Full text of "Outlines of the history of dogma"

See other formats

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at|http: //books .google .com/I

.* •

•;*

^ ^I.M^M*

l55JI

-t ^

'tg^

._»

OUTLINES

OF THE

HISTORY OF DOGMA

Db. ADOLF HARNACK

ProfesfOT of Church History in the Univertity of Berlin

TRANSLATED BT

EDWIN KNOX MITCHELL, M.A.

Professor of Orceco-Romnn and Ecutem Church History in
Hartford Theological Seminary

- " » } m

I, > ' 4 I

> 1 » u «

NEW YORK

FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY

LONDON AND TORONTO
1893 ^
Printed in the United States

^^y

"/^/^O-

COPTKIOBT, 1808, BT TBB
FUNK & WAGNALUS COMPAmr

[fiegUtered at Stationen^ EaU, London, Eng.]

: V

• ••

• •

••• •

• -• •

• •• •

••••
•• •

• •

• • • •

• • •

• •

• • «• • •

. • ••

• • - •

• • • • I

PREFACE.

THE English translation of my "Grundriss
der Dogmengeschichte" has been made,
in accordance with my expressed wish, by my
former pupil and esteemed friend, Mr. Edwin
Knox Mitchell. It is my pleasant duty to ex-
press to him here my heartiest thanks.

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

Adolf Harnace.

WnJCSBSDORF NEAR BSBUN,

March 17th, 1802«

I**

Si I.

Vllr

--■<

^T.

>»i

Stii

CONTENTS.

Prologomeiia to the Discipline 1

I. Idea and Aim of the Higtoiy of Dogma 1

n. Narrative of the History of Dogma ... 8

Presuppositians of the History of Dogma .... 10

m. Introductory 10

IV. TheQospel of Jesus Christ according to His Own

Testimony Vf^

V. The General Proclamation concerning Jesus
Christ in the First Generation of His Adherents 18

VI. The Current Exposition of the Old Testament and
the Jewish Future Hope, in their Bearing on the
Earliest Formulation of the Christian Message . 28
Vn. The Religious Conceptions and the Religious
Philosophy of the Hellenistic Jews in their Bear-
ing on the Transformation of the Gospel Message . 28
Vni. The Religious Disposition of the Greeks and Ro-
mans in the First Two Centuries and the Contem-
porary GrsBco-Roman Philosophy of Religion . . 82

PAET I.

THE RISE OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOGMA.

Book I.

THB PREPARATION.

Chapter I.— Historical Survey 89

Chapter U. — Ground Common to Christians and Attitude

Taken toward Judaism 40

Chapter HI.— The Common Faith and the Beginnings of
Self -Recognition in that Gentile Christianity
nUch was to Derelop into Catholicism . 48

• » •

Vlll CONTENTS.

PAOI

Chapter IV. — Attempt of the Gnostics to Construct an
Apostolic Doctrine of Faith and to Produce a
Christian Theology ; or, the Acute Secularization
of Christianity 58

Chapter V. — Marcion's Attempt to Set Aside the Old Tes-
tament as the Foundation of the Grospel, to Purify
Tradition, and to Reform Christianity on the
Basis of the Pauline (Gospel 70

Chapter VI. — Supplement : The Christianity of the Jewish

Christians 74

Book n.

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

Chapter L— Historical Survey 81

Section L EstabUahrnent of Christianity 08 a Church and |

its Oradual Secularization, n

Chapter II.— The Setting Forth of the Apostolic Rules \

(Norms) for Ecclesiastical Christianity. The
Catholic Church 84

A. The Recasting of the Baptismal Confession into

the Apostolic Rule of Faith 85

B. The Recognition of a Selection of Well-known

Scriptures as Virtually Belonging to the Old
Testament; i. e., as a Compilation of Apostolic |

Scriptures 88

C. The Transformation of the Episcopal Office in the

Church into the Apostolic Office. History of the
Transformation of the Idea of the Church 95

Chapter HE. — Continuation: The Old Christianity and

the New Church 100

Section IL Establishment of Christianity as Doctrine and

its Oradual Secularization.

Chapter IV.— Ecclesiastical Christianity and Philosophy'.

The Apologists 117

Chapter V. — Beginnings of an Ecclesiastico-Theological
Exposition and Revision of the Rule of Faith in
Opposition to Gnosticism on the Presupposition of
the New Testament and the Christian Philosophy
of the Apologists : IrensBus, Tertullian, Hippoly-
tus, Cyprian, Novatian 180

CONTENTS. ix

PAGE

Chapter YI. — ^Tnuosfomiation of Eccleeiastical Tradition
into a PhiloBophy of Religion, or the Origin of
Scientific Ecclesiastical Theology and Dogmatics :
Clement and Origen 149

Chapter Vn.— Decisive Result of Theological Speculation
within the Realm of the Rule of Faith, or the Defin-
ing of the Ecclesiastical Doctrinal Norm through
the Acceptance of the Logos-Chxistology . 166

PAET n.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOGMA.

Book I.

HIBrOBT OF THE DEVSLOFMENT OF DOOMA AS DOCTRINE OF THE
GOD-HAN UPON THE BASIS OF NATUBAL THEOLOGY.

Chapter I. —Historical Survey 198

Chapter H.— The Fundamental Conception of Salvation

and a General Sketch of the Doctrine of Faith . 206
Chapter HI.— The Sources of KQowledge and the Authori-
ties, or Scripture, Tradition, and the Church . 212

A. Th£ Presuppositions of the Doctrine of ScUvatian, or Nat-

unU Theology,

Chapter rv. — ^The Presuppositions and Conceptions of

God, the Creator, as the Dispenser of Salvation . 225

Chapter V. — The Presuppositions and Conceptions of Man

as the Recipient of Salvation .... 220

B. ITie Doctrine of Redemption through the Person of the

Ood-Man in its Historical Development,

Chapter YI.— The Doctrine of the Necessity and Reality of
Redemption through the Incarnation of the Son

ofGod 285

Chapter VC— The Doctrine of the Homousion of the Son

of God with God Himself 242

I. Until Council of Nicflea 242

n. Until Death of Constantius 258

in. Until Councils of Constantinople, 881, 883 . . 259
Supplement: The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit
and of the Trinity . 266

X CONTENTS.

PAOlt

Chapter Vm.— The Doctrine of the Perfect Equality
as to Nature of the Incarnate Son of God and

Humanity 274

Chapter IX. — Continuation : The Doctrine of the Personal
Union of the Divine and Human Natures in the

Incarnate Son of Ood 280

I. The Nestorian Controversy 280

n. The Eutychian Controversy 287

ni. The Monophysite Controversies and the 5th

Council 294

rv. The Monergistic and Monothelitic Controversies,
the 6th Council and John of Damascus . 800

C. The Temporal Er^oyment of Redemption.

Chapter X. — The Mysteries, and Matters Akin to Them . 806
Chapter XI. — Conclusion : Sketch of the Historic Begin-
nings of the Orthodox System .... 818

Book II.

BZPANSION Ain> BECASrma OF THE DOGMA IKTO A DOCTRINE

OONCERNINa SIN, GRACE AND THE MEANS OF GRACE

UPON THE BASIS OF THE CHURCH.

Chapter I. — Historical Survey 826

Chapter H. — Occidental Christianity and Occidental The-
ologians before Augustine 829

Chapter HI. — The World-Historical Position of Augustine

as Reformer of Christian Piety .... 885 >
Chapter rv. — ^The World-Historical Position of Augus-
tine as Teacher of the Church .... 842
I. Augustine's Doctrine of the First and lAst Things 845
n. The Donatist Contest. The Work *" De Civitate
Dei. " The Doctrine of the Church and of the

Means of Grace 854 '

in. The Pelagian Contest. Doctrine of Grace and

of Sin 868

IV. Augustine's Exposition of the Symbol. The

New Doctrine of Religion 876

Chapter v.— History of Dogma in the Occident till the

Beginning of the Middle Ages (480-604) . 882

CONTENTS. XI

PAGE

I. Contest between Semi-Pelagianism and Augustini-

anism 888

n. Gregory the Groat (500-604) 887

Chapter VI. — History of Dogma in the Time of the Carlo-

vingian Renaissance 802

I. A. The Adoption Controversy . . .894

I. B. The Predestination Controversy . • . 895
n. Controversy about the Filioque and about Images 897
m. The Development, in Practice and in Theory, of

the Mass (Dogma of the Eucharist) and of Penance 899
Chapter YII.— History of Dogma in the Time of Clagny,
Anselm and Bernard to the End of the 12th

Century 406

I. The Revival of Piety 407

II. On the History of Ecclesiastical Law . 412

ni. The Revival of Science 414

rV. Work upon the Dogma 422

A. The Berengar Controversy 428

B. Anselm's Doctrine of Satisfaction and the Doc-
trines of the Atonement of the Theologians of the
12th Century 427

Chapter VIII. — History of Dogma in the Time of the Men-
dicant Orders till the Beginning of the 16th

Century 433

I. On the History of Piety 434

n. On the History of Ecclesiastical Law. The Doc-
trine of the Church 442

III. On the History of Ecclesiastical Science . . 452

IV. The Reminting of Dogmatics into Scholastics . 461

A. The Working Over of the Traditional Articuli
Fidel 462

B. The Scholastic Doctrine of the Sacraments . . 468

C. The Revising of Augustinianism in the Direction

of the Doctrine of Meritorious Works . . 488

Book III.

THB THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF THE HISTOBY OF DOGMA.

Chapter I. — Historical Survey 501

Chapter II. — The Issuing of the Dogma in Roman Ca-
tholicism 510

• •

Xll CONTENTS.

PAGE

I. Codification of the MedisBTal Doctrines in Opposi-

tionto Protestantism (Tridentine Decrees) . . 510
II. Post-Trident ine Development as a Preparation for

the Vatican CJouncil 518

m. The Vatican Council 527

Chapter m. — The Issuing of the Dogma in Anti-Trinita-

rianism and Socinianism 529

I. Historical Introduction 529

II. The Socinian Doctrine 535

Chapter IV. — The Issuing of the Dogma in Protestantism 641

I. Introduction 541

n. Luther *s Christianity 545

ni. Luther's Strictures on the Dominating Ecclesi-
astical Tradition and on the Dogma . . . 551
rV. The Catholic Elements Retained with and within

Luther's Christianity 557

•

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

PROLEGOMENA TO THE DISCIPLINE.

L— Idea and Aim of the History of Dogma.

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

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

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

2 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOQMA.

hand the universal and supernatural character of the
Christian religion imposes upon its adherents the
duty of finding a statement of it which will not be
impaired by our wavering knowledge of nature and
history; and, indeed, which will be able to maintain
itself before every possible theory of nature or of
Problem history. The problem which thus arises permits,

Insoluble. ./ jt jt »

indeed, of no absolute solution, since all knowledge
is relative; and yet religion essays to bring her ab-
solute truth into the sphere of relative knowledge
and to reduce it to statement there. But history
teaches, and every thinking Christian testifies, that
the problem does not come to its solution; even on
that account the progressive efforts which have
been made to solve it are of value.
af"*8oS- ^- "^^^ most thorough-going attempt at solution
hitherto is that which the Catholic Church made,
and which the churches of the Reformation (with
more or less restrictions) have continued to make,
viz. : Accepting a collection of Christian and Pre-
Christian writings and oral traditions as of Divine
origin, to deduce from them a system of doctrine,
arranged in scientific form for apologetic purposes,
which should have as its content the knowledge of
Gk)d and of the world and of the means of salvation ;
then to proclaim this complex system {of dogma)
as the compendium of Christianity, to demand of
every mature member of the Church a faithful ac-
ceptance of it, and at the same time to maintain that
the same is a necessary preparation for the blesscd-

tion.

PROLEGOMENA.

nees promised by the religion. With this augmen-
tation the Christian brotherhood, whose character
as '^ Catholic Church " is essentially indicated under
this conception of Christianity, took a definite and,
as was supposed, incontestable attitude toward the
science of nature and of history, expressed its relig-
ious faith in Qod and Christ, and yet gave (inas-
much as it required of aU its members an acceptance
of these articles of faith) to the thinking part of the
community a system which is capable of a wider and
indeed boundless development. Thus arose dog-
matte Christianity,

4. The aim of the history of dogma is, (1) To ex-
plain the origin of this dogmatic Christianity, and,
(2) To describe its development.

5. The history of the rise of dogmatic Christian-
ity would seem to close when a well-formulated sys-
tem of belief had been established by scientific
means, and had been made the '^ articulus constitu-
tivus ecclesicBy" and as such had been imposed upon
the entire Church. This took place in the transition
from the 3d to the 4th century when the Logos-
Christology was established. The development of
AogcRSL is in abstracto without limit, but in con-
creto it has come to an end. For, (a) the Oreek
Church maintains that its system of dogma has been
complete since the end of the ** Image Controversy " ;
(b) the Roman Catholic Church leaves the possibil-
ity of the formulating of new dogmas open, but in
the Tridentine Coimcil and still more in the Vatican

Aim of

History of

Dogma

Rise of
Dogma.

Develop-
ment of
Dogma.

Qreeic
Church.

Roman
Chnrch.

4 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

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

PROLBGOMEKA. 5

6. The claim of the Church that the dogmas are '^^'^^^
simply the exposition of the Christian revelation, ^J^i^
hecaose deduced from the Holy Scriptures, is not ^^
confirmed by historical investigation. On the con-
trary, it becomes clear that dogmatic Christianity

(the dc^mas) in its conception and in its construc-
tion was the work of the Hellenic spirit upon the
Gospel soil. The intellectual medium by which in
early times men sought to make the Gk)spel compre-
hensible and to establish it securely, became insep-
arably blended with the content of the same. Thus
arose the dogma, in whose formation, to be sure,
other factors (the words of Sacred Scripture, require-
ments of the cult, and of the organization, political
and social environment, the impulse to push things
to their Ic^cal consequences, blind custom, etc.)
played a part, yet so that the desire and effort to
formulate the main principles of the Christian re-
demption, and to explain and develop them, secured
the upper hand, at least in the earlier times.

7. Just as the formulating of the dogma proved to JSSrtSSt-
be an illusion, so far as the same was to be ihepure uo^.
exposition of the Gk)Spel, so also does historical inves-
tigation destroy the other illusion of the Church,

viz. : that the dogma, always having been the same
therein, have simply been explained, and that eccle-
siastical theology has never had any other aim than
to explain the unchanging dogma and to refute the
heretical teaching pressing in from without. The
formulating of the dogma indicates rather that the-

T) OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ology constructed the dogma, but that the Church
must ever conceal the labor of the theologians,
which thus places them in an unfortunate plight.
In each favorable case the result of their labor has
been declared to be a reproduction and they tjiem-
selves have been robbed of their best service; as a
rule in the progress of history they fell under the
condemnation of the dogmatic scheme, whose foun-
dation they themselves had laid, and so entire gener-
rations of theologians, as well as the chief leaders
thereof, have, in the further development of dogma,
been afterwards marked and declared to be heretics
or held in suspicion. Dogma has ever in the prog-
ress of history devoured its own progenitors.
Aug^ttne, 8. Although dogmatic Christianity has never, in
the process of its development, lost its original style
and character as a work of the spirit of perishing
antiquity upon Gospel soil (style of the Oreek
apologists and of Origin)^ yet it experienced first
through Augustine and later through Luther a
deeper and more thorough transformation. Both of
these men, the latter more than the former, cham-
pioned a new and more evangelical conception of
Christianity, guided chiefly by Paulinism; Augus-
tine however hardly attempted a revision of the tra-
ditional dogma, rather did he co-ordinate the old and
the new; Lutiier, indeed, attempted it, but did not
carry it through. The Christian quality of the
dogma gained through the influence of each, and the
old traditional system of dogma was relaxed some-

PROLBOOMBNA. 7

what— this was so much the case in Protestantism
that one does well, as remarked above, no longer to
consider the symbolical teaching of the Protestant
churches as wholly a recasting of the old dogma.

9. An understanding of the dogmatico-historic Bniods lo
process cannot be secured by isolating the special i><«nM.
doctrines and considering them separately (Special
History of Dogma) after that the epochs have been
previously characterized (General History of Dogma) .

It is much better to consider the ^ general ^ and the
" special " in each period and to treat the periods sep-
arately, and as much as possible to prove the special
doctrines to be the outcome of the fundamental ideas
and motives. It is not possible, however, to make
more than four principcd divisions, viz. : I. The Ori-
gin of Dogma. II. a. The Development of Dogma
in accordance with the principles of its original con-
ception (Oriental Development from Arianism to the
Image-Controversy). II. b. The Occidental Devel-
opment of Dogma under the influence of Augustine's
Christianity and the Roman papal politics. II. c.
The Three-fold Issuing of Dogma (in the churches
of the Beformation — in Tridentine Catholicism — and
in the criticism of the rationalistic age, i.e., of So-
cinianism) .

10. The history of dogma, in that it sets forth the vaJi^ of
process of the origin and development of the dogma,

offers the very best means and methods of freeing
the Church from dogmatic Christianity, and of hast-
ening the inevitable process of emancipation, which

OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Mosheim,

etc.

Baronitis,

etc.

Lather,
etc.

Sraamiia,
etc.

Benedic-
tine, etc

Gk)ttfried
Arnold.

began with Augustine. But the history of dogma
testifies also to the unity and continuity of the
Christian faith in the progress of its history, in so
far as it proves that certain fundamental ideas of the
Gbspel have never been lost, and have defied all
attacks.

II.— History of the History of Dogma.

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

PBOLBOOICBNA. 9

have been inoonsiderable. Rationalism robbed the
history of dogma of its ecclesiastical interest and
gave it over to a critical treatment in which ite
darkness was lighted up in part by the lamp of
common understanding and in part by the torch
of general historical contemplation (first History of
Dogma by Lange, 1796, previous works by Sender, uose.
Bossier, Ldffler, etc., then the History of Dogma
by Munscher, Handb. 4 Bdd. 1797 f., an excellent Mflnwher.
Lehrbuch, 1. Aufl. 1811, 3. Aufl. 1832, Munter
2 Bdd. 1802 f, Staudlin 1800 and 1822, Augusti
1805 and 1835, Qieseler, edited by Bedepenning 2
Bdd. 1855). The valuable handbooks of Baumgar- Baum^ar-
ten-Crusius 1832, i.e. 1840 and 1846, and of Meier *^*^
1840, i.e. 1854, mark the transition to a class of
works in which an inner understanding of the pro-
cess of the History of Dogma has been won, for

which Lessing had already striven, and for which Leadng,
Herder, Schleiermacher and the Bomanticists on the ^IS^hir
one side, and H^;el and Schelling on the other, had scS^ng.
prepared the way. Epoch-making were the writings
of F. Chr. Baur (Lehrb. 1847, i.e. 1867, Vorles. Baur.
3. Thl. 1865 f.), in which the dogmatico-historic
process, conceived to be sure in a one-sided way,
was, so to speak, lived over again (cf . also Strauss,
Glaubenslehre 2 Bdd. 1840 f. Marheineke 1849).
From the Schleiermacher point of view, is Neander Keander.
(2. Thl. 1857) and Hagenbach (1840, i.e. 1867).
Domer (History of the Doctrine of the Person of Domer.
Christ, 1839 i.e. 1845-53) attempted to unite Hegel

OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Nitcsch.

and Scbleiermacher. From the Lutheran Confes-
sional standpoint Eliefoth (Einl. in d. D. G. 1839),
Thomasius (2 Bdd. 1874 f. and 1887 edited by Bon-
wetsch 1 Bd.), Schmid (1859 i.e. 1887 ed. by Hauck)
and, with reservations, Kahnis (The Faith of the
Church, 1864). A marked advance is indicated in
the History of Dogma by Nitzsch (1 Bd. 1870). For
a correct understanding especially of the origin of
dogma the labors of Rothe, Bitschl, Benan, Over-
beck, V. Engelhardt, Weizsacker and Beville are
valuable.

Gospel is

JeHus

Christ

PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE HISTORY

OF DOGMA.

III. — Introductory.

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

PROLEGOMBKA. 11

life and deed in a PersoUy whose greatness consists
also in this, that he did not remould his earthly en-
vironment, nor encounter any subsequent rebuff, —
in other words, that he did not become entangled in
his times.

2. Two generations later there existed, to be sure, j^'^^JJJI
no united and homogeneous Churchy but there *^™«^*°'»*-
were scattered throughout the wide Roman empire
confederated congr^ations of Christian believers
(churches) who, for the most part, were Gentile-
bom and condenmed the Jewish nation and religion
as apostate; they appropriated the Old Testament as
theirs by right and considered themselves a ^'new
nation **, and yet as the " ancient creation of God ",
while in all departments of life and thought certain
sacred forms were gradually being put forward.
The existence of these confederated Gentile Christian
communities is the preliminary condition to the rise
of dogmatic Christianity.

The oi^anization of these churches began, indeed. Freeing of

Gospel

in the apostolic times and their peculiar constitution *^"[^^^'
is negatively indicate by the freeing of the Gospel ^^"'^•
from the Jewish church. While in Islamism the
Arabic nation remained for centuries the main trunk
of the new religion, it is an astonishing fact in the
history of the Gospel, that it soon left its native soil
and went forth into the wide world and realized its
universal character, not through the transformation
of the Jewish religion, but by developing into a
world-religion upon Orceco-Roman soil. The Oos-

OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOOM A.

Gospel
World-Re-
ligion.

ClMBioal

Epoch of

Gospel

History.

Pfturs Mis-
sion.

No Chasm

Between

Earlier

Epoch and

Suooeedinff

Period.

pel became a world-religion in that^ having a
message for all mankind^ it preached it to Greek
and barbarian^ and accordingly attached itself
to the spiritual and political life of the world-
wide Roman empire.

3. Since the Qospel in its original form was Jew-
ish and was preached only to the Jews, there lay in
this transition, which was brought about, in part
gradually and without disturbance, and in part
through a severe crisis, consequences of the most
stringent kind. From the standpoint of the history
of the Church and of dogma, the brief history of the
Gk)8pel within the bounds of Palestinian Judaism is
accordingly a paleontological epoch. And yet this
remains the classical epochs not only on account of
the Founder and of the original testimony, but quite
as much because a Jewish Christian (Paul) recog-
nized the Gospel as the power of God, which was
able to save both Jew and Greek, and becaiise he
designedly severed the Gk)8pel from the Jewish na-
tional religion and proclaimed the Christ as the end
of the Law. Then other Jewish Christians, personal
disciples of Jesus, indeed, followed him in all this
(see also the 4th Gk)spel and the Epistle to the
Hebrews).

Yet there is in reality no chasm between the older
brief epoch and the succeeding period, so far as the
Gk)8pel is in itself universalistic, and this character
very soon became manifest. But the means by
which Paul and his sympathizers set forth the uni-

PROLBQOMSNA. 13

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

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

}

14 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

took on the form of the thought and life of the world
in which it lived, casting aside everything polythe-
istic, immoral and vulgar. Thus arose the new or-
Gentile ionizations, which with all their newness bore testi-

Churches ^ '

R^ned mony to their kinship with the original Palestinian
chwSJteS^ churches, in so far as, (1) the Old Testament was

i8tics>

likewise recognized as a primitive revelation, and
in so far as, (2) the strong spiritucd monotheism, (3)
the outlines of the proclamation concerning Jesus
Christ, (4) the consciousness of a direct and living
fellowship with Qod through the gift of the Spirit,
(5) the expectation of the approaching end of the
world, and the earnest conviction of the personal
responsibility and accountability of each individual
soul were all likewise maintained. To these is to
be added finally, that the earliest Jewish-Christian
proclamation, yes, the Gospel itself, bears the stamp
of the spiritual epochs, out of which it arose, — of the
Hellenic age, in which the nations exchanged their
wares and religions were transformed, and the idea
of the worth and accountability of every soul became
widespread; so that the Hellenism which soon
pressed so mightily into the Church was not abso-
lutely strange and new.
History^oi^ 5. The history of dogma has to do with the Qen-
^GteStiTi* tile Church only— the history of theology begins, it
Only. . is true, with Paul — , but in order to understand his-
torically the basis of the formation of doctrine in the
Gentile Church, it must take into consideration, as

ly stated, the following as antecedent condi-

PROLEGOMENA. 15

tions: (1) The Oospel of Jest^ Christ (2) The Pnwippo-
general and simultaneous proclamation of Jesus
Christ in the first generation of believers^ (3) The
current understanding and exposition of the Old
Testament and the Jewish anticipations of the fu-
ture and their speculations^ (4) The religious con-
ceptions and the religious philosophy of the Hel-
lenistic JewSj (5) The religious attitude of the
Greeks and Romans during the first two centu-
ries, and the current Orcsco-Roman philosophy
of religion,

rv.— The Gospel op Jesus Christ according

TO His Own Testimony.

The Gtospel is the good news of the reign of the ^^^^^^
Ahnighty and Holy God, the Father and Judge of °ioS oT
the world and of each individual soul. ' In this reign,
which makes men citizens of the heavenly kingdom
and gives them to realize their citizenship in the ap-
proaching eon, the life of every man who gives him-
self to God is secure, even if he should immediately
lose the world and his earthly life; while those
who seek to win the world and to keep their life fall
into the hands of the Judge, who condemns them to
hell. This reign of God, in that it rises above all
ceremonies and statutes, places men imder a law,
which is old and yet new, viz. : Whole-hearted love Love to

•^ ' God and

to God and to one's neighbor. In this love, wher- ^^^
ever it controls the thoughts in their deepest springs,
that better justice is exemplified which corresponds

16 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

to the perfection of Gk>d. The way to secure this
righteousness is by a change of hearty i.e. by self-
denial and humility before Qod and a heart-felt
trust in him. In such humility and trust in God
the soul realizes its own unworthiness. The Gk)spel,
however, calls even sinners, who are so disposed,
unto the kingdom of Gk>d, in that it assures them
satisfaction with his justice, i.e., g^uarantees them
tfie forgiveness of the sins which have hitherto
separated them from Gk>d. In the three-fold form,
however, in which the Gospel is set forth, (Gk)d's
^?gn^r sovereignty, higher justice [law of love] and for-
Lo^For- giveness of sin) it is inseparably connected with

Cri^GIMflB of ^^

Sin. Jesus Christ. For in the proclamation of the Gk)6-
pel, Jesus Christ everywhere called men unto him-

wJJdR^id ^^- ^ ^^ ^s *^® Gospel word and deed; it is
'j^ii'' his meat and drink and, therefore, is it become his
personal life, and into this life he would draw all
men. He is the Son^ who knows the Father. Men
should see in him how kind the Lord is; in him
they may experience the power and sovereignty of
Qod over the world and be comforted in this trust;
him, the meek and gentle-hearted One, should they
follow ; and inasmuch as he, the holy and pure One,
calls sinners unto himself, they should be fully as-
sured that God through him forgives sin.

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

PKOLEOOMBNA. 17

fession that he was their Master and Messiah. JesoB ibs-

Blah.

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

the world and called sinners to himself.
3

18 OX7TLINE8 OF TH1E HISTORT OF DOOHA.

v.— The General Pboglamation oonoerning
Jesus Christ in the First Generation of
His Adherents.

^cTlIoSl" ^' ^®^ ^^ learned to know Jesus Christ and had
found him to be the Messiah. In the first two gen-
erations following him everything was said about
him which men were in any way able to say. Inas-
much as they knew him to be the Risen One, they
exalted him as the Lord of the world and of history,

wj^ sitting at the right hand of God, as the Way, the

^^®- Truth and the Life, as the Prince of Life and the
living Power of a new existence, as the Conqueror

King. of death and the King of a coming new kingdom.
Although strong individual feeling, special experi-
ence. Scriptural learning and a fantastic tendency
gave from the beginning a form to the confession of
him, yet common characteristics of the proclamation
can be definitely pointed out.
D«?dSio8*5' ^- Th© content of the disciples' belief and the gen-
^* ^' eral proclamation of it on the ground of the certainty
of the resurrection of Jesus, can be set forth as fol-
lows : Jesus is the Messiah promised by the prophets
—he will come again and establish a visible king-
dom,— ^they who believe on him and surrender them-
selves entirely to this belief, may feel assured of the
grace of Qod and of a share in his future glory. A
new community of Christian believers thus organized
eSSch, itself within the Jewish nation. And this new com-

hml munity believed itself to be the true Israel of the

PROLEGOMENA. 19

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

^ •'of Spirit,

baptism) and in their gathering together. The pos- ^75522??
session of the Spirit was an assurance to each indi- p**^p-
vidual that he was not only a ^ disciple ** but also a
'^ called saint," and, as such, a priest and king of
God. Faith in the Gk>d of Israel became faith in
Qod the Father; added to this was faith in Jesus,
the Christ and Son of Gk>d, and the witness of the
gift of the Holy Spirit, i.e. of the Spirit of Qod and
Christ. In the strength of this faith men lived in
the fear of the Judge and in trust in Gk>d, who had
already begun the redemption of his own people.
The proclamation concerning Jesus, the Christ, g^Jg^^igf
rested first of all entirely upon the Old Testament, oVd%ita-
yet it had its starting-point in the exaltation of °^°^
Jesus through his resurrection from the dead. To
prove that the entire Old Testament pointed toward
him, and that his person, his work, his fate were the
actual and verbal fulfilment of the Old Testament
prophecies, was the chief interest of believers, in so
far as they did not give themselves entirely to ex-

20 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

pectations of the future. This reference did not
serve at once to make clear the meaning and worth
of the Messianic work — this it did not seem to need
— but rather to establish the Messiah-ship of Jesus.
However, the Old Testament, as it was then under-
stood, gave occasion, through the fixing of the per-
son and dignity of Christ, for widening the scope
of the thought of IsraePs perfected theocracy. And,
in addition, faith in the exaltation of Jesus to the
right hand of Ood caused men to think of the begin-
ning of his existence in harmony therewith. Then
the fact of the successful Gentile conversion threw a
new light upon the scope of his work, i.e, upon its
significance for all mankind. And finally the per-
sonal claims of Jesus led men to reflect on his pecu-
liar relation to God, the Father. On these four
tio?r^ P^^^*» speculation began abeady in the apostoHc age
'"in^f^*" and it went on to formulate new statements concern-
^- ing the person and digniiy of Christ. In p^laim-
ing Jesus to be the Christ men ceased thereby to
proclaim the Gospel, because the rjjpstv navra 8<ra
ivereiXaro 6 'Ir^ffou^ was to be included as a matter of
course and so did not especially engage the thoughts.
That this must be for the future a questionable
digression is plain enough; for since everything
depends upon the appropriation of the. Person of
Jesus, it is not possible for a personal life to be
appropriated through opinions about the Person,
but only through the record of the concrete Per-
sonality.

PROLEGOMENA. 21

3. Upon the basis of the plain words of Jesus and ^^JoSJ^
in the consciousness of the possession of the Spirit men jS^xJom-
were ahready assured of a, present possession of the ""ciod.****
forgiveness of sin, of righteousness before Gk>d, of

the full knowledge of the Divine Will and of the call
into the future kingdom. In the acquiring of these
blessings, surely not a few realized the consequences
of the first coming of the Messiah, i.e. his work, and
they referred especially the forgiveneas of sin to
the death of Christ, and eternal life to his resurrec
tion. But no theories touching the relation of the
blessings of the Gk)epel to the history of Christ were
propounded ; Paul was the first to develop a theology
upon the basis of the death and resurrection of Christ
and to bring it into relations with the Old Testa-
ment religion.

4. This theology was constructed in opposition to ^^ q^
the legalistic righteousness of the pharisees, i.e., to i^^Juc
the official religion of the Old Testament. While its ^neas."*^
form was thereby somewhat conditioned, its power

rested in the certainty of the new life of the Spirit,
which the Risen One ofi^ered, who through his death
overcame the world of the flesh and of sin. With
the thought that righteousness comes through faith
in Gk>d who raised Jesus from the dead and fulfilled
the Law by the legal way of the crucifixion of the
Christ upon the cross, Paul wrenched the Gk>spel
from its native soil and gave it at the same time
through his Christological speculation and his carry-
ing out of the contrast of flesh and spirit, a charac-

22 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

teristic stamp which was oomprehensible to the
Greeks, although they were illy prepared to accept
his special manner of reconciling it with the Law.
Through Paul, who was the first theologian, the
question of the Law (in theory and practice) and
the principles of missionary activity accordingly be-
came the absorbing themes in the Christian commu-
nities. While he proclaimed freedom from the Law
and baptized the heathen, forbidding them to become
Jews, others now for the first time consciously made
the righteousness of CSiristian believers dependent
upon the punctilious observance of the Law and re-
HeM^tei jected Paul as an apostle and as a Christian. Yet
^EteSme^ *^® chief disciplcs of Jesus were convinced, perhaps
^^^^ not a little influenced by the success of Paul, and
conceded to the heathen the right to become Chris-
tians without first becoming Jews. This well at-
tested fact is the strongest evidence that Christ had
awakened among his personal disciples a faith in
himself, which was dearer to them than all the tra-
ditions of the fathers. Yet there were among those
who accepted the Pauline mission various opinions
as to the attitude which one should take toward
heathen Christians in ordinary life and intercourse.
These opinions held out for a long time.
2*J^<^ As surely as Paul had fought his fight for the
^^^^' whole of Christendom, so sure also is it that the

curred

Ajg^ transformation of the original form of Christianity
^^^ into its universal form took place outside of his
aotivily (proof; the Church at Rome). The Juda-

PBOLBOOMBNA. 23

ism of the diaspora was long since surrounded by a
retinue of half-bred Grecian brethren, for whom the
particular and national forms of the Old Testament
religion were hardly existent (see YII.) . And, far-
ther, this Judaism itself had begun to transform for
the Jews the old religion into a universal and spirit-
ual religion without casting aside its forms, which
were rather considered significant symbols (mjrster-
ies). The Gospel, being received into these circles,
completed simply and almost suddenly the process of
spiritualizing the old religion, and it stripped off the
old forms as shells, replacing them at once in part by
new forms {e.g.y circumcision is circimicision of the
heart, likewise also baptism; the Sabbath is the
glorious kingdom of Christ, etc.). The outward
withdrawal from the synagogue is also here a clear
proof of the power and self -consciousness of the new
religion. The same developed itself rapidly in con-
sequence of the hatred of the Jews, who adhered to
the old faith. Paul exerted an influence, and the
destruction of Jerusalem cleared up entirely the ob-
scurities which still remained.

VI. — ^Thb Curbsnt Exposition of the Old Tes-
tament AND THE Jewish Future Hope, in
THEIR Bearing ON the Earliest Formula-
tion OF the Christian Message.

1. Although the method of the pedant, the casuis- ?^^^''

RotAJiiod

tic handling of the Law and the extortion of the by church.

^ OUTLINES O^ tHE &I8T0RY OP DOGMA.

deepest meaning of the prophecies, had been in prin-
ciple done away with by Jesus Christ, the old
school-exegesis still remained active in the Chris-
tian churches, and especially the unhistorical local-
method in the exposition of the Old Testament, as
well as the allegoristic and the Haggada ; for a sacred
text — ^and as such the Old Testament was considered
— ever invites men in the exposition of it to disre-
gard its historical conditions and interpret it accord-
ing to the needs of the time. Especially wherever
the proofs of the fulfilment prophecy, i.e., of the
Messiah-ship of Jesus was concerned, the received
point of view exercised its influence, as well upon
the exposition of the Old Testament as upon the
conception of the person, fate and deeds of Jesus.
It gave, under the strong impression of the history
of Jesus, to many Old Testament passages a foreign
sense and enriched, on the other hand, the life of
Jesus with new facts, throwing the emphasis upon
details, which were often unreal and seldom of prime
importance.
aSS? ^* "^^^ Jewish apocalyptic literature, as it flour-
^ture* R?" ished after the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, was not
forbidden within the circles of the first believers of
the Gospel, but rather was it retained and read as
an explanation of the prophecies of Jesus and, as it
were, cultivated. Although the content of the same
appeared modified and the imcertainty regarding the
person of the Messiah who was to appear in judg-
ment was done away with, the earthly sensuous

tained.

