illo,
quod pariter nos et illi suscipimus et tenemus, addidisse
Spiritum Sanctum a Filio procedere : et quaerunt, cur hoc
factum sit; et quare hoc prius eorum Ecclesiae monstratum
non est : ut communiter consideraretur, et communi con
sensu adderetur, quod addendum erat. Ad hoc, inquam,
responsum sufficiens habemus. Nam si quaeritur cur fac
tum sit ; dicimus, quia necesse erat propter quosdam mi
nus intelligentes, qui non animadvertebant in illis, quae
universa credit Ecclesia, contineri, et ex his sequi, Spiri
tum Sanctum de Filio procedere : ne forte hoc credere du-
bitarent. Quod quam necessarium fuerit, per illos qui hoc
negant, quia in illo Symbolo positum non est, cognosci-
mus. Quoniam igitur et necessitas cogebat, et nulla ratio
prohibebat ; et vera fides hoc admittebat ; fiducialiter as-
seruit Latinitas, quod credendum et confitendum esse cog-
noscebat. Scimus enim quod non omnia quae credere et
confiteri debemus, ibi dicta sunt ; nee illi ; qui symbolum
illud dictavere, voluerunt, fidem Christianam esse conten-
tam ea tantummodo credere et confiteri, quae ibi posue-
runt : ut alia taceam ; non ibi dicitur Dominus ad infernum
descendisse, quod tamen pariter et nos et Graeci credimus.
Si autem dicunt nullo modo debuisse corrumpi symbolum
tanta auctoritate firmatum : nos non judicamus esse cor-
ruptionem, ubi nihil addidimus, quod his quae ibi dicta sunt
adversetur. Et quamvis defendere possemus hanc adjec-
tionem non esse corruptionem, si quis tamen hoc conten-

NOTES TO LECTURE III. 481
tiose voluerit asserere : respondemus, nos illud non corru-
pisse, sed aliud novum edidisse : illud secundum proprieta-
tem Graeci dictaminis translatum, cum illis integrum ser-
vamus et veneramur. Illud autem, quo frequentius in
populi audientia utimur, Latino more dictatum, cum addi-
tamento supradicto edidimus. Quod autem quaeritur, quare
hoc Graecorum ecclesiae consensu factum non est : respon
demus; quia et nimis erat difficile Latinis, eorum episcopos
ad consulendum de hac re colligere ; nee erat necesse.
Unde non dubitabant in hoc quaestionem adducere. Quae
est enim ecclesia, quae vei per amplitudinem unius regni
dilatatur, cui non liceat aliquid secundum rectam fidem
constituere, quod in conventu populi utiliter legatur aut
cantetur. Quanto ergo magis licuit Latinis hoc constanter
proferre, in quo omnes gentes, et omnia regna, quae Lati
nis utuntur Uteris, pariter concordant. Anselm. de Pro
cess. Spir. S. Oper. t. III. p. 134.
NOTE Z. p. 144,
Relationes autem personas distinguere non possunt, nisi
secundum quod sunt oppositae : quod ex hoc patet ; quia
Pater habet duas relationes, quarum una refertur ad Fi
lium, et alia ad Spiritum Sanctum : quae tamen, quia non
sunt oppositae, non constituunt duas personas, sed ad unam
tantum personam Patris pertinent. Si autem in Filio, et
Spiritu Sancto, non esset invenire nisi duas relationes, qui
bus uterque refertur ad Patrem ; illae relationes non essent
ad invicem oppositae ; sicut neque duae relationes, quibus
Pater refertur ad illos. Unde, sicut persona Patris est una;
ita sequeretur, quod persona Filii et Spiritus Sancti esset
una, habens duas relationes oppositas duabus relationibus
Patris. Hoc autem est haereticum ; cum tollat fidem Tri
nitatis. Oportet ergo, quod Filius et Spiritus Sanctus ad
invicem referantur oppositis relationibus, &c. ... Si ergo
ab una persona Patris procedunt duae personae, scilicet Fi
lius et Spiritus Sanctus ; oportet esse aliquem ordinem eo
rum ad invicem : nee potest aliquis ordo alius assignari,

482- APPENDIX.
nisi ordo naturae, quo alius est ex alio. Non est igitur
possibile dicere, quod Filius et Spiritus Sanctus sic proce-
dant a Patre, quod neuter eorum procedat ab alio; nisi
quis poneret in eis materialem distinctionem ; quod est
impossibile. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu.
xxxvi. art. 2.

LECTURE IV.
NOTE A. p. 157-
OCIAS itaque domine beatissime, et plenissima charitate
venerabilis, non desperare nos, immo sperare vehementer,
quod Dominus et Deus noster per authoritatem personae
quam geris, quam, non carni, sed spiritui tuo impositam
esse confidimus, multas carnales felicitates et aegritudines,
quas Aphricana Ecclesia in multis patitur, in paucis gemit,
consiliorum gravitate et tua possit sanare  Com-
messationes enim et ebrietates, ita concessae et licitae pu-
tantur, ut in honorem etiam beatissimorum martyrum, non
solum per dies solennes, quod ipsum quis non lugendum
videat, qui haec non carnis oculis inspicit, sed etiam quoti-
die celebrentur  Sed feramus haec in luxu et labe
domestica, et eorum conviviorum quae privatis parietibus
continentur, accipiamusque cum eis corpus Christi, cum
quibus panem edere prohibemur, saltem de sanctorum cor-
porum sepulchris, saltem de locis sacrorum, de domibus
orationum, tantum dedecus arceatur  Sed tanta
pestUentia est hujus mali, ut sanari prorsus, quantum mihi
videtur, nisi concilii authoritate non possit. . . . De con-
tentione autem et dolo quid me attinet dicere, quoniam
ista vitia non in plebe, sed in nostro numero graviora
sunt ? Augustinus Aurelio, Ep. 64. Aug. Oper. torn. II.
fol. 94.

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 483
NOTE B. p. 158.
Augustine appears constantly to have treated Jerome
with the deference due to an elder brother in the Church.
He shewed his judiciousness in the management of Je
rome's haughty and enthusiastic temper, so as to apply
the learning and polemical talent and established authority
of the holy recluse of Bethlehem, to the effectual mainte
nance of his own ascendancy in the ecclesiastical world.
Jerome was a man calculated to establish a principle, to
give a tone to opinion and feeling; but not to perpetuate a
personal influence. Augustine, on the contrary, was formed
for guiding the conduct of other men after his own ex
ample ; but he wanted the power to give an intense in
terest to an abstract question, by throwing over it a warm
colouring, or merging it in solemn shadow. All his writ
ings shew the man of business ; the energy which they
display is that of one earnest in proving and carrying his
point, and not such as to interest the mere reader, like
those of Jerome, by the intrinsic force of the composition.
The personal influence accordingly of Jerome sank with
him at his death; whilst that of Augustine survived his
own existence, and permanently controlled the fortunes of
the Church. Augustine at the same time reaped the fruits
of Jerome's ardent exertions; which served, by conciliating
devotion to the doctrines themselves which he taught, to
support his personal authority.
These observations on the contrast of these two great
men of the Church are illustrated in the case of the Pela
gian controversies. Augustine takes no decisive measures
in the emergency, until he has consulted Jerome on the
philosophy of the question. He sends him an epistle by
Orosius, inquiring what opinion should be held on the na
ture of the soul. Quaestio de anima, he says, in writing
to him, multos movet, in quibus et me esse confiteorS. He
then proceeds to state his own views and difficulties on
s Epist. XXVIII. Augustin. Opera, torn. II. fol. 30.
I i 2

484 APPENDIX.
the subject, and he requests Jerome to instruct him what
he is to hold and teach respecting it. Misisti ad me dis
cipulos, ut ea doceam, quae nondum ipse didici. Doce ergo
quod doceam. Nam ut doceam multi a me flagitant, eis-
que me, sicut alia multa, et hoc ignorare confiteor 
Quid si ideo adhuc ista nescimus, et ea neque oraudo, ne
que legendo, neque cogitando et ratiocinando, invenire po-
tuimus, ut probemur, non solum indoctos quanta charitate
doceamus, verum a doctis etiam quanta humilitate disca-
mus? Doce ergo, quaeso, quod doceam; doce quod teneam,
&c.h — In the same epistle Augustine complains of the dis
tance which separated him from Jerome, and which neces
sarily made the intervals long between their several com
munications. Nihil equidem molestius fero in omnibus
angustiis meis quas patior in difficillimis quaestionibus,
quam in tarn longinqua tuae charitatis absentia, ut vix pos-
sim meas dare, vei recipere literas tuas, per intervalla, non
dierum, non mensium, sed aliquot annorum : cum, si fieri
posset, quotidie praesentem te habere vellem, cum quo lo-
querer quicquid vellem.
What an idea is given us of the steadiness and uni
formity of purpose with which the operations of the Latin
Church leaders were carried on, when we read the letters
that passed between these two, and notice the keen and
patient interest sustained on questions of speculative theo
logy over such spaces of time !
NOTE C. p. 158.
Mihi enim omnis occasio gratissima est, per quam scribo
vestrae reverentiae, testem invocans Deum, quod si posset
fieri, assumptis alis* columbae, vestris amplexibus impli-
carer : semper quidem pro merito virtutum vestrorum, sed
nunc maxime quia cooperatoribus et authoribus vobis hae
resis Celestina jugulata est : quae ita infecit corda mul-
torum, ut cum superatos damuatosque esse se sentiunt,
tamen venena mentium non omittant, et quod solum pos-
h Epist. XXVIII. Augustin. Opera, torn. II. fol. 30.

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 485
sint, nos oderint, per quos putant se libertatem docendae
haereseos perdidisse. Hieronymus Augustino et Alipio '.
Sanctse memoriae Bonifacius, cum esset doctissimus, ad-
versus libros tamen Pelagianorum, beati Augustini responsa
poscebat. Prosper, adv. Collat. c. 41.k

NOTE D. p. 159.
The character of invariableness claimed for the Church
of Rome, is not a little affected by the account of the pro
ceedings in the case of Pelagianism. Not only was Pela
gius not condemned by John, Bishop of Jerusalem, and
afterwards declared orthodox at the Synod of Diospolis
(the ancient Lydda) in Palestine, in the year 415, but pro
tected in some measure by the Roman Pontiff also, Inno
cent I : as is evident from the allusion contained in the
following passage of an epistle from the Fathers of a Coun
cil held at Carthage, A. D. 416. Si ergo Pelagius episco-
palibus gestis quae in oriente confecta dicuntur, et tuae
venerationi juste fuerit absolutus, error tamen ipse, et im-
pietas, quae tam multos assertores habet, per diversa dis-
persos, etiam authoritate apostolicae sedis anathematizanda
est '. . . . Quaecunque autem alia ab eis objiciuntur, non
dubitamus venerationem tuam, cum gesta episcopalia per-
spexerit, quae in Oriente in eadem causa confectae dicuntur,
id judicaturam, unde omnes in Dei misericordia gaudea-
mus. . . . Audivimus enim esse in urbe Roma, ubi ille diu
vixit, nonnullos, qui diversis causis ei faveant, quidam sci
licet qui vos talia persuasisse perhibent : plures vero qui
eum talia sentire non credunt ; praesertim, quia in Oriente
ubi degit, gesta ecclesiastica facta esse jactantur, quibus
putatur esse purgatus. . . . Aut ergo a tua veneratione ac-
ciendus est Romam, et diligenter interrogandus, quam di-
' Ep. XXIV. Augustin. Oper. torn. II. fol. 28.
k Vossii Hist. Pelag. lib. I. c. 29.
1 Ep. XC. Opera Augustin. torn. II. fol. 125.
1 i3

486 APPENDIX.
cat gratiam. . . . Aut hoc ipsum cum eo per literas agen
dum m, &c.
They affect not to believe that Pelagius had been ac
tually acquitted at Rome; and point out, without much
reserve, the course which they require the Pontiff to pur
sue in the matter.
This address was supported by a similar one from an
other African Council held in the same year at Millevi;
and by a letter of several African bishops, among whom
was Augustine. Innocent replies to these communications,
but in a style which leaves it very ambiguous what his
real design is. The style indeed of his three letters re
sembles that of Cromwell in some of his state papers —
full of wordy clauses which appear to say a great deal, but
in reality say nothing at all. And yet Augustine, having
occasion to make use of the authority of Innocent, speaks
of these letters in terms of approbation. — Ad omnia nobis
rescripsit eodem modo, quo fas erat, atque oportebat Apo-
stolicae sedis antistitem n.
Innocent lived but two months after these replies, leaving
the prosecution of the cause between the African Prelates
and the Pelagians to his successor Zosimus in the year
417- But the same vacillation of purpose appears also in
Zosimus. He was at first disposed to favour Celestius,
and on examination received him into the communion of
the Church. But the Africans were on the alert to secure
on their side the popular sanction of the Apostolic See.
In 418 another Council was held at Carthage, and appli
cation was made to the Emperor Honorius to obtain sup
port to their cause by the force of civil edicts. Zosimus
could not resist these importunities ; and finding that there
were no means of protecting Celestius, or hopes of restor
ing him to the Church, at length yielded the point, and
m Ep. XCV. Augustin. Opera, torn. II. fol. 129.
" Augustinus et Alipius Bonifacio, Ep. CVI. Opera, torn. II. fol. 144.
It has been denied that these letters were written by Innocent. Vossii
Hist. Pelag. lib. I. c. 27.

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 487
wrote to the African bishops, declaring his condemnation
of the Pelagians.
The Pelagians, though vanquished by these proceedings,
took advantage of this hesitation on the part of the Ro
man See to pronounce against them, to proclaim the
opinions of the Roman Clergy as favourable to their doc
trines, as appears from the following passage.
Quinetiam Romanos Clericos arguunt, scribentes eos
jussionis timore perculsos, non erubuisse praevaricationis
crimen admittere, ut, contra priorem sententiam qua gestis
catholico dogmati affuerant, postea pronunciarent malam
hominum esse naturam : imo Pelagiani spe falsa putave-
runt, novum et execrabile dogma Pelagianum vei Celes-
tianum persuaderi quorundam Romanorum catholicis men-
tibus posse, quoniam ilia ingenia quamvis nefando errore
perversa, non tamen contemptibilia, cum studiose corri
genda potius quam facile damnanda viderentur, alioquin
lenius, quam severior postulabat ecclesiae disciplina, trac-
tata sunt. Tot enim et tantis inter apostolicam sedem et
Aphros episcopos currentibus et recurrentibus scriptis ec-
clesiasticis, et gestis, de hac causa, apud illam sedem, Ce-
lestio praesente et respondente confectis, quaenam tandem
epistola venerandse memoriae papae Zosimi, quae interlo-
cutio reperitur, ubi praeceperit credi oportere, sine ullo
vitio peccati originalis hominem nasci : nusquam prorsus
hoc dixit, nusquam omnino conscripsit. Contra duas Ep.
Pelag. ad BonifacP The orthodox, we find, had to la
bour to palliate the conduct of Rome. The sequel of this
passage further illustrates the part taken by the African
Clergy in stimulating Innocent to act against Pelagius and
Celestius, and the anxiety of Augustine to remove the
appearance of reluctance and hesitation on the part of the
Pope. In noticing the exertions of the African Clergy in these
controversies, we must not forget that Jerome was also a
principal instrument in carrying the orthodox decision.
" Augustin. Opera, torn. VII. p. 287.
1 i4

488 APPENDIX.
He not only wrote strenuously and vehemently on the sub
ject ; but by his presence in Palestine, at the critical mo
ment when all seemed favourable to Pelagius, he excited
a reaction against the heresy, even amidst its apparent
triumph.
NOTE E. p. 159.
The prevalence of the infection of Pelagianism is evi
dent from the fact that eighteen bishops of Italy refused
to subscribe the condemnation of Pelagius, and in con
sequence of their refusal were deprived of their sees, and
exiled to the East P. Even in Africa, the seat itself of
opposition to Pelagianism, the heretical cause was not
without its advocates. This may be seen from the re
script of Honorius to Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage ; where
it is said : Praecipue tamen ad quorundam episcoponim
pertinaciam corrigendam, qui pravas eorum disputationes,
vei tacito consensu astruunt, vei publica oppugnatione non
destruunt 1, &c. NOTE F. p. 162.
Quae enim potest alia major esse temeritas, quam Dei
sibi, non.dico similitudinem, sed aequalitatem vendicare:
et brevi sententia, omnium haereticorum venena complecti,
quae de philosophorum, et maxime Pythagorae, et Zenonis
principis Stoicorum, fonte manarunt? Illi enim quae Graeci
appellant nddrj, nos perturbationes possumus dicere, aegri-
tudinem videlicet et gaudium, spem et metum, quorum
duo praesentia, duo futura sunt, asserunt extirpari posse
de mentibus, et nullam fibram radicemque vitiorum, in
homine omnino residere, meditatione et assidua exercita-
tione virtutum. . . . Pudeat ergo eos principum et sociorum
P See M. Guizot, Histoire de la Civiliz. Francaise, $". Lecon, p. 208.
Paris. 1829. This Lecture of M. Guizot gives, in the shortest compass, the
most perspicuous philosophical view of the Pelagian Question that has ever
appeared. 1 Salviani Opera, Appendix, p. 448.