PROLEGOMENA. 25

hopes were by no means wholly repressed. Confused
pictures fiUed the fancy, threatened to obscure the
plain and earnest description of the judgment which
every individual soul is sure of, and drove many
friends of the Qospel into a restless turmoil and into
a detestation of the state. Consequently the repro-
duction of the eschatological discourses of Jesus be-
came indefinite; even things wholly foreign were
mingled therewith, and the true aim of the Christian
life and hope began to waver.

3. Through the apocalyptic literature, the artificial Hythoioei-
exegesis and the Haggada, a mass of mythological m^^l^
and poetical ideas crowded into the Christian com- ^ ^^^
munities and were legitimized. The most impor-
tant for the succeeding times were the speculations in
regard to the Messiah, which were drawn in part
from the Old Testament and the apocalypses and in
part were constructed in accordance with methods
whose right no one questioned and whose adoption
seemed to give security to the faith. Long since in
the Jewish religion men had given to everything
that is and that happens an existence within the
knowledge of Gk)d, but they had in reality confilned
this representation to that only which is really im-
portant. The advancing religious thought had above Pre-Ezist.

ence As-

all included individuals also, that is, the most promi- 2(^,^^^J|^
nent, within this speculation which should glorify
Ood, and sd a pre-existence was ascribed also to the
Messiah, but of such a nature that by virtue of it
he abides vrith God during his ^earthly manifesta-

26 OUTIJtXES OF THB HI8TORY OF DOGMA.

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

PROLEGOMENA.

Only the Fourth Evaogelist — ^he hardly belongs to
the 1st century — saw with perfect clearness that the
pre-eartUy Christ must be established as ^eo9 ^y iv
dpj^ «f>^9 ^^j* *e<Jv, in order not to endanger the content
and significance of the revelation of God in Christ.
In addition there prevailed in wide circles such con-
ceptions also as recognissed in a spiritual communi-
cation at his baptism the equipment of the man
Jesus (see the genealogies, the beginning of the
Gfospel of Mark) for his office, or found upon the
basis of Isa. vii. in his miraculous birth (from a
virgin) the germ of his unique being. (The rise
and spread of this representation is wholly indistinct
to us; Paul seems not to have known it; in the be-
ginning of the 2d century it is almost universal.)
On the other hand, it is of ^great significance that
every teacher who recognized the new in Christian
ity as religion ascribed pre-existence to Christ.

Supplement. — A reference to the witness of proph-
ecy, to the current exposition of the Old Testament,
to apocalyptic writings and valid methods of specu-
lation was not sufficient to dear up every new point
which cropped out in the statement of the Christian
message. The earliest brother-hoods were enthusias-
tic, had prophets in the midst of them, etc. Under
such conditions facts were produced outright contin-
ually in the history (e.gr., as particularly weighty,
the ascension of Christ and his descent into hell).
It is farther not possible to point out the motive to
8adi productions, which first only by the creation of

Biaeaod
Bpreod

Earliest

Brother-

boodfl Eu-

thusiastlc.

FactR Pro-
duced.

2S OUTLINKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

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

VII. — The Religious Conceptions and the Re-
ligious Philosophy of the Hellenistic
Jews in Their Bearing on the Transfor-
ication of the (lospel message.

^^^^ 1. From the remnants of Jewish- Alexandrian lit-
^[^ac^' erature (reference is also made to the Sibylline
^ ^^^' Oracles as well as to Josephus) and from the great
propaganda of Judaism in the GrsBCO-Roman world,
it may be inferred that there was a Judaism in tiie
diaspora to whose consciousness the cultus and the
ceremonial law disappeared entirely behind the mono-
theistic worship of Qod without images, behind the
moral instruction and the faith in a future reward
beyond. Circumcision itself was no longer abso-
lutely required of those converted to Judaism ; one
was also satisfied with the cleansing bath. The
Jewish religion seemed here transformed into a com-
mon hmnan morality and into a monotheistic €X>S'
mology. Accordingly the thought of the theocracy
as well as the Messianic hope grew dim. The latter
did not entirely fail, however, but the prophecies
were valued chiefly for the proof of the antiquity of the
Jewish monotheism, and the thought of the future
itself in the expectation of the destruction of the
», of the burning of the world and —

PBOLEOOMBNA. • 29

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

2. The Jewish- Alexandrian philosophy of religion Jewiah-
had its most noted defender in Philo, — the perfect fJ^SShy^oi
Greek and the sincere Jew, who turned the religious ^{K!^
philosophy of his time in the direction of Neo-

OUTLINBS OF THS HISTOR7 OF DOGMA.

Ascetic
Virtue.

<« Aldxan-

lOMMlll* of

Ion

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

3. The practical fundamental conceptions of the
Alexandrian philosophy of religion must, in diflFerent
have found an entrance very early into

PBOI^BGOMIENA. 31

the Jewish-Christian cirdee of the diaspora, and
through the same also into the Gentile-Christian ; or
rather the soil was already prepared wherever these
thou^ts became widespread. After the beginning
of the 2d century the philosophy of Philo also be-
came influential through Christian teachers, espe-
cially his Logos-doctrine^ as the expression of the
unity of religion, nature and history; and above all
his fundamental hermeneuttc principles. Thesys- vaientinus

and Origen

terns of Valentine and Origen presuppose the system ^"^^
of Philo. His fine dualism and allegorical art {^ the
Biblical alchemy") became acceptable also to the
learned men of the Church; to find the spiritual
meaning of the sacred text, in part alongside the
letter and in part outside, was the watchword of
scientific Christian theology, which in general was
possible only upon such a basis, since it strove, with-
out reo^nizing a relative standard, to unify the
monstrous and discordant material of Hie Old Testa-
ment and the Gkwpel, and to reconcile both with the
rdig^on and scientific culture of the Qreeks. Here
Philo was a master, for he first in the largest sengp
poured the new wine into the old wine-skins — ^a pro-
cedure in its ultimate intention justified, since his-
tory is a unit; but in its pedantic and scholastic
execution the same was a source of illusions, of un-
reality and finally of stultification.

32 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

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

ra«nw5?d 1- I^ *^® *8® ^f Cicero and Augustus the people's
^iVouflT religion and the religious sense in general was cdmoert

in da and

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

PROLEGOMENA. 33

Beligion and individual morality became more ^'|g^.
closely united: Spiritualization of the cults^ en- *i^tS!*
nobling of marty idea of ethical personality^ of con-
science and of purity. Repentance and pardon
became of importance, also inner union with the
Divinity, longing for revelation {asceticism and
mysterious rites as a means of appropriating the
Divine), yearning after a painless, eternal Ufe be-
yond the grave (apotheosis); the earthly life as a
phantom life (hyxpartta and a:ifdirraatsi) . Just as in the
2d century the moral swing was the stronger, so in
the 3d century the religious increased more and more
— thirst for life. Polytheism was not thereby over-
come, but only shoved aside upon a lower plane,
where it was as active as ever. The numen supre-
mum revealed its fulness in a thousand forms (demi-
gods), going upward (apotheosis, emperor cult,
" dominus ac deus noster ") and downward (mani-
festations in nature and in history) . The soul itself
is a super-earthly being ; the ideal of the perfect man
and of the Leader (Bedeemer) was developed and
sought after. The new remained in part concealed
by the old cidtus forms, which the state and piety
protected or restored; there was a feeling-around
after forms of expression, and yet the wise, the
skeptic, the pious and the patriot capitulated to the
cultish traditions.

Social Or-

2. The formation of social organizations, on the Jom^-

one hand, and the founding of the monarchical ^^~.

world-wide Roman empire, on the other, had the ism.
8

OUTLINES OF THS HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Stoicism,
Platonism.

Neo-Plftt-
onlsm*

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

3. Perhaps the most decisive factor in the change
of the religious-ethical attitude was the philosophy,
which in almost all its schools had more and more
brought ethics forward and deepened the same.
Upon the soil of Stoicism, Posidonius, Seneca, Epic-
tetus and Marcus Aurelius, and upon the soil of
Platonism, men like Plutarch had achieved an ethi-
cal-outlook, which in its principles (knowledge, res-
ignation, trust in Gk)d) was obscure, yet in some
particulars scarcely admits of improvement. Com-
mon to them all is the great value put upon the soul.
A religious bent, the desire for Divine assistance,
for redemption and for a life beyond, comes out dis-
tinctly in some of them ; most clearly in the Neo-
Platonists and those who anticipated them in the 3d
centurj* (preparation by Philo). Characteristics of
this moile of tliought are the dualistic contrasting of
the Divine and the earthly, the abstract idea of Grod,
tho abortion of the unkiiowableness of God, skepti-
eisnt in reganl to sonso-oxi)orience and distrust of
tho i)OwerB of nvison ; at tho same time great readi-

PROLBOOlfKNA. 35

nesB to investigate and to utilize the results ot the
previous scientific labors; and farther, the demand
for freedom from the sensuous through asceticism,
the want of an authority, belief in a higher revela-
tion and the fusing of religion, science and mythol-
ogj. Already men began to legitimize the relig- R«iiffious
ious fantasie within the realm of philosophy, by u^u-

mixed.

reaching back and seizing the myths as the vehicle
of the deepest wisdom (romanticism). The theo-
sophical philosophy which had thus equipped itself
was from the standpoint of natural science and clear
thinking in many wajrs a retrogression (yet not in
all particulars, e.g. the Neo-Platonic psychology is
far^ better than the Stoic) ; but it was an expression
for the deeper religious needs and the better self-
knowledge. The inner life with its desires was now
altogether the starting-point for all thought concern-
ing the world. Thoughts of the divine, gracious
Providence, of the kinship of all men, of the conunon
fraternal love, of the ready and willing forgiveness
of wrong, of the indulgent patience, of the insight
into their own weaknesses were no less the product
of the practical philosophy of the Greeks for wide
circles, than the conviction of the inherent sinful-
ness, of the need of redemption and of the value of a
human soul which finds its rest only in God. But Reyeiatioii

*' and Relig

men possessed no sure revelation^ no comprehensive *^SJ^™"
and satisfactory religious communion^ no vigorous ^*""°^-
and religious genius and no conception of history^
which coidd take the place of the no longer valuable

36 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

political history; men possessed no certitude and
they did not get beyond the wavering between the
fear of Qod and the deification of nature. Yet with
this philosophy^ the highest the age had to offer ^
the Oospel allied itself^ and the stages of the
Ecclesiastical History of Dogma during the first
fwe centuries correspond to the stages of the
Hellenistic Philosophy of Religion within the
same period.

introduc- As an introduction to the study of the history of
to g^»toiy dogma the following works are to be especially com-
mended: Schiirer, G^schichte des judischen Volks
im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, 2. Bd. 1885 (English
translation published by T. Sc T. Clark). Weber,
System der altsynagogalen palastinensischen The-
ologie, 1880. Kuenen, Volksreligion und Weltre-
ligion, 1883. Wellhausen, Abriss der Geschichte
Israel's und Juda's (Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, 1.
Heft, 1884). Weiss, Lehrbuch der bibl. Theolo-
gie, 4. Aufl., 1884. Baldensperger, Das Selbstbe-
wustsein Jesu im Licht der messianischen Hoff-
nungen seiner Zeit, 1888. Leben Jesu von Keim,
Weiss and others and the Einleitungen in das N.
T. von Reuss, Hilgenfeld, Mangold, Holtzmaun und
Weiss. Weizsacker, Apostolisches Zeitalter, 1886.
Renan, Hist, des Orig. du Christianisme, T. II.-
IV. Pfleideror, Das Urchristendum, 1887, Dies-
tel, G^chichte des A. T. i. der christl. Kirche,

PROLEGOMENA. 37

1869, Siegfried, Philo v. Alex. 1875. Bigg, The
Christian Platonists of Alexandria, 1886. Die
Untersuchimgen von Freudenthal (' Hellenistische
Stadien') and Bemays. Boiseier, La Religion
Romaine d'Auguste anx Antonins, 2 vols., 1871.
Reville, La Religion k Rome sous lee Sevdres,
1886 (German by Kriiger 1888). Priedlander, Dar-
stellmigen aus der Sittengesehichte Rome in der Zeit
von Aug^ust bis zu Ausgang der Antonine, 3. Bdd.
5. Aufl. Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, 3.
Bdd. 1878. Leopold Schmidt, Die Ethik der alten
Griechen, 2 Bdd. 1882. Heinze, Die Lehre vom
Logos, 1872. Hirzel, Untersuchungen zu Cicero's
philoB. Schriften, 3 Thle. 1877. Die Lehrbucher
der G-eschichte der Philosophie von Zeller, Ueber-
weg, Strumpell and others.

part l*^

THE RISE OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOGMA.

BOOK I,

THE PREPARATION.

CHAPTER I.

HISTORICAL SURVEY.

THE first century of the existence of Gtentile- ^§J^J^
Christian communities is characterized, (1) by oogjj««^-
the rapid retirement of Jewish Christianity, (2) by
religious enthusiasm and the strength of the future
hope, (3) by a severe morality deduced from the
Masters' teaching, (4) by the manifold form and
freedom of expression of belief, on the basis of plain
formulas and ever increasing tradition, (5) by the
lack of a definite authority, in the transition to a
recognized outward authority among the churches,
(6) by the lack of a political connection among the
various communities, and by an organizaticm which
was firm and yet permitted individual liberty, (7)
by the development of a peculiar literary activity,
claiming assent to its newly produced facts, (8) by

the reproduction of detached phrases and individual

40 OTJTUNES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

inferences from the apostolical teaching, without
a clear understanding of the same, (9) by the crofH
ping out of those tendencies which served in every
way to hasten the process already b^^un of fusing^
the Qospel with the spiritual and religious interests
of the time, — with Hellenism, — as well as by numer-
ous attempts to wrench the Gospel free from its
native setting and to introduce elements foreign to
it. And finally, above all, it belonged to the (Hel-
lenic) representation to consider knowledge, not as
a (charismatic) supplement to faith, but as of like
essence with it.

CHAPTER IL

GROUND COMMON TO CHRISTIANS AND ATTITUDE
TAKEN TOWARD JUDAISM.

Beliefs That the great majority of Christians had com-

Common

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

Ooflpei. 1. The Gk)6pel, being founded upon a revelation,
is the reliable message of the true Qodj the faithful
acceptance of which guarantees salvation;

THE PREPARATIOK. 41

2. The real content of this message is spiritual oojrt«»t of
monotheism, the announcement of the resurrection

and eternal life, as well as the proclamation of moral
purity and abstinence on the ground of repentance
toward God and of attested cleansing through bap-
tism in remembrance of the reward of good and
evil;

3. This message comes to us through Jesus Christ, t£^^
who " in these last days " is the commissioned Sa- ^^^^*^^^
viour and stands in a peculiar relationship with God.

He is the Bedeemer (ff^tnjp) because he has brought
full knowledge of Gk)d and the gift of eternal life
(^ya<re9 and Cwi^, and especially r^mat^ rij? C»?9, the ex-
pression for the summa of the Gk)6pel). He is also
the highest Prototyjw of every ethical virtue, the
Law-Giver and the Law of the perfect life, and
accordingly the Conqueror of demons and the Judge
of the world;

4. Virtue is abstinence (a renunciation of the good virtne is

Abstinence

things of this world, in which the Christian is a "odLoTe.
stranger, and whose destruction is awaited) and
brotherly love;

5. The message of the Christ is entrusted to ^^^
chosen men, to apostles, and more especially to one ^u^
apostle; their preaching is the preaching of the
Christ. Moreover, the Spirit of Gkxl reproduces his

gifts and graces in the ^saints," and thus equips
special '^prophets and teachers," who receive com
munications for the edification of others;

6. Christian worship is the offering of spiritual worship.

OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Basis of
Brother-
hood.

Christian-
ity and
Judaism.

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

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

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

THB PREPARATION.

CHAPTER III.

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

Sources : Theumtings of the so-called Apoetolic Fathera,
inferences drawn from the Works of the Apologists of the 2d
century ; Ritschl, Entstehung der alt-kath. Kirche, 2. Ed.
1857; Engelhardt, Das Christenthum Justins, 1878; Pflei-
derer, Daa Urchristenthiun, 1887.

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

FIxIhk of
OutllDM

and Char-
acter of

CSirlatian-

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

of the Christ, and urged a holy life ("Two Ways,"
dependence of its ethical rules upon the Jewish- Alex-
andrian gnomic and the Sermon on the Mount) and,
without outward union and a common polity, they
recognized themselves as belonging to the new and
yet original creation of God, to the Church, which
is the true Eve, the Bride of the heavenly Christ
(Tertull. Apolog. 39 : coitus sumus de conscientia
religionis et discipUnae unitate et spei foedere ;

II. Clem. 14 : ^roeoDvTey t6 ^iXiifia too narpb^ ^ftwv ledfie^
ix TiJ? ixxXr^ffta^ r^y Trpwrrj^ t^9 )rveo/iar(x^9, T^y npo ^Xtou
xai ffsXijvfj^ IxTifffiivi^^ . . . ixxX-^ffia t^wtra ffw/id itrrt Xpt-
trroib " Xi-j^€t ydip ^ ypa^TJ * inotJ^ffev 6 ^ed^ rdv HLvOputttov Sptrsv
xa( ^f^Xo ' rd ^pfftv itniv 6 Xpurro^^ rb ^^Xo ^ ^xxXi^ffta),

2. The Foundations of the Faith, i.e. of the
confessions respecting the One God and Jesus and
also the Holy Spirit, were laid by the " Christian-
ized" Old Testament Scriptures, together with the
apocalypses and the ever increasing traditions con-
cerning the Christ (his ethical and eschatological dis-
courses, on the one side, and the proclamation of
the history of Jesus on the other). Prophecy was
proven by theology. Already at an early date short
^^J" <>' articles of faith had been formulated (^ napadotrt^^ 6

ftapado^ei^ Xdyo^y 6 xavlbv rr^^ 7rapad6<reaf^, rd XT^poyfui, ^
dtda^ijj ^ ntffTt^, 6 xavdjv r^y Tziffrson:, etc.). The chUTCh

at Borne had formulated before a.d. 150 the follow-
J*]^JjJ|^^® ing creed, which was the basis for all future creeds :

nttneuto sl^ Oedv iraripa Tzavroxpdropa * xa) e/? Xpimdv
^Ijjaoovy uldv alnoo rdv /lovtq/'ev^y rdv xoptou '^/iwv, rdv ytwri-

Founda-

tions of

the Faith.

Old TMta-
meat.

• I

THE PREPARATION. 45

^ivra ix irveo/iaTo^ dyiou xa\ Mapia^ r^9 izap^ivou, tov M
Ilovrioo IltXdrou <naupw^ivTa xa\ ra^ivTa, Tf Tpirj) ^fiipf
^amdvra ix vexpwv, dvafiavra elf tou^ obpayoo^^ xa^TJ/ievov iv
SsStf Tou itarpd^y S^ev Ip^erat xptvai Zfovra^ xa) vexpou^ • xai
c/f irveufia aytov^ dyiav ixxlT^aia)^^ &^tatv dfiaprtmv^ (rapxdf

dvd^afftv. Everything that had been prophesied con- Riaeof
ceming the Christ in the Old Testament, and that Appeal.
had been testified concerning him in the primitive
Gk^spel, was referred back to the concurrent teach-
ing and testimony of the twelve apostles (Ma^i)
xuptou did Tw> t^ dizoffT^Xutv) . The rise of this court of
appeal, which was the beginning of the idea of
Catholic tradilion, is historically obsciu*e and rests
upon an a priori. Of like authority, though not
identified with it, is Paul with his Epistles, which
were, moreover, diligently read.

3. The Principal Elements of Christianity were Main eio-
faith in God, the 5e^-«nj9, and in his Son, on the chri«tian-
ground of the fulfilment of prophecy and of the apos-
tolic attested teaching of the Lord, the discipline in
accordance with the standard laid down by the Mas-
ter, baptism culminating in a conmion sacrificial
prayer, the communion meal, and the certain hope
of the near coming of Christ's glorious kingdom.
The confessions of faith were very manifold ; there
was not as yet any definite doctrine of faith ; imagi-
nation, speculation and the exclusively spiritual
interpretation of the Old Testament had the widest
range; for man must not quench the Spirit. In the
exercise of prayer the congregations expressed that

ity.

46 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

which they possessed in God and in Christ; and the

duty of sacrificing this world for the hoped-for future

tionTof ^PP^^Li^ AS ^^ practical side of faith itself. The

Salvation, varying conceptions of salvation grouped themselves
about two centres, which were only loosely con-
nected ; the one was fixed chiefly by the disposition

chiiiasm. ^^^ ^^ imagination, the other by the intellect. On
the one side, accordingly, salvation was believed to
consist in the approaching glorious kingdom of
Christ, which should bring joy upon theoarth to the
righteous (this realistic Jewish conception was de-
rived directl}"^ from the apocalypses : Chiiiasm, and
hence the interest in the resurrection of ihe physical
body). On the other side, salvation was held to con-

^IfQ^^ sist in a definite and full knowledge of God (and the
world), as against the errors of heathenism; and this
knowledge disclosed to faith (;re'<n-e9) and hope the
gift of life and all imaginable blessings (less em-
phasis was accoidingly placed on the resurrection of
the physical body). Of these blessings the brother-
hood was already in possession of the forgiveness of
sin and of righteousness, in so far as theirs was a
vfew! brotherhood of saints. But these two blessings ap-
peared to be endangered as to their worth by empha-
sizing the moral point of view, in accordance with
which eternal life is looked upon, for the most part,
as the wages and the reward of a perfect moral life
lived in one's own strength. It is true that the
thought was still present, that sinlessuess rests upon
a new moral creation (the new birth) which is real-

«: .

THE PREPARATION. 47

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

crowded out by the other thought, that there are no

blessings in salvation save revealed knowledge and

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

in which the Gk)spel is set forth as the New Law (as

cetic holiness and love) . The ^ Christianizing " of the oospei as

N6W Law.

Old Testament served to promote this Greek concep-
tion. The idea, it is true, was already present that
the Gh>spel, in so far as it is law {v6/iog)^ includes the

gift of salvation {>o/J-og avsu Zvyoo avdyxyi^ — vdfio^ rify

Ueu^eptaig — Christ himself is the Law) ; but this rep-
resentation was always doubtful and was gradually
abandoned. The setting forth of the Gospel under
the conceptions: t^S^tc? (God and world), inajjeXia
(eternal life), vofiog (moral duty), appeared as plain as
it was exhaustive, and in every relation the Tre^rrc? was
held to be confirmed, since it exhibits itself in knowl-
edge as well as in hope and in obedience; but in
reality it is only if(<nt^ rij? xXij<rea>9^ a preparation, be-
cause the blessings of salvation (the fia<rcX$ia too ^$ou
as well as the d^apffia) are conferred in the future.

In this hope of the future, salvation is set forth
as realizing itself in a brotherhood^ while in the
moral-gnostic view it is considered as an individ-
ual possession, and reward and punishment are
represented as co-ordinated with it, which results in
emptying the conception of God of its content. The Transition,

"^ '^ -^ to Moral-

moral view of sin, forgiveness and righteousness in '**"•

Clement, Barnabas and Poly carp is overlaid by Pau-
line phrases and formulas; but the uncertainty with

48 OUTLINBS OP THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

which these are quoted indicates that they were not
really understood. In Hermas and II. Clement the
ground of the forgiveness of sin is the spontaneous
energizing fxerdvota. The wide-spread idea that griev-
ous sins could not be forgiven those who had been
baptized, but that light sins might be condoned,
indicates the complete transition to a barren, theo-
retical moralism, which was, however, still overlaid
by an apocalyptic enthusiasm.
influOTce 4. Tlie Old Testament (zs the Source of the EnowU

of Old •'

Testament ^^g^ qJ Faith contributed, (1) to the development of
the monotheistic cosmology, (2) to the setting forth of
the proofs of prophecy and of the antiquity of Chris-^
tianity (" older than the world "), (3) to the establish-
ing of all the ecclesiastical ideas, rights and cere-
monies, which were considered necessary, (4) to the
deepening of the life of faith (Psalms and prophetical
fragments), (5) to the refuting of Judaism as a
nation, t.e. to the proving that this people had been
cast off by God, and that they had either never had
any covenant with him (Barnabas), or had had a
covenant of wrath, or had forfeited their covenant;
that they had never understood the Old Testament and
were therefore now deprived of it, if, indeed, they
had ever been in possession of it (the attitude of the
Church as a whole toward the Jewish people and
their history appears to have been originaUy as in-
definite as the attitude of the gnostics toward the
Old Testament) . Attempts to correct the Old Testa-
ment and to give it a Christian sense were not want-

THK PREPARATION. 49

ing; in the formation of the New Testament there
were mdimentary efforts toward this end.

5. Faith Knowledge was above all a knowledge ood is
of Cfod as the only supernatural, spiritual and al- ^Jfe^
mighty Being: God is the Creator and Ruler of
tiie world and is therefore the Lord. But inas-
much as he created the world as a beautiful, well-
ordered whole (monotheistic theory of nature) for
Uie sake of man, he is at the same time the Ood
of goodness and of redemption (^eo? <ram^/i), and
only through the knowledge of the identity of the
Creator and Redeemer God does faith in Gk)d as
the Father reach its perfection. Redemption, how-
ever, was necessary, because mankind and the world
in the very beginning fell under the dominion of
demons. A general and acceptable theory in re- DomtDion
gard to the origin of this dominion did by no means
exist; but the conviction was fixed and universal,
that the present condition and course of the world is
not of God, but of the devil. Still, faith in the al-
mighty Creator, and hope in the restoration of the
earth did not aUow theoretical dualism to make any
headway and practical dualism dominated. The practical

Dualism.

world is good and belongs to God, but the present
course of it is of the devil. Thus men's thoughts os-
cillated between the conception of the world as a
beautiful and orderly whole, and the impression of
the present evil course of things, of the baseness
of the sensuous and of the dominion of demons in
the world.

OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Jesus is
I<onl and

Saviour
like God.

Titles

Given to

Jesus.

Son of
God.

G. Faith in Jesris Christ as the Redeemer was
closely identified with faith in Ood as the Redeemer.
Jesus is xopto^ and ffo»T7jp like Ood, and the samo
words were often used without indicating whether
the reference was to him or to God ; for in the Re-
vealer and Mediator of salvation (Jesus), the Author
(God) is represented (the purpose of salvation and
the revelation of it coincide) ; prayer, however, was
made to Gkni through Christ. This title given to Jesus
(" Christ ^) became indeed a mere name, since there
was no real knowledge of the meaning of ^ Messiah."
Therefore the Gentile Christians were obliged
through other means to find expressions for the dig-
nity of Jesus ; but they possessed in the full eschato-
logical traditions valuable reminiscences of the orig-
inal apprehension of the Person of Jesus. In the
confession that God has chosen and specially pre-
pared Jesus, that he is the "Angel" and "Servant"
of God, and that he shall judge mankind, and simi-
lar expressions, other utterances were made concern-
ing Jesus, which sprang from the fundamental idea
that he was the "Christ" called of God and en-
trusted with an office. In addition there was a
traditional, though not common, reference to him as
"The Teacher."

The title " Son of God " (not " Son of Man ") was
traditional, and was maintained without any waver-
ing. Out of this grew directly the conception that
Jesus belongs to the sphere of God and that one
must think of him " ^<: r^tpi tUoh " (II. Clem. 1) . In

THE PREPARATIOy. 51

this phrasing of it the indirect theologia Christie in
regard to which there w(%8 no wavering^ found ex-
pression in classical forms. It is necessary to think
of Jesus as one thinks of Gk)d, (1) because he is the
God-exalted Lord and Judge, (2) because he brought
true knowledge and life and has delivered mankind
from the dominion of demons, from error and sin, or
will deliver them. Therefore he is <rainj/), xo/9c«y, «5eo9
yauav^ dei filius clc deuSy doniinus ac denSy but not ^
•*£«?. He is "our Hope," "our Faith," the High-
Priest of our prayers, and "our Life."
Starting from this basis there were divers theories Theorieeoc

Peraon of

in r^ard to the Person of Jesus, which however all J««»-
bore a certain analogy to the naive and the philo-
sophical Greek " theologies", but there were no uni-
versally accepted " doctrines" . We may distinguish
here two principal types : Jesus was looked upon as
the man whom Gkxl had chosen and in whom the
Spirit of God (the Gk>dhead itself) dwelt; he was,
in accordance with his own testimony, adopted by
God and clothed with authority {Adoption Chris-
tology) ; or Jesus was looked upon as a heavenly
spiritual Being (the highest heavenly spiritual
Being next to (3od), who became incarnate and
after the completion of his work upon the earth
returned to the heavens (Pneumatic Christology ; two chii»-
the transition here to the Logos Christology was
easy). These two different Christologies (the Dei-
fied man and the Divine Being appearing in the
form of a man) were however brought closely to-

52 OUTLINES OF tHE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

gether so soon as the implanted Spirit of Gkxl in
the man Jesus was looked upon as the pre-existent
Son of God (Hennas), and so soon as the title "8oa
of Gjd," as applied to that spiritual Being, was
derived from his (miraculous) incarnation — ^both,
however, were maintained. Notwithstanding] these
transition forms the two Christologiesmaybe clearly-
distinguished: In the one case the election (emphasis
upon the miraculous occurrence at the baptism) and
the exaltation to God are characteristic ; in the other,

NWveDo- a ndive docetism; for as yet there was no two-
nature theory (Jesus' divinity was looked upon as
a gift, or else his human form as a temporary taber-
nacle). The declaration: Jesus was a mere man
(ff'tXd^ &)f$pwno(:) was undoubtedly from the beginning
and always highly objectionable ; likewise was the
denial of the ^ iv aapxl^ ; but the theories which iden-

NJJ^^o- tified the Person of Jesus with the Godhead (ndive
modalism) were not cast aside with the same assur-
ance. A formal theory of the identity of Qod and
Jesus does not seem to have been wide-spread in the
Church at large. The acceptance of the existence at
least of one heavenly, eternal, spiritual Being dose
to God was demanded outright by the Old Testa-
ment Scriptures, as men understood them, so that all
were constrained to recognize this^ whether or not
they had any basis for reconciling their Christology
with that heavenly Being.

PDoumatic The pueumatic Christology was always found
ogy. wherever men gave themselves to the study of the

THE PREPARATION. 53

Old Testament and wherever faith in Christ as the
o(»npl6te reTelation of God was the foremost thought,
i.e. it is found in all the important and educated
Christian writers (not in Hermas, but in Clement,
Barnabas, Ignatius, etc. ). Because this Christol-
ogy seemed to be directly demanded by the Old Tes-
tament as then expounded, because it alone united
and reconciled creation and redemption, because it
fumishied the proof that the world and religion have
the same Divine Source, because the most esteemed
primitive Scriptures championed it, and, finally, be-
cause it gave room for the introduction of the Logos-
speculation, it was the Christology of the future.
The adoption Christolqgy, however, proved itself ^2P^'?
insuflScient over against the consideration of the re- ^'^'
lation of religion to the cosmos, to humanity and
its history, as well as over against the Old Testa-
ment. And the advocates of the pneumatic Chris-
tology did not set it forth as a doubtful theologu-
menon; their expositions of it (Clement, Ignatius,
Barnabas, Justin), on the contrary, indicate that
they could not conceive of a Christianity without
faith in the divine spiritual Being, Christ. On the
other hand, in the liturgical fragments and prayers
that have come down to us, we find little reference
to the pre-existence; it sufficed that Jesus is now
the wpio^i to whom prayer may be addressed.

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

54 OUTLINES OP THB HISTORY OP DOGMA.

quering of demons, forgiving of past sins in the time
of error) were connected by some (following current
tradition, using the Pauline Epistles) with his death
and resurrection, by others they were aflSrmed with-
out direct reference to these facts. Independent re-
flections upon the close union of the saving work of
Christ with the facts set forth in his preaching are
nowhere found; and yet the representation of the
free endurance of suffering, of the cross, and of the
blood of Christ, was accepted in many communities
as a holy mysterium^ in which the deepest wisdom
and power of the Gospel is concealed (Ignatius),
although the death on the cross and the forgiveness
of sin were by no means everywhere (as in Clement,
Polycarp and Barnabas) inseparably joined together
(Hennas knows nothing whatever about such a
union). The peculiarity and the individuality of the
work of the historical ChHst were moreover menaced
by the idea that Christ had been the revealer of GK>d
in the Old Testament.
SlfS^ All the facts pertaining to the history of Jesus,
^^ S the real and the imagined, received an exaggerated
significance when reiterated in the work of instruc-
tion and when attacked by heretics. To the mirac-
ulous birth, death, resurrection, exaltation and return,
was added definitely now the ascension on the 40th
day and, less definitely, the descent into hell, while
the history of the baptism was more and more ig-
nored. The reality of these occurrences was strongly
emphasi2sed ; but they had not yet become " dogmas'' ;

THE PREPABATION. 55

for they were neither inseparably connected with the
idea of salvation, nor were they definitely outlined,
nor was the fantasie reBtricted in its artistic exuber-
ance.

7. That the Worship of Ood should be a pure, wonhip^
spiritual exercise, without oeremonieB, was taken for
granted. Every divine service was looked upon as
a spiritual offering (of thanks) accompanied with
fasting and deeds of compassionate love. The
Lord's Supper (eucharist) was held to be an offering ^^^^
in Ihe strictest sense of the word, and everything
which was associated with it (e.g. assistance of
the poor) became imbued with the idea of sacrifice.
Thenceforward the institutional idea found a wide
range, notwithstanding the essential spirituality of
worship. Starting with the idea of the symbolical^
"mysteries " which were so necessary to the Greeks
were soon established. Baptism in the name of the Baptiim.
Father, Son and Spirit was esteemed as the mystery
through which the sins of blindness are wholly set
aside, and which only thenceforward, however,
imposes obligations (mortal sins, committed after
baptism, were considered unpardonable, and yet
pardoning power was reserved for Ood who here
and there exercises it upon the earth through in-
spired men. The idea and practice of a ^sec-
ond repentance" were bom through the stress of
necessity, became however wide-spread, and were
then established by the prophetical book of Hennas).
Baptism was called ^^pa/iig and fwrttTftdg (no infant

66 OUTLINES Ot tHB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

baptism); the uniting of baptism with the gift of
the Holy Spirit became somewhat uncertain. The
Lord^s Supper was viewed as «pdpfiaxov d^avaffia^^ as
a mysterious communication of gnosis and of life
(see the eucharistic prayer in the Didache; the for-
giveness of sins is not there mentioned) ; it was at
once a communion meal and a sacrificial meal.
itoaium Realism and symbolism were here mingled together,
boiism. jyg^ j^ were the ideas of grace and of sacrificial
offering. Hellenic conceptions early crowded in here
(see Ignatius, Justin, Apol. I., the close).
SSStion' Church organization, as such, exercised no in-
fluence upon the form of the statement of belief until
about the year 150. And yet the high esteem in
which the apostles, prophets and teachers were held
laid the foundation for future developments; besides,
Ignatius had already declared that the attitude
toward the bishop determined the attitude toward
Qod and toward Christ, and other teachers insisted
that one must follow the "ancients", the disciples
of the apostles, in aU things.

s^m of ^^^^ survey indicates that the decisive premises
inKmbiyo. for the cvolution of the Catholic system of doctrine
were already in existence before the middle of the 2d
century and before the heated contest with gnosti-
cism.

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

THE PRBPARATION. 67

varied character from the point of view of the his-
tory of dogma. In the Didache we have a catechism Didache.
for the Christian life, dependent upon a Jewish-
Greek catechism, and bringing out in the prayers
and ecclesiastical discipline that which is specifically
Christian. The Bamabas-Epistley probably of Al- ^^SSST
ezandrian origin, teaches the correct (Christian)
interpretation of the Old Testament, casts aside
verbal interpretation and Judaism as of the devil,
and follows Paul essentially as regards Christology.
The same Christology is represented in the Roman
1, Clement-Epistle^ which also contains Pauline \^t
reminiscences (in regard to atonement and justifi-
cation), but these are conceived from the moral
standpoint. It is classically represented in Hermas P|2^
Pastor and in the II, Clement-Epistley where the ^m^tf"
eschatological element is also very prominent. The
Christology of the former is the adoption; the
author of the II. Clem. Epist. has no consistent
Christology, but follows various motives. The the-
ology of Ignatius is the most advanced, in so far as
he, in the contest with the gnostics, made the facts
of salvation prominent and drew his own gnosis
from the history of Christ rather than from the Old
Testament. He sought to make Jesus Christ, xara
irveofia and xarA adpxa^ the Centre of Christianity. The
Epistle of Polycarp is characteristic on account of its ^^^Jf
dependence upon earlier Christian writings (Paul's
Epistles, I. Peter, I. John), and on account of its
conservative attitude toward the most valuable tra

56 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

PnMiicAUo ditions. The Prcedicatio Petri marks the transition

Petri.

from the primitive Christian literary activity to the
apologetic writers (Christ as ^^/lo^ and ^^r*^).

CHAPTER IV.

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

Sources : The writings of Justin and the early Catholic
Fathers, together with Epiphanius and Theodoret. Frag-
ments collected by Hilgenfeld, Ketzergesch, 1884. Descrip-
tions by Neander, Gnostische System, 1818, Baur, Gnosis,
1835, Lipsius, Gnosticismus, 1860, Moeller, Kosmologie in
der griech. Kirche, 1860 ; vide also Renan, Hist. des. Orig.
duChristianisme", T. V.-Vn.

Gnoeti- ^- Gnosticism is a manifestation of the great syn-
• cretic movement of the 2d and 3d centuries, which
was occasioned by the interchange of national relig-
ions, by the contact of Orient and Occident, and by
the influence of Greek philosophy upon religion in

Alms at a general. It aimed at the winning of a world-relig-
ligion. lon^ in which men should be rated, not on the basis
of citizenship, but according to the standard of their
intellectual and moral aptitude. The Gospel was rec-
ognized as a world-religion only in so far as it could
be severed from the Old Testament religion and the
Old Testament, and be moulded by the religious
philosophy of the Greeks and grafted upon the
existing cultus-wisdom and practice of occult mys-

THE PREPARATION. 59

teries. The means by which this artificial union
was to be brought about was the allegorical method ^JJSJS^
as used long since by the Greek religious philoso
phers. The possibility of the rise of a CSiristian
gnosticism lay in this, that the Christian conmiu-
nitieB had everywhere fallen heir to the heritage of
the Jewish propaganda, where there was abready an ^^
exuberant tendency to spiritualize the Old Testament ^
religion, and where the intellectual interest in relig-
ion had long been unbridled. Besides, the Gospel of
Christ, and especially Christ himself, had made such
an overwhelming impression that men were pos-
sessed by the strongest impulse to subordinate their
highest conceptions to him, whence, as so often, the christian
** victus victori legem dat " attained its right. Fi- ^'*^*-
nally the Christian preaching from the beginning
promised a gnosis of the wisdom of God, espe
cially that of Paul an antinomian gnosis, and the
churches in the empire conceived the Christian
wisdom as Xoyixij XaTpua^ in accordance with their
Greek conceptions; they combined the mysterious
with a marvellous openness, the spiritual with the
most significant rites, and sought in this way, MysteriooB

Rites

through their organization and through their " phil-
osophical life", to realize that ideal for which the
HeUenic religious spirit was then striving,— namely,
a communion, or fellowship, which, upon the basis
of a Divine revelation, comes, into the possession of
the highest knowledge and therefore realizes the
holiest life, and which communicates this knowledge*

60 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

not through rational discussion, but through mys-
terious, efficacious consecrations and revealed doc-
trines.
suiS>*of ^' W® ^^ ^^"^ prepared to assert, that in gnos-
^^'^^^^^ ticism the acute stage of a process was reached,
which began early in the Church and which under-
went a slow and distinct evolution under the Catho-
lic system. The gnostics were the theologians of
the 1st century; they were the first to transform
Christianity into a system of doctrines (dogmas);
they were the first to treat tradition and the primitive
Christian Scriptures systematically ; they undertook
to set forth Christianity as the absolute religion, and
they therefore placed it in opposition to the other re-
ligions, to that of the Old Testament as well (not alone
to Judaism) ; but the absolute religion, which they
coupled with Christ, was to them essentially identical
with the results of the philosophy of religion, for which
they had now found the basis in a revelation : They
Attempt to were accordingly a class of Christians who essayed

c{^^^- through a sharp onset to conquer Christianity for
Hellenism. Hellenic culture, and Hellenic culture for Christian-
ity, and they thereby abandoned the Old Testament
in order to fitly close up the breach between the two
Christian- opposing forccs. Christianity became an occult tbe-
cukSi^ osophy (revealed metaphysics and apparition philos-
^^^^' ophy^ permeated with the Platonic spirit and with
Pauline ideas, constructed out of the material of
an old cultus-wisdom which was acquired through
mysteries and the illumined understanding, defined

THB PREPABATIOK. 61

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

ic DnunAtr

sophical, dramatico-poetic representation similar to *^22J**°
the Platonic, but far more complicated and therefore
more fantastical, in which those mighty powers, the

62 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

spiritual and the good, appeared to have been brought
into an unholy alliance with the material and the
base, from which however finally the spiritual, as-
sisted by kindred powers which are too exalted ever
to be abased, is after all rendered free. The good
and the heavenly which is degraded to the material
is the human spirit; and the sublime Power which
o?^> sets it free is the Christ. The Gospel history is not

^"oS?*^" the history of Christ, but a collection of allegorical
representations of the groat Divine world-history.
Christ has in truth no history; his appearance in
this world of confusion and delusion is his own act
and the enlightenment of the Spirit, as regards itself,
is the effect of this act. This illumination itself is
life, but it is dependent upon asceticism and upon a
surrender to the mysteries ordained by Christ, in
which one comes into communion with a praesens
ntuneriy and which in a mysterious way gradually free
the spirit from the world of sense. This spiritualize

nen^'he ^^^ procoss should also be actively cultivated. Absti-
watch-cry. qquqq jg therefore the watch-cry. Christianity is
accordingly a speculative philosophy which redeems
the spirit {r^wat^ trwnjpia^)^ inasmuch as it enlight-
ens and consecrates it and directs it unto the true
way of life. The gnosis is free from the rational-
istic interest of the stoa. The powers which give
vigor and life to the spirit rule in the supersensible
world. The only guide to this world is a fJLdt^<rt^
(not exact philosophy) resting upon a revelation and
allied with fiutrra^tu^ia. The fundamental principles

THE PREPARATION. 63

are acooidingly the following: (1) The sapersensi- runda-
ble, indefinite and eternal nature of the divine pri- Prtnc^p***-
mordial Being, (2) the evil (not real) matter opposed
to the divine Being, (3) the plenitude of the divine
powers (eons) which, viewed partly as powers, partly
as real ideas, partly as relatively independent beings,
represent in stages the development and revelation
of the Divinity, but which at the same time are
intended to make possible the transition from the
higher to the lower, {i) the cosmos as a mixture of
matter with sparks of the divine Being, and which
originated from the descent of the latter into the
former, i.e. from a reprehensible undertaking of a
subordinate spirit, merely through the Divine suf-
ferance, (5) the freeing of the spiritual elements from
their union with matter, or the separation of the
good from the sensuous world through the Christ-
Spirit, which is active in holy consecrations, knowl-
edge and asceticism — thus arises the complete gnos-
tic, the independent world-free spirit, who lives in
Grod and prepares himself for eternity. The rest of
mankind are earth-bom (hylikers). Yet leading 5Ji*^|".
teachers (School of Valentinus) distinguish also be-
tween hylikers and psychikers; the latter were the
doers of the law, who lived by law and faith, for
whom the common faith is good enough, that is,
necessary. The centre of gravity of the gnostic
system did not rest in its changing details, which
are so imperfectly known to us, but in its aim and
in its postulates.

chikera.

64 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Hums of 3. The phasos of gnosticism were as variegated as
<5*™- possible (brotherhoods, ascetic orders, cultus of mys-
teries, secret schools, free devotional associations,
performances by Christian swindlers and betrayed
betrayers, attempts to establish new religions after
the pattern and under the influence of the Christian
religion). Accordingly the relation of gnosticism
to that which was common to all Christians and to
the individual Christian communities was exceed-
ingly varied. On the one hand, gnosticism pene-
trated to the very heart of those Christian churches
' in which docetic and dualistic-ascetic influences
were largely at work and where there was a strong
' tendency to vary the original form of the kerygma ;
on the other hand, there were gnostic communities
that remained apart and indeed abhorred all alliances
with others. For the history of dogma the right
wing of gnosticism and the real stem, the great

ii^^ vti- S^^^^^ school sects (Basilidians, Yalentinians) come

entioians. especially under consideration. The latter wished
to establish a higher order of Christians above the
common psychikers, who were barely endured. The
contest was mainly with these and they were the

?i?eo/™* theologians from whom later generations learned
*5»**^ and were the first to write elementary works on
dogmatics, ethics, and scientific and exegetical trea-
tises; in short, they laid the foundations of Chris-
tian theological literature and began the elaboration
of Christian tradition. The expulsion of these gnos-
tics and of the right wing (Encratites, ^Docetse,''

THE PREPARATION. 65

Tatian) could be accomplished only slowly and it ^^^^^
was a result of the consolidating of the Christian Tatun.
communities into the Catholic Church which was
called forth by this gnostic movement.

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

66 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

demiurge, and then seek out of this to form from an
unbiased reading of the Christian writings an idea
of "gnostic.'* That the entire many-sided move-

Heiienism. ment, in which Hellenism, with ail its good and bad
qualities, sought to adapt the Gospel, should gradu-
ally become a Christian, or, rather, an ecclesiastical
movement, lay in the nature of the case. But it is
not therefore possible to group the systems in the
Zd century chronologically according to a Christian
standard, since attempts like that of Carpocrates be-
long to the earlier and not to the later times.

Difference 4. Although the differences between gnostic Chris-

between

(^istiui- ^^^'^^ty a^d the common ecclesiastical faith, as well
c^m^4 ^ ^^ 1^^^ ecclesiastical theology, appear in part
fleeting, in so far as in the latter also the question
of knowledge was especially emphasized and the
Gospel was being transformed into a system of com-
plete knowledge in order to subdue the world, and in
so far as the i^i<nt^ was made subordinate to the
yvwtrt^ and Greek philosophy was more and more
employed, and in so far as eschatology was restricted,
docetic views allowed free play and a rigid ascetism
prized; yet it is true, (1) that at the time when
gnosticism was most flourishing all these were found
in the Church at large only in germinal, or frag-
mentary form, (2) that the Church at large held fast
to the settled facts contained in the baptismal con-
fession and to the eschatological expectations, retain-
ing its belief also in the Creator as the Supreme
Gk>d, in the oneness of Jesus Christ and in the Old

THE PREPARATION. 67

Testament, thus rejecting dualism, (3) that the
Church maintained the imity and the parity of hu-
man kind and therefore the simplicity and universal
tendency of the Christian salvation, and (4) that it
opposed ever)' attempt to introduce new, Oriental
mythologies, guided in this by the early Christian
consciousness and a certain independent judgment.
However, the Church in its contest with gnosticism
learned a great deal from it. The principal points principal

Points un-

which were under discussion may be briefly sum- der discus-
marized as follows (the word ^ positive " appended to
a gnostic proposition indicates that the doctrine had
a positive influence in the development of the
Church view and doctrine) : (1) Christianity, which
is the only true and absolute religion, contains a re-
vealed system of doctrine (pos.), (2) the Revealer is
Christ (pos.), but Christ alone^ and Christy only so
far as he was made manifest (no O. T. Christ).
This manifestation is itself the redemption, — the
teaching is the proclamation of this and of the nec-
essary presuppositions (pos.), (3) the Christian teach-
ing is to be deduced from the apostolic tradition
critically treated ; the same is found in the apostolic
writings and in an esoteric doctrine transmitted
by the apostles (pos.) ; as an open doctrine it is con-
densed in the regulafidei (pos.), as an esoteric doc-
trine it is transmitted by appointed teachers, (4) the
primitive revelation (apostolic Scriptures), even be-
cause it is such, must be expounded by means of the
allegory, in order to draw out its deeper meaning

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Disparity
between
Supreme
Oodand
Creator.

DiBtin-

fTulahing

Supreme

God from

Qodof

O. T.

Eternity of
matter.

World
Product of
Intermedi-
ate or Eril

Being.

Evil Inher>

ent in

Matter and

a Physical

Agency.

Eons.

Christ Re-

vealer of

Unlcnown

God.

Jesus,

Heavenly

Eon.

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

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

(b) the distinguishing of the Supreme Gh)d from
the God of the Old Testament, and the consequent
rejection of the O. T. ; Le. the declaration that the
O. T. does not contain a revelation of the Supreme
God, unless it be in certain parts,

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

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

(f) the acceptance of eons, i.e. of real powers and
heavenly persons, in whom the absoluteness of the
Divinity unfolds itself,

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

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

THE PREPARATION.

existmt Being — Christ and the human manifestation
of him are to be dearly distinguished and to each
nature a **distincte agere^ was to be given (not
dooetism, but the two-nature doctrine is character-
istic). Accordingly some, as Basilides, recognized
no real imion whatever between Christ and the man
Jesus, whom they otherwise accepted as a real man.
Others, as a portion of the Valentinians — their Chris-
tology was exceedingly complicated and varied —
taught that the body of Jesus was a heavenly-psychi-
cal form, and that it only apparently came forth
from the womb of Mary. Others finally, like Sator-
nil, explained that the entire visible manifestation of
Christ was only a phantasma, and hence they ques-
tioned the reality of his birth,

(i) the transformation of the ixxXijffia (that the
heavenly Church was looked upon as an eon was
notiiing new) into the collegium of the pneuma-
tikers, who alone shall enjoy the highest blessedness,
while the hylikers shall suffer destruction and the
psychikers with their ffnXi^ irtffrt^ shall obtain only an
inferior blessedness,

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

BMilides.

Valentin*

iAOB.

Satoniil.

Church is

Collegium

of Pneu-

matikera.

Beiection
ofPriml-
tire Chrifi-
tian Escha-
tology.

70 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Duaiistic (1) the dualistic ethics (rifind asoetism) which here

Ethics.

and there may have veered over into libertinism.

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

^ CHAPTER V.

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

>gjjg<»'» Marcion should not be classed with gnostics like
PrincipieB. gasilidcs and Valentinus; for (1) he was guided by-
no metaphysical, also by no apologetical, but only
by a purely soteriological interest, (2) he therefore
placed the whole emphasis upon the pure Gbspel and
upon faith (not upon knowledge), (3) he did not em-
ploy philosophy — at least not as a main principle —
in his conception of Christianity, (4) he did not en-
deavor to found schools of philosophers, but to re-
form, in accordance with the true Pauline Gospel,
the churches whose Christianity he believed to be
legalistic ( Judaistic) and who, as he thought, denied
''^*^» free grace. When he failed in this, he formed a
church of his own. Wholly captivated by the nov-
elty, uniqueness and glory of the grace of God in

THE PREPARATION. 71

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

1. The Old Testament was expounded by Marcion itoojitiOT
according to its verbal sense and with a rejection of *«»«>*•
all allegorical interpretations; he accepted it as a
revelation of the Creator of the world and of the God
of the Jews; but even on this account he placed it
in sharp antithesis to the Gospel (see the " Antithe-
ses") the content of which he discovered solely in
the utterances of Jesus and in the Pauline Epistles, ^^^^^
after that he had purified them from supposed Jew- ^tStieB

the Sole

ish interpolations. These interpolations were, ac- oogpei.

iZ OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

cording to his idea, of long standing, since the
twelve apostles did not understand Jesus and mis-
construed his Gospel, making it to correspond with
^^und'Jj?-"^ the Old Testament. Paul, who was called by Christ
je«M. ^ restore the true Gospel, was the only one who per-
ceived that Jesus had proclaimed a hitherto imknown
God of grace in opposition to Jehovah « As his
preaching has also been obscured, he, Marcion, has
been authorized to restore the pure Gospel. This
was the mission which Marcion's church attributed
to him, and it gave his " Antitheses " a sort of canon-
ical authority.

^5j^}o«»'8 2. Marcion's conception of God and his Christol-
^^ ogy resemble the gnostic in so far as he also empha-
sized most clearly the newness, uniqueness and abso-
luteness of Christianity in opposition to the Church
at large; he surpassed the gnostics, however, in so
far as he conceived mankind to be wholly the ofiF-
spring of the Creator of the world and found in
man's nature nothing akin to the God of Love.
But love and grace are according to Marcion the
entire substance of the Godhead ; redemption is the
most incomprehensible act of the Divine mercy, and
everything that the Christian possesses he owes to
Christ aloney who is the manifestation of the good
God himself. Through his suffering he purchased
from the Creator of the world those who believe on
Docetiam. him, and won them for himself. The rigid doce-
tism, however, which Marcion taught, — the declara-
tion that the souls only of men will be saved, — the

THE PREPAKATION. 73

renunciation of the return of Christ and the increas-
inglj hard asceticism, even to the prohibition of mar- A^oeti-

ciniL

riage (in spite of the thought that Qod^s love should
control the "new " life), are proofs that Marcion was
to a certain extent defenceless against Hellenism ; on
the other hand, his eschatolog^cal ideas indicate that
he was seeking to return to the monarchy of the
good Qod.

3. With the view of restoring the Church of the >te?'<»>

^ Biblical

pure Gk)6pel and of gathering together the redeemed canon,
who are hated by the God of this world, Marcion
caused certain evangelical writings of a particular
character to be collected (Luke's Gbspel and 10
Pauline Epistles), laid down certain principles for
their interpretation and drew the conununities into
a closer, though freer, organization. Inasmuch as
he rejected the Old Testament, together with all
" natural ^ religion, philosophy and secret tradition,
he was obliged to answer the question, What is
Christian? out of the historical records. Here, as
in many other respects, did he anticipate the Cath-
olic Church.

4. The profound conception that the laws which Conception

of NaturOf

rule in nature and history and the course of civil m^'^p^

" Faith.

righteousness are a reflection of the acts of Divine
mercy, and that humble faith and fervent love are
the very opposite of self-complacent virtue and self-
righteousness — ^this conception, which dominated the
Christianity of Marcion, and which restrained him
from every rationalistic attempt at a system, was not

OUTLINES OP THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

clearly maintained by his church as time went on.
In order to close up the breaches and to remove the
inconsistencies of his conceptions, some of his pupils
advanced to a doctrine of three principles, others to
a vulgar dualism, without however surrendering en-
Apeiies. tii*ely the fundamental ideas of their master. Apelles,
however, Marcion's greatest pupil, returned to the
confession of the one God, without in other respects
surrendering the master's conceptions; and, indeed,
he further developed some valuable ideas, at which
Marcion had only hinted.

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

CHAPTER VI.

SUPPLEMENT: THE CHRISTIANITY OP THE JEWISH

CHRISTIANS.

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

THE PREPARATION. 75

refers to the Christian organization and teaching,
and this, whether a more or less realistic or spiritual
interpretation of it was in vogue. The question as
to the principles of interpretation was a problem
within the Church, so long as no superiority was
conceded to the Jewish nation as such, and until the
abrogation of the Jewish ceremonies and laws was
insisted upon. Therefore the term ^Jewish-Chris- ^^^
tianity " is applicable exclusively to those Christians ^^•
who really retained, entirely or in the smallest part,
the national and political forms of Judaism and
insisted upon the observance of the Mosaic Law
without modification as essential to Christianity, at
least to the Christianity of the Jewish-bom converts,
or who indeed rejected these forms, but acknowl-
edged the prerogative of the Sewi&h people also in
Christianity (Papias in spite of his chiliasm ; the papias, di-
author of the Didache, in spite of his transference
of the Old Testament priestly rights to the Chris-
tian prophets; Hermas, in spite of the waning an- Hemuu,
cient Qreek philosophy ; the adoption Christologists,
in spite of their rejection of the Logos, are not
Jewish Christians; Paul, however, is because of
Romans XL). The strong draft made upon the Old
Testament in favor of the Catholic cultus-, doctrine-
and discipline-system, is so little a sign of the ad-
vance of Jewish Christianity in the Church at large,
that it rather runs parallel to the advancing Hellen-
ism, and was called forth by it. The formula, " the
new lawy" in the Catholic Church is not Jewish,

76 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA

but anti- Jewish, yet it left room for the slipping in
of more and more of the Old Testament command-
ments into the Church.
CtartstSii- ^' Jewish Christianity, once a mighty antagonist
* TOme**^ of Paul, was, through his labors and the labors of
other teachers, as well as through the native force
of the Gk>spel, overcome. In the fall of Jerusalem
this conquest was completed. Since then Jewish
Christianity has not been a factor in the history of
the Church, while Judaism has remained such (in-
fluence of Judaism upon the churches of the farthest
Ebionites, Orient, in the 4th and 5th centuries). However,
fo? Soma Jewish Christians (Ebionites, Nazarenes) existed for
some time, and among them the distinctions re-
mained which were already formulated in the apos-
tolic age. Separated from the main Church origi-
nally, not on account of ^ doctrine **, but on account
of principles of social Church life, of morals and
missionary practice, there were among them the fol-
Points in lowing poiuts in controversy : (1) Whether the observ-

"^item"* ^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ * condition, or the determining
condition, of the reception of the Messianic salva-
tion, (2) whether the same was to be required also of
Gentile-bom converts, in order to their recognition
as Christians, (3) whether and to what extent one
might hold fellowship with Gentile Christians who
de not observe the Law, (4) whether Paul was a
chosen servant of Christ, or a Gk)d-hated interloper,
(5) whether Jesus was a son of Joseph, or was mirac-
ulously begotten of the Holy Spirit. Thus there

THE PREPABATION. 77

were shades of belief within Jewish Christianity
(not two dearly distinguished parties) . There seems
to have been little literary activity among these Jew-
ish Christians, who were expelled by the Jews, (see,
however, Symmachus) ; their Gospel was the Hebrew ^^^^"^^
Gospel which was related to the Synoptics (testimony a<*i*i-
of Justin, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, Epiphanius).
Justin still recognized the liberal Jewish Chris-
tians who observed the Law for themselves alone,
and were friendly toward the Gentile Christians, as
Christian brethren. As yet no Christological creed,
no iTew Testament, divided them, and even in their
eschatological expectations, Gtentile and Jewish
Christians could still come to an understanding.
But the more Jewish Christianity withdrew from the
world in general and the more iBrmly the Catholic GraduaJiv
Church fixed its doctrine and discipline (add to this '^™,j^*^
the formation of the New Testament canon) and <^"'^-
formulated its Logos-Christology, the more foreign
and heretical did Jewish C!hristianity appear; and
after IrenaBus it was even placed in the same cate-
gory with gnosticism. Certain Oriental fathers,
however, pass a better judgment upon it.

3. Judaism was in the 1st century a very compli- Judaism

Verv Com-

cated affair on account of foreign influences (Hellen- pucated.

istic Judaism, Samaritans, '^Sects''). Accordingly

there were already 'Agnostic" Jewish Christians, Gnostic

Jewish

(" false teachers " at Colosse, see also the Pastoral christians.
Epistles; on the other hand, Simon Magus, Menan-
der) who introduced into Christianity angelological

78 OUTLINES OP THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

^SSs^ifo^ speculations (these were also familiar to the phar-
nander. jg^^g ^nd the writers of apocalypses) and gave cur-
rency to cosmological ideas and myths, through both
of which they sublimated the idea of Gk>d, bisected,
corrected or transformed the Law (rejection of the
blood offering) and gave an impulse to a peculiar
asceticism and cultus of mysteries. They continued
cerinth. ujjtil far into the Byzantine age. Cerinth (c. 100)
retained certain established laws (circumcision) and
preached a grossly sensuous, realistic future king-
dom; but, on the other hand, he distinguished the
supreme God from the Creator of the world, freely
criticised the Law and distinguished in the Redeemer
the man Jesus from the Christ whom he identified
with the Holy Spirit. Another branch of this Jew-

ciemenun ^®^ Christianity is to be found in the Pseudo-

writingB. Clementine Writings. Therein, as appears from thei r
sources, the attempt is made by means of stoic ra-
tionalism, on the one side, and Oriental mythologic
cosmology on the other, to fortify apologetically the
conception that the Gospel is the restoration of the
pure Mosaic doctrine. The contradictory represen-
tations of stoic naturalism and a positive revelation
through prophets are to be united through the idea
of the one Prophet, who from Adam down has ap-

Ht4d*tS*be P^^^®^ ^^ different forms. The Gospel was believed
uon*Sf " to be the restoration of the primitive and universal

Beiigion. religion, which is simply Mosaism freed from all its
peculiar characteristics (circumcision, statutes re-
specting offerings). Christ is the one true Prophet,

THE PBEPABATION. 79

i¥ho, as it seems, was identified with the first Adam.
The stoic idea of the ^oj'ot was accepted, but it was j^S^SSi-
justified through a dualisticaUy-oonceived eon-spec- **"^*
ulation, in which the early Semitic principles cropped
out (masculine-feminine; neutralization of the ethi-
cal contradictions in the supreme God). Platonic
elements are hardly discernible. But along with
the apologetical tendency, the polemical is strongly
marked. This is directed, under the form of a refuta-
tion of Simon Magus, against every phase of Gentile-
Christian gnosticism (also against Marcion), while
the primitive writings doubtless contained a polemic
against Paul. The polemic and the means made use
of prove that the Catholic Church was already in ex-
istence. Therefore the Pseudo-Clementine Writings Pteudo-
belong to the 3d century. Accordingly it is probable tin® wnt-
that the compilers had before them earlier, anti-Paul- century-
ine writings. Moreover it is probable that the last
redactors were in no sense Jewish Christians, that,
also, the above-mentioned characteristics are not
ascribable to a group of writers, as such, but that
they belong to them only dccidentallyy that primi-
tive Jewish Christian writings passed through vari-
ous hands and were innocently transmitted and re-
vised. This being so, the seeking for a "Pseudo-
Clementine System" is a fruitless undertaking; it
were better to accept the last narrator as a Catholic
Christian who made use of whatever interested him
and others, but who was by no means a disciple of
Irenseus or Origen. Whether imder such conditions

Elkesaites.

80 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

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

BOOK 11.

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION.

CHAPTER I.

HISTORICAL 8UBVBY.

RitBchl, Entstehung der altkathl. Kirche, 1857. Benan,
Origines, T. V-Vn.

THE second century of the existence of Gentile- ,^tn®
•^ Christian-

Christian Churches is characterized by the 2d^tSy.

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

of Christian piety was curbed and the fanciful myth-
6 81

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Onofltic
SjrstemB
Befuted.

Double

Problem.

Firgt: Ori-

grin of

C^oll-

cism as

a Church.

Second:
Origin of
Scientiflo
System of

Faith.

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

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

THB LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 83

oonnection with the aims of the earliest Gentile
Christianity (see Book I. Chap. 3) ; to describe how
this, which was originally through revelation sim-
ply an assured monotheistic cosmology, Logos-doc-
trine and moral theology, became in the contest with
gnosticism amalgamated with the ideas of salvation
in the ancient mysteries, on the one side, with the
Church kerygma and the Old Testament ideas on
the other (Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian), and was Sf"^
thus transformed into a complicated system (philo- ^]iSJ"
sophical, kerygmatical. Biblical and primitive-Chris-
tian-eschatological elements); how, farther, under
the influence of the Alexandrians, it was recast into Aiezan-

' driaoB.

an Hellenic, syncretic system in the interest of
Catholic gnostics (type of Philo and Valentine) , and
how, then, the great breach between scientific dog-
matics and the traditional faith was made manifest,
which already in the 3d century had received such a
thorough solution that the aims of scientific dog-
matics and a part of its teaching (above all its
Logos-doctrine) were adopted as the faith of the ^^^^
Church; while other things were cast aside or con- ^**®p**^
tested, the realistic propositions of the kerygma
were shielded from the spiritualizing tendency that
would transform them, and the right of distinguish-
ing between a system of faith for thinking minds
and a faith for imthinking minds (thus Origen) was
fundamentally denied. The four stages of the de-
velopment of dogma (Apologists, early Catholic
Fathers, Alexandrines, Methodius together with

84 OUTUNBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

his followers) correspond to the progressive relig^-
ious and philosophical development of paganism dur-
ing that time : Philosophical theory of morals, idea
of salvation (theology and practice of mysteries),
Neo-Platonism and reactionary syncretism.

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

CHAPTER II.

THE SETTING FORTH OF THB APOSTOLIC RULES
(norms) for ECCLESIASTICAL CHRISTIANITF.
THE CATHOUC CHURCH.

Rule of '^HE three apostolic norms (Rule of Faith, New
Ta»tAraontT Testament, Office) — seelrenaaus, III.: 1 sq., Tertul-

Office.

lian, depraesc. 21. 32. 36.*) — found their way into
the different provincial churches at different times,
but the three always went together. They had their
preparatory stages in the brief kerygmatic confes-

* De praemr, 91: **Con&tat omnem doetrinam 91100 cum ecduUt apo*'
tolicU matricUniM ei originalibuB fidei corupiret veritati depuiandam^
id sine duMo tetientem qttod ecdeHae ab apoatolis^ apostoH a Chritto,,
Chritttu a deo acoqiHt. " 86 : ** Videamui qmd (ecdetia Boma$Uk) didicerit^
qtUd doeuerit^ cum Africani* quoque eodeaiU contemerarii, Unum deum,
dominum novit, crtatorem univerHtaHs^ ei ChrUtum Jemtm ex virgnte
Maria JUium dei creatoris^ et cami* resurrectionem; legem et propKeiae
cum evangelicis et apoetolicie litteria miacet, inde potai fidem^ earn aqtui
signat^ aancto spiritu vestiU eucharistia paadU martyrtiim exhortatwr^ et
itaadveraua hanc iristitutionem nominem recipit.^ 88: *'Evolvant ordi^
nem epiacoporum eiiorum^ ita per gucceseionem ab initio decurrentem^ ut
primus Ule epiacopua aliquem ex apoatolis vel apoatolicis virim^ qui tamen
cum apoBtoliaperaeveravit, Kabuerit auctorem et onleceaaeorem."

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 85

sions, in the authority of the xdpto^ and of the apos-
tolic tradition, as well as in the epistles read in the
chinches, and finaUj in the deference shown to
apostles, prophets and teachers, i.e. to the ^elders"
and leaders of the individual churches.

A. The Recasting of the Baptismal Confession Bapunnai
into the Apostolic Rule of Faith (Caspari, Quellen Bion.
z. Gkech. des Taufsymbols, 4 Bdd.). From the first
there was in the Church a kerygma (preaching) of
Christ (see Book I., Chap. 3 sub 2) and brief confes-
sional formulas (Father, Son and Spirit) ; and espe-
cially in the Roman church, at least since ± 140 a. D. ,
a definite baptismal confession (probably also in Asia
Minor). These confessions were ^the faith" and
were considered the quintessence of the apostolic
preaching and were, therefore, referred back to
Christ and ultimately to GKxl himself. But every-
thing indeed which seemed inalienable was looked
upon as an apostolic rule of faith, e.g. the Christian
interpretation of the Old Testament. However,
probably nothing was fixed, save that the Roman Roman
symbol and the ethical rules {^tda^^i^ xupioo) stood at
least upon the same plane as the kerygma of Christ.
From the beginning, however, in the work of in-
struction, in exhortations and, above all, in the con-
tests with false teachings men enjoined : d7toXiitwfie¥

rdif xevd^ xai fiaraia^ fpovtlda^^ xai iX^wfiev M rdv edxXe^
xa\ ae/u^v r^y icapa96trtw9 ^fiwv xaydva (I. Clem. 7 ; cf .

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

OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Need of
External
SUuuUrd.

Churches
of AsiA
Minor and
Borne Ac-
cept Bap-
tismal
Confession
as Apos-
tolic.

gnosticism became acute, men necessarily came to
realize that neither the content and compass of
"the received faith" ("the sound. doctrine"), nor
its interpretation was secured to them. There was
need, it seemed, of a fixed outward standard, in
order to be able to disprove doctrines such as that
of the difference between the supreme Qod and the
Creator-God, or such as that of docetism, and to
be able to maintain the true conception as apostolic
doctrine — ^they needed a definitely interpreted apos-
tolic creed. Under these circumstances the partic-
ularly closely allied churches of Asia Minor and
Rome, whose experience is known to us through
IrensBus (he is hardly the first writer on the subject),
accepted the fixed Roman baptismal confession as
apostolic in such a way that they proclaimed the
current anti-gnostic interpretation of it as its self--
evident content, and the expounded confession as
"fides catholica^^] i.e. they set it up as a standard
of truth in matters of faith and made its acceptance
the condition of membership in the Church. This
procedure, by which the centre of gravity of Chris-
tianity was shifted, (the latter, however, was pre-
served from entire dissolution) rests upon two un-
proven assertions and an exchange. It is not proven
that any confession of this kind emanated from the
apostles and that the churches founded by the apos-
tles always preserved their teaching without modi-
fications; and the confession itself was exchanged
for an exposition of it. Finally, the conclusion that

THB LAYING OP THE FOITNDATION. 87

from the virtual agreement in doctrine of a group of
churches (bishops) there existed a fides catholica
was unjustified. This action established the Cath- cithoiic

^ Argument

oUc argument from tradition and has determined 55t!SoB»r
its fundamental significance until the present *^**"****-
time : The equivocal right, on the one side, to an-
nounce the creed as complete andplain^ and, on the
other side, to make it so elastic that one can reject
every uncomfortable meaning, is to the present day
characteristic of Catholicism. It is also characteris-
tic that men identify Christianiiy with a system of
faith which the laity cannot imderstand. The lat-
ter are therefore oppressed and referred back to the
authority,

Tertullian developed the method of IrensBus still "SJJ^^^
farther. As the latter found the chief gnostic ^gSSSS^°
teachings already refuted in the baptismal confes-
sion, while as yet only the common sense of the
Church protested against them; so the former,
embracing the confession all the more firmly as au-
thority for the faith, found in the regula already the
creation of the universe from nothing, the mediator-
ship of the Logos in creation, the existence of the
same before all creatures, a definite theory in regard
to his incarnation, the preaching of a nova lex and
of a nova promissiOy and finally also the trinitarian
economy and the correct teaching in respect to the
natures of Christ (de praescr. 13 ; de virg. 1 ; adv.
Prax.j 2, etc.). His " regula " is an apostolic lex et
doctrina^ inviolable for every Christian.