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 489
suorum, qui aiunt, posse hominem sine peccato esse si
velit, quod Graeci dicunt dvapdprrjTov . Et quia hoc eccle-
siarum per Orientem aures ferre non possunt ; simulant se
sine peccato quidam dicere, sed dvapdprqrov dicere non
audere: quasi aliud sit, sine peccato, aliud, dvapdprqrov,
et non Graecum sermonem, qui apud iUos compositus est,
duobus verbis sermo Latinus expresserit. Si absque peccato
dicis, et dvapdprqrov dicere te diffiteris, damna eos ergo
qui dvapdprqrov praedicant. Sed non facis. Hieronymus
ad Ctesiph. Opera, torn. II. p. 251.
NOTE G. p. 175.
Respondeo dicendum; quod, cum supra ostensum sit,
quod Deus sciat omnia, non solum quae acta sunt, sed
etiam quae sunt in potentia sua, vei creaturae; horum au
tem quaedam sint contingentia nobis futura; sequitur quod
Deus contingentia futura cognoscat. Ad cujus evidentiam
considerandum est, quod contingens aliquod dupliciter
potest considerari. Uno modo in seipso, secundum quod
jam in actu est ; et sic consideratur, non ut futurum, sed ut
praesens ; neque ad utrumlibet contingens, sed ut determi-
natum ad unum ; et propter hoc, sic infallibiliter subdi
potest certae cognitioni, utpote sensus visui : sicut cum
video Socratem sedere. Alio modo potest considerari con
tingens, ut est sua in causa. Et sic consideratur ut futu
rum, et ut contingens nondum determinatum ad unum ;
quia causa contingens se habet ad opposita : et sic con
tingens non subditur per certitudinem alicui cognitioni.
Unde quicunque cognoscit effectum contingentem in causa
sua tantum, non habet de eo nisi conjecturalem scientiam.
Deus autem cognoscit omnia contingentia, non solum
prout sunt in suis causis, sed etiam prout unumquodque
eorum est actu in seipso. Et licet contingentia fiant in
actu successive, non tamen Deus successive cognoscit con
tingentia, prout sunt in suo esse, sicut nos, sed simul;
quia sua cognitio mensuratur aeternitate, sicut etiam suum
esse. jEternitas autem tota simul existens ambit totum

490 APPENDIX.
tempus, ut supra dictum est. Unde omnia, quae sunt in
tempore, sunt Deo ab aeterno praesentia, non solum ea ra
tione, qua habet rationes rerum apud se praesentes, ut
quidam dicunt; sed quia ejus intuitus fertur ab aeterno
supra omnia, prout sunt in sua praesentialitate. Unde
.manifestum est, quod contingentia et infallibiliter a Deo
cognoscuntur, in quantum subduntur divino conspectui,
secundum suam praesentialitatem : et tamen sunt futura
contingentia, suis causis proximis comparata. Aquinas,
Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xiv. art. 12.
NOTE H. p. 175.
Respondeo dicendum, quod necessarium dicitur aliquid
dupliciter, scilicet absolute, et ex suppositione. Necessa
rium absolute judicatur aliquid ex habitudine terminorum;
utpote quia praedicatum est in diffinitione subjecti, sicut
necessarium est hominem esse animal : vei quia subjectum
est de ratione praedicati ; sicut est necessarium numerum
esse parem vei imparem : sic autem non est necessarium
Socratem sedere ; unde non est necessarium absolute ; sed
potest dici necessarium ex suppositione : supposito enim
quod sedeat, necesse est eum sedere, dum sedet. Aqui
nas, Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xix. art. 3.
This distinction is laid down with precision by Ari
stotle, so that his followers in the Schools could not well
misapprehend the theory of the subject, whilst they prac
tically offended against it. The distinction is still more
clearly stated by a writer in the Xlth century, the monk
Gaunilo, in his observations, to which I before referred r,
on the argument of Anselm's Monologium. It may be
interesting to see how he develops his view, so far at least
as the obscurity of his Latin will permit his sense to ap
pear. Anselm's argument, in his Monologium, is an an
ticipation of the Cogito, ergo sum, of Descartes. It rests
the proof of the existence of the Deity on the existence of
the ideas of supreme goodness and greatness in the mind
r Page 449.

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 491
of man. He argues, that unless these ideas existed in re
as well as in intellectu, there would be a contradiction ;
for in such a case they would not be the ideas of supreme
goodness and greatness ; since it is greater aud better to
exist in re and in intellectu, than in the intellect alone. The
treatise in itself, as a whole, is an admirable specimen of.
scholastic reasoning. As an ingenious deduction of the
speculative reasons (rationes) conceived to be involved in
the doctrine of the Trinity, it stands unrivalled : though
the style is extremely rough and obscure. The objection
of Gaunilo is as follows :
Prius enim certum mihi necesse est, fiat revera, esse
alicubi majus ipsum, et tamen deinde ex eo quod majus
est omnibus, in seipso quoque subsistere non erit ambi
guum. Exempli gratia : Aiunt quidam alicubi Oceani esse
insulam, quam ex difficultate, vei potius ex impossibilitate
inveniendi, quod non est, cognominant aliqui perditam :
quamque fabulantur, multo amplius quam de fortunatis in-
sulis fertur, divitiarum deliciarumque omnium inaestimabili
ubertate pollere, nulloque possessore aut habitatore : uni-
versis aliis, quas incolunt homines, terris, possidendorum
redundantia, usquequaque praestare. Hoc ita esse dicat
mihi quispiam : et ego facile dictum, in quo nihil est diffi-
cultatis, intelligam. Ac si tunc velit, consequenter adjun-
gat, ac dicat : non potes ultra dubitare insulam illam, om
nibus terris praestantiorem, vere esse alicubi in re, quam
in intellectu tuo non ambigis esse ; et quia praestantius est
non in intellectu solo, sed etiam esse in re. Ideo sic earn
necesse est, quia nisi fuerit, quaecunque alia, in re, est
terra praestantior, ilia erit ac si ipsa jam a te praestantior
et intellecta praestantior non erit. Si, inquam, per hoc ille
mihi velit astruere, de insula ilia, quod vere sit, ambigen-
dum ultra non esse ; aut jocari ipsum credam ; aut nescio
quem stultiorem debeam reputare ; utrum me, si ei conce-
dam; an ilium, si se putet aliqua certitudine insula*; illius
essentiam astruxisse; nisi prius ipsam praestantiam ejus
solummodo, sicut rem vere atque indubie existentem, nee

492 APPENDIX.
ullatenus, sicut falsum aut incertum aliquid in intellectu,
in eo esse, docuerit. Liber pro Insipiente. Anselmi Opera,
torn. III. p. 30.
NOTE I. p. 178.
It may be sufficient to refer to the following passage of
Calvin, to see how he differs from Aquinas on the same
point. De modo quo Deus hominem in vitium tradit, minime
necessarium hoc loco texere longam quasstionem. Certum
quidem est, non sinendo tantum et connivendo, ilium per-
mittere homines prolabi : sed justo judicio sic ordinare, ut
turn a propria concupiscentia, turn a Diabolo in ejusmodi
rabiem agantur et ferantur. Ideo Tradendi voce utitur,
ex perpetuo Scripturae more : quam vocem nimis violenter
torquent, qui sola Dei permissione in peccatum agi nos
putant. Nam ut minister irae Dei est Satan, et quasi car-
nifex : ita non dissimulatione, sed mandato judicis in nos
armatur. Neque tamen ideo aut crudelis Deus, aut nos
innoxii ; quando aperte ostendit Paulus, nos non aliter ad-
dici in ejus potestatem, quam si tali poena digni simus.
Tantum id excipiamus, peccati causam a Deo non prove-
nire : cujus radices in peccatore ipso perpetuo resident.
Illud enim verum esse oportet; Perditio tua Israel: in me
tantummodo auxilium tuum. Calvin, in Ep. Pauli ad
Rom. c. 1. v. 24. Genevae, 1600.
NOTE J. p. 180.
Respondeo dicendum, quod Deus aliquos reprobat. Dic
tum enim est supra, quod praedestinatio est pars provi
dentiae. Ad providentiam -autem pertinet permittere ali-
quem defectum in rebus quae providentiae subduntur, ut
supra dictum est. Unde cum per divinam providentiam
homines in vitam aeternam ordinantur, pertinet etiam ad
divinam providentiam, ut permittat aliquos ab isto fine de-
ficere. Et hoc dicitur reprobare. Sic igitur, sicut praedes
tinatio est pars providentiae, respectu eorum qui divinitus
ordinantur in aeternam salutem, ita reprobatio est pars pro-

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 493
videntiae, respectu illorum qui ab hoc fine decidunt. Unde
reprobatio non nominat praescientiam tantum, sed aliquid
addit secundum rationem, sicut et providentia, ut etiam
supra dictum est. Sicut enim praedestinatio includit vo-
luntatem conferendi gratiam et gloriam, ita reprobatio in
cludit voluntatem permittendi aliquem cadere in culpam,
et inferendi damnationis pcenam pro culpa. Aquinas,
Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxiii. art. 3.
Aquinas also shews a like objection to that observable
in our 1 7th Article, against sanctioning the notion that
any one should suppose himself reprobated by God. Thus
he observes : Etiam si aliquibus ex speciali privilegio sua
praedestinatio revelatur, non tamen convenit ut reveletur
omnibus : quia sic illi, qui non sunt praedestinati, despera-
rent, et securitas in praedestinatis negligentiam parerets.
He appeals indeed to the same tests of the presence of
Divine Grace in the heart, which our Article employs in
speaking of predestination. Hoc modo aliquis cognoscere
potest se habere gratiam, in quantum scilicet percipit se
delectari in Deo, et contemnere res mundanas ; et in
quantum homo non est conscius sibi alicujus peccati mor-
talis .... ille qui accipit gratiam, per quandam experi-
entiam dulcedinis novit, quam non experitur ille qui non
accipit '.
NOTE K. p. 181.
Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus nominally divided
the Schools into two parties ; the former as the strictest
interpreter, the latter as the more moderate expositor of
Augustine's doctrines on the subject of Divine Agency.
The factious spirit which reigned in the political world,
extended itself to the monastic orders and the Schools ;
and it is no wonder that in such times, we find classes of
theological partisans designated as Thomists, and Scotists,
and Ockamists. Then the Dominicans and Franciscans,
s Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu. xxiii. art. i.
' Ibid. Prima Secunda?, qu. cxn. art. 5.

494 APPENDIX.
as rival professions, supporting the peculiar opinions of
their own member, perpetuated the distinction between
Thomist and Scotist. Fresh employment, of that kind
which particularly suited the scholastic genius, was thus
supplied to the Schools of a succeeding age ; that of re
conciling the respective tenets of the leading doctors, and
shewing their fundamental concord. This was only to act
over the part which Boethius, and others who preluded to
the scholastic philosophy, had originally acted, in forming
an eclectic system out of the theories of Plato and Aristo
tle. Among the merits accordingly of the once celebrated
Picus Mirandula, it is mentioned, that he was employed in
establishing an agreement between Aquinas and Duns
Scotus, when his premature death deprived the schools of
this and other labours on which he was engaged"
NOTE L. p. 181.
Praeterea, si Deus aliquem hominem reprobat, oportet
quod sic se habeat reprobatio ad reprobates, sicut praedes
tinatio ad praedestinatos. Sed praedestinatio est causa sa-
lutis praedestinatorum. Ergo reprobatio erit causa perdi-
tionis reproborum. Hoc autem est falsum. Dicitur enim
Oseae 13. Perditio tua ex te Israel, tantummodo ex me
auxilium tuum. Non ergo Deus aliquem reprobat.
.... Ad secundum dicendum quod aliter se habet re
probatio in causando quam praedestinatio. Nam praedes
tinatio est causa, et ejus quod expectatur in futura vita a
praedestinatis, scilicet gloriae; et ejus quod percipitur in
praesenti, scilicet gratiae. Reprobatio vero non est causa
ejus quod est in praesenti, scilicet culpae, sed est causa de-
relictionis a Deo. Est tamen causa ejus quod redditur in
" Inter Thomam et Scotum, qui jam diu conflictaverant, si non pacem in
universum, in multis tamen impetrasset inducias, quando in eorum pluribus
controversiis, si quispiam dissidentia verba rimetur attentius, et exactius li-
bret, scrupulosiusque vestigaus, cutem deserens, introrsum ad imas latebras,
profundaque penetralia mente pervadat, unionem sensuum indisseparatis
pugnantibusque verbis citra ambiguitatem comperiet. Pic. Mirandul. Vita,
Oper. ed. 1496.

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 495
futuro, scilicet pcenae aeternae. Sed culpa provenit ex libera
arbitrio ejus qui reprobatur et a gratia deseritur. Et se
cundum hoc verificatur dictum prophetae, scilicet, Perditio
tua, Israel, ex te. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Prima Pars,
qu. xxiii. art. 3.
Of course as speaking on a subject extending over so
large a range of volumes as those of the Schoolmen, I
must be understood to speak with some reserve. Still I
cannot but think that the . assertion made in the Lecture
will be verified by more extensive research. The predes
tination of punishment wUl be found to be the prevailing
character assigned to the term Reprobation. But punish
ment was viewed in the Scholastic system, according to
the Platonic and Aristotelic notion of it, as a good to those
to whom it was dispensed, as a purifying and healing of the
distempers of the soul. The scholastic distinction between
poena and culpa should be particularly noticed in reference
to the question of Reprobation. The Schoolmen would not
admit a predestination of guilt, for this would have argued
the presence of evU in the Divine Mind. For it should be
observed, that the will of God was considered identical
with his being and his intelligence ; and that predestina
tion accordingly was fundamentally coincident with the
doctrine of Ideas. Tt was the application of this doctrine
to moral subjects. I have alluded in the Lecture to the ar
gument of Erigena, according to which the predestination
of evil was impossible, since there were no such Ideas as
those of evil in the Divine Mind. It may be seen from
the following passage, how the rationalized doctrine of pre
destination was connected with the Idealism of Plato.
Causae itaque primordiales sunt (quod et in praecedenti-
bus dixeram, quas Graeci ideas vocant, hoc est species vei
formas) aeternae et incommutabiles rationes, sed in quas
et in quibus visibilis et invisibilis mundus formatur et re-
gitur; ideoque a Graecorum sapientibus rrpa>TOTvna appellari
meruerunt, hoc est principalia exempla, quae Pater in Filio
fecit, et per Spiritum Sanctum in effectus suos dividit atque

496 APPENDIX.
multiplicat ; rtpoopCapAXTa quoque vocant, id est, praedesti-
nationes, in ipsis enim quaecunque divina prudentia et fiunt
et facta sunt et futura, sunt simul et semel incommutabi-
liter praedestinata. Nihil enim naturaliter in creatura visi-
bili et invisibili oritur, praeter quod in eis ante omnia tem-
pora et loca praedefinitum et praeordinatum est ; item a
philosophis dela deXqpara, id est, divinae voluntates nomi-
nari solent; quoniam omnia quaecunque voluit dominus
facere, in ipsis primordialiter et causaliter fecit, &c.x Joan.
Scot. Erigen. de Div. Natur. lib. II. p. 94.
Though the later schoolmen might not go to the full
length of this language, the same views in a great measure
seem constantly before them in their disquisition on the
subject. They would not admit that evil had any positive
existence : they speak of it as a defect from good, as an
absence of what constitutes the perfection of any nature.
The real meaning again of the term Divine Will, as ap
plied to the subject of predestination, is not commonly
apprehended. In speculating on the course of the Divine
dispensations, and finding themselves at a loss to give a
satisfactory solution of the differences observed in the con
duct and fortunes of different individuals, scholastic rea
soners were forced to retire on the ground from which
they set out, and to confess that they could discover no
cause of these differences but the simple WiU of God.
The expression therefore is not to be taken as any positive
account of the case, but as an admission of ignorance of
any proper reason, and a denial of any of the reasons that
were alleged ; as the foreknowledge, for instance, of the
merits of individuals. Voluit igitur Deus, says Aquinas,
in hominibus, quantum ad aliquos quos praedestinat, suam
repraesentare bonitatem, per modum misericordiae par-
cendo ; et quantum ad aliquos, quos reprobat, per modum
justitiae, puniendo. Et haec est ratio quare Deus quosdam
eligit, et quosdam reprobat  Sed quare nos elegit in
x He ascribes the rise of the predestinarian controversy of his time to the
neglect of literature, and particularly to ignorance of the Greek language.