88 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

BotIS «ii ^^^y ^^ *^® course of the 3d century did this Cath-
oenSS^ olic standard become wide-spread in the Church.
Clement of Alexandria did not yet know it (for
him the «ava>y r^ff ixxXijffta^ was the anti-gnostic in-
terpretation of the Holy Scriptures) ; Origen, how-
ever, came very near accepting it (see, de princip,
praef.)y i.e. in the beginning of the 3d century the
Alexandrian Church was following the Roman, and
gradually became " Catholic**. Later still the Syrian
churches also followed, as the documentary source
of the Apostolic Constitutions proves, which knows
nothing of the "apostolic rule of faith" in the
Occidental sense. Only at the end of the 3d century
did the Catholic Church become a reality through
the common apostolic lex and distinguish itself
sharply from the heretical parties; remote churches,
indeed, probably came first through Nicea to an ac-
ceptance of an '^apostolic rule of faith." But even
the Nicene creed was not accepted at a single stroke.
New-^Mto- B. The Recognition of a Selection of Well-
o^Sfa^M known Scriptures as Virtually Belonging to the
Old Testament; i.e. as a Compilation of Apostolic
Scriptures (see the "Introductions to the N. T."
by Reuss, Holtzmann, Weiss). By the side of the
Law and the Prophets {rd pt^Ua) there was in the
churches the Word of the Lord, or briefly " ^ xOpto^'*^
which was indisputable. The words and deeds of
the Lord ("the Gospel") were recorded in numer-
ous, oft-revised scriptures closely related to each
other, which were called the " Lord's Writings**, also

Apostolic.

ron.

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 89

* ^t€^^ then — jet not till after the middle of the 2d

O^ltliry — " twrfyiXia ^ and ** aTZopLVtiftovtOfiara rwv ano-

tfTOiliw "; these were publicly read at least after c.
140 (Justin). The last named title expresses the
judgment, that everjrthing which was reported of
the Lord could be traced directly or indirectly to
the apostles. Out of these numerous evangelical Tatton^i
writings there were in certain churches, already
before the middle of the 2d century, four that were
prominent — our present Gospels — which, e.g., very
soon after 160 were worked over by Tatian into a
single Qospel (Diatessaron). About the same time
they took on their final form, more than likely in
Rome. Together with these writings the Epistles
of the apostle Paul, which had been collected earlier,
were rtad in the churches, i.e. by the leaders, as
the Epistles of Clement, Barnabas, Ignatius and par-
ticularly Polycarp testify. While however the Gos-
pels had a direct relation to the kerygma and met
the requirements of tradition (Ignatius, Justin), such
was not the case with the Pauline Epistles. Finally
all definite scriptural productions of prophetic spirits
(TTvsupuiTo^dpfn) were revered as inspired Holy Scrip-
tures, whether they were Jewish apocalypses with
high-sounding names, or the writings of Christian
prophets and teachers. The rp^^V was primarily
the Old Testament, but with, " <> xupto^ Xfyet*^ {yiypaitrat
or simply ^^r^O* apocalyptic verses were also cited.
Of like worth, but different in kind, was the cita-
tion : ^ xoptoq kiyet iv rtp sua^eXttp (fulfilling of proph-

90 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ecy — ethical rules). Many teachers gladly spoke in
the words of the apostle Paul, without according
them the same rank as the Scriptures and the Word
of the Lord (were the Epistles of Paul publicly read
in the churches before c. 180?).
Marcion«8 Marcion, who rejected the Old TestazQent and the

Canon.

prophetic proofs, formed a new collection of Scrip-
tures and gave it canonical rank (Luke's Gospel, 10
Pauline Epistles). At the same time probably, or
a little later, the gnostic school leaders did the same,
favoring the writings in widest circulation among
the churches, but with new additions (Yalentinus,
• Tatian, Encratites) . Everywhere in such circles the
Epistles of Paul came to the front; for they were
theological, soteriological, and could be interpreted
as dualistic. The new critically constituted collec-
tions, which the gnostics set over against the Old
Testament, were clothed with the same authority as
the Old Testament and were allegorically interpreted
in harmony with it (still, besides, secret tradition and
secret scriptures) . Again, a reference to the tp<^9tj
and the xbpw^ did not suffice for the leaders of the
Forming churches. It was necessary, (1) to determine which

of N. T. /. 1 1 V

Canon, evangelical writings (in which recension)^ were to
be taken into consideration ; it was necessary, (2) to
deprive the heretics of everything which could not
be discredited as new and false; it was necessary,
(3) to put forth such a collection of writings as did
not overturn the evidence from tradition, but on the
contrary by their inherent qualities even added

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 91

weight. At first they confined themselves to the
proclamation of the four Qospels as the only authen-
tic apostolic records of the Lord. These were al-
ready held in an esteem so nearly equal to that of
the Old Testament, that the immense stride neces-
sary to declare the words and letters holy was
scarcely recc^nized as an innovation; besides, what
the Master had said was from the beginning consid-
ered holy. Many and, indeed, most of the churches
abode by this decision until far into the 3d century;
see, for example, the documentary basis of iiie Apos-
tolic Constitutions; some Oriental churches continued
to use the Diatessaron. No second collection came to
be esteemed, and the four Gospels were joined to the

alongside of these stood the testimony of pneiimatic
scribblings, ever however having decreasing dignity
(Montanist controversy).
But wherever the contest with heresy was most Paurs

Epistles

vehemently carried on and the consolidation of the po^^^.
churches upon stable principles was most intelli- """^^^
gently undertaken — in (Asia Minor and) Rome, a
new Catholic-apostolic collection of scriptures
was opposed to the new gnostic collection, more in
defence than in attack. The Epistles of Paul were
added to the f omr Gospels (not without some scruples
in transforming scriptures which were written for
special occasions into Divine oracles and conceal-
ing the process even of transformation) and conse-
quently included under the argument from tradition.

92 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

BO that through the medium of a very recent book,
the Acts of the Apostles, they were associated with
the supposed preaching of the twelve apostles, i.e.
subordinated to it. The Paul sanctioned by the
twelve apostles in the Acts, and made hardly recog-
nizable by the Pastoral Epistles, thus became a wit-
ness of the ^tSaj^ij SiSl twv t^ dnotnoXutv^ i.e. one was
under obligation and had the right to understand
him in accordance with the Acts of the Apostles,
which surely came into the collection only faute de
mieux and was obliged to support a tradition far
New Testa- beyoud its otvn words. The two-, more properly

ment

^*8aine^ three-fold new apostolic collection (Gkwpels, Acts,
oid*TMt£ Pauline Epistles), now placed as the New Testa-
™^° ment on the same plane with the Old Testament and
presently raised above the latter, already recognized
by IrenaBUS and Tertullian (in practice, not in theory,
the Gbspels and the Pauline Epistles seemed to be
of equal worth), gradually came into use in the
churches, beginning in the Occident, and when this
was once accomplished the result could hardly be
disturbed. Whereas a fourth and fifth ingredient
could never really win a perfectly firm form. First,
men sought to strengthen the history of the apostles
by means of scriptures written by the twelve*apos-
ties. It was natural that they should wish to have
such scriptures, and then there were highly esteemed
scriptures from Christian prophets and teachers
enough to suggest their acceptance (they could not
be ignored), but without any apostolic authority (in

THE LATINO OF THE FOUNDATION.

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

A closed New Testament there was not in the
churches in the 8d century; but where there was at
hand a second collection, it was used virtually as the
Old Testament and no questions were raised. The
incomplete coUection served ad hoc every purpose
which, as one might think, the complete alone could
serve. Catholicism never came, however, to be a
religion of the book. The words of the Lord re-
mained the standard for the guidance of life, and
the development of doctrine pursued its own course

Oiihoiio

Epistles
Added.

Apoca-
IrpseBof
Fe««r and

John.

NoCIofled
N. T. in
8d Cen-
tury.

94 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

at all times, being influenced only in a secondary
way by the New Testament.
R«6uit8 Results: (1) The New Testament conserved the

which fol- ^

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

THS LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 95

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

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

Apoeto
Suoces

96 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

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

THS LAYING OF THS FOUNDATION. 97

meat of the Apoet. Constitutions is silent. Yet in
the time of Origen the doctrine began to establish
itself in Alexandria. The idea of the Church was mm of

Church

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

98 OUTLINES OP THB HISTORY OP DOGMA.

SrShurdi fl^©*^^^ ^y ^^^ hierarchical Church idea. The latter
'^^ was only hinted at by Irenseus and Tertullian (the
last named finally contended against it and in this
contention he even reverted to the primitive Church
idea: spiritus equals ecclesiaj imiversal priesthood) ;
it was farther developed by Calixtus and other
Roman priests, especially by Cyprian, while the
Alexandrians blended the earliest Church idea with
a mystic-philosophical conception, and Origen, al-
though greatly impressed by the empirical Church,
never lost sight of its relative significcmce and office.

^iSS^ Calixtus and Cyprian constructed the hierarchical
Church idea out of existing relations and the exigen-
cies which these imposed; the latter rounded out the
standard of the former, but on one point, touching^
the justification of the earthly character of the
Church, he lagged behind, while Calixtus had reso-
lutely advanced to its completion (v. the following
chapter). The crises were so great in the 3d cen-
tury that it was nowhere sufficient, — ^save in isolated
communities, — ^to simply preserve the Catholic faith ;
one must obey the bishops in order to guard the ex-
isting Church against the openly proclaimed heathen-
ism (in practical life) , heresy and enthusiasm (the
primitive Christian recollections). The idea of the
one episcopally constituted Church became supreme
and the significance of doctrine as a bond of union
was left in the background: The Church, resting
upon the bishops, who are the successors of the
apostles, the representatives of God, is by reason of

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 99

Uiese fundamental facts itself the apostolic legacy.
According to Cyprian the Church is the seat of sal-
Tation {extra quam nulla salus)^ as a single^ organ-
ized confederation. It rests wholly and solely upon J^^
the episcopate, which, as the continuation of the ^{^
apostolate, equipped with the powers of the apos-
tles, is the bearer of these powers. The union of the
individual with Gk>d and Christ is therefore con-
ceivable only in the form of subordination to the
bishops. The attribute, however, of the unity of
the Church, which is of equal significance with that
of its truth, since the unity comes only through love,
manifests itself primarily in the unity of the epis-
copate. This has been from the beginning a unit
and it remains a unit still, in so far as the bishops
are installed by God and continue in brotherly inter-
change. The individual bishops are to be considered
not only as leaders of their own particular churches,
but as the foundation of the one Church {" ecclesia
in episcopo est"). Thence it follows farther, that
the bishops of those churches founded by the apos-
tles possess no longer any peculiar dignity (all bish-
oi)s are equal, since they are partakers of the one
office). The Roman chair, however, came to have Roman

' ' ' Chair.

a peculiar significance, since it was the chair of the
apostle upon whom Christ first conferred the apos-
tolic gifts in order to indicate clearly the unity of
these gifts and of the Church; and farther also, be-
cause historically the Church of this chair was the
root and mother of the one Catholic Church. In a

100 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

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

CHAPTER III.

CONTINUATION: THE OLD CHRISTIANITY AND

THE NEW CHURCH.

[See the Literature on MontaDism and Novatianism. ]

Montan- ^' ^^^ denial of the claims of the ethical life, the

*\Tan?8m?" paling of the primitive Christian hopes, the legal and

political forms under which the churches protected

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 101

tb^nselves against the world and against heresies
called forth soon after the middle of the 2d century,
first in Asia Minor, then in other Christian commu-
nities, a reaction which sought to establish, or rather
to re-establish, the primitive times and conditions
and to protect Christianity from the secularizing
tendency. The result of this crisis (the so-called
Montanist crisis and the like) was, that the Church
asserted itself all the more strenuously as a legal
organization which has its truth in its historical
and objective foundation, that it accordingly gave a
new significance to the attribute of holiness^ that it
expressly authorized a double state, — a spiritual and
a secular, — ^within itself, and a double morality, that
it exchanged its character as the possessor of certain
salvation for that other, viz. to be an indispensable
condition for the transmission of salvation and to be
an institution for education. The Montanists were
compelled to withdraw (the New Testament had
already thereby done good service), as well as all
Christians who made the truth of the Church de-
pendent upon a rigid maintenance of its moral claims.
The consequence was that at the end of the 3d cen-
tury two great Christian communities put forth
claims to be the true Catholic Church : viz. the na-
tional Church confederated by Constantine and the
Kovatian churches which we refused with the rem-
nant of Montanism. The beginnings of the great
schism in Rome go back to the time of Hippolytus
and Calixtus.

102 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

^Ti^'" 2. The Montanist opposition had undergone a
great transformation. Originally it was the stupen-
dous undertaking of a Christian prophet (Montanus),
who with the assistance of prophetesses felt called
upon to realize for Christianity the rich prophetic
promises of the Fourth Gospel. He interpreted these
in accordance with the Apocalypse, and proclaimed
that the Paraclete had appeared in his own person,
in whom also Christ, yea, even God Almighty, had
come to his own in order to lead them into all truth
and to gather together into one fold his scattered
flocks. Accordingly it was Montanus' highest aim
to lead the Christians forth from their civic relations
and communial associations and to form a new,
homogeneous brotherhood which, separated from the
world, should prepare itself for the descent of the

Oppofled heavenly Jerusalem. The opposition which this ex-
fa v Leaden
of Church, orbitaut prophetical message encountered from the

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

THE laAYINO OF THE FOUNDATION. 103

acknowledged in corpore the Divine mission of the ^^SS^d"
prophets; in other provinces assemblies were formed ^*^*^
in which the current teachings of these prophets
were considered as a Gospel, at the same time vari-
ous modifications were going on (sympathies of the
confessors in Lyons. The Boman bishops came near
acknowledging the new prophecies). In the Mon-
tanist churches (c. 190) it was no longer a question
of a new organization in the strict sense of the word,
or of a radical re-formation of the Christian organi-
zations, but rather, wherever the movement can be
clearly traced, were these questions already pushed
aside, even when they were active and influential.
The original prophets had set no bounds to their en-
thusiasm; there were also no definite limits to their
high pretensions: God and Christ had appeared in
them; the Prisca saw Christ living in female form;
these prophets made the most extravagant prophecies
and spoke in a loftier tone than any one of the apos-
tles; they subverted apostolic regulations; they set
forth, regardless of every tradition, new command-
ments for the Christian life ; they railed at the great
body of Christian believers ; they thought themselves
to be the last and therefore the highest prophets, the
bearers of the final revelation of God. But after
they had passed off the stage, their followers sought
an agreement with the common Christian churches.
They recognized the great Church and begged to be "^j*^^
recognized by it. They were wiDing to bind them- "cSSSi.^
selves to the apostolic regula and to the New Tes-

104 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

tament; they no longer hesitated to accept the
ecclesiastical organization (the bishops). And they
accordingly demanded the recognition of their own
prophets, whom they now sought to commend as
successors of the earlier prophets (prophetic succes-
sion) ; the " new " prophecy is really a later revela-
tion, which, as the Church understands it, presup-
poses the earlier; and the later revelation pertains
simply and solely (in addition to the confirmation
which it gives to the Church teaching as opposed to
the gnostic) to the burning questions of Christian
discipline which it decides in the interest of a more
rigid observance. Therein lay the significance of
the new prophecy for its adherents in the empire
and accordingly they had bestowed their faith freely.
Through the belief that in Phrygia.the Paraclete
had given revelations for the entire Church in order
to establish a relatively severe regimen (refraining
from second marriage, severer fast regulations,
mightier attestation of Christianity in daily life,
complete readiness for martyrdom), the original en-
thusiasm received its death-blow. But this flame
was after all a mighty power, since Christendom at
large made, between the years 190 and 220, the
greatest progress toward the secularization of the
Gk)spel. The triumph of Montanism would have
been succeeded by a complete change in the owner-
ship of the Chiurch and in missionary operations:
its churches would have been decimated. Con-
cessions, therefore, (the New Testament, apos^

THE LATINO OF THE FOUNDATION. 106

tolica regula^ episcopate) did not help the Monta-
nists. The bishops attacked the form of the new ^£^?
prophecy as an innovation, threw suspicion on its ''ten^*
content, interpreted the earlier future hopes as ma-
terialistic and sensuous, and declared the ethical de-
mands to be extreme, I^alistic, ceremonial, Jewish,
oontraiy to the New Testament, and even heathenish.
They set over against the claims of the Montanists
to authentic divine oracles, the newly formed New
Testament, declared that every requirement was to
be found in the declarations of the two Testaments
and thus clearly defined a revelation epochs which
extended to the present time only through the New
Testament, the apostolic teaching and the apostolic
office of bishops (in this contest the new ideas were
for the first time made perfect, (1) that the Old Tes-
tament contained prophetical elements, the New
Testament was not prophetic, but apostolic, (2) that
apostolic dignity could not be reached by any person
of the present day) . They began finally to distin-
guish between the morality required of the clergy
and that required of the laity (thus in the question
of one wife). In this way they discredited that
which had once been dear to the whole of Christen-
dom, but which they could no longer make use of.
In so far as they repelled the edited misuse, they
rendered the thing itself less and less powerful (chil-
iasm, prophecy, right of laity to speak, rigid sanc-
tity), without being able to entirely suppress it. The
most vehement contest between the parties was in

106 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGHA.

contiroJer- regard to the question of the forgiveness of sin. The
F^i^iTe-^ Montanists, otherwise acknowledging the bishops,

Dess of

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

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 107

organization which possessed the New Testament
and the spiritual office.

3. Meanwhile the carrying out of the pretensions Biahops
of the bishops to the right to forgive sins (opposed gin^e^en
in part by the churches and the Christian heroes, sfns^^
the confessors) and the extension of the same to
mortal sins (contrary to the early practice, the early
conception of baptism and of the Church) was at-
tended by great difficulties, cdthough the bishops
encountered not only the early practice of the primi-
tive rigid discipline, but also a wide-spread laxness.
The extension of the forgiveness of sins to adulterers
was the occasion of the schism of Hippolytus. After
the Decian persecution, however, it was necessary to
declare even the greatest sin, apostasy, as pardona-
ble, likewise to enlarge the ancient concession that
one capital sin after baptism might still be pardona-
ble (a practice founded upon the Hermas Pastor) and
to abolish all rights of spiritual persons (confessors),
i.e, to make the forgiveness of sin dependent upon
a r^ular, casuistic, bishoply action (Cornelius of
Rome and Cyprian). Only then was the Church ideoof

•^'^ "^ Church

idea radically and totally Changed. The Church in- ^^'
eludes the pure and the impure (like Noah's ark) ; its
members are not collectively holy and every one is
by no means sure of blessedness. The Church, solely
in virtue of its endowments, is holy (objective), and
these have actually been conferred, together with the
pure teaching, upon the bishops (priests and judges
in the name of Qod) ; it is an indispensable salva-

108 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

tion institute, so that no one will be blessed who
remains without; it is also societas fideiy but not
fldeliuniy rather is it a training-school and cultus-
institute for salvation. It possesses also, in addition
to baptism, a second cure for sin, at least in practice;
the theory, however, was still confused and uncer-
tain. Now for the first time were the clergy and
laity sharply distinguished religiously {^'ecclesia
est numerus episcoporum^)^ and the Roman bish-
ops stamped the clergy with a character indelibilis
(not Cyprian). Now also began the theological
speculation in regard to the relation of the Church,
as a communion of saints, to the empirical holy
Church, to the milder secularizing of Christianity
Noyatian tempered* by the ''means of grace.'' But all this
ifoi^ could not be accomplished without a great counter-
agitation which began at Rome (Novatian) and
soon spread among all the provincial churches.
Novatian required only a minimum, the unpardona-
bleness of the sin of apostasy (upon the earth), other-
wise the Church would no more be holy. This
minimum, however, had the same significance as the
far more radical demands of the Montanists two
generations before. There was in it a vital remnant
of the ancient Church idea, although it was strange
that a Church should consider itself pure (katharoi)
and truly evangelical^ merely because of its unwill-
ingness to tolerate apostates (later perhaps other
Second mortal sinners) . A second Catholic Church, stretch-
Church, mg from Spam to Asia Mmor, arose, whose archaic

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 109

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

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

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

110 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGliA.

was the influence of heathenism at this point that an
ordo of priestly assistants (lower ordination) arose
(in the Occident first). The completed idea of priest
meets us first in Cyprian, in the Roman bishops of that
time, and in the document which lies at the basis of
the Apostolic Constitutions. The bishops (second-
arily also the presbyters) were held to be the repre-
sentatives of the Church before Gkxl (they alone are
permitted to bring the offering) and representatives
of God before the Church (they alone grant or with-
hold the Divine grace as judges in the place of Qod
and Christ; they are the depositaries of the myster-
ies, who dispense a grace which they thought to be
an anointing of a materialistic sort). In support of
Ma3S*U) *^^^ claim, appeal was made increasingly to the Old
s^S Testament priests and the entire Jewish cultus sys-
tem, naturally in a supplementary way. Doors and
windows were thus thrown open, as regards the
rights and duties of the priests, toward heathenism
and Judaism, after that they had disregarded the
exhortation of the aging TertuUian to return to a
common priesthood. Tithes, cleansings and finally
Sabbath ordinances (transferred to Sunday) were
gradually established.
Sacrifice. Note 2. The Sacrificial Offering. Priesthood and
sacrifice condition each other. The sacrificial idea
had from the beginning the widest play in the
Church (see Book I. Chap. 3, Sec. 7) ; therefore
the new conception of the priest must of necessity
influence the conception of the sacrifice, even though

OU8

Works.

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. Ill

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

Christ.

112 OUTLINBS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGHA.

^^j^[y_ plished, however, by Augustine; (2) the idea of
^fl4^ sacrifice underwent a change in the cultus. Here
also is Cyprian epoch-making. He first clearly as-
sociated the specific offering of the Lord's Supper
with the specific priesthood; he first declared the
passio dominiy and also the sanguis Christi and
the dominica hostia the object of the eucharistic
offering, and thereby reached the idea of the priestly
re-enacting of the sacrifice of Christ {v vpar^opd too
irwfiaTo^ xa\ tou oifiaTo^ also in the apostoUc Church
regulations) ; he placed the Lord's Supper decidedly
under the point of view of the incorporation of the
Church and of the individual with Christ, and cer-
tified in a clear way for the first time that the
commemoration of those taking part in the offering
{vivi et defuncti) had a special {deprecatory) sig-
nificance. The real effect of the sacrificial meal for
those participating was, however, the making of
prayers for each other more eflScacious ; for unto the
forgiveness of sins in the fullest sense this act could,
notwithstanding all the eurichment and lofty repre-
sentations of the ceremony, not be referred. There-
fore the claim that the service was the re-enactment
of the sacrifice of Christ remained still a mere claim ;
for against the conception so closely related to the
cultus of the times, that participation in the service
cleansed from sin as in the mysteries of the magna
mater and of Mithras, the fundamental ecclesiastical
principle of baptism and repentance stood in opposi-
tion. As a sacrificial act the Lord's Supper never

THB LATma OF THX FOUNDATION. 113

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

Xote 3. Means of Or ace. Baptism and Eucha- MeMnor
rist. That which since Augustine has been called ^p^*™-
*" means of grace **, the Church of the 2d and 3d cen-
tury did not possess, save in baptism : According to
the strict theory the baptized could not expect any
new bestowal of means of grace from Christ, he
must rather fulfil the law of Christ. But in practice
men possessed in absolution, from the moment when
mortal sins were absolved, a real means of grace,
whose significance was screened by baptism. Re-
flection upon this means of grace remained as yet
wholly uncertain, in so far as the thought that God
absolves the sinner through the priest was crossed
by the other (see above), that the penitential acts of
sinners the rather secure forgiveness. The ideas con-
cerning baptism did not essentially change (Hoefling,
Sacrament der Taufe. 2 Bdd. 1846). Forgiveness
of sins ivas looked upon in general as the result of
baptism (however, here also a moral consideration
entered : The sins of the unbaptized are sins of blind-
ness ; therefore it is fit that God should absolve the
penitent from them) ; actual sinlessness, which it was
necessary now to preserve, was considered the result
of forgiveness. Often there is mentioned in connec-
tion with the remissio and the consecutio atemu
tatis the absolutio mortis^ regeneratio hominis,

114 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

restitutio ad similitudineni deiy consecutio spirt-
tus sancti {^lavacrum regenerationis et sanctifi-

^ijj^ cationis'^)y and all possible blessings as well. The
ever-increasing enrichment of the ritual is in part a
consequence of the purpose to symbolize these pre-
supposed rich effects of baptism ; in part it owes its
origin to the desire to worthily equip the great mys-
terium. An explanation of the separate acts had
already begun (confirmation by the bishop). The
water was looked upon as a symbol and vehicle.
The introduction of infant baptism lies wholly in
the dark (in the time of Tertullian it was already
wide-spread, but condemned by him, de bapt. 18,
because he held that the cunctatio was indicated
by reason of the pondus of the act; Origen referred
it back to the apostles). The attempts of some to

Lord's repeat baptism were repelled. The Lord's Supper

Supper.

was looked upon not only as an offering, but also as
a divine gift (Monographien von Doellinger 1826,
Eahnis 1851, Rueckert 1856), whose effect, however,
was never strictly defined, because the rigid scheme
(baptismal grace, baptismal duties) excluded such.
Imparting of the Divine life through the Holy Sup-
per was the chief representation, closely connected
with purely superstitious ideas {<pdpfiaxov a^avacias) :
the spiritual and the physical were strangely mixed
(the bread as jr^a^at^ communication and Co»tj). TSo
Church father made a clear discrimination here:
The nvUiatio bocanie spiritualistic and the spiritu-
alintio ni}n»tioal; but the forgiveness of sins re-

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 115

treated entirely from view. In accordance with this
the representation of the relation of the visible ele-
ments to the body of Christ began to take form. A
problem (whether symbolical or realistic) no one
dreamed of : The symbol is the inherently potential
mystery (vehicle), and the mystery apart from the
symbol was inconceivable. The flesh of Christ is
itself '^ spirit" (no one perhaps thought of the his-
torical body) ; but that the spirit becomes perceptible
and tangible, was even the distinguishing mark.
The anti-gnostic fathers recognized that the con-
secrated bread was composed of two inseparable ele-
ments,— one earthly and the other heavenly, — and
thus saw in the sacrament that which was denied by
the gnostics, viz. : The union of the spiritual and the
fleshly and the warrant for the resurrection of the
flesh which is nourished by the blood of the Lord
(even so Tertullian, who has falsely been classed as
a pure symbolist). Justin spoke of a transforma-
tion, but of a transformation of the participants ; the Justin.
idea of the transformation of the elements was, how-
ever, already taking form. The Alexandrians saw
here, as in everything which the Church at large ^^®,2S.'
did, the mystery behind the mystery; they accommo-
dated themselves to the administration, but they
wished to be such spiritual Christians that they
might be continually nourished by the Logos and
might partake of a perpetual eucharist. Every-
where the service was departing from its original
significance and was made more and more precise as

116 OUTLINES OF THS HISTORY OF DOGHA.

r^^atds its form and content, both by the learned
and ignorant (practice of infant communion testified
toby Cyprian).

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

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

THB LAYING OF THE FOUKDATION. 11?

II. ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY AS

DOCTRINE AND ITS GRADUAL

SECULARIZATION.

CHAPTER IV.

SCCLRSIASTICAL CHRI8TIANITT AND PHILOSOPHT.

THB APOLOGISTS.

M. V. Engelhardt, Das Ghristenthum Justin's, 1878. Ktdm,
OctaTiuB, 1882. Ausgabe der Apologeten mit Comxnentar,
von Otto.

1. The apoIogistB wishing to declare and defend TbeApou
the Christianity of the churches stood therefore in
all things upon the basis of the Old Testament, em-
phasized the universalism of the Christian revela-
tion and held fast to the traditional eschatology.
They rejected gnosticism and saw in the moral
power which faith gave to the uncultured a princi-
pal proof of its genuineness. But anxious to present
Christianity to the educated as the highest and surest christian-
philosophy, they elaborated as truly Christian the |J^5*r2-
moral cast of thought with which the Gentile Chris- "^"*''
tians from the beginning had stamped the Gospel,
thereby making Christianity rational and giving
it a form which appealed to the common sense of all '
earnest, thinking and reasoning men of the times.
Besides, they knew how to use the traditional, posi-
tive material, the Old Testament as well as the his-
tory and worship of Christ, simply as a verification
and attestation of this rational religion which had

118 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOM A.

been hitherto wanting and had been sought for with
fervent desire. In the apologetic theology Chris-
tianity is conceived as a religious development
brought about by Gkxi hiniself and corresponding
to the primitive condition of man and placed in
the sharpest contrast with all polytheistic national
religions and ceremonial observances. With the
greatest energy the apologists proclaimed it to be
the religion of the spirit, of freedom and of absolute

^stian morality. The whole positive material of Christian-
Teaching "^ *^

fSSS. ity> however, was transformed into a great scheme of
evidence; religion did not obtain its content from
historical facts — it received it from Divine revela-
tion, which is self- witnessing in the creature-reason
and freedom of mankind — but the historical facts
serve for the attestation of religion, for its elucida-
tion^ as against its partial obscuration, and for its
universal spreading.

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

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 119

from the polytheism of the past and to descend from
the plane of the learned to the plane of the common
people.

The apologists were in contrast with the gnostics ^^^^^^
conservative^ inasmuch as they were not really dis- *^^*-
posed to investigate at any point the traditions of the
Church or to make the content of the same compre-
hensible. The argument from prophecy, now how-
ever formulated in the most external way, allied
them with the Church at large. The gnostics sought
in the Gkwpel a new religion^ the apologists by
means of the Gospel were confirmed in their relig-
urns moral sense. The former emphasized the re-
demptive idea and made everything subordinate to
it; the latter brought all within the radius of natural
religion and relegated the redemptive idea to the
circumference. Both hellenized the Gospel; but
only the speculations of the apologists were at once
legitimized, because they directed everything against
polytheism and left the Old Testament and the
keryg^ma imtouched and emphasized in the clearest
manner freedom and responsibility. Apologists and Apologists

and Onos-

gnostics carried forward the work which the Alex- ^^^nSed"
andrian Jewish thinker (Philo) had begun as regards ^wio?'
to the Old Testament religion ; but they divided the
work, so to speak, between them : The latter devot-
ing themselves rather to the Platonic-religious side
of the problem and the former to the stoic-rational-
istic side. The division however could not l^ sharply
made; no apologist entirely overlooked the redemp-

Apologists.

120 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

tive idea (redemption from the power of the demons
'SeS? <^° ^ wrought only by the Logos). With Irenseus
lems. begins again in the theological work of the Church
the blending of the two problems ; not only the con-
test with gnosticism made this necessary, but the
spirit of the age turned more and more from the
stoic morality to the Neo-Platonic mysticism, within
whose shell lay concealed the impulse toward religion.
iS^fphT- 2. Christianity is philosophy and revelation:
nSd^SeTer This is the thesis of every apologist from Aristides
.T^^ii to Minucius Felix. In the declaration that it is
philosophy, the apologists encountered the wide-
spread opinion among the churches, that it is the
antithesis to all worldly wisdom (see the testimony
of Celsus) ; but they reconciled this difference through
the friendly understanding that Christianity is of
supernatural origin and as revelation, notwithstand-
ing its rational content, cannot be apprehended save
by a divinely illumined understanding. On the
principles underlying this conception the apologists
were all agreed (Aristides, Justin, Tatian, Melito,
Athenagoras, Theophilus, Tertullian, Minucius Felix
and others whose writings are attributed to Justin) .
The strongest impress of stoic morality and rational-
ism is found in Minucius ; Justin's writings (Apol-
ogy and Dialc^ue) have the most in common with
the faith of the churches. On the other hand Justin
and Athenagoras think the most favorably of philos-
ophy and of philosophers, while in the succeeding
time the judgment became ever harsher (already by

THB LAYING OF THS FOUNDATION. 181

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

122 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Chrlttian-
ity is Phi-
losophy.

Rerelation

Philoso-

Sheni In-
ebtedto
Prophets.

Christ
only Em-
phasized
Prophets.

opposed to all natural and philosophical knowledge
and makes an end to such. (2) Christianity is the
manifestation which accords with the natural, though
darkened reason of mankind; it includes all the
essential elements of philosophy — it is therefore the

philosophy (^ xav9* r^/id^ ipihuTofia^ ij fiapfiapix^ ^tkoffo^ia)

— and it assists mankind to realize the truths which
philosophy contains. (3) Revelation of the rational
was and is necessary, because mankind has faUen
under the dominion of demons. (4) The efforts of
the philosophers to discover the true knowledge have
been fruitless, which is above all clearly shown by
the fact that neither polytheism nor the wide-spread
immorality has been overthrown by them. So far as
the philosophers -have discovered any truth, they are
indebted for it to the prophets (thus the Jewish Alex-
andrian philosophers already taught) from whom
they borrowed it; it is, to say the least, uncertain
whether they also have come to the knowledge of
any fragment of the truth through the sporadic activ-
ity of the Logos (see Justin on Socrates) ; certain is
it, however, that many apparent truths of the philos-
ophers are the aping of truth by evil spirits (to these
also the whole of polytheism was referred, which is
partly also the aping of Christian institutions). (5)
The acknowledgment of Christ is simply included
in the acknowledgment of the prophetic wisdom ; a
new content the teaching of the prophets did not
receive through Christ; he only gave it currency
and energy (triumph over the demons; Justin and

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 123

Tertullian recognize a new element in the Gospel) .
(6) The practical testing of Christianity lies, (a) in
its apprehensibility (the unlearned and women be-
come wise), (b) in the expulsion of demons, (c) in its
ability to produce a holy life. In the apologists
Christianity accordingly despoiled antiquity, i.e. the
proceeds of the monotheistic knowledge and ethics of

theQreek: oaa ^apd Tzdurt xakS}^ tlprfZai iffiwv rwv ^ptffTtavdtv

i^i (Justin) . It dates itself from the b^inning of chrirtian-
the world. Everything true and good that mankind **** ^®*^^<*-
extols came through Divine revelation, but is, at the
same time, truly human, because it is only a clearer
expression of that which men find within themselves.
It is at the same time Christian^ since Christianity
is nothing but the teaching of revelation. One cannot
think of another form in which the claim of Chris-
tianity to be the world-religion comes out so strongly
(hence the effort to reconcile the world-empire with
the new religion) , nor can one think of a second form
in which the specific content of the traditional Chris-
tianity is so thoroughly neutralized. But its truly ?f*jj*^'
epoch-making character lay in this, that the spiritual with^^ig-
culture of the race appeared now to be reconciled and
allied with religion: Revelation is wholly an out-
ward, miraculous communication (passivity of the
prophets) of rational truth; but rational truth — theis-
tic cosmology and morality — was set forth simply
dogmaticaUy and as the common possession of man-
kind.