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 497
gloriam, et illos reprobavit, non habet rationem, nisi divi
nam voluntatem y.
NOTE M. p. 182.
Respondeo dicendum ; quod praedestinatio secundum ra
tionem praesupponit electionem, et electio dilectionem.
Cujus ratio est : quia praedestinatio, (ut dictum est,) est
pars providentiae. Providentia autem, sicut et prudentia,
est ratio in intellectu existens, praeceptiva ordinationis ali-
quorum in finem, ut supra dictum est. Non autem praeci-
pitur aliquid ordinandum in finem, nisi praeexistente volun
tate finis. Unde praedestinatio aliquorum in salutem aeter
nam, praesupponit secundum rationem, quod Deus illorum
velit salutem : ad quod pertinet electio et dilectio : dilectio
quidem, in quantum vult eis hoc bonum salutis aeternae :
nam diligere est velle alicui bonum, ut supra dictum est :
electio autem, in quantum hoc bonum aliquibus prae aliis
vult, cum quosdam reprobet, ut supra dictum est. Electio
tamen et dilectio aliter ordinantur in nobis et in Deo : eo
quod in nobis voluntas diligendo non causat bonum, sed ex
bono praeexistente incitamur ad diligendum. Et ideo eli-
gimus aliquem, quem diligamus. Et sic electio dilectionem
praecedit in nobis. In Deo autem est e converso. Nam
voluntas ejus, qua vult bonum alicui diligendo, est causa
quod ilium bonum ab eo prae aliis habeatur. Et sic patet,
quod dilectio praesupponitur electioni secundum rationem,
et electio praedestinationi. Unde omnes praedestinati sunt
electi et dilecti. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Prima Pars,
qu. xxiii. art. 4.
NOTE N. p. 182.
Tu autem nos Manichaeos vocas, cur legi Evangelium
praeferent.es, in ilia umbram, in hoc veritatem esse dica-
mus. Hieronym. adv. Pelag. lib. I. Oper. torn. II. p. 274,
His morbis inter se contrariis, Manichaei Pelagianique
confligunt, dissimili voluntate, simili vanitate,separati opin-
y Summa Theol Prima Pars, qu. xxm. art. 5.
xk

498 APPENDIX.
ione diversa, sed propinqui mente perversa. Jam vero
gratiam Christi simul oppugnant, baptismum ejus simul
evacuant, carnem ejus simul exhonorant ; sed etiam haec
modis causisque diversis. Nam Manichaei meritis naturae
bonae, Pelagiani autem meritis voluntatis bonae, perhibent
divinitus subveniri. Illi dicunt ; debet hoc Deus laboribus
membrorum suorum: Isti dicunt; debet hoc virtutibus ser-
vorum suorum. Utrisque ergo merces non imputatur se
cundum gratiam, sed secundum debitum, &c. Contr. duas
Epist. Pelag. ad Bonif. Augustin. Oper. torn. VII. fol.
286. Les premiers de cette Soci^te, qui parurent en France,
sont ces quatorze personnes de la noblesse, et du clerge'
d'Orleans, contre lesquels le roi Robert assembla une
espece de Concile, en l'anne'e 1022, et qu'il fit bruler vifs
sous pretexte de Manich&sme. Beausobre, Hist, de Ma-
nich. torn. I. pref. p. 4.
NOTE O. p. 186.
Grace, no less than Predestination, is spoken of in the
language of the Schools as that by which a man is " or-
" dained" or " set in order" to eternal life. For, in dis
cussing the question, " whether any one may be blotted
" out of the book of life," Aquinas decides, that the ordi
nation of predestination " never fans ;" whereas, that of
grace, though in itself a title to eternal life, may fail,
through mortal sin. And the reason assigned is, that the
predestined have eternal life in itself; the ordination of
grace alone is to eternal life, not in itself, but in its cause.
Est enim liber vitae conscriptio ordinatorum in vitam
aeternam. Ad quam ordinatur aliquis ex duobus ; scUicet,
ex praedestinatione divina; et haec ordinatio nunquam de
ficit : et ex gratia. Quicunque enim gratiam habet, ex
hoc ipso dignus est vita asterna. Et haec ordinatio deficit
interdum : quia aliqui ordinati sunt ex gratia habita, ad
habendam vitam aeternam, a qua tamen deficiunt per pec-
catum mortale. Illi igitur qui sunt ordinati ad habendum

NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 499
vitam aeternam ex praedestinatione divina, sunt simpliciter
scripti in libro vitae ; quia sunt ibi scripti ut habituri vitam
aeternam in seipsa ; et isti nunquam delentur de libro
vitae. Sed illi qui sunt ordinati ad habendum vitam seter-
nam, non ex praedestinatione divina, sed solum ex gratia,
dicuntur esse scripti in libro vitae, non simpliciter, sed
secundum quid : quia sunt ibi scripti, ut habituri vitam
aeternam, non in seipsa, sed in sua causa. Et tales pos
sunt deleri de libro vitae, ut dilectio non referatur ad noti-
tiam Dei, quasi Deus aliquid praesciat, postea nesciat,
sed ad rem scitam : quia scilicet Deus scit aliquem prius
ordinari in vitam aeternam, et postea non ordinari, cum
deficit a gratia. Aquinas, Prima Pars, qu. xxiv. art. 3.
The general designation of the Divine Agency under the
notion of Grace, was a modification of abstract doctrine,
sanctioned by Scholasticism not without good reason. It
was a softening of the hard outlines of the theory of Pre
destination. By fixing the thoughts on the Divine good
ness, amidst the survey of the inflexible appointments of
Providence, it presented a view of God, touching to the
heart, and awakening pleasurable emotions. It preserved
the supremacy and constancy of the Divine Will, whilst it
exhibited that supremacy and constancy as the working of
a law of gentleness and love.
NOTE P. p. 189.
Sed contra; Lux ponit aliquid in illuminate. Sed gra
tia est quaedam lux animae : unde Augustinus dicit in libro
de Natura et Gratia : praevaricatorem legis divinae lux de-
serit veritatis, qua desertus utique fit caecus : ergo gratia
ponit aliquid in anima.
Sed quantum ad primum est differentia attendenda circa
gratiam Dei et gratiam hominis : quia enim bonum crea
tura? provenit ex voluntate divina, ideo ex dilectione Dei
qua vult creaturae bonum, profluit aliquod bonum in crea
tura. Ad secundum dicendum, quod Deus est vita animae per
Kk2

500 APPENDIX.
modum causae efficientis : sed anima est vita corporis per
modum causae formalis. Inter formam autem et materiam
non cadit aliquod medium, quia forma per seipsam in-
format materiam vei subjectum. Sed agens informat sub-
jectum, non per suam substantiam, sed per forniam quam
causat in materia. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Prima Se-
cundcB, qu. ex. art. 1.
Manifestum est autem quod gratia gratum faciens hoc
modo comparatur ad beatitudinem, sicut ratio seminalis in
natura ad effectum naturalem. Ibid. qu. lxii. art. 2.
NOTE Q. p. 190.
Respondeo dicendum ; quod sicut gratia dividitur in
operantem et cooperantem, secundum diversos effectus :
ita etiam in praevenientem et subsequentem, et qualiter-
cunque gratia accipiatur. Sunt autem quinque effectus
gratiae in nobis, quorum primus est ut anima sanetur:
secundus, ut bonum velit : tertius est, ut bonum quod
vult, efficaciter operetur: quartus est, ut in bono perse-
veret : quintus est, ut ad gloriam perveniat. Et ideo gra
tia secundum quod causat in nobis primum effectum, voca-
tur praeveniens respectu secundi effectus : et prout causat
in nobis secundum, vocatur subsequens respectu primi ef
fectus. Et sicut unus effectus est posterior uno effectu,
et prior alio ; ita gratia potest dici praeveniens et subse
quens secundum eundem. effectum, respectu diversorum.
Et hoc est quod Augustinus dicet in libro de Natura et
Gratia : " Praevenit ut sanemur ; subsequitur ut sanati
" vegetemur; praevenit ut vocemur; subsequitur ut glo-
" rificemur." Aquinas, Summa Theol. Prima Secundce,
qu. cxi. art. 3.

NOTES TO LECTURE V. 501
LECTURE V.
NOTE A. p. 229.
A.QUINAS, shewing that sin was not a total privation of
our nature, whence would follow the Stoical paradox that
" all sins were equal," observes : Hujusmodi autem pri-
vationes recipiunt magis et minus ex parte ejus quod re-
manet de habitu contrario ; multum enim refert ad aegri-
tudinem vei turpitudinem, utrum plus vei minus a debita
commensuratione humorum vei membrorum recedatur. Et
similiter dicendum est de vitiis et peccatis; sic enim in eis
privatur debita commensuratio rationis, ut non totaliter
ordo rationis toUatur ; alioquin malum si sit integrum, de-
struit seipsum, ut dicitur in quatuor Ethic. : non enim pos
set remanere substantia actus vei affectio agentis, nisi ali
quid remaneret de ordine rationis. Et ideo multum inter
est ad gravitatem peccati, utrum plus vei minus recedatur
a rectitudine rationis. Summa Theol. Prima Secundce,
qu. lxxiii. art. 2. Quia tamen natura humana per pec-
catum non est totaliter corrupta, ut scUicet toto bono na
turae privetur, &c. Ibid. qu. cix. art. 2.
The reference made in this passage is to the observ
ation of Aristotle, that " vice destroys itself; and if it be
" total, becomes intolerable : rb yap /ca/coz- /cat avrb airdX-
" Xvai, k&v oXoKX-qpov fj, d(pdpqrov yCverai z."
The expressions again, " total corruption," or " wholly
" corrupt," as applied to human nature, evidently derive
their character from the logical notion which the Scholas
tics intended by them. The whole of human nature is, the
whole extent of signification of the term human nature.
It means that every thing included under that term is also
included under the term corrupt. It is misconceived, when
it is understood to denote the several physical and moral
constituents, which, taken together, make up the com
plex idea of human nature. The mistake here is that of
z Aristot. Ethic. IV. t. 5-
Kk3

502 APPENDIX.
supposing, that what is true of all the kinds or varieties
found in a certain class of objects, is, on the other hand,
true, only in regard to all the parts of which any in
dividual of the class is composed. Anselm sufficiently
shews this, when, in a chapter of his treatise on Original
Sin, inquiring in what manner human nature is corrupt,
he observes : Quoniam autem personaliter peccaverunt,
cum originaliter fortes et incorrupti haberent potestatem
semper servandi sine difficultate justitiam, totum quod
erant infirrnatum et corruptum est. Corpus quidem, quia
tale post peccatum fuit, qualia sunt brutorum animalium
corruptione et carnalibus appetitibus subjacentia : anima
vero, quia, ex corruptione corporis et ejusdem appetitibus,
atque ex indigentia bonorum quae perdidit, carnalibus af-
fectibus infecta, et quia tota natura humana in illis erat,
et extra illos nihil erat, tota infirmata et corrupta est. . . .
Nee impotentia excusat earn in ipsis infantibus : quia in
illis non solvit quod debet : quoniam ipsa sibi fecit earn,
deserendo justitiam in primis hominibus in quibus tota
erat : et semper debitrix est habere potestatem, quam ad
servandam semper justitiam accepit : hoc esse videri potest
in infantibus originale peccatum a.
Clearly Anselm is speaking of the abstract being Human
Nature, the logical universal ; which, he contends, is cor
rupt in all born of Adam, because the whole being was
corrupted in the first sinner, and is the same in all who
participate of it. But since the Scholastic phUosophy has
been out of fashion, this is a notion by no means familiar
to the minds of men ; and the expression, " totally cor-
" rupt," has been very naturally taken in its most obvious
sense, as denoting all that is in any one individual man.
It is time indeed that we should study that philosophy, to
our contempt and ignorance of which, we may ascribe so
much aberration of theological opinion. We have indeed
more than enough of the Scholastic spirit among us, but
we want the Scholastic depth of thought. We treat the con-
**¦ De Concep. Virg. et Pec. Orig. c. 2. Opera, torn. III. p. 96.

NOTES TO LECTURE V. 503
elusions of the Schoolmen, as superficially, as they treated
the Greek philosophy, which they implicitly adopted. We
take their terms and reason from them, without acquaint
ing ourselves with the principles on which they are founded.
For instance, I have seen it somewhere argued, that man
is naturally in a state of utter reprobation ; because the
Scripture says, that " the carnal mind is enmity against
"¦ God." For, it was urged, had the expression been
" enemy," and not " enmity," then the possibility of re
conciliation might be conceivable ; but " enmity" could
never be reconciled. Could the Platonist or the Scholas
tic, I would ask, insist more on the importance of abstract
ideas, than is insisted on by such an argument ? We find
here an endeavour to establish the impossibility of a fact
concerning human nature, from a consideration of the
nature of a contradiction : or in other words, logical truth
is transformed into physical. NOTE B. p. 233.
Est peccatum a natura, ut dixi ; et est peccatum a per
sona. Itaque quod est a persona, potest dici personale :
quod autem a natura, naturale, quod dicitur originale : et
sicut personale transit ad naturam ; ita naturale ad perso
nam : hoc modo. Quod Adam comedebat, hoc natura
exigebat, quia ut haec exigeret sic creata erat. Quod vero
de ligno vetito comedit, non haec voluntas naturalis, sed
personalis Adae propria fecit: quod tamen egit persona,
non fecit sine natura. Persona enim erat quod dicebatur
Adam : natura quod homo. Fecit igitur persona pecca-
tricem naturam : quia ubi Adam peccavit, homo peccavit.
Siquidem non quia homo erat, ut vetitum praesumeret im-
pulsus est : sed propria voluntate, quam non exegit natura,
sed persona concepit, attractus est. Similiter fit in infan
tibus e converso. Nempe quod in illis non est justitia,
quam debent habere, non hoc fecit illorum voluntas per
sonalis, sicut in Adam ; sed egestas naturalis, quam ipsa
natura accepit ab Adam. In Adam namque, extra quem
xk4

504 APPENDIX.
de ilia nihil erat, est nudata justitia quam habebat : et ea
semper nisi adjuta careret : hac ratione : quia natura sub-
sistit in personis, et personae non sunt sine natura, fecit
natura personas infantium peccatrices. Sic spoliavit per
sona naturam bono justitiae in Adam ; et natura egens
facta, omnes personas quas ipsa de se procreat, eadem
egestate peccatrices et injustas facit. Hoc modo transit
peccatum Adae personale in omnes, qui de illo naturaliter
propagantur, et est in illis originale sive naturale. An
selm. De Concep. Virg. et Pec. Orig. c. 22. p. 103.
The same idea is further illustrated by the following
passage of Aquinas.
Unde etiam posito, quod anima rationalis traduceretur,
ex hoc 'ipso quod infectio animae prolis non esset in ejus
voluntate, amitteret rationem culpae obligantis ad poenam :
quia ut Philosophus dicit in tertia Ethicorum, nullus im-
properabit caeco nato, sed magis miserebitur. Et ideo alia
via procedendum est, dicendo, quod omnes homines qui
nascuntur ex Adam, possunt considerari ut unus homo, in
quantum conveniunt in natura quam a primo parente acci-
piunt; secundum quod in civilibus omnes homines qui sunt
unius communitatis, reputantur quasi unum corpus, et tota
communitas quasi unus homo : sicut etiam Porphyrius
dicit, quod participatione speciei plures homines sunt unus
homo. Sic igitur multi homines ex Adam derivati sunt,
tanquam multa membra unius corporis, actus autem unius
membri corporalis, puta manus, non est voluntarius volun
tate ipsius manus, sed voluntate animae quae primo movet
membrum. Unde homicidium quod manus committit, non
imputaretur manui ad peccatum, si consideraretur manus
secundum se, ut divisa a corpore ; sed imputatur ei in
quantum est aliquid hominis, quod movetur a primo prin
cipio motivo hominis. Sic igitur inordinatio, quae est in
isto homine ex Adam generate, non est voluntaria volun
tate ipsius, sed voluntate primi parentis, qui movet mo-
tione generationis omnes qui ex ejus origine derivantur,
sicut voluntas animae movet omnia membra ad actum.

NOTES TO LECTURE V. 505
Unde peccatum quod sic a primo parente in posteros deri
vator dicitur originale : sicut peccatum quod ab anima de
rivator ad membra corporis, dicitur actuale. Et sicut pec
catum actuale quod per membrum aliquod committitur, non
est peccatum illius membri, nisi in quantum illud mem-
bruiu est aliquid ipsius hominis, propter quod vocatur pec
catum humanum ; ita peccatum originale non est pecca
tum hujus personae, nisi in quantum haec persona recipit
naturam a primo parente, unde et vocatur peccatum na
turae: secundum illud Ephes. 2. Eramus autem filii irae.
Aquinas, Summa Theol. Prima Secundce, qu. lxxxi. art. 1.
NOTE C. p. 233.
Octavum in haec causa Concilium cecumenicum erat,
quod anno ccccxxxi habitum est. Quamquam enim propter
Pelagianos convocatum non fuit ; tamen Pelagianis Nes-
torium damnare refugientibus, atque adeo ilium etiam ju-
vantibus, Patres occasione ea uti voluerunt, ad. Pelagii
asseclas una cum Nestorio damnandos. Haec ita esse, ip
sius Concilii actis comprobatur. . . . Quod vero ex actis
synodicis hactenus ostendimus, idem variorum etiam scrip-
torum auctoritate demonstrator. Prosper in Chronicis :
" Congregata apud Ephesum plus ducentorum synodo sa-
" cerdotum, Nestorius cum haeresi nominis sui, et cum
" multis Pelagianis, qui cognatum sibi juvabant dogma,
" damnatur." Et adversus Collatorem : " Per hunc virum
" (Caelestinum) etiam Orientales ecclesiae geniina peste
" purgatae sunt ; quando Cyrillo, Alexandrinae urbis an-
" tistiti, gloriosissimo fidei Catholicae defensori, ad exe-
" crandam Nestorii impietatem, apostolico auxiliatus est
" gladio : quo etiam Pelagiani, dum cognatis confederan-
" tur erroribus, iterum prosternerentur." Haec causa est,
cur idem Prosper unum utriusque haereseos scripserit epi-
taphium, quod praemittitur carmini, Trept axa-pCanov. Etiam
Gregorius M., lib. V. epist. 14, Pelagium ea synodo dam-
natum testatur. Item Photius, pvpiofi'ifiXov, cap. 53. 'Ara-
depanadrj avrq f) r&v YleXayiaviar&v a'Cpeais Kai kv rfj 'Ecpe-
aCav dyt'a avvobu. Foss. Hist. Pelag. lib. I. c. 47.

506 APPENDIX.
NOTE D. p. 235.
Si aliquis diligenter attendat, impossibile est, quod ali
qua peccata proximorum parentum, vei etiam primi paren
tis, praeter primum, per originem traducantur. Cujus ratio
est, quia homo generat sibi idem in specie, non autem se
cundum individuum. Et ideo ea quae directe pertinent ad
individuum (sicut personales actus, et quae ad eos perti
nent) non traducunt a parentibus in filios : non enim gram-
maticus traducit in filium scientiam grammaticae, quam
proprio studio acquisivit. Sed ea quae pertinent ad natu
ram speciei, traducuntur a parentibus in filios : non enim
grammaticus traducit in filium scientiam grammaticae,
quam proprio studio acquisivit. Sed ea quae pertinent ad
naturam speciei traducuntur a parentibus in filios, nisi sit
defectus naturae ; sicut oculatus generat oculatum nisi na
tura deficiat: et si natura sit fortis, etiam aliqua accidentia
individualia propagantur in filios, pertinentia ad dispositio-
nem naturae ; sicut velocitas corporis, bonitas ingenii, et
alia hujusmodi : nullo autem modo ea quae sunt pure per
sonalia, ut dictum est. Sicut autem ad personam pertinet
aliquid secundum seipsam, et aliquid ex dono gratiae : ita
etiam ad naturam potest aliquid pertinere secundum seip
sam ; scilicet quod causatur ex principiis ejus ; et aliquid
ex dono gratiae : et hoc modo justitia originalis, (sicut in
Primo dictum est,) erat quoddam donum. gratiae toti hu
manae naturae divinitus collatum in primo parente ; quod
quidem primus homo amisit per primum peccatum. Unde
sicut ilia originalis justitia traducta fuisset in posteros simul
cum natura, ita etiam inordinatio opposita. Sed alia pec
cata actualia, vei primi parentis, vei aliorum, non corrum-
punt naturam, quantum ad id quod naturae est, sed solum
quantum ad id quod personae est; id est, secundum proni-
tatem ad actum : unde alia peccata non traducuntur.
Aquinas, Summa Theol. Prima Secundaz, qu. lxxxi.
art. 2. NOTE E. p. 240.
Respondeo, dicendum ; quod necessitas dicitur multi-

NOTES TO LECTURE V. 507
pliciter. . . . Ex agente autem hoc alicui convenit, sicut
cum aliquis cogitur ab aliquo agente, ita quod non possit
contrarium agere : et haec vocatur necessitas coactionis.
Haec igitur coactionis necessitas omnino repugnat volun-
tati. Nam hoc dicimus esse violentum, quod est contra
inclinationem rei. Ipse autem motus voluntatis est incli-
natio quaedam in aliquid. Et ideo sicut dicitur aliquid na
turale, quia est secundum inclinationem naturae : ita dici
tur aliquid voluntarium, quia est secundum inclinationem
voluntatis. Sicut ergo impossibile est, quod aliquid simul
sit violentum et naturale ; ita impossibile est, quod aliquid
simpliciter sit coactum, sive violentum, et necessarium.
Necessitas autem finis non repugnat voluntati, quando ad
finem non potest perveniri nisi uno modo : sicut ex volun
tate transeundi mare, fit necessitas in voluntate ut velit
navem. Similiter etiam nee necessitas naturalis repugnat
voluntati : quinimo necesse est quod, sicut intellectus ex
necessitate inhaeret primis principiis, ita voluntas ex ne
cessitate inhaereat ultimo fini, qui est beatitudo. Finis
enim se habet in operativis, sicut principium in speculati-
vis; ut dicitur in 2. Physic. Oportet enim quod illud
quod naturaliter alicui convenit et immobiliter, sit funda-
mentum et principium omnium aliorum : quia natura rei
est primum in unoquoque, et omnis motus procedit ab ali
quo immobili. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Prima Pars, qu.
lxxxii. art. 1. See also Voss. Hist. Pelag. lib. VII. par. I.
p. 701.
NOTE F. p. 248.
The difficulty on the subject of Merit is, in applying the
term to any relation between God and man : because we
closely connect the two ideas of serving God and moral
excellence. Still it is possible in theory to detach these
ideas from each other, and to view man in his service to
God, under the simple analogy of man earning a recom
pense from his fellow-man. And this is what the Schools
have done, in their various speculations on the subject of
Merit. Even however under this point of view, Aquinas

508 APPENDIX.
points out that no one can serve God, or have any merit
with God, unless by the gift of God. Dissimiliter, he says,
se habet in Deo et in homine : nam homo omnem virtutem
benefaciendi habet a Deo, non autem ab homine : et ideo
a Deo non potest homo aliquid mereri, nisi per donum
ejus ; quod Apostolus signanter exprimit, dicens : " Quis
" prior dedit ei, et retribuetur iUi ?" Sed ab homine potest
quis mereri antequam ab eo acceperit, per id quod accepit
a Deo. Summa Theol. Prima Secundce, qu. cxiv. art. 2.
On the use of the terms Condignity and Congruity, the
following passages of Aquinas illustrate the observations
made in the Lecture.
Respondeo, dicendum, quod opus meritorium hominis
dupliciter considerari potest. Uno modo secundum quod
procedit ex libero arbitrio. Alio modo secundum quod
procedit ex gratia Spiritus Sancti. Si consideretur secun
dum substantiam operis, et secundum quod procedit ex
libero arbitrio : sic non potest ibi esse condignitas, propter
maximam inaequalitatem : sed est ibi congruitas, propter
quandam aequalitatem proportionis. Videtur enim con-
gruum, ut homini operand secundum suam virtutem, Deus
recompenset, secundum excellentiam suae virtutis. Si au
tem loquamur de opere meritorio, secundum quod procedit
ex gratia Spiritus Sancti : sic est meritorium vitae aeternae,
ex condigno. Sic enim valor meriti attenditur secundum
virtutem Spiritus Sancti moventis nos in vitam aeternam;
secundum illud Joan. iv. "Fiet in eo fons aquae salientis in
" vitam aeternam." Attenditur etiam pretium operis secun
dum dignitatem gratiae ; per quam homo, consors factus
divinae naturae, adoptatur in filium Dei, cui debetur haere-
ditas ex ipso jure adoptionis; secundum illud Rom. viii.
Si filii, et haeredes. Summa Theol. Prima Secundce, qu.
cxiv. art. 3.
Opus nostrum habet rationem meriti ex duobus. Primo
quidem ex vi motionis divinae ; et sic meretur afiquis ex
condigno. Alio modo habet rationem meriti, secundum
quod procedit ex libero arbitrio ; in quantum voluntarie

NOTES TO LECTURE V. 509
aliquid facimus ; et ex hac parte est meritum congrui :
quia congruum est, ut dum homo bene utitur sua virtute,
Deus secundum superexcellentem virtutem excellentius
operetur. Ex quo patet, quod merito condigni nullus potest
mereri alteri primam gratiam, nisi solus Christus. . . . Sed
merito congrui potest aliquis alteri mereri primam gratiam.
Quia enim homo in gratia constitutus implet Dei volunta-
tem, congruum est secundum amicitiae proportionem, ut
Deus impleat hominis voluntatem in salvatione alterius 
Impetratio orationis innititur misericordiae, meritum autem
condigni innititur justitiae : et in eo multa orando impetrat
homo ex divina misericordia, quae tamen non meretur se
cundum justitiam. Ibid. art. 6.
NOTE G. p. 250.
Hunc honorem debitum, qui Deo non reddit, aufert Deo
quod suum est ; et Deum exhonorat : et hoe est peccare.
Quamdiu autem non solvit quod rapuit manet in culpa ;
nee sufficit solummodo reddere quod ablatum est ; sed pro
contumelia illata plus habet reddere quam abstulit. Sicut
enim qui laedit salutem alterius, non sufficit, si salutem re-
stituit, nisi pro illata doloris injuria recompenset aliquid :
ita qui honorem alicujus violat, non sufficit honorem red
dere, si non secundum exhonorationis factam molestiam,
aliquid quod placet illi quem exhonoravit restauret. Hoc
quoque attendendum, quod cum aliquis quod injuste ab
stulit, solvit, hoc debet dare, quod ab illo non posset exigi,
si alienum non rapuisset. Sic ergo debet omnis, qui peccat,
honorem quem rapit, Deo solvere ; et hoc est satisfactio,
quam omnis peccator debet Deo facere, &c. Anselm. Cur
Deus Homo, lib. I. c. 2. p. 46.
Satisfactio est redditio voluntaria equivalentis alias inde-
biti. Primum scilicet redditio patet; quia non est absoluta
datio. Nam hoc quod est satis, dicit commensurationem
ad aliquid praecedens correspondentem. Quod dicitur vo
luntaria patet ; quia si esset involuntaria, non esset satis
factio, sed satispassio : et hoc modo ille, a quo exigitur in

510 APPENDIX.
inferno poena debita culpae commissae, satis patitur et non
satisfacit, &c. Joan. Duns Scot, in lib. sentent. IV. qu.xv.
fol. 80.
Conjungitur autem Deo homo per voluntatem : unde ma
cula peccati ab homine tolli non potest, nisi voluntas ho
minis ordinem divinae justitiae acceptet : ut scilicet vei ipse
sibi pcenam spontaneus assumat in recompensationem cul
pae praeteritae, vei etiam a Deo illatam patienter sustineat.
Utroque enim modo poena rationem satisfactionis habet.
Poena autem satisfactoria diminuit aliquid de ratione pcenae:
est enim de ratione poenae, quod sit contra voluntatem ;
poena autem satisfactoria, etsi secundum absolutam consi-
derationem sit contra voluntatem, &c. Aquinas, Summa
Theol. Tertia Pars, qu. lxxxvi. art. 4.
NOTE H. p. 251.
Actus enim peccati facit hominem reum pcenae, in quan
tum transgreditur ordinem divinae justitiae : ad quem non
redit nisi per quandam recompensationem pcenae quae ad
aequalitatem justitiae reducit : ut scilicet qui plus voluntati
suae indulsit quam debuit, contra mandatum Dei agens,
secundum ordinem divinae justitiae aliquid contra illud quod
vellet, spontaneus vei invitus patiatur, quod etiam in inju-
riis hominibus factis observatur, ut per recompensationem
pcenae, reintegretur aequalitas justitiae. Aquinas, Summa
Theol. Prima Secundce, qu. lxxxvii. art. 6.
Consequitur peccatum mortale reatus alicujus pcenae,
quia inordinatio culpae non reducitur ad ordinem justitiae
nisi per pcenam. Justum est enim, ut qui voluntati suae
plus indulsit quam debuit, contra voluntatem suam aliquid
patiatur : sic enim erit aequalitas. Unde Apocal. xviii. di
citur : " Quantum glorificavit se, et in deliciis fuit, tantum
" date illi tormentum et luctum." Aquinas, Summa Theol.
Tertia Pars, qu. lxxxvi. art. 4.

NOTES TO LECTURE VI. 511
LECTURE VI.
NOTE A. p. 277.
X HUS Thomas a Kempis, expressing the natural con
summation of the theological morality.
Valde bonum est in obedientia stare, sub praelato vivere,
et sui juris non esse. Multo tutius est in subjectione vi
vere, quam in praelatura. . . . Curre hue vei illuc : nusquam
invenies quietem, nisi in humUi subjectione sub praelati
regimine. . . . Quis est ita sapiens qui omnia plene scire
possit ? Ergo noli minis in sensu too confidere ; sed velis
etiam aliorum sensum audire. Si bonum est tuum sentire,
et hoc ipsum propter Deum dimittis, et alius sentire se-
queris, magis exinde proficies. De Imit. Christi, lib. I.
c. 9.We may regard the monastic institutions, when brought
to their perfection of organization, as an attempt to realize
the principle of a theocracy, in the human government
of a particular society. The wonderful effect under the
Divine Government is, that the Will of God is the law
of the world of free agents ; each of whom has his own
distinct will acting by its proper laws, whilst yet the
sovereign Will is accomplished throughout, and all are as
instruments in the Divine hand to work the Divine pur
poses. In order to effect the same object by mere human
government, it was necessary to neutralize the refractory
power of the will in the subject, and antecedently to re
duce the human agent to the condition of the mere instru
ment. Thence the principle of Obedience so incessantly
and strongly inculcated in the rules of the monastic orders :
—an obedience carried to the minutest points ; so far that
an immediate attention to the word of the superior was
required, however the individual addressed might be en
gaged at the moment. If he should happen to be writing,
he must leave the very stroke unfinished, and instantly

512 APPENDIX.
proceed on the errand to which he was summoned. An
inspection of the rules of the different orders will furnish
ample evidence of the truth of these statements?
The system was carried to its perfection by the Jesuits.
A member of that society might be at Rome at one mo
ment, quite unconscious of any scheme in which he was
to take a part, and the next moment be proceeding on his
way to China or Paraguay. I have already mentioned an
instance of the kind among the Franciscans, in the case
of John Duns Scotus a. The amazing power obtained
to the governors of societies so constituted may easily be
supposed. The wonder indeed which so greatly perplexes us in
the Divine government — the circumstance of a regular
direction of results, by means intrinsically variable, and
apparently uncontrollable, — vanishes in the survey of the
artificial human system. We see the mechanism by which
the result is effected. The subject of the human institu
tion has been trained by unnatural discipline, not to feel
his own proper responsibility as a moral agent. And a
person brought to such a state, is of course prepared to
execute any purpose, however mischievous in itself, be
cause it is commanded by an external authority. Under
such a system, . crimes may be perpetrated without re
morse, and crimes too of an atrocity that would make the
heart shrink from them, were it not steeled against its
own intercession. The only wonder is, that men have been
brought to this state of submission ; that an artificial sys
tem has so completely mastered their moral principles.
The consummate art of the framers of the institutions has
been shewn, in their success in thus modifying the charac
ters of men, and bringing them under the perfect command
of a sovereign intellect. Let the principle, however, be once
established, that the wiU of another is the supreme law of
conduct, and then the like effects will be produced, to what
we find under the stern dominion of fatalism among Ma-
" Page 4Z5-