3. The ** dogmas " of Christianity — this conception

124 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

J^^j^n. and the other, ^eokoyia^ were first introduced into
*i Tnitiw. pjjiiogQphicai language by the apologists — ^are those
rational truths which are reyealed by the prophets in
the Holy Scriptures, and which are all summed up
in Christ {Xfinno<: ko^»9 xai v6fio^) and haye as their
consequent true virtue and eternal life (Ood, liberty
and virtue, eternal reward and eternal punishment,
i.e. Christianity as a monotheistic cosmology, as a
doctrine of liberty and morals, as a doctrine of re-
demption ; the latter however is not clearly set forth).
The instruction is referred back to God, the estab-
lishment of a virtuous life (of righteousness) God
must needs have left to men. The prophets and
Christ are therefore fountains of righteousness, in
so far as they are Divine teachers. Christianity
may be defined as the God-transmitted knowledge of
God, and as virtuous conformity to rational law, in
the longing and striving after eternal life and in the
certainty of reward. Through the knowledge of the
truth and through the doing of good, men become
righteous and partake of the highest blessedness.
Knowledge rests upon faith in the Divine revela-
tion. This revelation has also the genius and the
power of redemption, in so far as the fact is unques-
tionable that mankind cannot without it triumph
over the dominion of the demons. All this is con-
ceived from the Greek standpoint.
£t^?5i (®) Tb® dogmas which set forth the knowledge of
of God.*^ God and of the world are dominated by the funda-
mental thought, that over against the world as a

THE LATINO OF THE FOUNDATION. 125

created, conditioned and transient existence stands
the Self-Ebdstent, Undiangeable and Eternal, who is
the primal Cause of the world. He has no attri-
butes, which are attributable to the world; therefore
he is exalted above every name and has in himself
no distinctions (the Platonic expressions concerning
Gk>d were held as incomparably good). He is ac-
cordingly one and aloney spiritttal and faultless
and therefore perfect; in purely negative predicates
he is best characterized; and yet he is Origin (Cause)
and the Fulness of all existences; he is Will and
LifCy therefore also the kind Giver. The foDowing
theses remain fixed with the apologists as regards
the relation of God to the world: (1) that God is to summary.
be thought of primarily as the final Catise^ (2) that
the principle of the ethicaUy good is the Principle of
the world, (3) that the Principle of the world, i.e.
ihe Gkxihead, as immortal and eternal, forms the
contrast to the world as the perishable. The dogmas
concerning God are not set forth from the stand-
point of the redeemed Church, but on the basis of a
certain conception of the world on the one hand,
and of the moral nature of man on the other; which
latter however is a manifestation within the cosmos.
The cosmos is everywhere permeated with reason «c<»™«»,

" *^ Permeated

and order (opposition to gnosticism); it bears the ^*'**^'«*-
stamp of the Logos (as a reflection of a higher world
and as a product of a rational Will). The material
also which lies at the basis of its composition is not
evil, but was created by God. Still the apologists

son.

126 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

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

The Logos. Logos is the hypostasis of the active energizing
Reason, which makes it possible to think of the God-
head itself as resting ^-epoOfftoy ; he is both the re-
vealing Word of God, the Divine manifesting him-
self audibly and visibly upon the earth, and the
creating Reason which expresses himself in the work
of his own hands ; he is the Principle of the world
and of revelation at the same time. All this is
not new ; yet the Logos was not proclaimed by the
apologists as a voou/isvov^ but as the surest reality).
Beyond the carrying out of the thought that the
principle of the cosmos is also the principle of reve-
lation the majority did not go; their dependence
upon the faith of the Church is evidenced, how-
ever, by their failure to clearly distinguish between

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

Logos.

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

THE ULYINQ OF THE FOUNDATION. 127

standing all n^atiye assertions, God and the world
were somehow bound together). For the sake of the
creation Gk>d put the Logos forth from himself (sent
him forth, permitted him to go forth), i.e. through a
free simple act of his will generated him out of his
own Being. He is now an independent hypostasis
('9eo9 ix Seoo) whose real essence (odffta) is identical
with that of Ood; he is not separated from Qoi but
only severed, and is also not a mere mode or attribute
of God; but is the independent result of the self-
unf olding of God, and, although being the compen-
dium of the Divine Reason, he did not rob the Father
of his reason ; he is God and Lord, possesses the es-
sence of the Divine Nature, although he is a second
being by the side of God {ftpiOtup irepuv r«, ^ed^ dtbrt-
/>'»^); but his personality had a beginning ("fuit
tempuSy cum patriJUius non fuity " Tertull. ) . Since ^*g?^
then he had a beginning, and the Father did not, he
is, as compared with the Father, a Creature^ the
begotten, created, manifested God. The subordina-
tion lies, not in his essence (for monotheism would
then have been destroyed), but in the manner of his
orig^ {epyov TzpmroToxov too narpoi;). This made it
possible for him to go forth into the iSnite as rea-
son, revelation, and activity, while the Father re-
mains in the obscurity of his unchangeableness.
With the going forth of the Logos begins the reali-
zation of the world-idea. He is the Creator and to a creator

and Proto*

degree the Prototype of the world (the one and spir- ^y^-
itual Being among the many sentiment creatures),

128 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Doctrines
of Free-
dom.

Virtue.

RlghteouB-

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

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

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 129

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

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

Irenffius.
9

130 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGHiL

CHAPTER V.

BEGINNINGS OF AN ECGLESIASTICO - THEOLOGICAL.
EXPOSITION AND REVISION OF THE RULE OF
FAITH IN OPPOSITION TO GNOSTICISM ON THE
PRESUPPOSITION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ANI>
THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY OF THE APOLO-
GISTS: IREN-ffiUS, TERTULLIAN, HIPPOLYTUS,
CYPRIAN, NOVATIAN.

ireiuBus. 1. Irenjsus, a pupil of Polycarp and a teacher
from Asia Minor, who resided in Lyons and was
conversant with the traditions of the Roman church,
set forth in his great anti-gnostic work the apos-
tolic norms of the Catholic Church and also made
an attempt to develop a system of Church doctrine,
^ombined He sought to Combine the apologetic theology with
with^Bap^ a theological revision of the baptismal confessions
teuion^ he took from the two Testaments that material
which served not alone to attest his philosophical
teaching; like the gnostics he placed the thought of
the realized redemption in the centre and sought
thereby at the same time to express the primitive
Christian eschatological hopes. In this way arose
a " faith " of unlimited extent, which was to be the
faith of the Church, of the learned and unlearned,
composed of the most divers elements — the philo-
sophico-apologetic. Biblical, Christosophic, gnostic-
anti-gnostic and materialistic-fantastical (the pistis
should at flie same time be the gnosis and vice versa;

THB LAYING OF THE POUNDATION. 131

all oonsciousnees that rational theology and fides
credenda are irreconcilable magnitudes was want-
ing; everything stood upon an even plane; specula-
tion was mistrusted and yet was not discarded).
This complicated structure received its outward ^^gj^
unity through the reference of a]l declarations to the ^"^'
rule of faith and the two Testaments, and its in-
ward unity through the strong emphasis of two fun-
damental thoughts: That the Creator- Ood is also
the Redeemer- God^ and that Jesus Christ is the
Redeemer solely on this account y because he is the
incarnate Ood {filius dei filius hominis /actus).
In the carrying out of the latter thought, IrensBUS is
superior to his pupils, Tertullian and Hippolytus.
For the former especially was entirely incompetent
to unite the apologetico-rational, the historico-re*
demptive, and the eschatological ranges of thought,
but he developed, conformably to his juristic temper
and equipments, a well-rounded system in certain
particulars, which was very influential in the sub*
sequent times (terminology of the trinitarian and
Christological dogmas; giving Occidental dogmatics
a juristic trend).

The joining of the old idea of salvation with the cjurirtiaa-
thoughts of the New Testament (salvation-history) ^^^^^
and with the apologetic rationalism was the work of ^^gk»i ^^
IrensBus. Christianity is to him real redemption^
brought about by the Creator- Ood. This redemp-
tion is to him recapitulation i.e. restoration to a
living unity of that which has been unnaturally

132 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

separated through death and sin ; especially, as re-
gards mankind, the restoration of human nature unto
the Divine image through the gift of imperishable-
ness. This salvation is accomplished, not through the
Logos in itself, but solely through Jesus Christ, and,
indeed, through Jesus Christ in so far as he was Gk)d
and became man. In that he took upon himself hu-
manity he has inseparably united and blended the
tio^Sn "3*"^® with Divinity. The incarnation is therefore
*jg^jj* along with the doctrine of the unity of Ood the
fundamental dogma. Thus the historical Christ
stands (as with the gnostics and Marcion) at the
centre, not as the teacher (although Irenaeus' rational
scheme in many respects intersected his realistic
theory of redemption), but by virtue of his constitu-
tion as the God-man. All else in the Holy Scriptures
is preparatory history (not simply ciphers in the
evidence from prophecy), and the history of Christ
(kerygma) himself is the unfolding of the process
of the incarnation (not simply the fidfilment of
prophecy). Although the apologists in reality did
not pose the question " cur deus homo " at all, yet
Iremeus made it fundamental and answered it with
the intoxicating statement : ^' That we might become
j^^*^^^ Qods ". This answer was accordingly highly satis-
ceptonoe. factory, because, (1) it indicated a specific Christian
benefit from salvation, (2) it was of like rank with
the gnostic conception; indeed it even went beyond
the latter in its compass of territory regarding deifi-
cation, (3) it met the eschatological trend of Chris-

THK LAYING OF THE FOtTNDATION. 133

tianity half-way, yet at the same time it could take
the place of the f antastic-eechatological expectationsy
(4) it expreesed the mystic Neo- Platonic trend of the
time and gave the same the greatest satisf action, (5)
it replaced the waning inteUectualism (rationalism)
by the certain hope of a supernatural transformation
of our nature, which will make it capable of appro-
priating that which is above reason, (6) it gave to the
traditional historical utterances concerning Christ,
and the entire previous history as well, a firm founda-
tion and a definite aim, and made possible the con-
ception of a gradual unfolding of the history of
salvation {oUovofiia 4eou; appropriation of Pauline
ideas, disting^shing of the two Testaments, vital
interest in the kerygma). The moral and eechato-
logical interest was now balanced by a real religious
and Christological interest: The restoration of hu-
man nature imto the Divine image per adoptionem.
** Through his birth as a man the eternal Word of
Qod secured the legacy of life for those who, through
1^ natural birth, had inherited death ^. The carry-
ing out of this thought is indeed crossed by many
things foreign to it. Irenseus and his pupils warded ireiuBus
off Hie acute hellenization by the bringing in of the warded

^ ^ ^ off Hellen-

two Testaments, by the idea of the unity of crea;tion *»tion.
and redemption, by their opposition to docetism;
they taught the Church anew that Christianity is
faith in Jestis Christ; but on the other hand they
promoted the hellenization by their superstitious
conception of redemption, and by turning the inter-

134 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Declared
Dualism
Destroyed
Omnipo-
teoce of
God.

Gnostic

Demiurge.

Doctrine of
God Out-
lined for
All Time

est toward the natures rather than toward the living
Person.

2. The early Catholic fathers, in opposition to the
gnostic theses, declared that dualism destroys the
omnipotence of God, therefore in general the idea of
God, that the emanations are a mythological fancy
and endanger the unity of the Godhead, that the at-
tempt to ascertain the inner Divine constitution is
audacious, that the gnostics could not avoid placing
the final origin of sin in the pleroma, that criticism
of the constitution of the cosmos is impertinent, the
same is much rather an evidence of wisdom and good-
ness, that docetism gives the lie to the Deity, that
the freedom of man is an undeniable fact, that evil
is a necessary means of correction, that goodness and
justice do not exclude each other, etc. Everywhere
they argue accordingly for the gnostic demiurge as
against the gnostic Redeemer-God. They refer
above all to the two Testaments, and have therefore
been eulogistically called "Scripture theologians";
but the "religion of ' the Scriptures", whereby the
latter is wilfully interpreted as inspired testimony
(Iren^us looks askance at the gnostic exegesis, but
comes very near making use of it) gives no guarantee
of contact with the Gospel. The relation between
the rule of faith and the Scriptures (now super-,
now sub-ordination) also did not come to a clear
statement.

In the doctrine of Ood the main outlines were
firmly drawn for all time. A middle way between

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 135

the disavowal of knowledge and an over-curious
speculation was much prized. In IrensBus are found
tendencies to make lovey i.e. Jesus Christy the prin-
ciple of knowledge. Qod is to be known through
revelation, whereby the knowledge of the world is
declared, now to be sufScient, and now insufficient;
For IrensBus, the apologist, it is sufficient, for Ire-
nsBus, the Christologist, it is not; but a GK)d with-
out a creation is a phantom ; always must the coe-
mical precede the religious. The Creator-Ood is
the starting-point, blasphemy of the Creator is the
highest blasphemy. Hence also the apologetic idea
of God is virtually made use of (Gk>d the negation
and the Cause of the cosmos) ; but Irensdus is still
enthused by it, since a real interest is at hand as
r^ards the historical revelation. Especially was it
pointed out against Marcion, that goodness requires
justice.

In the Logos-doctrine Tertullian and Hippolytus Logos-Doc-
trine; Ter-
manifest a deeper apologetic mterest than IrensBus. t^iian and

They adopt the whole mass of apologetic material ***
(Tertull. Apolog. 21); but they gfive it a more par-
ticular reference to Jesus Christ (Tertull. de came
Christi and adv. Prax.). Accordingly Tertullian
fashioned the formulas of the later orthodoxy, in
that he introduced the conceptions substance and
person^ and notwithstanding his very elaborate sub-
ordinationism and his merely economical construction
of the trinity, he still hit upon ideas concerning the
relations of the three Persons which could be fully

136 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGlfA.

^Sntia?" recognized upon the soil of the Nioene Creed (" utia
^DK**^' substantia, tres personcB ") . The unity of the God-
head was set forth in the una substantia; the dis-
position of the one substance among the three Per-
sons (trinitaSj rptd^ first by Theophilus) did not
destroy the unity (the gnostic eons-speculation is
here confined to three in number). Already it was
considered a heresy to maintain that Qod is a numer-
ical unity. But the self -unfolding (not partitioning)
of the (Godhead had made a beginning (the realiza-
tion of the world-idea is still ever the main-spring of
the inner Divine dispositio) ; the Logos became a
distinct being {^ secundum a deo constitutuSy perse-
^^loS^' ^«^on5 in sua forma ") ; since he is derivation so is
^^'^^^ • he portio of the Deity {^ pater tota substantia ").
Therefore notwithstanding his unity of substance
{unius substanticB — 6fioouffto^) he has the charac-
teristic of temporality (the Son is not the world-idea
itself, although he possesses the same) : He, the
Stream, when the revelation has accomplished its
aim, will finally flow back into its Fountain. This
form of statement is in itself as yet not at all distin-
guishable from the Hellenic; it was not fitted to
preserve faith in Jesus Christ, for it is too low; it
has its importance merely in the identification of the
historical Christ with this Logos. Through this
Tertullian united the scientific idealistic cosmology
with the declarations of the primitive Cllhristian
tradition concerning Jesus, so that both were to
him like the wholly dissimilar wings of one and the

THE* LATINO OF THE FOUNDATION. 137

same building. The Holy Spirit TertuUian treated ^^^
merely according to the schema of the LogoB-doctrine,
— an advance upon the apologistB, — yet without any
trace of an independent interest ('* tertius est spiri-
tus a deo et filio ", " vicaria visfilii ", subordinate to
the Son as the latter is to the Father, yet still ^ nnius
svbstanticB ") . Hippolytus emphasized the creature-
character of the Logos still stronger (Philos. X, 33 :

ti jap de6y <re ^^iXij^e not^<rat 6 d€6^^ iduvaro * c/ee? roD

Aojoo rd icapddetffjui)^ but did not attribute an indepen-
dent jiro^opon to the Spirit (adv. Noet. 14: i^a ^eov

ipi^j ttpoamita 9e duo^ olxovofiia 9i rpiTT^v ri^v ^dpiv ruo dyioo

While TertuUian and Hippolytus simply add the ^fg^
Christ of the kerygmas to the complete Logos-doc- t^jj^'^l^
trine already at hand, IrensBus took his point of de- S£! ^'
parture from the Qod-Christ, who became man. The
** Logos " to him is more a predicate of Christ than
the subject itself. His declarations concerning
Christ were won from the standpoint of the doctrine
of redemption; the apologetic Logos-doctrine even
troubled him; but he could not rid himself of it,
since redemption is recapitulatto of the creation,
and since John 1 : 1 teaches that Christ is the Logos.
However, he rejected from principle every irpofioXij^
emanation and theological speculation. Christ is
the eternal Son of Qod (no temporal coming-forth) ;
he is the eternal self -revelation of the Father; there
exists between him and God no separation. Yet so
g^reatly did he strive to reject the eon-speculation —

138 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

he also could not quite see the Divine in Christ in
the redemption; he was obliged to give him a part
in the creation, and then he taught nothing different
from Justin and Tertullian. But he always had the
incarnation in view, whose subject must be the full
Divinity. "Gkxi placed himself in the relation of
Father to the Son, in order to create, after the like-
ness of his Son, men who should be his sons*'. Per-
haps the incarnation was to IrensBus the highest
expression of purpose in the sonship of Christ. In
regard to the Holy Spirit IrenaBus spoke with the
greatest indefiniteness ; not once is rptaa^ found in his
writings.
itortri»fof ^^ *^® teaching of Irenseus concerning the destiny
^^^' of mankind^ their original state^ fall and sin^ the
divergent lines of thought become very apparent
(apologetico-moralistic, Biblico-realistic), and have
characteristically remained so for the doctrine of the
Church. Only the first is clearly developed. Every-
thing created, therefore also man, is in the begin-
ning imperfect. Perfection could only be the destiny
(native capacity) of mankind. This end is realized
through the free decision of man upon the basis of
^sawe" his God-given capacity (image of God). The prim-
tageous. itive man stumbled and fell into death ; but his fall
is excusable (he was tempted, he was ignorant, he
allowed himself to be seduced proetextu immortali'
tatis)^ and even teleologically necessary. Disobedi-
ence has been advantageous for the development of
man. In order to become wise he must see that dis-

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 139

obedience works death; he must learn the distance
between man and Gk>d, and the right use of freedom.
It is a question of life and death ; the consequence of
sin is that which is really dreadful. But the good-
ness of God showed itself at once, as well in the re-
moval of the tree of life, as in the ordaining of tem-
poral death. Man regains his destiny, when he de-
cides freely for the good, and that he can still ever
do. The significance of the prophets and of Christ
reduces itself here, as by the apologists, to the teach-
ing which strengthens freedom (so taught Tertul-
lian and Hippolytus). The second course of thought irennuB

Influenced

by Irenaaus flowed out of the gnostic-anti-gnostic byPsui.

recapitulation-theory and was influenced by Paul.

This encompasses entire humanity as the sinful

Adam, who having fallen once cannot help himself.

All offended God in Adam ; through Eve the entire

race has become subject to death; the original end

is forfeited and God alone can help by descending

again into communion with us and restoring us to

likeness with his Being (not out of freedom does

blessedness flow, but out of communion with God,

" in quantum deus nulling indiget^ in tantum homo Christ sec-

ond Adam.

indiget dei communione^^ IV. 14, 1). Christ, as
the second Adam, redeems the first Adam ('' Christus
lihertatein restauravit^)^ in that he step for step
restored in honum^ what Adam had done in malum.
(The testimony of prophecy is here changed into a
history of destruction and salvation)'. This relig-
ious, preconceived historical view is carried out in

140 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

an almost naturalistic way. f "rom the consequence
of the apokatastasis of every individual man Ire-
niBus was preserved only by his moral train of
thought.
God^ttSui '^^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ Ood-man dominated this entire

DomU

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

THK LAYING OF THK FOUNDATION. 141

''hamo deo mixtus'^y but not understanding the
" homo FACTUS " in the strict sense. He speaks (adv. Two sub-
Praz.) of two substances of Christ (corporalis et ^f^J^'
8pir%tualis)y of the ^conditio duarum substantia-
rum " which in their integrity persist, of the ^ du-
plex stattAs dominiy non confusus, sed cujunctus
in una persona — dei^ et homo ". Here is already
the Chalcedon (juristic) terminology. TertuUian
developed it in endeavoring to ward off the thought :
Gk)d transformed himself (so some patripassionists) ;
but he did not see, although he used the old formulas,
"* deus crucifixus ", ^ nasci se vult deus ", that the
realistic redemption becomes more strongly menaced
through the sharp separation of the two natures,
than through the acceptance of a transformation.
Indeed he only asserts the oneness and rejects the
idea that Christ is ** tertiam guid*^ . But even Ire-
nsBus could not persuade himself, against his own
better judgment, to divide the one Jesus Christ after
the manner of the gnostics : (1) There are not a few Jjf"^
passages in the New Testament, which can be re-
ferred only to the hiunanity of Jesus (not to the Ood-
man), if the real Divinity on the other hand is not
made to suffer (so e.g. the descent of the Spirit at
his baptism, his trembling and shaking), (2) Ire-
nseus also conceived of Christ in such a way as to
make him the new Adam {^perfectus homo "), who
possesses the Logos, which in certain acts in the
history of Jesus was inactive. The gnostic distin-
guishing of the Jesus patibilis and the Christus

tarine.

142 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

disa^Tj^ was by Tertullian explicitly, and by IrensBUS
indirectly, legitimized. Thus arose the ecclesias-
tical two-nature doctrine. Hippolytus stood be-
tween the two older teachers.
pStherof However, the oneness was still the penetrating con-
of ?acS^ ception of Irenseus. Since Christ became what we
are, he as God-man likewise passed through and
suffered what we should have suffered. Christ is
not only " salus et salvator ", but also his whole life
is a work of redemption. From his conception to
his burial everything was inwardly necessary. Ire-
nsBUS is the father of the " theology of facts " in the
Church (Paul emphasized only the death and the
resurrection). The influence of the gnosis is unmis-
takable, and he even uses the same expressions as the
gnostics when he conceives redemption as fully ac-
complished,— on the.one side, in the mere manifes-
tation of Jesus Christ as the second Adam, on the
other, in the mere knowledge of this manifestation

(IV. 36, 7: "fj yvcjfft^ roh ulou too ^euu^ fJTt^ ^v d^^apffia).

Still he emphasizes the personal meritorious service.
Thrist' ^® looked at the work from many points of view
^'inSr?^^ (leading back into communion, restoration of free-
dom, redemption from death and the devil, propitia-
tion of God) ; the dominating one is the procuring
of the d^&aptTta (adoption unto Divine life) . But how
uncertain all is to him, he betrays in I. 10, 3, when
he attributes the question, Why did God become
flesh? to those who will have nothing to do with
the simple faith. He can also still ever rest satis-

preted.

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 143

fied with the hope of the second coming of Christ
and the resurrection of the body. Between this
hope and the deification-idea lies the Pauline view
(gnosis of the death on the cross); Irenseus exer-
cised himself to prove its legitimateness (the death
of Christ is the true redemption) . Still he had not ^^^^
reached the idea of the atonement (the redemption Atone-
money is not paid to the devil upon his '^ with-
drawal"); within the recapitulation-theory he ex-
presses the idea, that through disobedience upon the
tree Adam became a debtor toward God, and through
obedience upon the tree God became reconciled.
Reflections on a substitutional sacrifice are not found
in IrensBus; seldom do we find the idea of sacrificial
death. Forgiveness of sins he did not really recog-
nize, but only the setting aside of sins and their
consequences. The redeemed become through Christ
bound together into a true unity, into true humanity,
into the Church, whose head Christ is. In Tertullian
and Hippolytus the same points of view are found,
except that the mystic (recapitulating) form of the re-
demption recedes. They oscillate con amore between
the rational and the Pauline representation of re-
demption (" totum Christiani nominis et pondus
et fructus mors Christi^\ adv. Marc. III., 8); but
Hippolytus (Philosoph. fin.) gave a classical expres- ^^J^®
sion to the deification brought about by Christ, inter- **^tion!^'
weaving therewith the rational schema (knowledge
redeems). More sharply come out in Tertullian
the conceptions, culpa^ reatus peccatiy etc. ; he

144 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

has also already "aatisftxcere deo"^ ^meritum"^
^promereri deum ", which Cyprian carried out more

Te^uum precisely. Finally we find in Tertullian the por-
BrMe^ trayal of Christ as the Bridegroom and the individ-

lodiTidiuti ual soul as the bride, a fatal modification of the

Soul.

primitive Christian representation of the Church as
the body of Christ, under the influence of the Hel-
lenic representation (see also the gnostics), that the
Deity is the husband of the soul.

Esc^toi- Very striking is the impression made upon one by
the eschatology of the early Catholic fathers; for
it corresponds neither with their rational theology,
nor with their mysticism, but is still wholly archaic.
They do not, however, repeat the same in any urgent
way (perhaps on account of the churches, or the re-
gulay or the Apocalypse of John), but they and the
Latin fathers of the 3d, and of the beginning of the
4th, century live and move altogether in the hope

juS^ o^ ^^^ earliest Christian churches (like Papias and
Justin). The Pauline eschatology they felt as a dif-
ficulty, the primitive Christian, together with its
grossest chiliasm, not at all. This is the clearest
proof that these theologians were only half-hearted
about their rational and mystic theology, which they
had been compelled to adopt in their contest with
the gnosis. They had in fact two Christs: The
returning Christ, who should conquer the antichrist
and set up his judgment seat as the victorious
King, imd the Logos, who was looked upon, now as
a Divine teacher, now as Gk>d-man. This very com-

THB LATINO OF THB FOUNDATION. 146

plication reoommended the new Church doctrine.
The details of the eschatological hopes in Irensus iS^laa,
(I- ^-9 see also Melito), Tertullian and Hippolytus t^
{de antichr. ) are in the main as stereotyped, in par-
ticolars as wavering, as in the earlier times. The
Jofaannean Apocalypse, together with its learned ex*
positions, stands with Daniel in the foreground (six,
or rather seven thousand years, heathen earthly
power, antichrist, site in Jerusalem, campaign of the
returning Christ, victory, resurrection of Christians,
visible kingdom of joy, general resurrection, judg-
ment, final end). But after the Montanistic crisis
there arose in the Orient an opposition movement ^^^^
against this drama of the future (the ^ alogoi '') ; the
learned bishops of the Orient in the 3d century, above
all the Origenists, opposed it, yes, even the Johannean
Apocalypse (Dionysius Alex.) ; they found however
tenacious oppposers among the " simplices et idio-
tee " (Nepos in Egypt) . The Christian people of the
Orient also unwillingly suffered themselves to be
robbed of their old faith, they were obliged however
to submit gradually (the Apocalypse disappears often
in the Oriental church canon). In the Occident
chiliasm remained unbroken.

There remains still the doctrine concerning the ^J^;*
two Testaments. The creation of the New Testa- ^^
ment threw a new light upon the Old Testament.
This passed now no longer simply as a Christian
book (Barnabas, Justin), and also not as a book of

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

146 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGHA.

conception that it is Christian in every line and
stands upon the summit of the Christian revelation,
was peacefully established the other which is in-
consistent with it, that it was a preparatory stage
to Christ and the New Testament. This view, in
which an historical conception faintly appears, was
first set forth by the Valentinians {ep, Ptoleinaei
ad Floram), Men varied according to necessity:
mont Con- Now the Old Testament is held to contain the whole

tained All.

truth in the form of prophecy, now it is a legisdatio
in servttutem by the side of the new legisdatio in
libertatem^ an old transient covenant, which pre-
pared the way for the new, and whose content is the
history of God's pedagogy of the human race,— in
every portion of saving value and yet transient, and
at the same time the forecast of the future and typi-
cal. As over against the gnostic attacks the fathers
tried to set forth the incomparableness of the cere-
monial laws, and Paul is distorted for the purpose
in order to prove by him also devotion to the law.
Prophecy, type, pedagogy were the decisive points of
view, and only when men were restricted by no op-
position did they admit that certain Old Testament
requirements had been abrogated. In all this there
lay, notwithstanding the confusion and the contra-
diction which persists even until the present time, a
An Ad- real step forward. Men began to make distinctions
in the Old Testament, they hit upon the idea of ad-
vancing stages of truth, of historical conditions (Ter-
tulHan, de oraf. 1: ^ quiif quid retro fuerat^ autde-

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 147

mutatum est per Christum ut ctrcutncisioy aut
suppletum ut reliqua lex^ aut impletum ut pro-
phetiay aut perfectum ut fides ipsa "). Inasmuch
as two Testaments were now accepted, the specific
significance of the Christian covenant became more
prominent (Tertull. ^lex et prqphetae u^qiie ad
Johannem *" ; the apostles greater than the prophets) ;-
true, the new Covenant was still ever treated as
"^ lex ", and the hopeless question was accordingly
discussed, whether Christ has lightened or weighted
the old law? The pedagogical salvation-history, ^^gf^;
as it was first put forth by Irenseus and intertwined ** ^17.*""
with the testimony of prophecy, made a tremendous
impression {ab initio — Moses-Christ) ; the Tertul-
lian addition (4th stage : paracletus as novus legis-
lator) did not gain acceptance, yet it has over re-
appeared in the history of the Church, since even
Christ and Paul cannot be included in the scheme
of new law-givers for the Church life.
3. The value of the work of the old Catholic ^^^\

Work of

fathers to the Church— in the Occident Novatian ^^fic^^""
worked out the Tertullian Christology, Cyprian es- ^"'
tablished the regula as developed into a salvation-
history and made a part of the Tertullian formulas
current in larger circles — did not consist in their
construction of a system of dogmatics, but in their
refutation of the gnosis and in the theological frag-
ments which they left, i.e, in the anti-gnostically
interpreted " rule of faith ", which was coupled with
the chief statements of the apologetic theology (vide

148 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

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

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 149

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

CHAPTER VI.

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

Guericke, de schola qnss Alex, floruit catechetica, 1824.
Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alex., 1886. Winter,
Ethik dee Clemens, 1882. Redepenning, Origenes, 1841, f.
Denis, Philosophie d'Orig^ne, 1884.

1. The gnostics sharply distinguished pistis and ^®^®°^'
gnosis; IrensBus and TertuUian made use of science
and speculation only from necessity and in order to
refute them, reckoning that to faith itself which they
needed for theological exposition. In the main they
were satisfied with the authority, hope and holy ordi-
nances of life; they were building upon a building,
which they themselves did not care for. But after
the end of the 2d century there began to be in the
Church a movement toward a scientific religion and
toward a theological science (schools in Asia Minor, ^hooi«^
Oappadocia, Edessa, Aelia, Csesarea, Rome; alogoi, dna.

150 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Alexander of Cappadocia, Julius Africanus, Theok-
tist, Theodocian schools). It was the strongest in
the City of Science, Alexandria, where Christianity
became the heir of Philo and where evidently, until
toward the year 200, there had not been a firm organ-
ization of Christians upon exclusive principles. The
Alexandrian church comes into the light of history
together with the Alexandrian Christian school (c.
190) ; in the latter the entire Hellenic science was
taught and adapted to the service of the Gk)spel and

Oement a the Church. Clement, the pupil of Pantsenus, pro-
PantsDus. duced in his Stromata the first Christian ecclesiasti-
C£d work, in which the Greek philosophy of religion
served not only an apologetic and polemic purpose,
but was the means of first restricting Christi-
anity to thinking men (as by Philo and Valen-
tinus). Ecclesiastical literature was in itself un-
familiar to Clement; he acknowledged its authority,
because the Holy Scriptures appeared to him as a
revelation; but it was his conscious purpose to
work their content out philosophically and to make

^ivwi' them his own. The pistis is given; it is to be
recoined into gnosis, i.e. a doctrine is to be de-
veloped which will satisfy scientific demands by a
philosophical view of the world and of ethics.
Gnosis does not conflict with faith, but on the con-
trary it supports and enlightens it, not only in cer-
tain points, but it lifts it up into a higher sphere out
of the domain of authority, into the sphere of pure
knowledge and inner spiritual harmony flowing

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 151

from the love of God. Pistis and gnosis, however, ^q^^^
are bound together in this, that both have their con- gether.^
tent in the Holy Scriptures (yet in practice Clement is
not an exact Scripture-theol(^an like Origen). Into
these Scriptures the highest aim and the entire appa-
ratus of the idealistic Greek philosophy is read ; they
are at the same time referred to Christ and ecclesi-
astical Christianity — so far as there was such in Alex-
andria at that time. The apologetic purpose, which
Justin had had, is here transformed into a systemati-
oo-theologic. The positive material is accordingly
not shoved into the proof of prophecy, but, as by
Philo and Valentinus, is carried over with infinite
pains to scientific dogmatics.

To the idea of the Ix^os who is Christ, Clement, SSSoSf
in that he exalted it to the highest principle of the
religious view of the world and of the exposition of
Christianity, gave a far richer content than did Jus-
tin. Christianity is the doctrine of the creation,
education and perfecting of the human race through
the Logos, whose work reaches its climax m the per-
fect gnostic, and who has made use of two means,
the Old Testament and Hellenic philosophy. Logos
is everywhere, wherever men rise above the plane
of nature (the Logos is the moral and rational prin-
ciple in all stages of the development) ; but the
authentic knowledge of him can be won only from
revelation. He is the law of the world, the teacher, ^j^J^hST'
or in Christ the hierourge, who through holy ordina- ^^^"'^Ke.
tions conducts to knowledge ; finally, for the perfect,

152 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

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

Problem.

THK LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 153

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

Platonic

in God and to gain from him power and life, with ^^^
the ideal of the Platonic philosophy to raise oneself
as a free spirit above the world unto Gk)d, and then to
bind together the instructions pertaining to a blessed
life which are found in the one and in the other. But
Origen was the first to succeed in putting this into a
systematic form, in which the most scrupulous Bibli-
cism and the most conscientious regard for the rule
of faith are conjoined with the philosophy of religion.

2. Origen was the most influential theologian in orfgen.
the Oriental church, the father of theological science,
the author of ecclesiastical dogmatics. What the

154 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

apologiBts, gnostics and old Catholic theologians
had taught, he brought together and combined; he
recognized the problem and the problems, the histori-
cal and the speculative. He sharply distinguished,
with the clearest vision, between ecclesiastical faith
and ecclesiastical theology, and spoke one thing to
the people and another to the discerning. His uni-
(MMerv^ versal spirit did not wish to destroy anything, but
All Truth. QY^jy^iiere to conserve ; he found on every hand that
which is valuable and he knew how to give to every
truth its place, be this in the pistis, or in the gnosis ;
no one should be '^ offended'^, but Christian truth
should triumph over the systems of the HeUenic phi-
losophers and the old Catholic gnostics, over the
superstition of the heathen and Jews and over the
defective presentation of Christian unitarians. This
Christian truth bore as gnosis Neo-Platonic marks,
and indeed to such a high degree that a Porphyry
commended the theology of Origen, and rejected only
p^^%ie the intermingled "strange fables". Origen presup-

r\9 ITa \t\\

poses the rule of faith in a firmly outlined form (see
his principal work, r^spi «/>/ci)v), together with the
two Testaments: He who has these has the truth
which makes blessed, yet there is a deeper, more
gratifying conception. Upon its summit all con-
trasts become mere shades, and in the absolute har-
ortbodoz- mony which such a view erives, one learns to estimate

Tradition- ^ '

\i^'^^ *^® relative. Thus is Origen an orthodox tradition-

i<2Si?8tio alist, a strong Biblical theologian (nothing should

pher. pass cuiTent which is not in the Scriptures), a keen

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 155

idealistic pLilosopber who translated the content of
faith into ideas, completed the structure of the world
that is within, and finally let nothing pass save
knowledge of God and of self in closest union, which
cxklte us above the world and conducts unto deifica-
tion. Zeno and Plato, however, should not be the
leaders, but Christ; for the former did not overcome
polytheism, nor make the truth generally accessible,
nor give a system of instruction which made it pos-
sible for the unlearned to become any better than
their natural ability permits. That Christianity is ^'^fw "
for both classes, — religion for the common man with- classes,
out polytheism (of course with pictures and signs)
and religion for the thinking mind, — Origen recog-
nized as its superiority over all other religions and
systems. The Christian religion is the only relig- ^^^l^^
ion which is also truth in mythical fonn, Theol- M^thic^
ogy it is true is obliged — as always, so also here — to
emancipate itself from the positive traits (character-
istic of the positive religion) belonging to external
revelation and statutes; but in Christianity this is
accomplished under the guidance of Holy Scripture
which establishes the positive religion for the masses.
The gnosis neutralizes everything empirically histor- Gnosis
ical, if not indeed always in matters of fact, yet *^i^^'
wholly so as regards its worth. It sublimates first
from the empirical history a higher transcendental
Wstory, which begins in eternity and rests behind
the empirical; but in reality it sublimates this trans-
c^dental once again, and there remains now only

156 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the unchangeable Qod and the created soul. This is
ciuiBtoi- most clearly brought out in Origen's Christology.

ogy.

Back of the historical Christ reposes the eternal
Logos; he who appeared first as physician and re-
deemer, appears on a deeper view as the teacher —
blessed are the advanced ones, who need no more the
physician, the shepherd and the redeemer ! — but the
teacher is finally no longer necessary to those who are
become perfect ; such rest in Qod, Thus is ecclesi-
astical Christianity here stripped off as a husk and
thrown aside like a crutch. That which in Justin is
proof of prophecy, in IrensBus salvation-history, van-
ishes in Origen for the gnostic, or is only a picture
of a spiritual history. In the final analysis there
fails in his high-flying, all-comprehensive ethics the
sense of guilt and fear of the Judge.
MoSJtic, The system was intended to be strongly monistic
i^iiBtfc (that which was created out of nothing has only a
transitory significance as a place of purification) ; yet
in fact there dwelt within it a dualistic element.
The dominating antithesis is God and created things.
The amphiboly lay in his double view of the spiritual
(it belongs on the one side, as the outgoing of Qod's
nature, to Gkxl himself, on the other side, as that
which has been created, it stands in opposition to
Qod) J which keeps cropping out in all Neo-Platonic
systems. Pantheism was to be warded off, and yet the
supermundane character of the human spirit was to
be stoutly maintained. This spirit is the freej heav-
enly eon, conscious of the right way, but uncertain

THB ULTING OF THB FOUNDATION. 157

in its striving. Divine orig^, divine end, and free
choioe constitute its essence. The knot is tied how-
ever, in that moment when the spirit comes forth in
manifestation. There is therefore a history prior to
temporal history. The system is divided into three ^^R^|^'
parts: (1) Ood and his outgoing, (2) the faU of the ^ ^
created spirit and the consequences, (3) redemption
and restoration. That freedom will only be a sem-
blance, if the spirit must finally attain unto its end,
Origen did not observe. In carrying out his scheme
he was so earnest that he even limited the Divine
onmipotence and omniscience. Out of the Holy
Scriptures the Gk)d-world drama is educed (secret tra-
dition which still played a great role in Cl^nent en-
tirely recedes) . As the cosmos is spiritual, psychic
and material, so also the Holy Scriptures, the second
revelation, consist of these three parts. Thereby ^'^j*
was a secure method given for exegesis; it has, (1) to
discover the verbal sense, which, however, is the
shell, (2) the psychic-moral sense, (3) the pneumatic.
Here and there this pneumatic is alone taken into
consideration and the verbal sense must even be cast
aside, whereby only one is permitted to discover the
deeper sense. This Biblical alchemy Origen devel-
oped with the greatest virtuosity.

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

Over

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

158 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the longing of the many tell of him. Gkxl as the
absolute Cause, with self-consciousness and will,
is set forth as more living and, so to speak, as more
personal by Origen than by the gnostics and the
Neo-Platonists. But Qod is ever causality, and
therefore never to be thought of apart from revela-
tion. That he creates belongs to his being, which is
revealed indeed even in the many. Since however
all revelation must be partial, Origen permits no
limitless conceptions to be applied to the Omniscience
and Omnipotence ; God can only what he will; he
Grni Not cannot do that which is in itself contradictory and

Absolutely

OmniB- is not able to become existent (all miracles are natu-

cient and ^

^^n^r*" r^y 5 ^® cannot indeed make the created absolutely
good, since the conception of the created includes a
privatio of being; he can make the same only poten-
tially good ; for the idea never goes forth without re-
serve into the substance which gives it form. Free-
dom also places limitations upon God, which he, it is
true, imposed upon himself. Thus are relative ideas
applied to the idea of Qod. God is love and goodness ;
righteousness is a manifestation of his goodness.

Since God is eternally revealed, the world is eter-
nal, but not this world, yet the world of spirits.
With this world, however, God is imited through
the Logos, into whom, laying aside his absolute
apathy, God once again entered. The Logos is

LofTos Is God himself and at the same time the totality and

God. "^

the creator of the many (Philo), a special hypostasis,
like indeed the self-consciousness of God and the

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 159

potency of the world. The Logos is the perfect like-
ness of God {ofioooato^) . . He has nothing corporeal
about him and is therefore true Qod, yet a second
Grod (no sharing of Divinity, ou xara /uTooaiav^ dXXd
z^acf oi}<fiav f^eoy). He is begotten of the essence of the ^^JattT
Father from eternity; there was no time when he
was not, and he ever goes forth from the Father's
being through the Divine constraining will. But
even because he is substantia substantialiter sub-
sistens, he is as such no d^iy^r^Tov ; he is an ahtarov^
the Father is T^pmrav ahtov. Accordingly he is the
first stage in the transition from the One to the ^rom^oS**
many ; from the standpoint of Gkxi the xrttrfxa 6fioo6' Many!
<re/iv, from our standpoint the manifest, essential Grod.
For us alone therefore does the essential likeness of
the Father and Son exist; his imchangeableness is
therefore only relative, since it does not reside in the
autousie. Everywhere in this speculation in regard
to the Logos-Creator, there is no thought of the
Logos-Redeemer. The Holy Spirit also — the rule of g^oiy
faith necessitated him — is included in the Godhead
as a third unchangeable being and reckoned as a
third stage and hypostasis. He is become through
the Son and is related to him as the Son to the
Father. His sphere of activity is the smallest —
strangely enough, indeed, the most important. The
Father is the principle of existence, the Son of
reason, the Spirit of that which is holy. This grad-
uated trinity is a trinity of revelation, but even on
that account also imminent and persistent, since God

160 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Created
Spirits.

Freedom.

Fall,
World Cre-
ated to
Redeem
Them.

can never be thought of apart from revelation. The
Holy Spirit is the transition to the fuhiess of spirits
and ideas, which, created through the Son, are in
truth the unfolding of his own fulness. The charac-
teristic of created spirits is the becoming (advance,
jrpoxoKij)^ i,e. freedom (opposition to the heretical
gnosis). But the freedom is still relative, i.e. in a
broad sense they are free; fundamentally however -
there exists the rig^d necessity for the created spirit
to reach the goal. Freedom therefore is sub specie
aetemitatis necessary evolution. Out of freedom
Origen sought to understand the actual world ; for to
the spirits belong also human spirits; they were all
created from eternity (God is ever a Creator), orig-
inally alike in substance; but their duties are differ-
ent and therefore their development. In so far as
they are changeable spirits they are all endowed with
a kind of corporeality. In the fact itself of being
created there is ordained for angels and men a kind
of materiality. As to how they might have devel-
oped themselves Origen did not speculate, but only
as to how they have developed.

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

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 161

men, who are supported and endangered by deyils
and angels (acceptance of popular representations).
Life is a discipline, a conflict under the permission
and leading of God, which will end with the con-
quest and destruction of evil. Thus harshly, almost
Buddhistically, did Origen think of the world — he is
however fundamentally an optimist. Man consists *Sg^^*
of spirit, soul and body (after Plato and because the swSl'alQd

Body

spirit cannot be the principle of action antagonistic
to Gk)d. The soul is treated just as inconsistently as
the Logos : It is a spirit grown cold and yet no spirit.
It was thus conceived in order to make the fall conceiv-
able, and yet to guard the integrity of the reasonable
soul) . Man's conflict consists in the striving of those
powers inherent in his constitution to gain dominion
over his environment. Sin inheres on the one side
in the earthly state (in reality all must be sinners) ;
on the other, it is the product of freedom, but is even
therefore conquerable when God assists. For with-
out him nothing is good.

(c) But we must help ourselves; God helps as oodHeim
teacher, first through the laws of nature, then j^^^^^
through the laws of Moses, then through the Gospel ^S^.
(to each according to his kind and according to the
measure of his receptivity) ; the perfect he helps
through the eternal Gtospel, which has no outer shell
and no representation. Revelation is a manifold,
gradual rendering of help, which comes to the assist-
ance of the growing creature (the significance of the

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

162 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

self appear and help. His work must be as compli-
cated as the need is : He must exhibit to the one class
the true victory over death and the demons, must, as
the God-man, bring an offering which represents the
expiation of sin, must pay the price of redemption
which shall end the dominion of the devil — in short
he must bring a comprehensible redemption in
" deeds ". (Origen first introduced into the Gtentile
Church a theory of reconciliation and atonement;
but one should consider in what age he wrote.) To
others, however, he must, as Divine teacher and
Hierourge, disclose the depths of knowledge and bring
to them a new principle of life, so that they may
share his life and, interwoven with the Divine Being
himself, may become divine. Return to conununion
with God is here, as yonder, the goal; yonder
through facts toward which man directs his faith ;
here through knowledge and love, which, striving up
beyond the Crucified, lays hold upon eternal life as the
Logos himself encompasses it. The " facts" are also,
as with the gnostics, not simulation or an indifferent
basis of truth, but are truth, though not the truth.
Thus he reconciled faith and the philosophy of relig-
ion. He can commend the cosmic significance of
the death on the cross, a work which encompasses
all spirits, and yet rise above this occurrence by spec-
ulations which have no history.
Chris- In accordance therewith his Christology takes its

Complex, form; its characteristic is its complexity: The Re-
deemer was all that Christians can think him to have

THE LAYING OP THB FOUNDATION. 163

been. For the gnostic he is the divine Principle,
the Teacher, the First-Bom, the knowable, Divine
Reason. The gnostic knows no " Christology '' : From
Christ on began the perfect indwelling of the Logos
in noankind. Here, therefore, neither the Divinity
nor the humanity of Christ is a question or a prob-
lem. But for the imperfect Christian Christ is the
God-man, and the gnostic is in duty bound to solve
the problem which this expression offers and to
guard the solution from errors on the right and on
the left (against docetism and ebionitism). The
Logos could unite itself with the body only through
the medium of a human soul. This soul was a pure
unfallen spirit, which had destined itself for the soul
in order to serve the purposes of redemption. It was
a pure spirit fundamentally united with the Logos
and became then, by reason of its moral worthiness,
a medium for the incarnation of the Logos (closest
inner union, but really perfect only through incessant
exercise of will from both sides; therefore no ming-
ling). The Logos remains unchangeable; only the
soul hungers and suffers, inasmuch as it, like the Element
body, is truly human. But because both axe pure
and their substance is in itself without qualities, his
body was still actually totally different from ours
(Clement is stiU more docetic). The body could at
any moment assume such a character as the situa-
tion required, in order to make the strongest impres-
sion upon different persons. The Logos was also not
shut up within the body, but wrought everywhere as

164 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

hitherto and united itself with all pious souls. It
is true the union was with none so close as with the
soul of JesuSy and the same was true as regards his
body. The Logos illumined and deified the soul
gpradually during the earthly life, and the soul the
body. The functions and the attributes of the in-
carnate Logos form a gradation, in the knowledge
of which believers progress. The union became so
close {xotvwvta^ ivaxrt^^ dvdxpatrti:) that the attributes
are interchanged in the Holy Scriptures. Finally
Jesus appears transformed into Spirit, received into
juAisand the Godhcad, the same with the Logos. But the

Logos

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

und^aSi "^^^ redemptive adaptations are in all this already
indicated : Freedom and faith are in the van. As in
Christ the human soul gradually united itself with
the Logos, so man receives grace gradually, in keep-
ing with his progress (Neo-Platonic progressive
stages of knowledge from simple science and sensu-
ous things onward ; yet ecstasy and visions recede ;
there is little that is shadowy) . Everywhere a blend-

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 165

ing of freedom and enlightenment is necessary, and
the ecclesiastical faith remains the starting-point also
of the ** theoretic life**, until this comes to joyous as-
cetic contemplation, in which the Logos is the friend
and bridegroom of the soul that is now deified in love
and rests in Divinity. Regeneration Origen recog- Begenen-
ized oBly as a process; but in him and Clement are ^r^
found statements joined to the New Testament (God
as Love, as the Father, regeneration, adoption) which,
free from the shackles of the system, set forth the
evangelical announcement in a surprisingly pertinent
way. In the highest sense there are no " means of
grace'', but the symbols which accompany the be-
stowal of grace are not equally good. The system SSStoS
of numerous mediators and intercessors (angels,
maiiyrs, living saints) Origen first brought actually
into operation and encouraged prayers to these (as
r^ards praying to Christ Origen was very reticent).

According to Origen all spirits will, in the form ^[®^
of their individual lives, be finally rescued and glor- '*°°'
ified (apokatastasis), in order to make way for a new
world-epoch. The sensuous-eschatological expecta-
tions are in toto banished. The doctrine of the
resurrection of the body Origen adopted (rule of
faith), but he conceived of it in such a way that a
corpvs spiritale will rise, in which all sense-facul-
ties, yes all the members which have sensuous func-
tions, will be wanting, and which will shine brightly
like the angels and stars. The souls of those who ^'^^'y-
have fallen asleep will go at once to paradise (no

166 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

sleeping of the soul); the souls which are not yet
purified will pass into a new condition of punish-
ment (purgatory), which will purify them still far-
ther (the remorse of conscience is hell). Only so far,
however, did Origen accept the ecclesiastical doctrine
of damnation ; at last all spirits, the demons them-
selves, will return to God purified. Yet is his doc-
trine esoteric : " for the common man it is enough to
know that sin will be punished". This system drove
from the field the heretic gnostic theology and later
dominated the ecclesiastical theology of the Orient.
But the Church could not for any length of time ap-
prove of all the teaching of Origen or content itself
with his sharp discrimination between faith and the
science of faith. It was obliged to try to unite both
and to put them upon the same plane (like Irenaeus).

CHAPTER VII.

DECISIVE RESULT OF THEOLOGICAL SPECULATION
WITHIN THE REALM OF THE RULE OF FAITH,
OR THE DEFINING OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL DOC-
TRINAL NORM THROUGH THE ACCEPTANCE OP
THE LOGOS-CHRISTOLOGY.

LofiroB- The Logos-Christology alone permitted a uniting

^^ogy. q£ faith and science, corresponded to the doctrine that

God became man in order that we might become gods,

and thus supported Christianity from without and

from within. But it was by no means wide-spread

THB LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 167

in the churches in the year 190, or even later; rather
was it in part unknown, and in part feared as
heretic-gnostic (destruction of the Divine monarchy,
that is, on the other hand, of the Divinity of Christ) ;
Tertull. adv. Prax. 3 : " Simplices quique^ ne dixe-
rem inprudentes et idiotae^ quae maior semper
pars credentium est^ quoniam et ipsa regula fidei
a pluribus diis saeculi ad unicum et verum deum
transfert^ non intelligentes unicum quidem^ sed
cum sua olxovojiia esse credendum^ expavescunt ad
oixovofiia . . . Itaque duos et tres iam iactitant a
nobis pradicariy se vero unius dei cultores prae-
sumunt . . . monarchiam inquiunt tenemus^.
The establishment of the Logos-Christology with- EstaD-

liahed br

inthe/atYA of the Church — and indeed as articu- »b21i?«"-

-^ Effect.

tus fundamentalis — was accomplished after severe
conflicts during the course of a hundred years (till
about 300). It signified the transformation of the
faith into a system of beliefs with an Hellenic-philo-
sophical cast; it shoved the old eschatological repre-
sentations aside, and even suppressed them ; it put
back of the Christ of history a conceivable Christ, a
principle, and reduced the historical figure to a mere
appearance; it referred the Christian to "natures"
and naturalistic magnitudes, instead of to the Person
and to the ethical ; it gave the faith of the Christians a
definite trend toward the contemplation of ideas and
doctrinal formulas, and prepared the way, on the one
side for the monastic life, on the other for the chap-
eroned Christianity of the imperfect, active laity ; it

1C8 OUTLINES OP THE mSTORY OP DOGMA.

legitimized a hundred questions in metaphysics,
cosmology, and natural science as ecclesiastical, and
demanded, under threat of loss of bliss, a definite
answer; it went so far that men preached, instead of
faith, rather faith in the faith, and it stunted religion
while it appeared to broaden it. But in that it made
the bond with natural science perfect it raised Chris-
tianity to the world-and-everybody's religion and
prepared the way for the act of Constantine.
^toira " The tendencies in the Church, which strove against

Resisted

philosophical Christianity and the Logos-Christology,
men called monarchian (so first Tertullian). The
name was not happily chosen, since many monarch-
ians acknowledged a second hypostasis, yet made
use of it for everything except for Christology . Two
tendencies can be distinguished among the monarch-
ians (see the old Christologies, Book I. chap. 3, sub 6) :
The adoption^ which looked upon the Divine in
Christ as a power and started from the human per-
son of Jesus which was deified, and the modalistiCy
which held Christ to be a manifestation of God the
Father. Both contested the Logos-Christology as
" gnosticism " ; the first through an avowed interest
in the historical representation of Christ (Synoptic),
the second in the interest of monarchy and of the Di-
in Vain, vinity of Christ. Both tendencies, passing into each
other, were Catholic, maintaining the fundamental
principles of the rule of faith (neither " ebionitic ",
nor gnostic) ; but after the New Testament had es-
tablished itself as such the contest was in vain ; for

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 169

although there are passs^es in the New Testament
in favor of these theses, the other passages which
maintain the pre-existence of Christ as a special
hypostasis outweigh them — at least according to
the interpretation then current — and it seemed self-
evident that the " lower " in the expressions should
everywhere he interpreted according to the " higher '*
(pneumatic), (therefore the Synoptics in accord-
ance with John). In aU ecclesiastical provinces
there were monarchian contests; but we know them
only in part.

(1) The Rejection of Dynamic Monarchian- Adoption
ism, or Adqptionism. — (a) The alogoi (nickname; Rejected.
sources : Irenseus, Hippolytus, Epiphanius) in Asia
Minor were a party of the radical anti-Montanis-
tic opposition, which rejected all prophecy in the
Church ; they appeared at a time when there was as
yet no New Testament. They criticised the Johan-
nean writings on historical grounds and rejected them
on account of their proclamation of the Paraclete
and the apocalypse, at the same time proving the in-
accuracy of the historical narratives in the Johannean
Gospel. But they criticised also the docetism of the
Qo6i)el, hesitated at the Logos, and decided that the
untrue writings, which, on the one hand, contained
Jewish-naturalistic elements, on the other, docetic-
gnostic, must have originated with Ceiinthus. Their synoptic
own Christology was fashioned after the Synoptics : to^ogy-
The miraculous birth, the descent of the Spirit upon
Jesus, his development, the exaltation through his

170 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

resurrection constitute his dignity. The earliest op-
ponents (Irenaeus, Hippolytus) treated these in a
measure respectfully, since these " alogoi " did good
service against the Montanists. But one must say,
notwithstanding the high esteem which the " alogoi "
had for sound historical criticism, that their relig-
ious inspiration could not have been of a very high
order; for they were neither apocalyptic enthusiasts,
nor mystics : Wherein then consisted the power of
their piety?
Expelled (6) The Same can be said of the Roman-adoption
Roma parties of the Theodotians, who stood in evident
alliance with the "alogoi" (the cobbler Theodo-
tus and his party, Theodotus the banker, the
Artemonites). They established themselves after
about 185 in Rome (the elder Theodotus was from
Byzantium, a man of unusual culture) ; but already
had bishop Victor of Rome expelled Theodotus (c.
195) from the Church, because he held Christ to be
a f/'tXd^ av^pwno^ — the first case where a Christian who
stood upon the rule of faith is disciplined as an
unsound teacher. Theodotus taught as did the
" alogoi " concerning Christ {npoxonij of the miracu-
lously born man Jesus, equipped by his baptism and
prepared for his exaltation through the resurrection ;
stress upon the ethical proof), but recognized the
Johannean Gospel already as Holy Scripture, and
carried on his Scripture argument in the same sound
critical way as did the latter (Deut. 18: 15; Jer. 17:
9; Isa. 53: 2 seq.; Matt. 12: 31; Luke 1: 35; Jno.

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

171

8 : 40; Acts 2: 22; I. Tim. 2: 5). Under their most '"^^gf^^'"*
distinguished pupil Theodotus, the banker, the ®*'^^™^-
adoptionists zealously cultivated the criticism of
the sacred text, empirical science and natural
phenomena (not with Plato), and stood as a school
alongside the Church (see the description in Eusebius,
H. E. V, 28). Their attempt to found a church
(bishop Natalis) was soon frustrated (at the time of
bishop Zephyrinus) ; they remained as oflScers with
an ever-dwindling army. Out of their thesis, that
the Holy Spirit, whose hyi)ostasis (as eternal Son of
God, see Hennas whose Christology they followed)
they acknowledged, stood higher than Jesus, since
the latter is only an adopted Qod, their opponents
made a capital heresy. Inasmuch as they ascribed
the Old Testament theophanies to this eternal Son
of God and took Melchisedec to be a manifes-
tation of the eternal Son, they were called Melchis-
edecs, because they prayed to him. Of the learned
labors of these men nothing remains to us. Hippo-
lytus informs us that some of them would not concede
that Christ is a God, even after his resurrection;
others acknowledged the ^eonvtrjfft^. It became clear in
the contest that an alliance with the science of Aris-
totle, Euclid, and Galen, was not compatible with the
Church, but on the contrary that it demands an alli-
ance with Plato, and that the old Christology of
Hermas — the adoptionists appealed to such docu-
ments— was no longer satisfactory. Some decades
later there appeared in Rome in the person of Arte-

Logos-
Ch Pis-
tol ogy
Platonic.

By2S0

172 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

mon a still more important adopiionist teacher, of
whom, however, little is known. He also put aside
the predicate " God " as applied to Christ, but seems
not to have agreed rigidly in aU particulars with the
Adoption- Theodotians. About the year 250 adoptionism was

ism Van-

isheR from insignificant in Rome (Cyprian is silent; yet see
Novatian, de trinit,)\ but in the Occident it contin-
ued for a long time in the Church formulas, as
^^spiritus sanctus dei filiuSy caro Jesus — spiritus
sanctus Christus — spiritus carni mixtus Jesus
Christus" (through the reading of the highly es-
teemed Hermas) ; and it is instructive that Augustine
still a short time before his conversion thought the
adoption Christology to be the Catholic. Therefore
the orthodox Christological formulas were still little
known in the fourth century in the Occidental laity-
world.

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

B^^}^«' Pamphilus defended him) ? Beryllus of Bostra, the
monarchian teacher who won a large following in
Arabia and Syria, became convinced of the truth of
the Logos-Christology through Origen (Euseb. VI.,

33 : Tov ffwT/'^pa xai xnptov -^jjiatv fiTf 7:pou<fs<rrdvat xar idiaof

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 173

^eoTTjTa iStav £/e«v, aXX" ifinoXtreoofiivi^v abr^ fiovr^v njv

icarpixr^v) , Those Egyptian chiliasts, whom Diony-
sius of Alexandria opposed, and whose teaching -Ktpi

T^^ Mo^oo xal alij^^^ iv^ioo too xuptoo ijfiwv iittipavtia^ he

acknowledged as necessary , may have favored dynam-
ical representations. But no great adoption move-
ment was undertaken in the Orient, save by Paul of „p»ui of

Sunonta

Samosata, metropolitan of Antioch (Euseb. VII,
27-30; other material in Routh, Rel. Sacr. III.)f the
national Syrian bishop, who opposed the Greeks and
their science as well as the Romans and their church.
That two great Oriental general councils at Antioch
proved ineffective against him, and only the third
condemned and deposed him (very probably 268) is
an evidence of how little even yet the Alexandrian
dogmatics had found acceptance in the Orient. Paul
was a learned theologian (unspiritual, vain, shrewd,
sophistical; a "man of the world" his opponents
called him), who wished to break the power of the
Hellenic (Platonic) philosophy in the Church and to
maintain the old teaching. In later times he ap-
pears to the Church as a heretic of the first order, like
a Judas, ebionite, Nestorian, monothelite, etc. His
conception was this : God is to be thought of sim-
ply as individually personal (ly 7tp6ffwi:ov), It is true uJ^"ine
that in Qod a Logos (Son), i.e. a Sophia (Spirit), can
be distinguished — both are otherwise also to be iden-
tified— but these are attributes. God from eternity
sent forth the Logos from himself, so that one can
call him Son, but he remains an impersonal power.

174 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

He worked in Moses and the prophets, ftaXXov xai
dta^epovTot^ in the Son of David, bom of the virgin.
The Redeemer is a man from *' beneath", but the
Logos from above worked within him (in-dwelling
by means of an inspiration working from without,
so that the Logos becomes the " inner man " of the
Redeemer). The communion which thus arises is a

covdftia xara /idi^r^fftv xai fisrouffiav^ a (foviXeofft^ (no odaia

oofftw/iivrj iv adtfiart) ; the Logos did not dwell in Jesus
oufftatSoj^^ but xard r.otuTtjTa ; therefore is he always to be
distinguished from the latter as the greater. The
Redeemer is the man wrought upon by the Logos ;
but he possessed in a unique way the Divine grace,
just as his position is unique. His testimony bears
witness to his endowments. Between two persons —
therefore also between God and Christ — unity of dis-
position and of will alone is possible. Such imity is
realized only through love ; but also only that which
comes from love has value; that which is gained
through " nature " is indifiEerent. Jesus by reason of
the unchangeableness of his love and will is like God
and has become one with him, inasmuch as he not
only himself remained without siu, but through con-
flict and endurance overcame the sins of our progen-
itors. Like as he however advanced and persisted
in the confirmation of the good, so also did the
Father endow him with might and miraculous deeds,
by which he made known his unswerving will toward
God. Thus he became the Redeemer and entered
into an indissoluble and eternal imion with God, be-

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

175

canse his love can never fail. As a reward of his
victorious love he has obtained a name above every
name, judgment and Divine dignity, so that one may
call him "the God bom of the virgin", which he has
ever been in God's decree and proclamation (through
grace and confirmation did he attain unto Godhood ;
the steps were here also birth, baptism, and resurrec-
tion). This evangelical Christology, which was the Evaneeii-
only one to consciously cast aside the religious character.
physics, Paul supported by Scripture proofs and zeal-
ously refuted its opponents, especially the " old ex-
positors", the Alexandrians. He did away with all
CLurch liturgies in which the essential Divinity of
Christ was proclaimed ; he would know nothing of
"substances", but held fast to the living Person.
His teaching was considered heretical in the highest
degree by the learned Hellenic bishops : He has be-
trayed the mystery ! In the confession of six bishops
against him the physical Logos-doctrine was set forth
in broad terms as a most important part of the apos-
tolic and Catholic Church faith. At the synod the
word ** opLoooffu)^ " was also expressly cast aside, evi-
dently because Paul had used it for the Logos in
order to prove by it that God and the Logos are one
subject. With Paul's deposition and removal (272)
it was decided that no Catholic Christian dare any
more doubt the Divine physis of the Redeemer, But
the teaching of Paul did not succumb in Antioch
without leaving its trace behind. Lucian and his
renowned professional school, the birthplace of

Paul
Deposed.

Lucian.

176 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Arianism, were fructified by the spirit of Paul.
However, the doctrine is badly disfigured in Arian-
ism by reason of its combination with the hyposta-

PhoUnus. tized Idyo^xrifffia. On the contrary Photinus and the
great Antiochians — ^althoughthe latter acknowledged
the Nicene symbol — learned their best lesson from
Paul: So-called Nestorianism had its roots in Paul's
teaching, and in it Paul was once more condemned.
How long imbroken adoption views held their
sway in outlying Oriental churches is indicated by
the Acta Archelai^ written at the beginning of the
fourth century. What its author, a clerical teacher,
says about Christ is very like the teaching of Paul.
But in the great centres of Christianity adoptionism
was totally broken down by about 270.

SSS^i* (2) The Rejection of Modalistic Monarchian-
ism. Not adoptionism, but modalism was the dan-
gerous opponent of the Logos-Christology between
180 and 300, the doctrine according to which the
Godhead itself is seen incarnate in Christ, and he
himself considered the very and only God. Against
this view TertuUian, Origen, Novatian, and espe-
cially Hippolytus contended most energetically (" pa-
tripassiani", they were first called by TertuUian;
in the Orient later the most common expression was
" Sabelliani "). Hippolytus says that in his time the
question agitated the whole Church (Philos. IX, 6 :

fiiyttrrov rdpa^uv xara TTfivra tov xotTfiuv iv nafftv r«?9 TTHTTOt^

i/i^dXXooffiu)^ and TertuUian and Origen testify that
the majority of Christian people think "monarch-

ianism.

THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 177

ianically^. In Eome, from Victor to Calixtus, D^riMin
modalism was the official doctrine; among the Mon- ^^uv^

Caliztua.

tanists one-half thought modaliBtically ; the Marcio-
nite chnich also leaned toward this view, and in the
Catholic Church &om the earliest times on many
formulas were used which served to promote this
form of thought, which indeed in reality best agreed
with tiie plain, unreflecting faith (o *e<J9 fwu Xpuno^).
But an exclusive modalistic doctrine was first de-
veloped in opposition to gnosticism and the Logos-
Christology, (1) in order to ward off ditheism, (2) in
order to maintain the full Divinity of Christ, (3) in
order to sever all connection with gnosticism. Now
for the first time men sought to establish this faith
energeticaUy as doctrine. Scientific theologians came
to its defence. But to this religious conception more
flian to any other contact with thought and science
must needs prove detrimental : It was the beginning
of the end ; however, the death-struggle continued a
long time. The stoic philosophy with its pantheism
and its dialectical formulas was called in to assist
(the adoptionists relied in part upon Aristotle; see
above). The controversy thus presented a phase
which makes it appear related to the controversy of
tiie Platonists and common stoics about the idea of
Gfod (whether the Ao^oy-tJeo? is the Intimate God, or
whether there still stands behind him an apathetic ov
as ^ed^) . The oldest defenders of modalism, how-
ever, had at the same time an express Biblical in-
terest.

178 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Asia Minor
and Rome

First
Theatres.

Caiixtus*
Compro-

mifie
Formula.

Two Mon-

archian

Postulates.

(a) Here also were Asia Minor and Rome the
first theatres of the controversy. In the former was
Noetus (he, however, was probably finidly excom-
municated), in the latter his pupil Epigonus (about
200), who won first Kleomenes, then Sabellius to his
cause. Against them Hippolytus came forward ; but
the bishops of Rome favored the school (above all
Zephyrinus) . Caliztus (217-222), originally a medal-
ist, sought to satisfy all parties by a compromise
formula and found himself thereby obliged to excom-
municate Hippolytus (rival bishop) as well as Sabel-
lius. His formula seems to have pacified the major-
ity. How imperfect our knowledge of this matter
is, is indicated by the circumstance that Hippolytus
is wholly silent about the medalist Praxeas in Rome
(see TertuUian). Probably the latter came to Rome
before Epigonus (perhaps even under Eleutherus),
but had not at that time aroused opposition. Since
he also went to Carthage and was an out-and-out
anti-Montanist, Tertullian used his name in order
to combat the Roman modalism in general (about
210). Certain is it that Victor, who excommunicated
Theodotus, did so, not from the standpoint of the
Logos-Christology, but rather from that of modalism.
Yet it is to be observed that the two monarchian
views are more nearly related to each other than
is either of them to the Logos-Christology. Both
defend the redemptive historical view of the Person
of Christ, as against the naturalistic historical, and
oftsil BMi tetttlttte. JMdhi' dUier (as to Beryllus one

THE BATING OF THB FOUNDATION. 179

can queetioQ whether he was an adoptioniet or a
modalist; in the writingB of Origen not a few pas-
sages leave us in doubt which party he is contending
against ; the compromise formula of C&lixtua is also
vari^ated). The simplest form of modalism is rep-
resented by Noetus (see Hippolytus) : Christ is the
Father hitoself, who was bom and died. If Christ
is not the Father, then is he not God. Next to the
monotheistic interest (opponents were called ii^t"i)
was the interest in the full Divinity of Christ (yawuo-

aiv amt^ray Iva fleuv — rJ uZv laiiv iratoi ta^dZmv ro» -YptvrAii
— Xptardt ijv 9tut lai ticaa^itv St' r,;idf uutuc &y xanjp, iva

xat iraaai T,iiat Joi^*f), Scripture evidence was Ex.
3: 6; 20: 2 aeq; Isa. 44: G; 45: 6, 14; Baruch 3:
36; Jno. 10: 30; 14: 8 seq; Bom. 9:6; the Johan-
nean Gospel was recognized; but Vuidyy^s /lii- kiytt
iiiyitv, dW Silaiv aU^r"P'^' The concoptioQ " Ix^os "
was rigidly rejected. Speculatively the idea of '
Qod is grounded (in Eleomenes) upon the thought
that Gk>d is invisible if he wishes, visible however
when he permits himself to be seen ; intangible when
he does not wish to be touched, tangible when
he presents himself to be touched; unbegotten
and b^otten; mortal and immortal (old Church
fiirmulas justified by the stoic idea of God), The
Futher bu far as ho doigiicd to be bom is the Son;
Ixith are therefore only vominally to be distin-
^ished; but the dlBtinction is also an historical, re-
di-mptive one. In favor of the identity they called
io muul the Old Testumeut theophanies. That they

180 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

after the manner of the stoics attributed to the God-
head itself the element of finiteness cannot be proven.
M«i2!^ It is the old naiVe modalism, which is here exalted
to a theory (otherwise, observe that all early Chris-
tian writers, who were not philosophical, knew only
one birth of the Son, that from the virgin). The
theory was wrecked in this, that in the Qospels
without doubt two subjects (Father and Son) are
presupposed. However, the medalists hardly de-
clared unequivocally: The Father suffered; they
said, the Son, who suffered, is identical with the
Father (bishop Zephyrinus : ^/oi olda iua i^edu Xpttrrdv

^Irfmr,v xcCi TzXi^v wnoh Erepa oodiva yevijToi/ xai izaf^r^rih^ but:

01)^ 6 itarijp drrii^avsv^ dXXd 6 tifoff). More complicated is
Priuceas. the doctriuc of ^ Praxeas " and the formulas of Ca-
lixtus; they indicate a trace of the difficulties:
''Logos" is no substance, it is nothing else than
sound and word. Praxeas, in tendency and in Scrip-
ture argument at one with Noetus, made, however,
a clearer distinction between the Father and the Son :
God through the assiunption of the flesh made him-
self into the Son; the flesh makes the Father into
the Son, i,e, in the Person of the Redeemer the flesh
(the man Josus) is the Son, the Spirit (God, Christ)
is the Father (citation of Luke 1 : 35). That which
was horn is the Son ; the Spirit (God) could not suf-
fer ; so far as he entered into the flesh he shared the
^ewmw suffering ("pafer compassus est filio^^). As soon
^^rsm!^**' as the distinguishing of caro {Jilius) and spiritus
{pater) was taken strictly modalism passes over

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

181

Caliztus'

into adoptionism. This took place in part through
Caliztus, who in his formula of reconciliation ac-
cepted the Logos (but as a designation of the Father
also) and an adoption element (this Hippolytus has
well observed), but by means of it actually trans-
ferred the faith of the Roman church to the Logos-
Christology, and to the physico-deification doctrine —
excommunicating his old friend Sabellius. Yet the
gnoetical subordinationism of TertuUian and Hippo- t^^^Z.
lytus could never gain acceptance in Rome (Calix-

tus' formula : tov Xo^ov adrdv elvat ulov^ aoTuv xa\ iraripa
(stoic Xo'j^o^^eog'j xdi naripa Svofiart fiiv xaXouftevou^ iv dk
ov r^ r:>€'^fia dotaiperov * odx akku tivat i:aTipa^ aXXo de ulov^
iv di xai To af'}7d uicdp^etv xai rd icavra yifittv rob ^eioo
Tn^eoftaro^ rd re Svw xai xdrw* xa) elvat rd iv rff Ttap^ivut
trapxm^h Trveufia oo^ irepov irapd rdv iraripa^ dXXd fv xai rd
aoro. Kdl rouro elvat rd eiprj/iivov • JnO. 14 : 11. Td fikv
ydp ^ktTcdfjLtvov^ Sitep i^rrh av^pwiro^^ rodro elvat rdv olov^
rd dk Iv rdi uldi ^topr^^iv irvsofia rouro elvat rdv iraripa • oo
T^Py ^<f^^y ^P<^ ^''^^ ^eowf iraripa xa) ultiv^ dXX^ Fva. *0 fdp
iv atnw ytvonsvo^ Ttarrjp izpotrXa^ofitvo^ njv <rdpxa i^eoizoii^iftv
ivw<ra^ iaurw^ xcCi iizoc'^trev ?v, 0*9 xaXeirrtSat naripa xa\ uldv
iva ^rwv, xai rovro iv Sv i:p6<rw7rov fii) dovatr^^at el)^at duo^
xa\ ourof^ rdv rraripa trofinenov^ivat rtp olw ' on yap ^iXti
Xiytiv rdv Tzaripa iteTCOv^ivaty

Certain is it that the learned and influential Nova-
tian (de trinit,) did much toward bringing about AbaodMied
the final abandonment of the Logos-Christology in o<«*<J«nt.
the Occident. About the year 260 the Roman bis-
hop Dionysius wrote : lapiXXw^ fiXa^rfrjiieT^ aarOy rdv oldv

Logos-

Chris-

182 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ehai kiywy rov naripa^ Cyprian marked patripassian-
ism as a pestilential heresy like Marcionitism, and he
himself shoved into a second recension of the Roman
symbol ( Aquileja) the phrase : " Credo in deo patre
omnipotentey invisibiliet tmpassibili". However,
the LogOB-Christology had never found a congenial
soil in the Occident; men let it pass, but they held
much more firmly — in this there was a real interest —
to the article of faith : Christ is true, complete God,
and there is only one God. This attitude of the Oc-
cident became of most decisive significance in the
Arian controversy : The Nicene doctrine is, not as a
philosophical speculation, but as the direct, symboli-
cal faith, as much the property of the Occidental
church of the third century, as the Chalcedon doctrine.
Accordingly many Occidental teachers, who were
not influenced by Plato and the Orient, used in
the third and fourth centuries modalistic formulas
Occidental without hesitation, above all Commodian. The the-

Theology '

Au^istine. ology of the Occident until Augustine shows in gen-
eral a mingling of Ciceronian morality, massive,
primitive Christian eschatology, and unreflecting
Christology with more or less latent modalism {one
God in the strictest sense; Christ God and man)
and practical Church politics (penitential institute),
which is wholly foreign to the Orient (Amobius,
Lactantius, Commodian). They were no mystics,
in part opponents of Neo-Platonism. How hard it
would have been for them to make themselves at
home in the speculations of the Orient is indicated

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 183

by the energetic, but abortive attempt of Hilarius and
the theological barbarism of Lucifer. It is well
miderstood that modalism did not continue in the
Occident as a sect, so long as in the Orient; it foimd
in the latter, even in the prevailing form of teaching
especially where the Logos was accepted, a shelter.