NOTES TO LECTURE VI. 513
hometans. The subject- votary concentrates his whole
energy and interest on the one false principle on which his
character has been formed ; and he proceeds to the work
enjoined on him, with a fanatical self-devotion, that resem
bles motion produced by impact rather than the operation
of a moral being. Moral force, in fact, is converted into
physical; and morality is extinguished; all check being
given to the exercise of moral judgment and discretion.
The same consequences in kind follow from taking the
will of God as the sole practical guide of conduct; or,
which is the same thing, making religion the substitute
for morality. For the error is the same ; that of acting on
one abstract principle, instead of attending to the several
internal laws of our nature, the whole law of God written
on the heart, by which He instructs us how to do his will.
The principle here takes a noble and sublime form : for
who can argue abstractedly against the propriety of fol
lowing the Divine will ? But, from its abstract excellence,
it is the more likely to lead to romantic aberrations in con
duct. In the true practical view of the will of God, the
term is only a general expression for the various particular
instances, in which God informs and admonishes us, what
is our duty and interest in conduct, whether by the laws
of our nature, or those of his revealed word. To argue re
specting the will of God, as if we had any positive notion
of what it is in God, can lead to no practical truth : for it
is to argue from a mere hypothesis. Such a proceeding
indeed is found necessarily to involve us in paradox. For
thus Ockam affirms, that if God should so will, what is
now held to be vice might become virtue. This statement
was probably made by him and other scholastics, merely
with a design of maintaining the principle itself as specu
latively true; whatever consequence might be deduced
from it : and without any view of establishing the conse
quence as absolutely true. There is a passage of Anselm
which inculcates this interpretation of the doctrine ; and
which is important to be attended to, in forming an esti-
l1

514 APPENDIX.
mate of its real import, that we may not judge the main-
tamers of it too hardly.
Quod autem dicitur, quia quod vult justum est, et quod
non vult, justum non est, non ita intelligendum est, ut si
Deus velit quodlibet inconveniens, justum sit, quia ipse
vult. Non enim sequitur, si Deus vult mentiri, justum
esse mentiri ; sed potius Deum ilium non esse. Nam ne-
quaquam potest velle mentiri voluntas, nisi in qua cor-
rupta est Veritas, immo quae deserendo veritatem corrupta
est. Cum ergo dicitur, si Deus vult mentiri, non est aliud,
quam si Deus est taUs naturae, quae velit mentiri : et id
circo non sequitur justum esse mendacium : nisi ita intel-
Ugatur, sicut cum de duobus impossibUibus dicimus : si
hoc est, illud est : quia nee hoc, nee illud est : ut si quis
dicat : si aqua est sicca, et ignis est humidus : neutrum
enim verum est. Itaque de illis tantum est verum dicere;
si Deus hoc vult, justum est ; quae Deum velle non est in
conveniens. Si enim vult Deus ut pluat, justum est ut
pluat : et si vult ut aliquis homo occidatur, justum est ut
occidatur. Cur Deus Homo, lib. I. c. 12. p. 47.
The real objection however to the introduction of such
a speculation into ethics is, that it is unphilosophical ; over
looking clear facts of our moral nature, and suggesting,
instead of rules founded on these facts, an abstract notion,
which has no existence independently of them.
NOTE B. p. 284.
Principaliter quidem ad vitam contemplativam pertinet
contemplatio divinae veritatis : quia hujusmodi contempla-
tio est finis totius humanae vitae. Unde Augustinus dicit
in 1 . de Trinitate, quod contemplatio Dei promittitor nobis,
ut actionum omnium finis atque aeterna perfectio gaudio-
rum. Quae quidem in futura vita erit perfecta, quando vi-
debimus eum facie ad faciem ; unde et perfecte beatos fa
ciet. Nunc autem contemplatio divinae veritatis competit
nobis imperfecte, videlicet per speculum et in aenigmate.
Unde per earn fit nobis quaedam inchoatio beatitudinis,

NOTES TO LECTURE VI. 515
quae hic incipit ut in futuro continuetur. Unde et Philo-
sophus in 10. Ethic, in contemplatione optimi inteUigibilis
ponit ultimam felicitatem hominis. Aquinas, Summa
Theol. Secunda Secundai, qu. clxxx. art. 4.
Secundum se quidem manifestum est quod vita contem-
plativa diuturna est dupliciter. Uno modo, eo quod ver-
satur circa incorruptibilia et immobilia. Alio modo, quia
non habet contrarietatem. Delectationi enim quae est in
considerando, nihil est contrarium, ut dicitur in 1 . Topic.
Sed quoad nos etiam vita contemplativa diuturna est : turn
quia cotnpetit nobis secundum actionem incorruptibilis
partis animae, scilicet secundum intellectum ; unde potest
post hanc vitam durare : alio modo, quia in operibus con-
templativae corporaliter non laboramus. Unde magis in
hujusmodi operibus continue persistere possumus : sicut
Philosophus dicit in 10. Ethicorum. Ibid. art. 8.
Dicendum est ergo quod vita contemplativa simpliciter
melior est quam activa : quod Philosophus in 1 0. Ethic.
probat octo rationibus ; &c. Ibid. qu. clxxxii. art. 1 .
NOTE C. p. 289.
The passage which is commonly referred to by the
Schoolmen, occurs in the Eudemian Ethics. The philo
sopher is endeavouring to account for the phenomenon,
that fortune often appears in the world triumphant over
virtue and reason : and he closes his discussion in the
following manner. " The object of inquiry is," he says,
" what is the principle of motion in the soul. It is
" plain then that as God is in the universe, so every thing
"is in Him; for the divinity within us in a manner
" moves all things. But the principle of reason is not
" reason, but something superior. What then can one
" say is superior even to science, but God? for virtue is an
" instrument of the intellect. On this account also the
" ancients said: they are called fortunate, who have an im-
" pulse to succeed, being themselves without reason ; and
" willing is not expedient for them ; for they have a prin-
1.12

516 APPENDIX.
" ciple of a nature superior to intellect and wUl. But there
" are some that have reason, and not this : and there are
" enthusiasms ; but these have not the power of this : for
" as being unreasonable, they fail  It is evident then that
" there are two kinds of good-fortune: one, divine; whence
" also the fortunate seems to succeed through God : this
" is the character that is apt to do right through impulse:
" the other one who does right against impulse b." We
see plainly in this passage of the philosopher a warrant
for the notion of divinely-inspired Virtue, as of a principle
with which the reason itself of man had no proper con
cern ; but animating the agent by an instinctive efficacy,
and promoting his success in a way beyond his own con
sciousness or intentions.
These divine instincts, regarded in their effects on the
human subject, assumed in Scholastic phraseology the
forms of good Dispositions, Preparations, Conversion of
heart. They were termed Dispositions, so far as the
agent was thereby fitly disposed for the operation of grace;
since the matter on which any power has to act, must be
of a suitable nature in order to that action. Preparation
expressed the previous operation of the Spirit, rendering
the agent susceptible of divine impressions, both at the
commencement of his Christian life, and for his habitual
progress in that life c . Conversion denoted the efficacy
of the Spirit in producing the change of the soul towards
God, the proper end of its being, by a series of effects ad
justed successively to that end. These terms are all dif
ferent views of the process of that energy which is working
in the soul and bringing it to God — parts of the history of
that alteration which it undergoes in putting off the form
of the sinful Adam, and putting on the glorious form of
the sons of God.
>> Aristot. Eth. Eudem. lib. VII. c. 14. torn. II. p. 289. Du Val.
c Aquin. Summa Theol. Pi-ima Secundte, qu. cix. art. 6. qu. xlii. art. 2.

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 517

LECTURE VII.
NOTE A. p. 311.
1 HAVE before spoken of the refined materialism, which,
particularly in regard to the nature of the soul, was the
early and general tenet of theologians. In the IXth cen
tury controversy revived on the nature of the soul as on
other subjects. Ratramn of Corbey was employed in writ
ing a book De Anima, at the instance of Odo, Bishop of
Beauvais, in reply to the fanciful theory, drawn probably
from the New-Platonists, of a monk of the same convent,
who maintained that all men had but one and the same
soul. Another evidence of the sort of physical speculation
which was afloat at this period is, that the same writer is
said to have been engaged in an inquiry concerning the
fabled race of the Cynocephali, " whether they be truly
" men of Adam's seed, or brute creatures d."
Are we not disposed even in these days to rest too much
on the natural or metaphysical arguments for a future
state, and to imagine that the Christian Faith is compro
mised by a denial of the immateriality of the soul ? I by
no means intend to deny its immateriality. The soul is
undoubtedly immaterial in this sense; that it is only to
confound distinct phenomena, to identify the facts of con
sciousness with those of external observation, as Priestley
has done, in his attempt to establish the material nature of
the soul. The two classes of facts are clearly distinct and
different, and they ought therefore, in philosophical accu
racy, to be distinguished by different names. But we go
beyond the basis of the facts, when we assume, in our ab
stract arguments for the natural immortality of the soul,
its separate existence apart from the body. There is no
observation which shews that the living powers, (to use
* Ratramn's Treatise on the Body and Blood of the Lord, in Latin and
English, 8vo, 1688. 1.13

518 APPENDIX.
the phrase of Butler,) the powers of thought, and will, and
action, exist otherwise than in connexion with a bodily
system. However little the bodily system may be called
into action during the exertion of these living powers,
however it may in some instances be an obstruction to
their energy, and however actively they may energize in
the very moment of the decay of this system, stiU it is
always in connexion with the bodily system that the living
powers are displayed : and we are not authorized therefore
speculatively to conclude their future existence, independ
ently of their union with such a system. But what mat
ters this to the Christian, who is fully assured, that, because
Christ lives, he shaU live also ; that, " as by man came
" death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead."
I would say, in the words of Nemesius, 'Hplv be dp/cet -npbs
drtdbei£iv rrjs ddavaaCas avrqs, rj r&v deCtav XoyCmv bibaaKaXCa,
to nriarbv d<p' eavrrjs kxpvaa, bia. to dednvevarov etvaie. If
we sincerely rely on the clear evidence given of Christ
raised from the dead, as a certain fact in the course of
Divine Providence, and believe the connexion of our own
immortality with that fact, we may surely regard all merely
philosophical inquiries on the subject, as fair matter of dis
putation, without offence, and without any fear whatever
for the stability of the real Christian doctrine of the Resur
rection of the dead.
NOTE B. p. 313.
Sacrificium ergo visibile invisibilis sacrificii Sacramen-
tum, i. e. sacrum signum est. Augustin. De Civ. Dei,
lib.X. c.5.
Sacramentum est sacrae rei signum. Dicitur tamen sa-
cramentum etiam sacrum secretum, sicut sacramentum
divinitatis : ut sacramentum sit sacrum signarts : sed nunc
agitur de sacramento secundum quod est signum. Item
sacramentum est invisibilis gratiae visibilis forma. Lom
bard. Sent. lib. IV. dist. 1 .
" I remember there be many definitions of a sacrament
* De Natura Hominis, c. 2. p. 93. ed. 8vo. Oxon. 1671.

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 519
" in Austin : but I will take that which is most fit to this
" present purpose. A sacrament is a visible sign of in-
" visible grace." Ridley's Disput. at Oxford. Foxe's
Eccl. Hist. vol. II. p. 1619.
NOTE C. p. 314.
Sicut in vita naturali primum est generatio : deinde se
quitur nutritio, et roboratio, et sanitatis perditae reparatio :
et haec quatuor pertinent ad quamlibet personam singula-
rem : praeter haec autem requiritur aliquid pertinens ad
communitatem, quo aliquis constituatur in gradu neces-
sario ad aliquem actum necessarium communitati : et ita
spiritualiter ad completam perfectionem extensive opus
esse adjutorium aliquod pertinens ad generationem spiri-
tualem : et 2d0 aliquid pertinens ad nutritionem, 3° per
tinens ad roborationem : 4° ad separationem post lap-
sum : praeter haec autem, 5° requiritur aliquid esse quo
exiens finaliter praeparetur : quia vita ista spiritualis quae
dam via est ordinans, ut bene vivens in ea, de ipsa sine
impedimento transeat ad aliam pro qua praeparatur. Haec
ergo quinque requirantur tanquam adjutoria necessaria
personae cuicunque pro se. Ad bonum autem communi-
tatis observantis istam legem, requiritur et multiplicatio
carnalis : quia ista praesupponitur bono spirituali : sicut
natura gratiae : et multiplicatio spiritualis aliquorum in
ista lege. Sic ergo congruum fuit septem adjutoria con-
ferri observatoribus legis evangelicae, in quibus esset per-
fectio, non tantum intensiva, sed etiam extensiva, et suf-
ficiens ad omnia necessaria pro observantia hujus legis.
Haec autem sunt, ut dicit magister in litera; baptismus
pertinens ad generationem spiritualem : eucharistia neces
saria ad nutritionem : confirmatio ad roborationem : poe-
nitentia ad lapsi reparationem : extrema unctio ad finalem
praeparationem : matrimonium ad multiplicationem in esse
naturae vei carnali: et ordo ad multiplicationem in esse
gratiae vei spirituali. Jo. Duns Scot, in Lib. Sent. IV.
L 1 4

520 APPENDIX.
dist. 2. qu. 1. Also Aquinas, Summa Theol. Tertia Pars,
qu. lxv. art. 1.
Ibi autem debet medicinale remedium homini adhiberi,
ubi patitur morbum. Et ideo conveniens fuit, ut Deus
per quaedam corporalia signa homini spiritualem medici-
nam adhiberet. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Tertia Pars,
qu. lxi. art. 1.
The term Salvation has evidently been founded on this
analogy, so much insisted on by the Scholastic writers,
and indeed suggested by Scripture, between the state of
the soul under sin, and that of the body under disease.
It has now however almost lost its original sense, and is
commonly understood as if it denoted some particular ob
ject, or state, out of the soul itself. But the original
meaning seems more consistent with the tenour and spirit
of Christianity ; which leaves the nature of our future hap
piness in the most indistinct form, and directs the believer
to look for the kingdom of God within himself.
NOTE D. p. 315.
Aquinas, having adduced the opinion of some who as
serted that the sacraments operated by virtue of the Will
of God, annexing certain benefits to the use of them, in a
manner analogous to the beneficence of a king who should
promise to give au hundred pounds to any one presenting
a leaden penny, objects to this doctrine as reducing the
sacraments to mere signs, and thus states his own view of
the subject.
Et ideo aliter dicendum, quod duplex est causa agens,
principalis et instrumentalis. Principalis quidem operator
per virtutem suae formae, cui assimilatur effectus; sicut
ignis suo calore calefacit. Et hoc modo nihU potest cau-
sare gratiam, nisi Deus. . . . Causa vero instrumentalis non
agit per virtutem suae formae, sed solum per motum quo
movetur a principali agente : unde effectus non assimilatur
securi, sed arti quae est in mente artificis. Et hoc modo

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 521
sacramenta novae legis gratiam causant. ... Ad secundum
dicendum, quod instrumentum habet duas actiones : unam
instrumentalem, secundum quam operator non in virtute
propria, sed in virtute principalis agentis : aliam autem
habet actionem propriam, quae competit sibi secundum
propriam formam : sicut securi competit scindere ratione
suae acuitatis, facere autem lectum, in quantum est instru
mentum artis. Non autem perficit instrumentalem ac
tionem, nisi exercendo actionem propriam : scindendo enim
facit lectum. Et similiter sacramenta corporalia, per pro
priam operationem, quam exercent circa corpus quod tan-
gunt, efficiunt operationem instrumentalem ex virtute di
vina circa animam : sicut aqua baptismi, abluendo corpus
secundum propriam virtutem, abluit animam, in quantum
est instrumentum virtutis divinae : nam ex anima et cor-
pore unum fit. Et hoc est quod Augustinus dicit ; quod
corpus tangit, et cor abluit. Aquinas, Summa Theol.
Tertia Pars, qu. lxh. art. 1.
NOTE E. p. 316.
" The occasion of his writing, was news out of Germany,
" (as I guess from New Corbey, which had much corre-
" spondence with this Corbey in France, of which it was
" a colony,) that some in those parts held strange opinions
" touching our Saviour's birth, as though He came not out
" of his mother's womb into the world, the same way with
" other men. In opposition to that doctrine, Ratramnus
" asserts, that Christ was born as other men, and his Virgin
" mother bare Him, as other women bring forth, to use
" Tertullian's words, patefacti corporis lege. Those whose
" opinions he confutes, were, perhaps, some of those no-
" vices, for whose use Paschasius had written his book of
" the Sacrament, and who had not only imbibed his doc-
« trine touching the carnal presence of Christ therein, but
" might have also heard the manner of our Saviour's birth
" without opening his mother's womb, alleged to solve
" an objection against it : for our adversaries of the Church

522 APPENDIX.
" of Rome now say, that it is no more impossible for one
" body to be in two places, than for two bodies to be in
" one; which they conceive must have happened in our
" Saviour's birth, as also in his resurrection, and coming
" into his disciples, the doors being shut. This might
" provoke Paschasius to write against our Author, as well
" as zeal for the blessed Virgin's integrity." Editor of
Ratramn, p. 14. 8vo. London, 1688.
NOTE F. p. 317-
Ex quibus Domini verbis ortae sunt duae haereses anti-
quis temporibus. Et in hoc quidem consenserunt omnes,
quod panis et vinum in veram filii hominis carnem, verum-
que ejus sanguinem converterentur. Sed quis esset iste
filius hominis, non omnes eamdem sententiam tenuerunt.
Quidam arbitrati sunt, hunc oportere intelligi, quemlibet
hominem sive justum sive peccatorem, in cujus carnem
ac sanguinem conversa terrena substantia sumeretur in
remissionem peccatorum. Alii arbitrati sunt, non hunc
esse de turba quemlibet hominem, sed virum justum, sanc-
tificatum, a communi hominum vita per su*e vitae celsitu-
dinem segregatum, qui templum Dei esset, qui divinam in
se habitationem verissime possideret. In hujus carnem
ac sanguinem commutari posse panem vinumque altaris,
haeretica pertinacia delirabant. Factum est hoc paucis
annis post obitum beati Augustini, tempore Caelestini Pa-
pae, et Cyrilli Alexandrini Episcopi, quibus praecipienti-
bus, atque annitentibus, indicta ac celebrata est, Synodus
Ephesina, una de quatuor quas beatus Gregorius in Epi
stola ad Patriarchas fatetur se ita suscipere, complecti, et
venerari, quemadmodum quatuor Evangelia Domini nostri
Jesu Christi. In qua synodo damnatae sunt utraeque su-
perius comprehensae lethales pestes, roborata est fides, qua
credimus panem converti in earn carnem, quae in cruce
pependit, vinumque in eum sanguinem, qui de pendentis
in cruce latere emanavit. Denique ducenti qui eidem con-
cilio interfuere Episcopi, inter caetera de hoc Sacramento

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 523
sic scripserunt; et Nestorio Episcopo quasi haereticorum
capiti transmiserunt. "Ad benedictiones," inquiunt, "mys-
" ticas accedimus, et sanctificamur, participes sancti cor-
" poris, et pretiosi Sanguinis Christi omnium nostrum Re-
" demptoris, effecti: non ut communem carnem percipi-
" entes, quod absit, nee ut viri sanctificati et verbo con-
" juncti secundum dignitatis unitatem, aut sicut divinam
" possidentis habitationem, sed vere vivificatricem, et ip-
" sius verbi propriam factam. Vita enim naturaliter ut
" Deus existens, quia propriae carni unitus est, vivificatri-
" cem «am esse professus est. Et ideo quamvis dicat ad
" nos ; Amen, amen, dico vobis, nisi manducaveritis car-
" nem filii hominis, et biberitis ejus sanguinem ; non tamen
" earn, ut hominis unius ex nobis, existimare debemus :
" (quomodo enim juxta naturam suam vivificatrix esse
" caro hominis poterit?) sed ut vere propriam ejus fac-
" tam, qui propter nos filius hominis, et factus est, et vo-
" catus." Et circa finem concilii : " Si quis non confitetur
" carnem Domini vivificatricem esse, et propriam ipsius
" Verbi Dei Patris, sed velut alterius praeter ipsum con-
" juncti eidem per dignitatem, aut quasi divinam haben-
" tis habitationem, ac non potius vivificatricem esse, quia
" facta est propria Verbi vivificare valentis, anathema sit."
Quid manifestius audire desideras, si studiosum novae con-
tentionis animum studio antiquae pacis omittas ? Non est,
ut sancta synodus definit, haec caro alicujus de vulgo ho
minis, non justi et sanctificati hominis, sed potius cui ipse
unitus, id est, incarnatus est Dei et hominis, &c. Lan
franc, Lib. De Corp. et Sang. Domini, c. xvii. p. 242, 243.
NOTE G. p. 320.
See the Letter of Berenger to Lanfranc, p. 415, note:
in which it appears that Berenger maintained, that the
authorities of Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine, were on
his side. Augustine indeed uses expressions which miU-
tate with the notion of any actual change in the sacred
elements, as the following: Nonne semel immolatus est

524 APPENDIX.
Christus in seipso, et tamen in sacramento non solum per
omnes paschae solennitates, sed omni die populis immola-
tur : nee utique mentitur qui interrogatus eum respondent
immolari. Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem
earum rerum, quarurn sacramenta sunt, non haberent, om-
nino sacramenta non essent. Ex hac autem simUitudine
plerumque etiam ipsarum rerum nomina accipiunt. Sicut
ergo secundum quendam modum, sacramentum corporis
Christi, corpus Christi est, sacramentum sanguinis Christi,
sanguis Christi est, ita sacramentum fidei, fides estf. The
controversial tract of Lanfranc against Berenger, is no
favourable specimen of the polemical talents of Lanfranc ;
nor can we form from it any just notion of the sacra
mental doctrine of Berenger. He is very inferior to An
selm in strength and acuteness of reasoning, resembling
rather the unscientific controvertists of the IXth cen
tury; vehement like them too, in calling for authorities
on the point in dispute, and declaiming against the in
troduction of dialectical subtilties into theology, though
not scrupling to employ them in support of what he con
ceives the orthodox doctrine. It was a natural miscon
ception, if not a trick of controversy, to charge the oppo
nents of a doctrine of the corporal presence with reducing
the Sacrament to a merely commemorative sign. Nothing
can be concluded therefore against Berenger on this head,
from the antagonist representations of Lanfranc.
It is plain, from the following passages of Ratramn, that
he maintained a Real Presence in the Eucharist ; whilst
he directly opposes the doctrine of a substantial presence
in the consecrated elements.
At ille panis qui per sacerdotis ministerium Christi cor
pus conficitur, aliud exterius humanis sensibus ostendit, et
aliud interius fidelium mentibus clamat. Exterius quidem
panis, quod ante fuerat, forma praetenditur, color ostendi-
tur, sapor accipitur : est interius longe aliud multo pre-
tiosius, multoque exceUentius, intimatur ; quia cceleste,
f Augustinus Bonifacio, Ep. XXIII. Opera, torn. II. fol. 28.

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 525
quia divinum, id est, Christi corpus, ostenditur ; quod non
sensibus carnis, sed animi fidelis contuitu, vei aspicitur,
vei comeditur. Vinum quoque quod sacerdotali consecra-
tione Christi sanguinis efficitur sacramentum, aliud super-
ficie tenus ostendit, aliud interius ostendit. Quid enim
aliud in superficie quam substantia vini conspicitur.
Gusta, vinum sapit : odora, vinum redolet : inspice, vini
color intuetur. At interius si consideres, jam non liquor
vini, sed liquor sanguinis Christi, credentium mentibus, et
sapit dum gustatur, et agnoscitur dum conspicitur, et pro-
batur dum odoratur. Haec ita esse, dum nemo potest ab-
negare, claret quia panis ille vinumque figurate Christi
corpus et sanguis existit. Non enim secundum quod vide
tur, vei carnis species in illo pane cognoscitur, vei in illo
vino cruoris unda monstratur, cum tamen, post mysticam
consecrationem, nee panis jam dicitur nee vinum, sed
Christi corpus et sanguis. Bertram, or Ratram, on the
Body and Blood of the Lord, in Latin and English, c. 9,
10. 8vo. 1688.
Si ergo nihil est permutatum, non est aliud quam ante
fuit. Est autem aliud, quoniam panis corpus, et vinum
sanguis Christi, facta sunt. . . . Et si nihil permutationis
pertulerunt, nihil aliud existunt, quam quod prius fuere. .
. - Corporaliter namque nihil in eis cernitur esse permu
tatum. ... At quia confitentur et corpus et sanguinem Dei
esse, nee hoc esse potuisse nisi facta in melius commuta-
tione, neque ista commutatio corporaliter, sed spiritualiter,
facta sit; necesse est jam ut figurate facta esse dicatur;
quoniam sub velamento corporei panis, corporeique vini,
spirituale corpus Christi, spiritualisque sanguis existit. . . .
Hinc etiam et Sacramenta vocitantur, quia tegumento cor-
poralium rerum, virtus divina secretam salutem accipientium
fideliter dispensat  At nunc sanguis Christi quem cre-
dentes ebibunt, et corpus quod comedunt, aliud sunt in
specie, et aliud in significatione : aliud quod pascunt cor
pus esca corporea, et aliud quod saginant mentes aeternEe
vita- substantia  Exterius igitur quod apparet, non est

526 APPENDIX.
ipsa res, sed imago rei : mente vero quod sentitur et intel
ligitur, Veritas rei. Ibid. c. 13, 14, 15, 16. 48. 69. 77-
NOTE H. p. 320.
Ridley, in a conversation in the Tower recorded by Foxe,
thus speaks of Ratramn, or Bertram, as he calls him.
" Sir," said I, " it is certain that other before these have
" written of this matter, not by the way only and obiter,
" as doth for the most part all the old writers, but even
" ex professo, and their whole books intreat of it alone, as
" Bertram." " Bertram," said the secretary : " what man
" was he, and when was he, and how do ye know?" &c,
with many questions. " Sir," quoth I, " I have read his
" book : he proponeth the same which is now in contro-
" versy, and answereth so directly, that no man may doubt
" but that he affirmeth that the substance of bread re-
" maineth still in the Sacrament : and he wrote unto Ca-
" rolus Magnus." " Marry," quoth he, " mark ; for there
" is a matter." " He wrote," quoth he, " ad Henricum,
" and not ad Carolum : for no author makes any such
" mention of Bertramus." " Yes," quoth I, " Trithemius
" in Catalogo Illustrium Scriptorum speaketh of him.
" Trithemius was but of late time : but he speaketh,"
quoth I, " of them that were of antiquity. Here, after
" much talk of Bertram," &c. Foxe's Eccl. Hist. vol. II.
p. 1590.
Again in his Disputation at Oxford, Ridley, appealing
to the authorities of Cyprian, Augustine, HUary, and
others, as conformable to his view of the Eucharist, to shew
that he held it to be more than a mere sign, concludes
with that of Ratramn : " Finally with Bertram," he says,
" (which was the last of all these,) I confess that Christ's
" body is in the Sacrament in this respect, namely (as he
" writeth) because there is. in it the Spirit of Christ; that
" is, the power of the Word of God, which not only feed-
" eth the soul, but also cleanseth it. Out of these I sup-
" pose it may clearly appear unto all men, how far we

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 527
" are from that opinion, whereof some go about falsely to
" slander us to the world, saying, we teach that the godly
" and faithful should receive nothing else at the Lord's
" table, but a figure of the body of Christ." Ibid., p. 1609.
" I have also for the proof of that I have spoken, what-
" soever Bertram, a man learned, of sound and upright
" judgment, and ever counted a Catholic for these seven
" hundred years until this our age, hath written. His
" treatise, whosoever shall read and weigh, considering the
" time of the writer, his learning, godliness of life, the
" allegations of the ancient fathers, and his manifold and
" most grounded arguments, I cannot doubtless but much
" marvel, if he have any fear of God at all, how he can with
" good conscience speak against him in this matter of the
" Sacrament. This Bertram was the first that pulled me
" by the ear, and that first brought me from that common
" error of the Romish Church, and caused me to search
" more diligently and exactly, both the Scriptures and the
" writings of the old ecclesiastical fathers in this matter.
11 And this I protest before the face of God, who knoweth
" I lie not in the things I now speaks." Ibid. p. 1610.
NOTE E. p. 322.
Respondeo dicendum, quod (sicut dictum est) sacra
mentum operator ad gratiam causandum per modum in
strument!. Est autem duplex instrumentum ; unum qui
dem separatum, ut baculus ; aliud autem conjunctum, ut
manus. Per instrumentum autem conjunctum movetur
instrumentum separatum, sicut baculus per manum. Prin
cipalis autem causa efficiens gratiae est ipse Deus, ad quem
comparator humanitas Christi, sicut instrumentum con
junctum; sacramentum autem sicut instrumentum sepa
ratum. Et ideo oportet quod virtus salutifera a divinitate
Christi, per ejus humanitatem in ipsa Sacramenta derive-
tur. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Tertia Pars, qu. lxii. art. 5.
b It is strange that this treatise of Ratramn, which had such influence on
our Reformers, should not be more familiarly known. It ought to be re-
published.

528 APPENDIX.

NOTE F. p. 323.
Ad primum ergo dicendum, quod instrumentum inani-
matum non habet aliquam intentionem respectu effectus :
sed loco intentionis est motus quo movetur a principali
agente. Sed instrumentum animatum, sicut est minister,
non solum movetur, sed etiam quodammodo movet seip-
sum, in quantum sua voluntate movet membra ad operan-
dum. Et ideo requiritur ejus intentio, qua se subjiciat
principali agenti, ut scilicet intendat facere quod facit
Christus et Ecclesia.
Ad secundum dicendum, quod circa hoc est duplex
opinio. Quidam enim dicunt, quod requiritur mentalis
intentio in ministro, quae si desit, non perficitur sacra
mentum : sed hunc defectum in pueris, qui non habent
intentionem accedendi ad sacramentum, supplet Christus,
qui interius baptizat : in 'adultis autem qui intendunt sa
cramentum suscipere, supplet ilium defectum fides et de-
votio. Sed hoc satis posset dici quantum ad ultimum
effectum, qui est res et sacramentum ; scilicet quantum ad
characterem, non videtur quod per devotionem acceden-
tis posset suppleri : quia character nunquam imprimitur
nisi per sacramentum. Et ideo alii melius dicunt, quod
minister sacramenti agit in persona totius Ecclesiae, cujus
est minister. In verbis autem quae profert, exprimitur
intentio Ecclesiae, quae sufficit ad perfectionem sacramenti,
nisi contrarium exterius exprimatur, ex parte ministri, vei
recipientis sacramentum.
Ad tertium dicendum, quod licet ille qui aliud cogitat,
non habeat actualem intentionem, habet tamen habitua-
lem, quae sufficit ad perfectionem sacramenti : puta, cum
sacerdos accedens ad baptizandum, intendit facere circa
baptizandum quod facit Ecclesia. Unde si postea in ipso
exercitio actus, cogitatio ejus ad alia rapiatur, ex virtute
primae intentionis perficitur sacramentum : quam vis stu-
diose curare debeat sacramenti minister, ut etiam actualem
intentionem adhibeat. Sed hoc non est totaliter positum

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 529
in hominis potestate; quia praeter intentionem, cum homo
vult multum intendere, incipit alia cogitare, secundum
illud Psal. xxxix. Cor meum dereliquit me. Aquinas
Summa Theol. Tertia Pars, qu. lxiv. art. 8.
The word " Intention," as introduced into the doctrine
of the Sacraments, it should further be observed, is the
completion of the theory of causation in that subject.
We have the efficient cause in Christ himself communi
cating his virtue to the sacrament,— the material cause in
the emblems employed,— the formal cause in the words
uttered,— and lastly, the final cause determining the parti
cular effect, in the intention of the officiating minister.
The intention is strictly the ov IW/ca of Aristotle. Un
less this were assigned, no reason would be given for
the particular effect ; and it must be regarded there
fore as casual — must be placed among those effects which,
as not knowing their reason, we ascribe to chance. Sed
contra est, says Aquinas in the article quoted above, quod
ea quae sunt praeter intentionem, sunt casualia : quod non
est dicendum de operatione sacramentorum. Ergo sacra
menta requirunt intentionem ministri.
NOTE G. p. 323.
Illud tamen quod est sacramenti effectus, non impetra-
tur oratione Ecclesiae vei ministri, sed ex merito passionis
Christi, cujus virtus operatur in Sacramentis : ut dictum
est. Unde effectus sacramenti non datur melior per me-
liorem ministrum : aliquid tamen annexum impetrari po
test recipienti Sacramentum, per devotionem ministri. Nee
tamen minister illud operatur, sed impetrat operandum a
Deo. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Tertia Pars, qu.Lxiv. art. 1.
Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut dictum est, ministri
Ecclesiae instrumentaliter operantur in sacramentis, eo
quod quodammodo eadem est ratio ministri et instrumenti.
Sicut autem supra dictum est, instrumentum non agit se
cundum propriam formam aut virtutem, sed secundum
virtutem ejus a quo movetur. Et ideo accidit instrumento,
m m

530 APPENDIX.
in quantum est instrumentum, qualemcunque formam vei
virtutem habeat, praeter id quod exigitur ad rationem in
strument! : sicut quod corpus medici (quod est instrumen
tum animae habentis artem) sit sanum vei infirmum : et
sicut quod fistula per quam transit aqua, sit argentea vei
plumbea. Unde ministri Ecclesia? possunt sacramenta
conferre, etiam si sint mali. Ibid. art. 5.
Potest autem aliquis operari per instrumentum carens
vita, et a se separatum, quantum ad corporis unionem,
dummodo sit conjunctum per quandam motionem : aliter
enim operatur artifex per manum, et aliter per securim.
Sic igitur Christus operatur in sacramentis, et per bonos
tanquam per membra viventia, et per malos tanquam per
instrumenta carentia vita. Ibid.
Respondeo dicendum, quod, sicut supra dictum est, quia
minister in sacramentis instrumentaliter operatur, non agit
in virtute propria, sed in virtute Christi. Sicut autem per
tinet ad propriam virtutem hominis charitas, ita et fides :
unde sicut non requiritur ad perfectionem sacramenti, quod
minister sit in charitate, sed possunt etiam peccatores sa
cramenta conferre, ut supra dictum est, ita non requiritur
ad perfectionem sacramenti fides ejus ; sed infidelis potest
verum sacramentum praebere, dummodo caetera adsint, quae
sunt de necessitate sacramenti. Ibid. art. 9.
Respondeo dicendum, quod intentio ministri potest per-
verti dupliciter. Uno modo respectu ipsius sacramenti :
puta cum aliquis non intendit sacramentum conferre, sed
derisorie aliquid agere. Et talis perversitas tollit verita-
tem sacramenti, praecipue quando suam intentionem exte
rius manifestat. Alio modo potest perverti intentio mi
nistri quantum ad id quod sequitur sacramentum : puta, si
sacerdos intendat aliquam faeminam baptizare ut abutatur
ea ; vei si intendat conficere corpus Christi, ut eo ad ve-
neficia utatur. Et quia prius non dependet a posteriori,
inde est, quod talis intentionis perversitas veritatem sacra
menti non toUit, sed ipse minister ex tali intentione gra-
viter peccat. Ibid. art. 10.