(b) The accounts of the old modalism in the ow Modal-

^ ' ism In

Orient are very turbid ; for subsequently everything o^ent
is called " Sabellianism*^, which pertains to the eter-
nal and enduring hypostasis of the Son {e.g. Marcel-
lus' doctrine ). Already in the third century in the
Orient 8i)eculation concerning the modalistic theses
increased greatly and was carried out into manifold
forms, and the historians of the movement (Epipha- '
nius, Athanasius, etc.) add thereto still other discov-
ered forms. Just as one can write no history of the ^^^^**
Logos-Christology in the Orient from Origen to ^'SSSIgm'
Athanasius — the sources have been destroyed — so " ^
also one can write no history of modalism. It is
certain that the contest began later in the Orient,
but it was more passionate and enduring and led to
the development of the Origenistic Christology in
the direction of Arianism (also antithetic) . The first
great agitation took place in the Pentapolis, after
that Origen combated the '' singular " medalists as
Christian brethren and sharply criticised bishops
(Soman), who made the distinction between Father
and Son merely nominal (the condemnation of Origen
at Some under Pontianus may also have had reference
to his Christology). Perhaps Sabellius himself near

184 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

SSSiS?.' *^^ ^^^ ^* ^^^ l^f® ^^^* (again?) from Rome into
the Pentapolis. He waa already dead when Diony-
sius of Alexandria combated Sabellianism there.
He is to be distinguished from Noetus by his more
careful theological deductions and by his regard for
the Holy Spirit: To one Being are attached three
names (Father, Son, and Spirit), otherwise polythe-
ism would be established ; the three names are at the
same time three energies. The one Being is to be
called olondratp — a designation for the being of OtoA
himself. However this Being is not at the same
moment Father and Son, but in three consecutive, in-
terchanging energies (prosopons) he acts as Creator
and Law-giver, as Redeemer, as Quickener (through
this teaching the conception " Prosopon **, " Person ^
became discredited in the Orient). Whether it was
possible for Sabellius to carry through the thought of
strict succession, we do not know. Perhaps he still
permitted the Prosopon of the Father to continue

^*ddu2?" active (the Sabellians fell back upon the Old Testa-
peito ment Scriptures, but also upon the Qospel to the

Egyptians,

etc. Egyptians and other apocrypha — ^a proof that the
Catholic canon had not yet established itself in the
Pentapolis). This distinguished itself from the ear-
lier modalism, not by a stronger pantheistic tendency,
nor by a new doctrine of the trinity (both came
thereto first later in the fourth century, if the modi-
fications were not introduced by the historians), but
by the attempt to explain the succession of the Pro-
sopons, by the attention given to the Holy Spirit (see

THB LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 186

above) and by the drawing of a formal parallel be-
tween the Prosopon of the Father and the two other
ProsoponSy which indeed tended toward the accept-
BJioe of a fiovd^Xoyo^ back of the Prosopon {troffroirj and
7TAaTUir/ji6^)^ who never reveals himself, but becomes
known only through his activity-(this view is favored
by Schleiermacher, Theol. Ztschr. 1822 H. 3). Cos- sabeiuan-
mology is introduced by Sabellius as a parallel to ^Sr^ltha/
soteriology, without the preference being given to ofri^
the Father, and thereby in a peculiar manner the
way was prepared for the Athanasian Christologifj
i.e, the Augustinian. This is the decisive signifi-
cance of Sabellianism in the Orient. It prepared
there the way for the 6/ioou<no^'^ for that the SabeUians
made use of this word (on the other hand also Paul
of Samosata) is clear. While within modalism there
was hitherto no firm connection between cosmology
and soteriology, under the later Sabellianism the
history of the world and of redemption became one
history of the self -revealing Gk)d; this became of
equal rank with the Logos-Christology. In different
ways Maroellus and Athanasius sought to reconcile
the main principles of modalism and the Logos-
Christology : The former failed, the latter succeeded
in that he almost entirely excluded the world-idea'
from the Logos-idea, i.e. restored the Logos (as the
SabeUians the old^)^ to the being, yes, to the numerical
unity of God.

186 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGlfA.

quence of modaliBm was that the followers of Origen
gave to the Logos-Christology a strong subordination
cast. Dionysius of Alexandria went so far as to set
forth in a doctrinal letter the Son simply as a crea-
tion, which is related to the Father as the vine to the
gardener and as the boat to the builder (Athana-
siuSy de sentent, Diony, ). He was denounced by his
Roman colleague of the same name (about 260) ; the
latter published a warning, in which he very charac-
teristically branded modalism as a heresy; first, on
the ground of its affinity with the Christology then
current in Alexandria, which he however totally
misunderstood and represented in its coarsest form ;
second, on account of its tritheism. And without
any adjustment, he proclaimed the paradox, that
one must believe in the Father, Son, and Spirit, and
^^SS^' these three are at the same time one. The Alexan-
^Rome. drian college, presenting now the other side of the
Origenistic Christology, humbly submitting, ex-
plained that it had nothing against the word ij/ioo6~
<rto<: ; the Father was always Father, the Son always
Son, and the latter is related to the former as the
beam is to the light, the stream to the fountain ; they
even went farther and explained that in the very
designation ''Father" the Son is included; but in
the diplomatic writing the bishop allowed himself a
mental reservation ; he would have been obliged to
set aside the Neo-Platonic philosophy, i.e. science,
t2wK^ if he had rejected every fiepitrfid^ in the Gk>dhead. This
▲rian. controversy was a prelude to the Arian, it ended

THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 187

qnickly and its culmination did not require the Alex-
andrians to restrict their speculations. They were
besides also very anxious to replace the old simple
faith in the churches (when it became inconvenient)
by the philosophical (Dionysius labored in Egyptian
villages against chiliasm; his opponent was Nepoe;
Euseb., H. E. VII, 24, 25), but at the same time to
refute the empirical philosophy (Dionysius' Tract
on nature gainst the atomic theory). The Logos-
and Christus-doctrine was worked out by the leaders
of the catechetical school in the spirit of Origen
(finer philosophical polytheism) ; but out of the com-
prehensive literature we have only insignificant frag-
ments : Pierius, the junior of Origen, expressly desig-
nated the Father and Logos as two outrlai and two
^oiretq and subordinated the Holy Spirit very greatly
to the Son, as the third obaia. He taught the pre-
existence of souls and contested the verbal sense of
some Scripture passages as not authoritative. The- ^ "^^^ug
ognostus (in the time of Diocletian) composed a com- orfren?^
prehensive dogmatic work, which as a system sur- tion of'

ArUtDism.

passed that of Origen and had a form that has been
in use until to-day. He moreover developed Origen-
ism in the direction of Arius. Another Origenist,
Hierakas, established an order of monks, in whose
celibacy he saw something new in Christian ethics
and, as it seems, emphasized more strongly the sub-
stantial unity of the Father and Son. At all events
Peter (f as martyr 311), bishop of Alexandria, did peter.
this. In him the Alexandrian bishop again in-

188 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

clined toward the views of the Demetrius, who had
condemned Origen. Under what circumstances this
happened is unknown. But from his extant writ-
ings it is clear that he substituted Biblical realism
(history of the creation and the fall) for the Ori-
genistic spiritualism and designated this sa fid^^a
Tf 9 '£A^iyy(xf 9 Ttatdeia^, Yet this reaction on the part
of Peter was still not a radical one; he only rounded
off the points; he began in Alexandria the adjust-
ment between the realistic faith of the simple-minded
and the scientific faith^by means of subtractions and
additions : That which was before his mind was a
concordant faith which should be at the same time
ecclesiastical and scientific. But the time for this
was not yet at hand (see the Cappadocians) ; freedom
still ruled in theology, which latter, it is true, was
pushing on toward its complete secularization and
submersion. Already every future conception was
current; but there was wanting as yet a definite
statement of them and a fixed value *, yes, they were
looked upon as unbiblical, by many still as suspicious.
^^^^ The state of the doctrine of faith is best reflected
*'*^^*^^ in the works of Gregory Thaumaturgus, the en-
thusiastic pupil of Origen, the most influential

* Thus f^ovAcj rptdcj owj'ta, ^(^'f , imoKtifitvoVy vwdaraatCj irpdaunnv,

iroiiiv, yiyvea^ai^ ycwdv, ofioobatoc^ U t^ ovaiac roif irarpdc, Sta to»
^e^fuiTOi^ ^edc tK i^eov, ^ cu ^orr^, ycwrr&hrra ov voirr&hrraj ijv 6re
WK iv, ovK iv bre ovk ^, ^fpof KnT* ovaiaVj ATpenroc^ avaXXitUnvf^
ayhnnrroct oX^piof, miy^ r^ i^crfryrof , <K« owriat^ ovaia ovotofihtf^
ivav^p^TTtfot^y '&£&ir&fHj:roiy tvtjaiq owjtitdtf^y hnjatc Kara fterovciaVf
aw&^ta KOTCk fiA^ifOiv xai furovaiav^ avyKpaat( hoiKUv^ eto.

THK UkYINa OF THE FOUNDATION. 189

theologian in Asia Minor. One sees here that the
*" scientific " itself trembled before the fine polytheism
which it introduced, and farther that Christology
became pure philosophy : The symbol which Gregory
disseminated among the churches hardly corresponded
in a single sentence with the Biblical statements; it
is a compendiimi of the purest speculations, recall-
ing the Oospel only in the words, Father, Son, and
Spirit. Therein Christian faith was expected to rec-
ognize itself once more !

No wonder that a reaction set in, if indeed a tame Js^^J?"?

' Methodius.

one. By the side of Peter of Alexandria there ap-
peared here and there in the Orient about the year
300 opponents of Origen who compelled those who
still honored him to come to his defence. The most
significant and influential of these opponents was
Methodius (about 300). He was no enemy of Plato
and of speculation — quite the contrary ; but he wished
to harmonize the Biblical realism and the verl^al
sense of the rule of faith with science — a new Ire-
n^us, be wanted a consistent faith which would be
purely ecclesiastical and purely scientific. Moreover
all the heretical points of Origenism must be rounded ^^^1^
oflf , in order that the latter may be thereby introduced
in this form into the ecclesiastical faith {speculative
realism; Methodius had read IrensBus). Above all
the pessimism of Origen as regards the world (with-
in the cosmology) must be set aside : Matter and the
human body were approved by God and will there-
fore be glorified and remain eternal. In accordance

190 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

with this the Origenistic teaching concerning the
eternal creation of spirits, concerning the fall in a
pre-existent state, concerning the character and pur-
pose of the world, etc., were set aside. In the place
of the same the mystico-reaiistic teaching of IrenaBus
concerning Adam (mankind) was reintroduced, but
was still more mystically developed and brought into
an alliance with the recapitulation-theory. Man-
kind before Christ was Adam (in need of redemption,
but in the condition of children). Through the
second Adam the Logos unites himself with us. But
^g^^** Methodius went a step farther; the new mankind
as a whole is the second Adam. Every one should
become Christ, inasmuch as the Logos unites itself
with every soul as with Christ (the descent of the
Logos from heaven and his death must be repeated
for every soul — namely within). This comes to pass
not so much through knowledge as through virginity
and ascetism. The theoretic optimism was also bal-
R^5°fOT ^^^^ ^y *^® renunciation of the world expressed in
Virginity, virginity. No ecclesiastic before Methodius had so
prized virginity as he, so prized it as a means of
mystic union with the Godhead (virginity is the
end of the incarnation). In that the realism of the
doctrine of faith was hero bound up with the Origen-
istic speculation, the two-foldness of faith and the
science of faith reduced to one, theoretical optimism
(as regards the sensuous world) joined to the practi-
cal renunciation of the world, and everything made
dependent upon the mystic union with the Godhead

THB LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION.

191

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

That which Methodius had done for dogmatics
as developed doctrine, the bishops did about the
year 300 for the rule of faith, in so far as they in-
troduced the scientific Logos-doctrine into the in-
structional symbol, thereby neutralizing the distinc
tion between faith and scientific dogmatics and
placing the chief contribution of Hellenic speculation
under the protection of the apostolic tradition. The
Oriental symbols of this time (sjrmbol of Caesarea,
of Alexandria, of the six bishops against Paul, of
Gregory Thaumaturgus, etc.) put themselves for-
ward as the incontestible apostolic faith of the
Church and are the philosophical constructions of
the rule of faith : The exegetical-speculative theolo-
gy was introduced into faith itself. This came
to pass through the Logos-doctrine; the dogma was
now found and established. A divine Being has
actually appeared upon the earth, and his appear-
ance is the key to cosmology and soteriology. How-
ever, these fundamental theses were accepted only
in the widest circles. But men could not rest with
this, so long as it was not definitely determined hoto
the divine Being, who has appeared upon the earth,
is related to the highest Divinity. Is the divine
Being who has appeared upon the earth the Divinity
himself, or is he a subordinate, second Divinity?

Loff06-Doo-
Trine

Added to
Rule of
Fftith.

Exegetic-
al Specu-
lative
Theoloj
Add

logy
ed.

192 OUTUNES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

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

part 2.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOGMA.

BOOK I.

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

CHAPTER I.

HISTORICAL SURVEY.

Walsch, Entw. einer vollst. Historie der Ketzereien,
1763 ff. Hefele, Conciliengesch. 2. Aufl., Bd. I-IV. His-
tories of the Roman Empire, by TiUemont, Gibbon, and
Ranke. Reyille, Die Religion z. Rom. unter den SeTerem
(Grerman by Kraeger, 1888). Domer, Entw. Gesch. d. L. v.
d. Peraon Christi, 1845. H. Schultz, Die L. v. d. Gottheit
Christi, 1881, Gass, Symbolik d. griech. Kirche, 1872. Den-
zinger, Ritua Orientalium, 2 Bdd. , 1863 f .

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

Holy Scriptures — and the testament of antiquity —
18 193

194 OUTLINES OF THE HI8T0RY OF DOQlfA.

Church
Doctrine
Reeomes
Mysterj.

Doctrine,

Pol it J, and

CultuB He-

feired to

Apostles.

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

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTBINB OF INCARNATION. 195

ogists had onoe represented Christianity to be, the
latter became the religion of the most powerful con-
secrations, of the most mysterious media and of
a sensuous sanctity. The tendency toward the in-
vention of mechanically-atoning consecrations (sac-
raments) grew constantly more pronounced and of-
iended vigorously thinking heathen even.

The adaptation of the local cults, manners and ^^£j^^
customs must needs lead finally to a complete secu- ^^*^ **^
larizing and splitting of the Church (into national
churches) ; but for the time the uniting force was
stronger than the dividing. The acknowledgment
of the same authorities and formulae, the like regard
for the same sacramental consecrations, the horror
at the coarse polytheism, and the tendency toward
asceticism for the sake of the life beyond, formed,
together with the homogeneous and well-compacted
episcopal organization, the common basis of the
churches. All these elements were not sufficient. Tendency
however, to preserve the unity of the churches. If into Va-
Constantino had not thrown about them a new bond churchea.
by raising them to the Church of the empire, the
split which one observes from the 5th century
would have taken place much earlier ; for the episco-
pal-metropolitan organization carried within itself a
centrifugal element, and the asceticism in which all
earnest thinkers found themselves at one, could not
but dissolve the historic conditions upon which the
religion rested, and destroy the communal veneration
of God; besides, differences crept more and more into

196 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOlfA.

the expounding of the authorities and doctrines,
which rendered their internal harmony questionable.
chrifl^. Taking one's stand at the end of the 3d century
(^pSte ^^® cannot avoid the impression, that ecclesiastical
^^SS!.^**" Christianity at that time was threatened with com-
plete secularization and with external and internal
dissolution. The danger from within just prior to
the Diocletian persecution, Eusebius himself has es-
tablished (H. E. VIII, i.). He admits — at least as
regards the churches of the Orient — that they threat-
ened to mingle with the world, and that pure pagan-
ism vaunted itself among them. The Diocletian
persecution added the external danger, and it cannot
be said that it was the strength of the Church alone
which triumphed over the danger.
Bishops' Already at that time the Church was a bishops' and

aud llieo

joKj^' theologians' church. But the power which, as mat-
ters then stood, was alone able to support energet-
ically the distinctive character of the religion — the-
ology— came very near dissolving it and handing it
over to the world.

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

Church.

l>EVKL.OPMENT OF DOCTRINE OV INCARNATION. 197

heterodox, the development of the Alexandrian the- ^Se^
ology threatened the Church with further dangers, nates? '
Origen liad kept gnosis and pistis unmixed; he
thought to link together in a conservative sense
everything valuable and to bring to a kind of equi-
librium the divers factors (cosmologic and soteri-
ologic) ; he had given to his theology by a strict ad-
herence to the sacred text a Biblical stamp and
demanded throughout Scripture proof. With the ^JgiJ^J*
epigonoi, however, occurred changes everj'where:
(1) The pupils as well as the opponents of Origen en-
deavored to place pistis and gnosis again upon the
same plane, to add some philosophy to the formulas
of faith and to subtract something from the gnosis.
Precisely thereby a stagnation and confusion was
threatening, which Origen had carefully warded off.
The faith itself became obscure and unintelligible to
the laity ; {%) The cosmologic and purely philosophic
interests obtained in theology a preponderance over
the soteriolog^c. In accordance therewith Christol-
ogy became again in a higher degree a philosophic
Logos-doctrine (as with the apologists) and the idea
of the cosmic Gk>d as the lower, subordinate Qod
alongside the highest Qod, threatened monotheism
outright. Already here and there — in opposition to ^"J^ ^f '
" Sabellianism " — articles of faith were being com- ^bRbuSSc*'
posed, in which there was no mention of Christ, but
in which the Logos alone was glorified in a profu-
sion of philosophic predicates as the manifested, but
subordinate God ; already the incarnation was cele-

Caesarea.

108 OUTLINES OB* THE HISTORY OP DOQMA.

brated as the rising of tho suu which ilhimines all
men ; akeady men seemed desirous of adapting phe-
nomena and vice-regents to the Neo-Platonic idea of
the one unnamable Being and his graded and more
or less numerous powers, while they encircled all with
a chaplet of philosophic artificial expressions; (3)
Even the Holy Scriptures gave way somewhat in
these endeavors ; yet only in a formal manner and
without forfeiting their value. The theology which
^^J**"" was formed out of these elements (e. g. Eusebius of
CaBsarea is its representative) let everything pass
that kept within the bounds of Origenism. Its rep-
resentatives considered themselves as conservatives,
since they rejected every more precise definition of
the doctrine of God (doctrine of the trinity) and of
Christ as an innovation (antipathy toward precise
definition of hitherto not precisely defined dogmas has
always animated the majority of the Church, since
precise definition is innovation), and since they exert-
ed themselves solely for the sake of science and the
" faith " to give form to the Logos-doctrine in a cos-
mologic sense and to subordinate everything inward
and moral to the thought of the freedom of choice.
^o^«^n. Neither thoughts of an heroic asceticism, nor real-
naaius. istic mysticism in the sense of Methodius, nor deduc-
tions from the heterodoxies of Origen could aid here.
Theology, and with it the Church, seemed to be irre-
trievably swallowed up in the current of the times.
But in the beginning of the fourth century there ap-
peared a man who saved the Church seriously threat-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 199

ened by inward strife and outward persecution —
Constantine — so at the same time there appeared an-
other man who preserved the Church from the com-
plete secularization of its most fundamental faith —
Athanasius. True, reactions against the Logos-doc-
tiine in the direction of the complete alienation of
the Son of God from the Father were probably at no
time lacking in the Orient; but Athanasius (assisted
by the West, the bishops of which however did
not at first recognize the pith of the question) first
secured to the Christian religion its own territory
upon the preoccupied soil of Greek speculation and
brought everything back to the thought of redemp-
tion through God himself, i.e. through the God-man,
who is of the same essence with God. He was not
concerned about a formula, but about a decisive basis
for faith, about redemption unto a divine life by the
God-man. Upon this surety alone, that the Divine
which appeared in Christ has the nature of the God-
head itself, and only on that account is able to ele-
vate us to a divine life, can faith receive its power,
life its law and theology its direction. But while
Athanasius placed faith in the God-man, which alone
frees us from death and sin, above everything else,
he at the same time gave to practical piety, which
then well-nigh exclusively lived in monkish asceti-
cism, the highest motive. He united the "Ofiooomo^^
which guarantees the deification* of human nat-

* Vergottnng: The oMisiBg to partake of the DiTine nature, restoratlOB
to the DiTlne likeneM.

Redemp-
tion
through
Ood-Man
Funda-
mentaL

Highest
Motive

Given to
Piety.

200 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OP DOGMA.

ure, in the closest relations with the monkish as*
ceticism and lifted the latter out of its still subterra-
nean, or insecure sphere into the public life of the
Church. While he combated the formula of the
koyoi^xTiirfia^ the Neo-Platonic doctrine of a descending
trinity, as pagan and as a denial of the essence of
Christianity, he also in like manner combated ener-
getically the tendency to worldly living. He became
U^^ the father of ecclesiastical orthodoxy and the patron
oitho- of ecclesiastical monasticism: He taught nothing
new^ new only was the doings the energy and exclu-
siveness of his conceptions and actions at a time
when everything threatened to dissolve. He was
also not a scientific theologian in the strict sense, but
he descended from theology to piety and found the
fitting word. He honored science, even that of On-
gen, but he went beyond the intelligent thought of
his time. While acknowledging its premises, he
added to them a new element which speculation h£i8
never been able fully to resolve. Nothing was here
more unintelligible to the thought of the day than
the assumption of the essential oneness of the change-
less and of the working Divinity. Athanasius fixed
fSloa? ^ ^^ between the Logos, of which the philosophers
EogoL thought, and the Logos, whose redeeming power he
proclaimed. That which he expressed concerning
the latter, while announcing the mystery emphat-
ically and powerfully and in no way indulging him-
self in new distinctions, appeared to the Greeks an
offence and foolishness. But he did not shun this

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTBINE OF INCARNATION. 201

reproach, rather did he circumscribe for the Chris-
tian faith within the already g^ven speculation its
own territory, and thus did he find the way to ward
off the complete hellenization and secularization of
Christianity.

The history of dogma in the Orient since NicsBa tvoDeJei-
shows two intermingled coinrses of development. In ^^^^
the first place, the idea of the God-man became defi-
nitely defined in every direction from the point of
view of the redemption of the human race unto a
divine life — the creed of Athanasius — (history of
dogma in the strictest sense of the word). Secondly,
the aim was to determine how much of the specu-
lative system of Origen, i.e. of the 'Ek^vixr^ rzatdsia^
would be endurable in the churches; in other words,
in what measure the Sacred Scriptures and rule of
faith would bear a speculative restatement and spirit-
ualization. The treatment of both problems was
rendered di£Scult by countless conditions (also politi-
cal ones), but above all was it obscured and vitiated
because the Church was never allowed to concede to
itself a theological handling of dogma, and because
at the same time the great majority of Christians
in fact denounced every eflfort leading to new forms
as an apostasy from the faith, since the same was
an innovation. The semblance of the *^ semper
idem" must ever be kept up, since the Church
in its ^ apostolic inheritance " surely possesses every-

202 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Theoio- thing fixed and final. The theologr and the theo-

by^^ logians — even the best of them — came thereby dur-
tiomT" ing their lifetime and after their death into the

worst predicament; during life they were considered
innovators, and after death, when the dogma had
progressed above and beyond them, they came often
enough wholly into discredit, for the more precisely
perfected dogma now became the standard which
was applied even to the theologians of the earliest
conaerFa- timcs. The Church found rest only when dogma-
Triumph. building ceased and when by the side of the com-
pleted dogma, a scholastico-mystical theology and a
harmless antiquarian science succeeded which no
longer touched the dogma, but either explained it as
settled, or indifferently laid it aside. Thus was
gained at last what the " conservatives " had always
longed for. But vital piety had in the mean time
withdrawn from the dogma and regarded them no
longer in truth as the sphere in which it lived, as its
original and living expression, but looked upon them
as the sacred inheritance of antiquity and as the
primary condition to the enjoyment of the Christian
benefits.

Periods of the History of Dogma in the Orient.

Unifl^tion Constantine made possible a unity in the develop-
^tai^^ ment of the Church into dogma (ecumenical synods
as forum publicum; in place of the symbols of the
provincial churches a homogeneous dogmatic confes-

sible.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP INCARNATION. 203

sion -wss introduced); but the unification of the
churches in the strict sense never became perfect,
and the tendency to a peculiar individuality of the
national churches grew stronger in direct contrast to
Byzantinism, but it was overcome in the Occident,
since there the old Roman empire took refuge in the
Roman church. While the East crumbled to pieces
and Islam finally wholly wrecked the creation of
Alexander the Great, separating Greeks and Semites,
the West and the East fell more and more apart.
Yet till the end of the dogma-building period in the
Bast, the West took the most active and often de-
cisive interest in dogmatic decisions.

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

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

II. Period from 383-461 : The independent theo- Quarrel be-

tween

log^c science (EXXjivtxij Ttatdeta^ Origen) was already ^J^^^^
violently combated; the ecclesiastical leaders aban- ^^J?*"
doned it and threw themselves more and more into
the arms of communal and monkish orthodoxy. The
most violent quarrels, behind which the question of

204 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGHA.

SediUon

and
Schism.

power hides itself, arose between Antioch and Alex-
andria over the Christological dogma. The correct
^phtfwia^ doctrine conquered at Ephesus, 449 ; but, united with
the tyranny of the Alexandrian patriarchs, it must
needs share the fate of the latter and triumph over
emperor and state. Nothing was left to the em-
peror but to proclaim the Occidental creed as the
orthodox one (the Chalcedon), which at first was
strange to the Orient and seemed, not without rea-
son, to be heretical.

III. Period from 451-553: Sedition and schism
in the Orient on account of the Chalcedon addition ;
monophysitism is exceedingly energetic; at first or-
thodoxy was at a loss. But speculative Platonism
had exhausted itself; in its place had come even in
the common science the Aristotelian dialectics and
scholasticism; on the other side a mysteriosophy
which knew how to make something out of every
formula and every rite. These powers succeeded in
interpreting the formula that was forced upon them
(Leontius of Byzantium, the Areopagite) . Justinian,
rejecting this and that, codified the dogma as well as
the law, and closed not only the school of Athens,
but also those of Alexandria and Antioch. Origen
and the theologians of Antioch were condemned.
Theological science remained a science only of the
second order — scholasticism and the cultus-mysti-
cism, these indeed in their fundamental principle
and aim heterodox, were outwardly however en-
tirely correct. The Church did not renew the agita-

Jiutinian
Codifies
Dogma.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 205

tion, for it has always wished peace, and piety had
long sinoe thrown itself into monasticism and the
mysteries.

IV. Period from 553-680 : The monotheletic quar- i^tesSite.
rels, primarily partly after-play partly repetition of

the old strife, were bom not of conviction, but of
politics. Here also the West must finally come to
the rescue with a bloodless formula.

V. Period from 726-842: In truth the conflicts of HMgeOon-

ttoveny.

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

206 OUTLINES OF THE HI8TOBY OF DOGMA.

CHAPTER II.

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

Hemnann, Gregorii Nyss. sententiae de salute adipisc.,
1875. SchulU, Lehre v. d. Gottheit Christi, 1881. Ritschl,
Die chrifitl. Lehre v. d. Rechtfert. und Versdh., 2. Aufl.
Bd. I. 8. 8 ff.

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

*See page 190, note.

DKVEIA>PMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 207

as the abolition of the natnra]- state through a mi- ^on ^'
racnloufi transformation (deification is the central Miracu&us

Transfor*

thought); the religious benefit of salvation is defi- mation.
nitely distinguished from the moral, and the idea of
atonement accordingly remains rudimentary ; for the
present state only a provisional enjoyment of salva-
tion is presupposed (calling, knowledge of God and
of salvation, victory over the demons, helpful com-
munications from Qod, enjoyment of the mysteries).
Accordingly the fundamental confession is that of
Ireiueus : " We become divine for Christ's sake, since
he also for our sakes has become human". This
confession, rightly weighed, demands two principal
dogmas, no more and no less : " Christ is ^c<>9 ^ixoooffw^^
this ^e(>9 ofwouctoi: has taken human nature into his
own being and fashioned it into oneness with him-
self'.

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

(1) The formulas which were required, being n£Wy
had the spirit of the Church against them, which
suspected even the best of innovations ;

(2) The pure exposition of faith is at all times the
most difficult problem ; but at that time it was espe-
cially hampered by apologetic, as well as by other
foreign considerations ;

(3) The orthodox formulas conflicted with every

Dofpnas
Carried
throu);h

after
struggles.

208 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

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

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

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

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

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINB OF INCARNATION. 209

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

2. Since the doctrine of salvation was kept strictly ^SSSon'
within the scheme of the mystico-realistic idea of *" ^^
redemption, it was in itself indifferent to the moral;
but on every side men were sure that Christianity
also embraced the highest morality. Accordingly
the benefits of salvation were adjudged only to mor-
ally good men, but the moraUy good conceived as
the product of the free agency of man and as the
condition of sanctification to be fulfilled by him,
whereby God at the most was conceived of as assist-
ing (this concerns positive morality ; the negative,
asceticism, was regarded as the* direct preparation
for deification *). The dogmatic form of the Chris- ^f^™!**
tian religion was, therefore, balanced by the idea of
freedom of election (See already Clem. Alex. Pro-

trep. 1, 7 : t^ e5 C>7*' ^^idaSev i7:t^aus\i wg diddtrxaXof^ Fva

TO de\ C7> SffTepov wf ^ed^ X^f^T^^)^ ^^d this is Only the
shortest expression for the whole natural theology
which the Church appropriated from the ancient phi-
losophy and treated as the self-evident presupposition
of its specific doctrine, reckoning upon a general un-
derstanding of the same. Consequently Greek Chris-
tianity oscillates between two poles, which are simply
co-ordinate with each other. Dogmas in a strict
sense exist only within the doctrine of redemption ;
on the other hand, there exist only presuppositions
and conceptions (so far, deviations in simple mat-

* See page 100, note.
14

210 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

^{^ ters are here not insupportable). But sinoe the
"bailor Greek natural philosophy stood in conflict in not a
few points with the letter and spirit of the Holy
Scriptures, and with the rule of faith (as, above all,
the theology of Origen proves), problems must arise
here also, which in an increasing mieasure were
solved in detail in favor of Biblical realism and
Biblical verbalism, contrary to reason and an idealis-
tic view, even though in general the rationalistic-
moral scheme remained unscathed (vid. dogmatics of
John of Damascus; Sophronius of Jerusalem: ^eo#-

&wfiey ^etae^ fisrafioXat^ xai nt/iiJ4Te<rcv) , An entirely subor-

dinate part was played by the primitive Christian
eschatology alongside of the redemption-mysticism,
rationalism and Biblicism; gradually, however, it
also was aided by Biblicism (cf . the history of the
Apocalypse in the Greek Church) ; men began again
to add apocalyptic ideas to dogmatics, which how-
ever remained without any real effect. The valua-
ble part also of the old eschatology, the expectation
of the judgment, never played the part in Greek
theology y which is due to this highly important rem-
nant. In spite of the rejection of the Origenistic
eschatology there remained in Greek dogmatics a
slight trace of the conception of history as an evolu-
tion.
i^eoio^. 3. As a result of this examination it follows that
after sifting the authorities and sources of informa-
tion, (A) that one has to treat natural theology as pre-
supposing the doctrine of redemption ; this, however,

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 211

divides itself into the doctrine of God and the doc- ^^Sfp?'
trine of man. Farther, (B) the doctrine of redemp-
tion itself must be treated in its historic development
as the doctrine of the trinity and Christology. The
conclusion forms (C) the doctrine of the mysteries, DoctHneof
in which already in this life the coming deification *
of the temporal is represented and can be enjoyed.
To this should be added a sketch of the history of the
origin of the orthodox system.

Note: Only through Aristotelianism did the Greek ^iJJiSS"*
Church after Origen arrive again at a dogmatic '""^i^
system, which was, however, by no means a uni-
versal system (John of Damascus). A knowledge
of the history of Greek dogma is therefore to be
gained, aside from the acts and decisions of synods,
(1) from the numerous works on the incarnation of
the Son of God, (2) from the catechetical writings,
(3) from the apologetic treatises, (4) from the mono-
graphs on the " six days' work ^ and similar composi-
tions as well as from the exegetical works, (5) from
the monographs on virginity, monasticism, perfec-
tion, the virtues and the resurrection, (0) from
monographs on the mysteries, cultus and priest-
hood, (7) from sermons. In using these sources
this fact with others is to be considered, that the
fathers frequently wrote SiaXsxnxw^^ and that the
official literature (synod literature) in an increas-
ing measure bristles with falsifications and is per-
meated with conscious untruth and injustice.

• See pajje 190, note.

212 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

CHAPTER III.