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 531
NOTE H. p. 325.
Regeneratio spiritualis, quae fit per baptismum, est quo-
dammodo similis nativitati carnali, quantum ad hoc, quod
sicut pueri in maternis uteris constituti, non per seipsos
nutrimentum accipiunt, sed ex nutrimento matris susten-
tantur: ita etiam pueri nondum habentes usum rationis,
quasi in utero matris Ecclesiae constituti, non per seipsos,
sed per actum Ecclesiae salutem suscipiunt. . . . Sicut Au
gustinus scribens Bonifacio dicit, in Ecclesia Salvatoris
parvuli per alios credunt, sicut ex aliis quae in baptismo
remittuntur peccata traxerunt. Nee impeditur eorum sa-
lus, si parentes sint infideles : quia, sicut Augustinus di
cit, eidem Bonifacio scribens, offeruntur parvuli ad perci-
piendam spiritualem gratiam, non tam ab eis, quorum
gestantur manibus (quamvis et ab ipsis si et ipsi boni fide-
les sunt) quam ab universa societate sanctorum atque fide-
lium, &c. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Tertia Pars, qu. lxviii.
art. 9. NOTE I. p. 326.
Cyprianus autem nullo modo sacramentum conferre hae-
reticos posse credebat : sed in hoc ejus sententia non tene-
tur. Unde Augustinus dicit : Martyrem Cyprianum, qui
apud haereticos, vei schismaticos, datum baptisma nolebat
cognoscere, tanta merita usque ad triumphum martyrii
secuta sunt, ut charitatis qua excellebat luce, obumbratio
ilia figuraretur, et si quid purgandum erat, passionis falce
tolleretur. Aquinas, Summa Theol. Tertia Pars, qu. lxv.
art. 9.
Et nunc quoque cum in unum convenissemus, tam pro-
vincise Africae quam Numidiae Episcopi numero septuaginta
et unus, hoc idem denuo sententia nostra firmavimus, sta-
tuentes unum baptisma esse quod sit in Ecclesia Catholica
constitutum, ac per hoc non rebaptizari, sed baptizari a
nobis. Quicunque ergo ab adultera et profana aqua veni-
unt abluendi sunt et sanctificandi salutaris aquae veritate.
. Apud nos autem non nova aut repentina res est, ut
m m 2

532 APPENDIX.
baptizandos censeamus eos qui ab haereticis ad Ecclesiam
veniunt, &c. Cyprianus Jubiano, Ep. LXXIII. Opera,
p. 198.
Augustine labours to remove the unfavourable impres
sion, that the authority of so eminent a person as Cyprian,
a martyr of the Church, is against his own doctrine; some
times by insinuating a doubt as to the genuineness of his
epistles ; sometimes admitting the fact of Cyprian's dis
sent, and artfully palliating it as a pardonable error in so
great a saint. NOTE I. p. 331.
" It (the word Species) is a term wherewith the lawyers
" are well acquainted, and signifieth all that the ancient
" Latin writers include in the notion of fruges, wine, oil,
" corn, pulse, &c. And the glossary at the end of the
" Theodosian Code, published by Gothofred, extends its
" signification to all necessaries of life, tributes, public
" stores of provisions, and not only for the belly, but the
" back also ; with clothes, and household stuff, jewels, as
" also materials for building, timber and iron, passing by
" that name in both the Theodosian and Justinian Codes,
" in the writers of the Imperial History, Vegetius, Cas-
" siodorus, &c. In the Theodosian Code there are many
" laws concerning the public Species S, requiring them to
" be brought in kind, and not a composition for them in
" money, particularly that the Species of Wine h be paid
" in kind. There are laws to compel aU farmers to furnish
" their proportions of all Species, to oblige men and ships
" and waggons for the carriage of them to Rome and
" other places, laws also directing the mixing the sweet
" and fresh with the Species decayed and corrupted by
" long lying in public granaries and cellars. Cassiodorus
" in his Epistles, issues out orders for the providing of the

g Tributa in ipsis Speciebus inferri. Non sunt pretia specierum, sed ipsa;
qua; postulantur Species inferendse. Codex Theodos. lib. XI. tit. 2. leg. 4.
h Speciem Vini. Ibid. Leg. II.

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 533
" Species of bacon, wheat, cheese, wine, and iron '. And
" the law-notion of the term, I conceive, took its rise from
" the great variety of necessaries of several sorts and
" kinds that are requisite for the subsistence of armies or
" great cities, or else from the variety of such provisions
" paid in the nature of rents or tribute."
" Now as the word Sacrament is generally acknow-
" ledged to be a term borrowed from the Roman military
" laws, so probably was the word Species ; and as corn
" and wine, and other stores for the public use, either of
" the prince, the city, or army, go by that name, espe-
" cially what came in by way of pension or tribute, so it
" is not unUkely that the oblations of the faithful, brought
" to the altar as a tribute to God for the use of his holy
" table, consisting of bread and wine, the two main sup-
" ports of life, might in allusion thereunto be called Spe-
" cies by Ecclesiastic writers." Ratramn on the Body and
Blood of the Lord, Appendix by the Editor, p. 433 — 435 .
London, 1688. NOTE J. p. 333.
Leotheric, Archbishop of Sens, was a disciple at Rheims,
of the celebrated Gerbert, whose name stands almost alone
in the annals of philosophy in the Xth century, and whose
merits, under the patronage of the Emperor Otho III. af
terwards exalted him to the papal throne. Leotheric died
in 1032. His doubts, de veritate corporis et sanguinis
Domini, appear to have attracted notice about 1004. See
Du Boullay, Hist. Acad. Paris, torn. I. pp. 354, 402. He
submitted however to correction, and we hear nothing
more of any agitation of the subject from him.
Berenger appears to have been supported by numerous
partisans. Lanfranc complains of his popularity as ob-
i Speciem laridi, lib. II. Ep. XII. Tritici speciem, lib. III. Ep. XLI.
Vini, tritici, pauici speciem, lib. XII. Ep. XXVI. Vini, olei, vei tritici
species, lib. XII. Ep. XXIII. Casei et vini Palmatiani species, lib. XII.
Ep XII. De ferro, lib. III. Ep. XXV. Convenit itaque banc speciem dili
gent! indagatione rimari.
m m 3

534 APPENDIX.
tained by improper means. Hoc garriunt, he says, disci-
puli atque sequaces tui, subversores quidem aliorum, et
ipsi auro et argento, caeteraque pecunia tua, a te subversi,
errantes, et alios in errorem mittentes. Lanfranc. De
Corp. et Sang. Dom. c. 20. Oper. p. 247-
NOTE K. p. 335.
Respondeo dicendum, quod sacramenta (sicut dictum
est) adhibentur ad hominum sanctificationem ; sicut quae
dam signa. Tripliciter ergo considerari possunt : et quo-
libet modo congruit eis quod verba rebus sensibilibus ad-
jungantur. Primo enim possunt considerari ex parte causae
sanctificantis, quae est verbum incarnatum : cui sacramen
tum quodammodo conformatur, in hoc quod rei sensibili
verbum adhibetur, sicut, in mysterio Incarnationis, carni
sensibili est verbum Dei unitum, &c. Aquinas, Summa
Theol. Tertia Pars, qu. lx. art. 5.
Sed contra est, quod Ambrosius dicit in libro de sacra
mentis. Si tanta est vis in sermone Domini Jesu, ut in-
ciperent esse quae non erant, quanto magis operatorius est,
ut sint quae erant, et in aliud commutentur ? Et sic quod
erat panis ante consecrationem, jam corpus Christi est post
consecrationem : quia sermo Christi in aliud creaturam
mutat. Respondeo dicendum, quod quidam dixerunt nullam vir
tutem creatam esse, nee in praedictis verbis ad transub-
stantiationem faciendam ; nee etiam in aliis sacramento-
rum formis, vei etiam in ipsis sacramentis, ad inducendos
sacramentorum effectus. Quod (sicut supra habitum est)
et dictis sanctorum repugnat, et derogat dignitati sacra
mentorum novae legis. Unde cum hoc sacramentum sit
prae caeteris dignius, sicut supra dictum est, consequens est,
quod in verbis formalibus hujus sacramenti sit quaedam
virtus creata, ad conversionem hujus sacramenti facien
dam ; instrumentalis tamen, sicut et in aliis sacramentis,
sicut supra dictum est. Cum enim haec verba ex persona
Christi proferantur ex ejus mandate, consequuntur virtu-

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 535
tem instrumentalem a Christo ; sicut et caetera ejus facta
vei dicta habent instrumentaliter salutiferam virtutem, ut
supra dictum est. Ibid. qu. lxxviii. art. 4.
Et ideo aliter dicendum est, quod sicut praedictum est,
haec locutio habet virtutem factivam conversionis panis in
corpus Christi : et ideo comparator ad alias locutiones,
quae habent solum vim significativam, et non factivam,
sicut comparator conceptio intellectus practici, quae est
factiva rei, conceptiom intellectus nostri speculativi, quae
est accepta a rebus : nam voces sunt signa intellectuum,
secundum Philosophum. Et ideo sicut conceptio in
tellectus practici non praesupponit rem conceptam, sed
facit earn; ita Veritas hujus locutionis non praesupponit
rem significatam, sed facit earn ; sic enim se habet ver
bum Dei ad res factas per verbum. Ibid. art. 5.
We may see from this last passage particularly the con
nexion of Transubstantiation with the scholastic theory of
the Trinity. The Word of God is the Divine conception
expressed, and by its utterance, carrying creative efficacy :
so also the words of consecration are the divine conception
going forth actively, and bringing down Christ with trans
forming power to the creatures of bread and wine.
It followed from this doctrine, that all who participate
of the consecrated elements, whatever may be their dispo
sition of mind, participate of Christ. Aquinas accordingly
is forced to admit, that even if the consecrated host should
be eaten by mice or dogs, the substance of Christ still does
not cease to be under the species, so long as the species
remaink. To obviate this inconvenience, a distinction was
drawn between receiving the body of Christ in essence, or
merely sacramentally, and receiving it spiritually, or with
salutary efficacy. Thus Lanfranc says : Est quidem etiam
peccatoribus, et indigne sumentibus, vera Christi caro, ve-
rusque sanguis, sed essentia, non salubri efficientia1.
The same doctrine is expressed under the technical
i* Summa Theol. Tertia Pars, qu. lxxx. art. .3.
1 De Corp. et Sang. Dom. v. 20. Oper. p. 248.
M m 4

536 APPENDIX.
terms opus operatum and opus operands : the former be
ing the spiritual power or grace attached to the visible
sign; the latter, the part which, either the minister, or the
recipient acts, and on which the application of the grace,
the opus operatum, depends. The materialism involved in
the speculation should not pass unnoticed. The effect of
the, sacrament takes place, unless the recipient opposes an
obstacle [obicem] ; in which case the sacred instrument,
from the want of a proper matter to act on, is obstructed
in its operation. NOTE K. p. 339.
Aquinas labours hard to reconcile these miraculous ap
pearances with the doctrine of Transubstantiation. He
has a question on the point ; " Whether when in this sa-
" crament there appears miraculously flesh, or a child, the
" body of Christ be truly there." The appearance, he says,
may sometimes be explained by the change taking place
in the eye of the individual who beholds it, whilst by others
or by the same person at another time, only the species of
bread is seen. And yet there is no deception, he adds ;
because the effect is divinely produced, in order to the re
presentation of the truth : quoting Augustine to the pur
port that, "when a fiction refers to some signification, it is
" not a falsehood, but a figure of the truth." But he ad
mits that there are instances also of the miraculous change
being external, in the sacrament itself: and rejecting the
speculation which explained it as an appearance of Christ
under the proper species, on account of other difficulties
involved in such an account of the phenomenon, he con
cludes that the change takes place in some of the acci
dents ; in the colour, for instance, or figure, of the con
secrated bread, whilst the dimensions continue the same.
Neither is there deception, he contends, in this case ; be
cause the miraculous apparition is for the purpose of shew
ing, that the body and blood of Christ are truly under the
sacrament"1. 111 Summa Theol. Tertia Pars, qu. lxxvi. art. 8.

NOTES TO LECTURE VII. 537
NOTE L. p. 341.
The philosophy of Descartes naturally drew the atten
tion of theologians to the scholastic theory of Transub
stantiation, from his division of substance into the two
great classes of thinking and extended substances. It
was evident that the supposed sole existence of the
accidents of bread and wine after consecration, could no
longer be maintained, if such a philosophy were admitted.
If the dimensions of the sacred elements still remained, as
the scholastics taught ; then, according to Descartes, the
substance of bread and wine would be there. Descartes
accordingly being attacked on this ground, was driven into
explanations, at any rate, no less subtile than those of the
Schools, to defend the orthodoxy of his philosophy. He
urged, that the superficies of the bread and wine presented
to the senses, were not the proper substances of them ;
but that their substances were, the superficial boundaries
between the several internal particles of which they were
composed, and other bodies occupying their interstices.
The change therefore might take place in these internal
boundaries, and consequently a different substance be
produced ; whUst the external visible superficies remain
ed the same. Various other refinements were devised
by his foUowers, to maintain their consistency with the
council of Trent. A mass of angry controversy was ex
cited on the subject. The character of the whole dispute
illustrates the vital importance of the scholastic philosophy
to the peculiar doctrines of the Church of Rome. See
Brucker. Hist. Crit. Philos. torn. IV. p. 584.
NOTE M. p. 343.
Everv one knows what volumes of casuistry the doc
trines of Penance, Auricular Confession, Absolution, have
given occasion to. We have only to look into the forms
of self-examination contained in some modern devo
tional works by writers of the Church of Rome, to see the

538 APPENDIX.
perplexities thrown into the way of the conscientious and
sensitive mind, by this minute philosophy of divine things;
What difficulties indeed must have been produced in con
nexion with the sacramental doctrine of Intention, by such
a case as that mentioned in the Life of Esprit Fleshier, the
French bishop ; of a vicar of Paris, who confessed on his
death-bed, that he had for many years administered the
sacramental rites under a positive secret wUl of being in
sport ?

LECTURE VIII.
NOTE A. p. 352.
JL REFER to the following passages, to shew the difficulty
which the distinction between what is necessary and what
is not necessary to be believed, in order to salvation, has
occasioned. " The Scriptures and the Creed are not two different
" rules of faith, but one and the same rule, dilated in the
" Scripture and contracted in the Creed ; the end of the
" Creed being to contain all fundamental points of faith,
" or a summary of all things necessary to salvation, to be
" believed necessitate medii; but in what particular writ-
" ings all these fundamental points are contained, is no
" particular fundamental article itself, nor contained in the
" Creed, nor could be contained in it ; since it is apparent
" out of the Scripture itself, that the Creed was made and
" deposited with the Church as a rule of Faith, before the
" canon of the New Testament was fully perfected."
Schism Guarded, Bramhall's Works, p. 402.
" And although the distinction be commonly received,
" of necessity of the means, and of the command, as im-
" porting a different kind of necessity ; yet in the sense I
" here take necessity in, the members of that division do
" to me seem coincident t for I cannot see any reason to

NOTES TO LECTURE VIII. 539
" believe that God should make the belief of any thing
" necessary, by an absolute command, but what hath an
" immediate tendency by way of means, for the attain -
" ment of this end, (eternal welfare and happiness of
" mankind :) for otherwise, that which is called the neces-
" sity of precept falls under the former degree of neces-
" sity, viz. that which is to be believed on the general ac-
" count of Divine Revelation  Whatever therefore
" is necessary to a spiritual life, is necessary absolutely to
" salvation, and no more ; but what, and how much that
" is, must be gathered by every one as to himself from
" Scripture, but it is impossible to be defined by others as
" to all persons. But in all, Faith towards God and in
" our Lord Jesus Christ, and repentance from dead works,
" are absolutely and indispensably necessary to salvation,
" which imply in them both an universal readiness of
" mind to believe and obey God in all things  But
" this controversy never need break Christian Societies in
" that sense, but the great difficulty lies in the other part
" of it, which is most commonly strangely confounded
" with the former, viz. What things are necessary to be
" owned, in order to Church Societies or Ecclesiastical
" Communion ? . . . . Only I add here, when I speak of
" the necessary conditions of ecclesiastical communion, I
" speak of such things which must be owned as necessary
" articles of Faith, not of any other agreements for the
" Church's peace. I deny not, therefore, but that in case
" of great divisions in the Christian world, and any na-
" tional Church's reforming itself, that Church may de-
" clare its sense of those abuses in articles of religion, and
" require of men a subscription to them : but then we are
" to consider, that there is a great deal of difference between
" the owning some propositions in order to peace, and the
" believing of them as necessary articles of faith. And this
" is clearly the state of the difference between the Church
« of Rome and the Church of England  So the late
" learned Lord Primate of Ireland often expresseth the

540 APPENDIX.
" sense of the Church of England as to her XXXIX Ar-
" tides. . . . By which we see, what a vast difference there
" is between those things which are required by the
" Church of England in order to peace, and those which
" are imposed by the Church of Rome as part of that
" Faith, extra quam non est salus, without belief of which
" there is no salvation." Stilling fleet, vol. IV. Rational
Account, &c. 1709. p. 51 — 54.
NOTE B. p. 363.
An excellent illustration of the delusive force of abstract
terms may be seen in Burke's Letters on a Regicide Peace.
" That hostile power, to the period of the fourth week in
" that month, has been ever called and considered as an
" usurpation. In that week, for the first time, it changed
" its name of an usurped power, and took the simple name
" of France. . . . This shifting of persons could not be done
" without the hocus-pocus of abstraction. . . . Blessings
" on his soul that first invented sleep, said Sancho Pancha
" the wise ! AU those blessings, and ten thousand times
" more, on him who found out abstraction, personification,
" and impersonals. In certain cases, they are the first of
" all soporifics. Terribly alarmed we should be, if things
" were proposed to us in the concrete, &c. . . . But plain
" truth would here be shocking and absurd ; therefore
" comes in abstraction and personification. ' Make your
" ' peace with France.' That word France sounds quite
" as well as any other ; and it conveys no idea but that of
" a very pleasant country, and very hospitable inhabitants.
" Nothing absurd and shocking in amity and good corre-
" spondence with France, &c." Burke's Works, vol. IX.
p. 10.
Many an ingenious theological theory has been raised
in like manner on the mere sense of an abstract term ;
for instance, the doctrine of Imputation, which could have
no existence but for the analytical power of language.

NOTES TO LECTURE VIII. 54 j
NOTE C. p. 369.
Multa enim latebant in scripturis, et cum praecisi essent
haeretici, quaestionibus agitaverunt ecclesiam Dei. Aperta
sunt quae latebant, et intellecta est voluntas Dei. . . . Ergo
multi qui optime poterant scripturas dignoscere et pertrac-
tare, latebant in populo Dei, nee asserebant solutionem
quaestionum difficilium, cum calumniator nullus instaret.
Numquid enim perfecte de Trinitate tractatum est, ante
quam oblatrarent Ariani ? Numquid perfecte de pcenitentia
tractatum est, antequam obsisterent Novatiani. Sic non
perfecte de baptismate tractatum est, antequam contradi-
cerent foras positi rebaptizatores : nee de ipsa imitate
Christi enucleate dicta erant quae dicta sunt, nisi postea-
quam separatio ilia urgere coepit fratres infirmos ; ut jam
illi, qui noverant haec tractare atque dissolvere, ne perirent
infirmi, sollicitati quaestionibus impiorum, sermonibus et
disputationibus suis, obscura legis in publicum deducerent.
Augustin. in Psalm. 54.
NOTE D. p. 370.
Even Vincent of Lerins, the very advocate of the un-
changeableness of church-doctrines, is obliged to allow the
gradual accumulation of dogmas. It is easy to say, as he
does, that these successive decisions are only explanations
of the same truths originally propounded. So they may
be in theory, and such may be the historical origin of
them. But what are they in fact ? As successively en
forced by the authority of the Church, with the same stress,
and on the same footing of divine truth, as the original
points which they are intended to explain, they become in
reality new truths of religion. His argument proceeds on
a false analogy, presupposed between personal identity and
generic unity or sameness. He supposes it possible for
doctrines to go on expanding and growing, whilst the same
being continues to subsist in them, as the human being
continues the same in the progress from infancy to matu-

542 APPENDIX.
rity. Now there is no similarity between the two cases.
The sameness of the human being at different periods of
life, is strictly a numerical unity : the one being continues
under successive modifications. But where is the evi
dence of the one truth subsisting a priori, and gradually
adding to itself? The variation of doctrines is what is
evident here; and the only unity that can be affirmed, is a
logical one, — one of consonance or agreement. In one case
we should say, a real unity consists with great variations ;
in the other case, that great variations are not inconsistent
with a general unity. But even were the analogy admitted,
it would be against his purpose ; for surely it would not de
clare much in favour of the unity of doctrine, to admit as
great a change in it as we see in the successive states of
human life. It may be seen from the following passage
how he proposes the point.
Sed forsitan dicit aliquis : Nullus ne ergo in ecclesia
Christi profectus habebitur religionis ? Habeatur plane et
maximus. Nam quis est ille tam invidus hominibus, tam
exosus Deo, qui istud prohibere conetur? Sed ita tamen
ut vere profectus sit ille fidei, non permutatio. Siquidem
ad profectum pertinet, ut in seipsam unaquaeque res am-
plificetur ; ad permutationem vero, ut aliquid ex alio in
aliud transvertatur. Crescat igitur oportet, et multum
vehementerque proficiat, tam singulorum quam omnium,
tam unius hominis, quam totius ecclesiae, aetatum ac secu-
lorum, gradibus, intelligentia, scientia, sapientia ; sed in
suo duntaxat genere, in eodem scilicet dogmate, eodem
sensu, eademque sententia. Imitetur animarum religio
rationem corporum : quae licet annorum processu numeros
suos evolvant et explicent, eadem tamen quae erant per
manent. Multum interest inter pueritiae florem et senec-
tutis maturitatem ; sed iidem tamen ipsi fiunt senes, qui
adolescentes ; ut quamvis unius ejusdemque hominis sta
tus habitusque mutetur, una tamen nihilominus eademque
natura, una eademque persona sit, &c. Commonitorium,
p. 350.

NOTES TO LECTURE VIII. 543
Evidently his notion is drawn from the ancient physical
philosophy of Transmutation; which, by the aid of Realism,
he is applying to a logical subject, and arguing from it, a
sameness under all the various developments which the
form of doctrine may assume.
NOTE E. p. 370.
It is curious to observe here the manner in which free
dom was secured, by the very advocate of Church-autho
rity, for any new speculations on the doctrines already
established. His own conclusions might extravagate ever
so widely from the given dogma, the point of outset ;
but they were not therefore to be reprobated as heretical,
since the Church had not pronounced against the conclu
sion. The same principle is ingeniously stated by Eri
gena, in the form of a just theory of Authority. The pas
sage indeed is interesting in respect to the whole subject
of these Lectures; as it throws light on the origin of Scho
lasticism, and confirms what has been already pointed out
respecting its fundamental character.
D. Admodum urges me talia rationabiliter fieri ; sed auc
toritate sanctorum patrum aliquod munimen ad hoc robo-
randa velim inseras. M. Non ignoras, ut opinor, majoris
dignitatis esse, quod prius est natura, quam quod prius est
tempore. D. Hoc p-ene omnibus notum est. M. Ratio
nem priorem esse natura, auctoritatem vero tempore, didi-
cimus. Quamvis enim natura simul cum tempore creata
sit ; non tamen ab initio temporis atque naturae ccepit esse
auctoritas. Ratio vero cum natura ac tempore ex rerum
principio orta est. D. Et hoc ipsa ratio edocet. Aucto
ritas siquidem ex vera ratione processit, ratio vero nequa-
quam ex auctoritate. Omnis autem auctoritas quae vera
ratione non approbatur, infirma videtur esse. Vera autem
ratio, quum virtutibus suis rata atque immutabilis muni-
tur, nullius auctoritatis adstipulatione roborari indiget.
Nil enim aliud videtur mihi esse vera auctoritas, nisi ra-
*> Page 485—488.

544 APPENDIX.
tionis virtute cooperta Veritas, et a sacris patribus ad pos-
teritatis utilitatem Uteris commendata. Sed forte tibi aliter
videtur. M. NuUo modo. Ideoque prius ratione utendum
est in his quae nunc instant, ac deinde auctoritate. Joan.
Scot. Erigen. De Div. Nat. I. c. 70, 71. p. 39.
NOTE D. p. 376.
Non peregrina loquor, neque ignorata scribo. Audivi
ac vidi vitia praesentium, non laicorum, sed episcoporum.
Nam absque episcopo Eleusio, et paucis cum eo, ex majori
parte, Asianae decern provinciae, intra quas consisto, vere
Deum nesciunt. Atque utinam penitus nescirent; cum
procliviori enim venia ignorarent quam obtrectarent. Hi
lar. De Synod, p. 498.
Item, quando Arrianorum venenum, non jam portiun-
culam quandam, sed paene orbem totum contaminaverat,
adeo ut prope cunctis Latini sermonis episcopis, partim
vi, partim fraude, deceptis, caligo quaedam mentibus offun-
deretur, quidnam potissimum in tanta rerum confusione
sequendum foret, &c. Vincent. Lirinens. Commonit. p. 319.
ed. Baluz. NOTE E. p. 376.
The extent of the popularity of Pelagianism at its rise,
appears from what has been already observed in regard to
this point". In the XI Vth century Bradwardine, surnamed
the Profound Doctor, felt himself roused to vindicate " the
" cause of God" by the Pelagianism of the times, com
plaining that the whole world was gone after Pelagius.
NOTE F. p. 379.
The Apostles' Creed states nothing but facts. The
transition is immense from this to the scholastic specula
tions involved in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. Both
these last indeed are logical definitions of the high subject
of which they treat, differing from each other only in point
of comprehensiveness and exactness. A definition in spe-
° P. 485—488.

NOTES TO LECTURE VIII. 545
culative theology would necessarily be imperfect, so long
as disputation was actively proceeding on the matter de
fined. New ideas would be continually introduced into
the discussion, and a term or a description that seemed
before sufficiently exclusive of notions foreign to the
subject, would require to be further fenced round with
new limitations. Thus the term Con substantial, which at
one time was heterodox, when the tendency was to " con-
" found the persons" of the Trinity, would become neces
sary, and consequently orthodox, when the tendency was
the other way, " to divide the substance." It was a re
quisite limitation in the Nicene Creed, of the assertion
previously made concerning Christ's derivation from the
Father ; since that assertion taken in itself might include
also the Gnostic and Arian notions. The addition of the
term in this place, applied the restriction just where
it was wanted, and brought the terms of the proposed
definition more immediately on the point to be defined.
Thus Hilary, in explaining the term, recommends the cau
tious mode of applying it ; by not setting out, that is, with
declaring one substance, but adding it, after having first
stated the relations of the Father and the Son °.
The more we examine into the Trinitarian Contro
versies, the more will this form of definition evidence itself
to our view in these two Creeds. We shaU find the idea
of the Divine Being gradually expanded in each; whilst at
the same time a more restricted and exclusive set of cha
racteristics are successively brought before us ; each of
which has been ground won from the heretic by hard-
fought debate. The copious particularity of the Athana-
sian Creed still more illustrates the logical nature of the
formularies. There we have the terms of a definition
strongly put in contrast with each other, so that each in
succession may limit that which precedes. Does a pre
ceding term taken in itself include in its meaning any of the
theories which the Church has rejected : — immediately a
" De Synodis, Oper. p. 501.
n n

546 APPENDIX.
term is subjoined, which corrects the statement by nar
rowing the extent of the former : as is evident in the in
stance " neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but pro-
" ceeding?" Where the terms involve numerical state
ments, an air of contradiction is given to this series of
limitations of which the Creed wiU be found to be made
¦*%
up. But this arises, as I have before stated, from the
positive notions which we attach to the numbers, instead
of regarding them as negative; and generally indeed from
not taking them in their acquired controversial sense.
The paradoxical mode, in which the several terms are
strung together, was probably further designed by the
composer of the Creed, to combine with the logical expo
sition a rhetorical effect, — to render the formulary more
energetic and more easy to be remembered, or perhaps
more adapted to the alternations of choral chaunting, and
imitative of the repetitions of Hebrew poetry. The reason
indeed of those clauses, in which the contradiction appears
most explicit, is the same as that of the others. Definition
is what the author is engaged in. Thus, having affirmed
the essential attributes of omnipotence, immensity, and
eternity of each of the Persons, he is careful afterwards
to exclude the notion of distinctness, from that of distri
bution, which his first declaration had asserted.
NOTE G. p. 386.
It is enough to refer to the reception which the Carte
sian philosophy experienced at Rome, where a decree was
passed immediately on its appearance, that no one of any
degree or condition should presume either to print, or read,
or keep in his possession, any of the works of Descartes; —
or to the clamour raised against the Copernican theory of
the universe, and the various shifts to which mathema
ticians were consequently driven, to evade the threats of
the Vatican ; — or lastly, to the well-known persecutions
of Galileo. See Brucker, Hist. Crit. Phil. torn. V. p. 284.
628. 637.

NOTES TO LEC^RE VIII. 547

NOTE H. p. 387.
The manner in which the words of texts of Scripture
were used in sermons, is illustrated in the following ac
count given by Foxe, in his life of Latimer.
" Amongst these, there was an Augustine Friar, who
" took occasion, upon certain sermons that Master Lati-
" mer made about Christmas 1529, as well in the Church
" of St. Edward, as also in St. Augustine's, within the
" University in Cambridge, to inveigh against him ; for
" that Master Latimer in the said sermons (alluding to
" the common usage of the season) gave the people cer-
" tain cards out of the fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of
" St. Matthew, whereupon they might not only then, but
" always else occupy their time. . . . This was upon the
" Sunday before the Christmas-day; on which day, coming
" to the church, and causing the bell to be tolled to a
" sermon, he entered into the pulpit, taking for his text
" the words of the Gospel aforesaid read in the church
" that day, Tu quis es ? in delivering the which cards (as
" is aforesaid) he made the heart to be triumph ; exhort-
" ing and inviting all men thereby to serve the Lord with
" inward heart and true affection, and not with outward
" ceremonies : adding moreover to the praise of that tri-
" umph, that though it were never so small, yet it would
" make by the best court card in the bunch, yea though
" it were the king of clubs, &c, meaning thereby, how the
" Lord would be worshipped and served in simplicity of
" the heart and verity, &c. It would ask a long discourse
" to declare, what a stir there was in Cambridge upon this
" preaching of Master Latimer. . . . First came out the
" prior of the Black Friars, called Bucknham, otherwise
" surnamed Domine Labia ; who, thinking to make a
" great hand against Master Latimer, about the same
" time of Christmas, when Master Latimer brought forth
" his cards, to deface belike the doings of the other,

548 APPENDIX.
" brought out his Christmas dice, casting them t*o his
" audience cinque and quater : meaning by the cinque five
" places in the New Testament, and the four Doctors by
" the quater : by which his cinque quater he would prove
" that it was not expedient the Scriptures to be in English,"
&c. Foxe's Eccl. Hist. vol. II. p. 1903.

THE END.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 01311 6463