Catholic
Authori-
ties.

Holy
Scriptures

Unique
Autliority,

THE SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE AND THE AU-
THORITIES, OR SCRIPTURE, TRADITION, AND
THE CHURCH.

See the Introductions to the Old and New TestamentB.
Jacobi, Die k. L. v. d. Tradition u. h. Schrift. I. Abth. ,
1847. Holtzmann, Kanon u. Tradition, 1859. Soder, Der
Begriff d. Katholicit&t d. K., 1881. Seeberg. Studien z.
Gesch. d. Begrififsd. K., 1885. Renter, Augustin. Studien,
1888.

The extent and value of the Catholic authorities
was already essentially established at the beginning
of the 4th century, although perhaps not their mu-
tual relation and the manner of their exposition.
Underneath the great contrast between the more
liberal theology and pure traditionalism lay £dso a
different conception of the authorities, but this never
found a statement. Changes took place during the
period between Eusebius and John of Damascus,
keeping pace with the growing traditionalism ; but
no one undertook to make an inventory, a proof that
opponents of the method, worthy of notice, failed to
palm off the existing state of the Church as the tra-
ditional (apostolic). The sects alone protested and
continued to agitate.

1. The Holy Scriptures had a imique authority.
To depend upon them alone was in reality not un-
catholic ; Scripture-proof one might always demand.
But an entirely accepted agreement, even respecting

DEVELOPHBNT OP DOCTRINE OP INCAHNATION. 213

the extent of the Bible, did not exist (see the school
of Antioch with its criticism of the canon). As
regards the Old Testament the Hebraic canon only
-wsa^ in theory, for a long time considered the stand-
ard in the Orient; nevertheless, in practice, the writ-
ings which were copied with the LXX had value.
Only in the 17 th century through Roman influence
did the equalization of the canonical and deutero-
canonical writings take place in the Orient, yet not
in the form of an official declaration. In the Occi-
dent the uncritical view of Augustine gained the tine^
victory over the critical one of Jerome (synods at Accepted

instead of

Hippo, 393, and Carthage, 397), which had only a Jerome's.
slight after-effect. Into the Alexandrian canon,
moreover, were also introduced apocalypses like
Hermas and Esra. — Regarding the New Testament,
Eusebius made rather a relative end to a highly in-
secure state of affairs. With the three categories
which he adopted one could not content oneself, and
the early decrees of provincial churches had an after-
effect, especially in the Orient. Yet after the mid- Essential

Ag^reenieut

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

214 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

tuiy. Aug^stine*s viewB in regard to the extent of
the New Testament has been the authoritative stand-
ard for the whole Occident (see also the so-called
" Docret. Qelasii"). However, an ecclesiastical judg-
ment on this question, excluding every doubt, did
not take place until the Tridentine council.
Holy All predicates concerning the Holy Scriptures dis-

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

and

^e^ls° ^^^ ®*^ more the Antiochian exegesis was repressed

^Sri^ but not vanquished, the literalistic, realistic one, made

palatable through mystic fancies, pushed forward (see

John of Damascus, and his interpretation of Gten.

1-3.) The Occident became aoj^uainted with the

DEVlOiOPHEMT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 215

spiritual, scientific method of the Cappadocians
through Hilary, Ambrosey Jerome, and Rufinus.
Sef ore and afterward there was a complete lack of
system; r^^ard for the letter went hand in hand
^with allegorical fancies and chiliastic interests.
Jerome was too cowardly to teach his contempo- AuSSSSd.
raries the better view, and Augustine, although he
learned from the Greeks, never rose above the latter
and did not even reach them. He introduced into
the Occident the Scripture-theology with its waver-
ing three- and four-fold sense, and above all the strict
Biblicism, although he himself knew that religious
truth is an inward assurance to which the Scriptures
can only lectd^ and that there exists a Christian free-
dom which is also independent of the Scriptures (de
doctrina Christiana). Through Jimilius especially juniiiua

Influenoea

the more methodical Antiochian exegesis exerted an ^^t-
influence over the Occident, without being able to
remedy the lack of method and the tendency to apol-
ogetic renderings on the part of the commentators.
After-all the Scriptures received in fact a position in
the life of the Church in the Occident, different from
their position in the Orient (formerly it was other-
wise; see e.g. Cyril of Jerusalem); they occupied a
more prominent place. This is to be explained pri-
marily from the influence of Augustine and from the
fact that ecclesiastical dogmatics in the Occident was
never so assertive as in the Orient. Just as the ex-
tent of the Scriptures was never securely settled, so
also their properties were not. The predicate of iner-

216 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

TiTrJS; rancy l^ad indeed to submit to gentle restrictions and
™*°^ men did not really come to a clear conception of the
sufficiency of the Scriptures. In regard to the two
Testaments there remained the same want of clear-
ness as formerly (the O. T. is a Christian book as
well as the N. T. — the O. T. throughout is a record
of the prophecies — the O. T. is the book which con-
tains, with certain restrictions and under definite en-
cumbrances, the verities of the faith, and it has led
and leads pedagogicalfy to Christ).

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

chlmsfi' Tradition was above all the faith of the Church.
The symbols were considered apostolic; yet only the
Roman church proclaimed its creed as apostolic in
the strictest sense (composed by the apostles). But
the content of the Nicene and Chalcedon creeds
was considered as apostolic, yes, as the legacy of the
apostles xaTeSoxijv and as the quintessence of the Holy

DELBLOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP INCARNATION. 217

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

But the regulations also of the org^anization and ?*ciiJtiM°**
ciiltus were placed, under the protection of apostolic ^p^**®"®-
tradition, and one pointed as proof to their general
spread and also to the legends concerning the apos-
tles. Besides, men began in the 4th century—not
without influence from the side of Origen and
Clement — to introduce the conceptions of an apostolic
TzapdSoct^ aypaipoi:^ in the whoDy imcertain content of
"which they even included dogmatic teaching — how-
ever, very rarely trinitarian and Christological watch-
words— the understanding of which was not every-
body's concern (thus especially the Cappadocians).
But this gnostic conception of tradition (secret tradi-
tion), although it became more and more settled, was
yet felt to be dangerous ; use was made of it in dog-
matic discussions only in extreme cases (e. 9., in the
doctrine of the Holy Spirit), and it was otherwise
applied to the mysteries and their ritual expositions.

Since it was imderstood that the decisive authority
was vested in the Church itself by virtue of its union
with the Holy Spirit (Augustine: ^ego evangelio
ncm credereniy nisi me catholicae ecclesiae commo-
veret auctoritas "), the questions must arise : Through

(1) Through whom and when does the Church ^do«b^

Church

speak? Speak r

Oouncils.

218 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

'SoM*' (^) How are the innovations in the Church, espe-
cially within the realm of doctrine, to be interpreted
if the authority of the Church is lodged entirely in
its apostolicity, i.e. in its permanence? Both ques-
tions, however, were never distinctly put, and there-

Episco- fore only very vaguely answered. Fixed was it that
^"iwh!** ^'^ representation of the Church was vested in the
episcopate (see Euseb. H. E.), although the strict
theory of Cyprian had not at all become conunon
property and the idea had never cropped out that the
individual bishop is infallible. But already there
was attributed a certain inspiration to the provincial
^^f***" synods. Constantine first called an ecumenical synod
and declared its decisions to be without error.
Slowly the thought of the infallible authority of the
Nicene council crept in during the 4th century and
was later on transferred to the following councils,
in such a way, however, that one synod (3d) was
stamped post factum as ecumenical, and the dif-
ference between them and the provincial synods re-
mained for a long time unsettled (Was the synod
of Aries ecumenic?). Through Justinian the four
councils were placed upon an unapproachable height,
and after the 7th coimcil the principle established
itself firmly in the Orient, that the sources of knowl-
edge of Christian truth are the Scriptures and the
decrees of the seven ecumenical councils. Even to-
day men assume frequently in the Orient an mr as
if the Church did not possess or need any other, s
But this apparently simple and consistent develop-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 219

ment solved by no means all the difficulties, because
councils were not always at hand and other author-
ities also had still to be taken into account. How
should one act if the Church has not yet spoken?
Does not an especial authority belong to the occu-
pants of the great apostolic episcopal chairs, or to
the bishops of the capitals?

Ans. 1. The Church also speaks through unan- ^JJen*^^
imous ancient testimonies. The citing of the has^ot
"fathers" is important, even decisive. Whatever
has universality and antiquity is true. Besides, the
conception of " antiquity ^ grew ever more elastic.
Originally the disciples of the apostles were the
•* ancients ", then they counted also the 3d and 4th
generations among the "ancients'% then Origen and
his disciples were the "ancient" expounders; finally
the whole ante-Constantine epoch was considered
classic antiquity. But since one could make, use of
rather little from this period, appeal was taken to
Athanasius and the fathers of the 4th century, just
as to the "ancients", and at the same time to numer-
ous falsifications under the name of the fathers of
the 2d and 3d centuries. At the councils one counted
more and more only the voices of the " ancients " and
employed very general explanations to confirm the
new formulas and watchwords. Things came thus
to be decided more and more according to authori-
ties, which one indeed frequently first created. The
council was therefore infallible, only and in so far
as it did not teach anything else but the "fathers".

220 OUTLINES OF THE BISTORT OP DOGMA.

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

Authority

Bei^ to authority of the apostolic chairs (also the Oriental)
Chairsr Qn ijJjq question concerning the extent of the Holy-
Scriptures. But in the Orient this authority was
merged in that of the chairs of the capitals and
therefore Constantinople moved to the front, being
strongly attacked by the Roman bishop. The Roman
chair alone was able not only to preserve its ancient
authority in the Occident, but also to heighten it
(only apostolic chmr in the Occident, Peter and Paul,
fall of the West-Roman empire, the centre for the
remnant of Romanism in the West) and (thanks to
the favorable circumstances of political and ecclesi-
astical history) to fortify the same £dso in the Orient,
imder great fluctuation to be sure. To the Roman
bishop was always attached an authority peculiar in
kind, without its being possible to define the same
more closely. It only ceased in the Orient, when
Orient and Occident possessed nothing more what-
ever in common. But before the same became ex-
^itai^' tinct the Roman bishop, in league with the eastern
Roman emperor, had gained the point that in the
Orient attempts at a primacy of any bishop, espe-
cially the Alexandrian, should be suppressed, to
which suppression the Christological contests contrib-
uted. The great chairs of the patriarchs in the
Orient, weakened through schisms, partially deprived
of their real importance, stood in theory in equal

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 221

positions toward one another. Their occupants also
represented in their co-operations a kind of dogmatic
aathority, which however was defined neither in
itself, nor in its relation to the ecumenical councils.
They form simply a relique of antiquity.

From statements made it follows, that the ability
to transmit new revelations to the Church did not
belong to the councils; rather are the same rendered
Intimate through the preservation of the apostolic
legacy. Therefore did the declaration and adoption
of new formulas (of the o>oo6<r(o9, of the oneness of
the trinity, of the two natures, and so on) cause
such great difficulties. When at last the Nicene
doctrine gained the victory, it was accomplished only
because the Nicene creed itself had become a piece
of antiquity and because one endeavored, poorly
enough, to deduce from the Nicene all later formulas
by giving out (as IrenaBus had once done) as pre-
scribed^ together with the text, also a definite expo-
sition of the same. The ability of the councils even
to explain the doctrines authentically had not been
clearly declared in the Orient; therefore the excuse
has only seldom been made for the earlier eastern
fathers, that at their time the dogma had not been
explained and definitely formulated. Whereas a
western man (Vincent of Lerinum) in his Com-
monitorium, after having asserted the criteria of
the true tradition (that which has been believed
everywhere, always and by all), and after having
warned men against the heresies of otherwise ortho-

Councilfl
Not Au-
thorita-
tive.

Apo6tolio
Legacy.

Vincent of

Lerinum ;

Organic

ProgreifBin
Doctrine.

Vague.

222 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

dox fathers, admitted an ^ organic ^ progress in doc-
trine (from the more imcertain to the more certain)
and proclaimed the councils as agents in this
progress {^excitata hcereticorum novitattbus").
Augustine expressly taught, that so long as unequiv-
ocal decisions on a question had not been given, the
bond of union between dissenting bishops should be
maintained. The Roman bishop has always acted
according to this rule, but has reserved for himself
the decisions and the time for the same.
•^Sditfon "^^^ conception of tradition is therefore entirely
vague. The hierarchical element does not play in
theory the first part. The apostolic succession has
even in the Occident not been in theory of such great
importance for the confirming of tradition. At the
councils, since the time they were called, the author-
ity of the bishops as bearers of tradition was ex-
hausted. Still, perhaps that is saying too much.
Everything was very obscure. But in so far as the
Greek Church has not changed since John of Damas-
cus, the Greek even at the present time has a per-
fectly definite consciousness of the foundation of
religion. By the side of the Holy Scriptures, the
foundation of religion is the Church itself, not as liv-
ing power, but in its immovable doctrines and time-
honored orders. The Scriptures also are to be ex-
plained according to tradition. But the tradition is
primarily always two-fold,— the public one of the
councils and fathers, and the secret one which con-
firms the mysteries, their ritual and its interpretation.

BEYSLOPMENT OF DOCTRINB OF INCARNATION. 223

3. The Church. As guarantee of the true faith, ©SSStoe
and administrator of the mysteries, the Church above f Jt£*
aU came into consideration. Furthermore, men re-
flected about it when they thought of the Old Testa-
ment and false church of the Jews, of heresy and the
organization of Christianity, as also of the presimip-
tion of the Roman bishop (Christ alone is the head
of the Church). Again, the Church was represented
in catechetical instruction as the communion of the
true faith and virtue, outside of which there could
not easily be a wise and pious person, and the Bibli-
cal declaration regarding it was that it was the only
and holy one, guided by the Holy Spirit, Catholic
in opposition to the numerous impious unions of the
heretics. Very evidently men identified thereby the
empirical church with the Church of the faith and ^j!? 2d
virtue, without, however, coming to a closer reflec- Faitb

. Identified.

tion on corpus verum et permixtum and without
drawing aU the consequences which the identification
demanded. In spite of all this the Church was not
primarily a dogmatic conception, belonging to the
department of the doctrine of salvation itself; or it
became so only when men thought of it as the insti-
tution of mysteries, from which, moreover, the monk
was permitted to emancipate himself. Through the
restrictions under which the Greeks viewed the duties
of the Church and through the natural theology,
is this disregard to be explained. The Church is
the human race as the totality of all individuals who
accept salvation. The doctrine of salvation exhausted

224 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

itself in the conceptions : Gkxl, humanity, Christ, the
^^g[g^}<^ mysteries, the individual. The conception of the
Not^Fixed. Church as the mother of believers, as a divine crea-
tion, as the body of Christ was not worked out dog-
matically. The mystical doctrine of redemption also
and the doctrine of the eucharist did not assist the
Church to a dogmatic position (it is wanting, for ex-
ample, in John of Damascus). Its organization,
thorough as it is, was not perfected beyond the grade
of bishops and was seldom treated dogmatically. The
Church is not the bequest of the apostles, but of
Christ; therefore its importance as an institution of
worship takes the first rank.
^hSxjh -^ ^is has reference to the Oriental Church. In
Teioping. the Occident, through the Donatist contest, the
foundation was laid by the Church for new and rich
conceptions. The Church itself was at the end of
the early period divided into three great parts : The
western Church, the Byzantine, the Semitic eastern ;
and the latter was cleft into manifold parts. Each
part considered itself the one Catholic Church and
.extolled its particular palladia.

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

Thw?o^. Natural theology with all the fathers was essen-
tially the same thing; but it shows shades according
as Platonism or Aristotelianism predominated and ac-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTBINE OP INCARNATION. 225

cording to the measure in which the letter of the
Bible exerted an influence.

CHAPTER IV.

THE PRESUPPOSITIONS AND CONCEPTIONS OP GOD,
THE CREATOR, AS DISPENSER OP SALVATION.

The main principles of the doctrine of God, as the ^'^^^^^^^^
apologists and anti-gnostic fathers had established
them, remained firm and were directed particularly
against Manichsism, but were hardly touched by the
development of the doctrine of the trinity, since the
Father as fiiCii r^9 ^eon^ro? alone came into considera-
tion here. Tet with the growing Biblicism and the
monkish barbarism, anthropomorphic conceptions
forced themselves more and inore into theology.
Concerning the question of man's ability to know
God, Aristotelians (Eunomius, Diodorus of Tarsus,
especially since the beginning of the 6th century) and
Platonists contended with each other, and yet were
fundamentally agreed. That man knows God only ^^^^}^'
through revelation, more exactly through Christ, was ^^'
generally allowed, but to this declaration as a rule
no further consequences were given and men as-
cended from the world to God, making use of the
old proofs and supplementing them with the ontolog-
ical argument (Augustine). Neo- Platonic theolo-
gians assumed an immediate, intuitive perception of

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

NegatiTe

226 OUTLINKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

fected very precisely the scholastic form of this
knowledge (the Areopagite: Negation, exaltation,
causality).

At^ibuteB The loftiest expression for the heing of God was
aixecL as yet that he is *' not- the- world", the spiritual,
immortal, apathetic Substance (the "Ov)^ to which
alone real being belongs (Aristotelians thought of
cause and purpose, without correcting radically
the Platonic scheme). His goodness is perfection,
unenviousness and creating wiU (additions leadings
to a better conception by Augustine: Ood as love,
which frees men from self-seeking). The attributes
of Ood were treated accordingly as expressions of
causality and power, in which the purpose of salva-
tion was not taken into account (Origen's conception
became tempered, i.e. corrected). By the side of the

w^"^ At- naturalistic conception of Ghxi as the "Ov stood the
moralistic one of Rewarder and Judge; upon this
also the idea of redemption had hardly any notice-
able influence (less than with Origen), skice ^re-
ward *' and ** punishment " were treated as one. Yet
Aug^tine recognized the worthlessness of a theol-
ogy which places Ood only at the beginning and the
end and makes men independent of him, instead of
acknowledging God as the Power for good and the
Source of the personal, blessed life.

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

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRIJfE OF INCARNATION. 227

out of nothing this world, which has had a beginning
and will have an end ; it was created after the pat-
tern of an upper world, which was brought forth by
him, and has its culmination in man in order to
prove his own kindness and to permit creatures to
participate in his bliss. In this thesis the heresies
of Origen were set aside (especially his pessimism).
Still men did not succeed in entirely justifying the
verbal meaning of Qen. 1-3, and in the representa- <^^- i-in.
tion of an upper world (xd^^o^ voepd^)^ whose lesser
copy the earthly is, there remained a significant
piece of the Neo-Platonic-Origenistic doctrine, which
was then greatly amplified, after the Areopagite, by
the Platonizing mystics. But the pantheistic here-
sies were scarcely felt thereafter, if only in some
way the verbal meaning of Gen. 1-3 seemed to be
preserved. The theodicy — still always necessary on Theodicy.
account of Manichsism and fatalism — sought to hold
its ground through empirical considerations, but
since it too must be natural theology it revealed its
ancient root in an oft-estranging casuistry and in
doubtful claims. Men referred to the necessity and
fitness of the freedom of the creature which must
have as a consequence wickedness and evil, to the
harmlessness of evil for the soul, to the unreality of
wickedness and to the value of evil as a means of
purification.

In regard to the heavenly spirits the following ^^g^ts.^'
points were settled : That they were created by God,
that they are free and lack material bodies, that

228 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

they have passed through a crisis in which a part
have fallen, that Qod uses the good spirits as instru-
ments in governing the world, that the existence of
wickedness in the world is to he traced back to the
wicked spirits, whom Qod allows to have their way
and who are incorrigible and have almost unlimited
power over the world which only the cross can break
and who are going to receive damnation (against
Origen). After the 4th century, however, the poly-
theistic tendency became stronger and stronger
toward angels and demons, and already by about 400
A. D. the piety of monks and laymen was nourished
more by these than by Qod. While the synod of
Laodicea about 360 declared angel- worship to be idol-
I'^X atry, stm the veneration of angels became more firmly
established (guardian-angels, faith in their interces-
sion) and was ecclesiastically fixed at the 7th council,
787 {i:po<rx{)vyj<Tt^) . It contributed much toward this,
that the " scientific " theology in the form of the Neo-
Platonic mysticism, after about 500, incrdased the
esteem given to angels, and that they were received
into the system as most important factors (but see
already the Alexandrian theologians) : The angels in
graded ranks are, on the one side, the unfolding of
the heavenly, on the other, the mediators between
the heavenly and men. To the earthly hierarchy with
its grades, agencies and consecrations, corresponds a
heavenly, graded hierarchy with heavenly sacrifices,
intercessions, etc. ; in divine worship both unite
(vid. the Areopagite and his expoimders). Thus

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 229

-truly after long preparation — ^a new ecclesi- ^J^}**"
astical theosophy which was purely pagan and which Tbec-ophy.
Tras finally a shamefaced expression for jugglering
the idea of creation and redemption and for reviving
tlie fantastic pantheism which the bizarre theosophy
of perishing antiquity had created : Everything that
exists streams out from God in manifold radiations
and musty since it is remote and isolated, be purifi
and returned to Qod. This has taken place in nec-
essary processes which Were so represented that all
needs, even the most barbaric, were taken into con-
sideration, and all authorities and forms were re*
spected. But the living God, besides whom the soul
possesses nothing, threatened thereby to disappear.

CHAPTER V.

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

The common conviction of the orthodox fathers Doctrine of

Man.

may be stated somewhat as follows: Man, created
after the image of Gk)d, is a free self-determining
being. He has been endowed with reason, in order
to decide in favor of the good and to enjoy immortal
life. Having indulged himself and still ever in-
dulgping himself in sin, misled, or of his own free
will, he has missed this destination without, how-
ever, having forfeited the privilege and power of a
virtuous life and the capability of immortality.

230 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Through the Christian revelation^ which oomes to
the aid of the darkened reason with fuU knowledge
of Qod, that ability has been strengthened and the
immortality restored and proffered. Upon good or
evil therefore the judgment decides. The will has,
strictly speaking, no moral quality. In r^ard to
iH>^te details there were varying opinions: (1) What was
^^^^^^^ the original inheritance of man, and what his desti-
nation? (2) How far does nature go, and where does
the gift of grace begin? (3) How far-reaching are
the consequences of sin? (4) Is mere freedom char-
acteristic of the being of man, or does it inhere in
his nature to be good? (5) Into what elements is
the human personality to be divided? (G) In what
does the Divine likeness consist? and so forth.

The various answers are all compromises; (a) be-
tween the religious-scientific theory (doctrine of Ori-
gen) and Gen. 1-3 ; (6) between the moralistic con-
siderations and a regard for the redemption through
Christ; (c) between dualism and the recognition of
the body as a necessary and good organ.

ISSuria ^' '^^® ^^®^ ^^ inborn freedom is central; with it
^I^ML TeoBon is included. It constitutes the Divine im-
age, which therefore means independence as regards
God. Whether there belongs to the nature of man
only the sensuousness of the creature, or whether
he is endowed with reason and even immortality,
remained in controversy. However, the controversy
was quite immaterial, since the glorious nature of
man was after all ever considered a gift of grace.

DBVEIOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 231

and this gift of grace was oonsidered by the majority
as natural. The being of man was represented as
trichotomotis, by others as dichotomous. The Oreek- o^eS^
Oiigenistic conception of the body as a prison was B^SedT
finally officiaUy rejected — ^man is rather, even as a
spiritual being, a microcosm and the body is also
Qod-given — but the same never ceased to have
an after-effect, because the positive morality was
always obliged to give way to the negative (asceti-
cism), t.e., because it received in the conception of
the opera supererogatoria an ascetic cast. The
later Neo-Platonic mysteriosophists, indeed, knew
how to make good use of the idea of the glorification
of the body, but in truth the corporeal was still con-
sidered by them as something to be *' absorbed," even
though they no longer dared to shake the verbal mean-
ing of. the formxila of the " resurrection of the body".
Concerning the origin of individutd souls (the soul
is no part of Qod ; but in reality many theosophists
after all considered it as such) the pre-existent view
of Origen was expressly condemned, 553, but the
traducian theory was not able to carry the day;
rather did the creation theory (continued creation
of individual souls) become dominant.

As regards the Gk)d-likeness, men still continued
in the antinomy, that goodness and purity can be ^®^**^'*-
the product only of human freedom ; that, however,
the likeness imprinted by creation cannot reside
in the possibilitas utrtvsque^ but in a determina-^
tion of reason and freedom, and that it has in part

Orii^n of
Souls.

Original
state in

232 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOOHA.

been lost. Accordingly the conceptions also regard-
ing the primitive condition of man were as hazy
as by IrenfiBus. On the one side, the perfection of
man was said to have been practically realized at
the beginning and was later restored by Christ ; on
the other, the primitive condition was said to have
been the child-like state out of which man had first
to develop himself unto perfection and which he
therefore in reality could never lose, but only im-
prove (thus especially and emphatically theAntio-
chians). The Cappadocians stiU taught in the main
much like Origen ; but later men were forced to bind
themselves strictly to (Genesis, and the speculative
conceptions were cultivated as much as the rational-
istic ones of the Antiochians. Doubts about the
primitive condition of man resulted in indefinite con-
ceptions of asceticism, which have never been cleared
up in the Greek Church : Some saw in asceticism
the natural constitutional condition of man, others
(especially the Antiochians) conceived of it as some-
thing superterrestrial and superhuman.
j^jjrteB 2. It was acknowledged that the human race since
Sn. ite origin, i.e. since Adam (express rejection in the
6th century of the doctrine of Origen as to the
fall in a pre-existent state), has turned away from
the good (cause: Not a created sinful power, not
matter, not the Divinity, not inheritance of the sin
of Adam — Adam was for the majority the type, not
the progenitor of sinners, — but abuse of freedom by
reason of demoniac betrayal, and transmission of

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 233

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

234 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the non-being, never entirely left their memory, and
since they always felt the oonsequenoes of sin more
severely than sin itself — ^to which consideration their
conception of the work of Christ also led them — ^they
were never able to give to the gravity of sin, i. e. to
guilty a satisfactory expression : Sin is a bad single
deed; it is accident and again fatality; it is the con-
sequence of the liability to death ; but it is not the
dreadful power which destroys union with GK)d.
•n^^o^ "^^ influence of natural theology (and of the
Domin;K. ^tionalism and mysticism akin to it), pre-eminent
in the doctrine of God and man, upon the actual
dogmatic teaching was fundamental :
^d^o^ (1) Man is led through redemption to that dee-
'***■**<'• tination which he can also reach by virtue of his
freedom (danger, that of looking upon redemption
merely as an assistance) ;
Related to ^^^ Man, as the image of God, an independent
^^^^ being also as regards God, can have no other rela-
tions to him than as to the Creator and Judge; Gk)d
himself is not his life, but the law of God is his rule
of conduct (danger, that of looking upon the Gk)spel
and salvation as knowledge and law, upon punish-
ment as the greatest misfortune, and upon repent-
ance as the cause of pardon) ;
^>«Jgtoeo« (3) The doctrines also r^arding God, the Bedeem-
^^S^' er, must needs be treated according to the rationalis-
tic scheme (rationality of the doctrine of the trinity,
of the doctrine of the resurrection of the body, etc.) ;
(4) In the last analysis man can gather nothing

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 235

from history; but to history, indeed, belongs the QS^^gi
X6pf^ ivffapxo^'^ the view therefore was not entirely re- ^"^
jected, that there is a standpoint from which the
historical Christ, since he is only an assisting
teacher, has no meaning: Man, who through gnosis
and asceticism has become a moral hero, stands free
by the side of Gk)d ; he loves GK)d and God loves him ;
in him will a Christ be bom. The most vital piety
of the Greek fathers and the most energetic attempt
to make themselves at home in religion, have even
been the least safeguard against their losing the
historical Christ. Still it was a danger which only
threatened. Divinity has descended, God has become
man in the historical Jesus; faith in this immense
fact — "the newest of all the new, yes, the only new
fact under the sun " (John of Damascus) — as well as
the mystery and terror of death restricted aU ration-
alism. Man must he redeemed and has been re-
deemed.

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

CHAPTER VI.

THE DOGTBINB OF THE NBCBSSITY AND RBALITF
OF RBDBHPTION THBOUGH THB INCARNATION
OF THE SON OF GOD.

The incarnation of God alone balanced the whole S^lfS© *©?

Incama-

system of natural theology. Because men believed tion.

236 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

in its reality, they also asserted its necessity. They
referred it to death, to the dominion of demons, to
sin and error, and not seldom in this connection they
made, regarding the wickedness of man, assertions
which recall Augustine* But when a definite theory
was given, tiie idea of the abolition of perishableness
and of the sting of death alone held out; for the
doctrine of freedom excluded an expiation of sin
and, on the other side, brought home the thought
that heart-felt repentance before Grod frees from sin
^Sa?^ (thus, e.g. Athanasius, de incam. VII.). After Ire-
in^umi^ nsous, Athanasius first propounded a definite theory
of the incarnation (1. c). He bases it, on the one
hand, upon the goodness of Gkd, i.e.y upon his self-
assertion and honor; on the other, upon the conse-
quences oi sin, i.e. perishableness. These the Logos
only is able to remove, who also originally created
everything out of nothing. Regarding the means,
Athanasius has recourse to all the Biblical concep-
tions (sacrificial death, expiation of guilt, etc.) ; but
he only carries out strictly the thought, that in the
act of incarnation itself lies the changing from the
doom of death to df^aptrta, in so far as the physical
union of the human with the Divine (the dwelling of
God in the flesh) elevates humanity into the sphere
RMu?ts ^' hlisB and of the hip^apnia. The consequence of
the incarnation is, therefore, primarily a transfor-
mation into the imperishable (renewal of the Divine
likeness), but secondarily also the restoring of the
knowledge of God, in so far as the earthly appear-

Secured.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 237

ance of Divinity (in Christ) makes Divinity recogniz-
able to the dullest eye and thereby eradicates poly-
theism. AthanasiuSy in asserting this double result,
was also able to explain the particular result of the
incarnation: Only those are benefited by it who
know God and who regulate their lives according to
this knowledge. The apotheosis of human nature ^^^^^
(participation in God through son-ship) and not *'^oiiit!°
knowledge was to Athanasius the main point.
Therefore his whole concern was with the exact
determining of the question, how the Divine which
became man was constituted, and into what con-
nections with humanity he entered. On the con-
trary the Arians and, later, the Antiochians placed
the principal stress upon the knowledge; they perse-
vered in the rationalistic scheme. On that very ac-
coimt they had not in general a decided interest in
the two questions, and when they had, they answered
them in another way. It is plain that the great
dogmatic contentions have their root herein : Sub- j^t ^^
stantial participation in God, or knowledge of him ^uow?'
which assists freedom — Christ the Divinity, or the
intelligent Reason of the world and the Divine
Teacher — Christ the inseparable Gkni-man, or the
inspired man and the dual Being. Athanasius had
on his side the highest Greek piety, his opponents
the more intelligible formulas and, in part, the letter
of the Bible.

No other Greek father has answered the question ^ ^^
why Qod became man so clearly as Athanasius. ^™®^*'*^

238 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

®']^22L °' Next to him comes the Platonist, Gregory of Nyssa
(large catechism), since in general the whole concep-
tion of doctrine is possible only upon the basis of Pla-
tonism. Gregory at some points strengthened the
deductions, in many instances, however, he followed
Methodius. In contending with Jews and pagans
he shows that the incarnation is the best form of
redemption; he conceives the whole sinful state as
deaths and gives, therefore, to this conception a wider
scope (all turning away from God to the non-exist-
u^oiSj ^^^ sensuous is death) ;. he viewed the incarnation as
com Wished f ully accomplished first in the resurrection of Christ

in Resur-
rection. (Origenistic declaration: Bedemption presupposes

separation from the body) ; he expressly taught that
Christ did not assume the nature of an individual
man, but, as second Adam, human nature itself, so
that according to this mystic-Platonic view, every-
thing human has blended with the Divinity; he con-
PhSral!!£M- cei ved of the whole strictly as a physico-pharmacolog-
prooeas. ical process : Humanity became thoroughly pene-
trated by the leaven of Divinity (the counter-weight
is the demand for the spontaneous fulfilling of the
law) ; he brought the sacraments into the closest re-
lation with the incarnation. But, finally, he gave a
%^eat° pantheistic turn to this realistic and, to all rational-
ism, apparently hostile idea, which deprives it of its
peculiarity and is quite in accord with a rationalis-
tic conception: Christ's incarnation is an act of
cosmic importance; it reaches as reconciliation and
restitution over the whole world from the highest

DBVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 239

angels down to the deepest depths. Thus it dis-
solves, as with Origen, into a necessary oosmical
process; it becomes a special case of the general
onmipTesenoe of the Divine in creation. In the
cosmos the alienation from Ood is set forth in the
same manner as the return to him. Gregory assisted
in transmitting to futurity this pantheistic idea,
which he himself indeed never quite clearly thought
out so as to separate it from its historical conditions.
The pantheistic doctrine of redemption appears in
after times in a double form (pantheistic monophy- ^l^'^f
sites, the Areopagite and his disciples, etc.) : Either %^i^^
the work of the historical Christ appears as a special
instance, i.e. as a symbol of the general purifying
and sanctifying activity which the Logos in common
with the graded orders of super-sensuous creatures,
and at tibQ same time for them, continually effects by
means of holy agencies — or instantly with the thought
of the incarnation the union of each individual soul
with the Logos is conceived of, in which there is
repeated what occurred in regard to Christ. A third
form stiU is the view, that the humanity of Christ
was a heavenly one, i.e. that the Logos always car-
ried humanity within itself. Even unconcealed pan-
theism (nature as a whole is of one essence with
Divinity) was not wanting.

But all this lay only in the background, while the u^^rI^
thought that Christ took upon himself humanity as sin and
generally conceived spread in the East and West, and
destroyed the idea of a moral union of the Divinity

240 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

with an individual man, from which, of course, the
certainty of our participation in God cannot be in-
ferred. Those who taught this moral union (Anti-
ochians) ordinarily conceived redemption, not as a
restitution, the necessity of which they did not exactly
feel, but as a leading up to a new state, as the close of
the Divine pedagogy. Whereas the theologians fol-
lowing Athanasius and Gregory always conceived of
the incarnation as a necessary restitution and referred
it therefore to sin and death. Accordingly they firm-
ly maintained, so far as they were not misled by pan-
theism, that the incarnation was an historical deed
of imfathomable Divine compassion, by means of
which humanity has been restored to Divine life.
m^?^ Supplement. Men attempted to fit the facts of the
Jesus' life history of Jesus into the work of redemption, which

toRedemp*

^^n indeed was a success as regards the resurrection, but
not wholly so in any other single point. The death
on the cross remained in particular imintellig^ble,
although Pauline points of view were continually
repeated; for by the incarnation everything had
really been given and death could at the most be but
the conclusion of the '^becoming flesh" (the sacrifi-
cial view moreover has seldom since Origen been far-
ther fertilized according to the scheme of the Greek
mysteries). Nevertheless there can be no doubt
that death was considered a blissful mystery, before
which one should bow down, and it is after all a
question whether the dogmatic reticence here of the
Greeks is less worthy in contrast with the bold reckon-

DBTEIiOPHBNT OF DOCTRINB OF INCABNATION. 241

ing and bargaining of the Occidental theologians.
The latter since Tertullian and Cyprian have ever St^SSio
considered the endurance of death as a service, the
value of which should be appraised in juristic formu-
las; they have looked upon death as satisf actio and
placatio dei and applied to it the view gained by the
contemplation of the legal scheme of atonement (abo-
lition of suffering and punishment for guilt through
the expiation^ i.e. through the meHt of Christ's death
which pacified an angry Qod. Calculating the value
to Qod of Christ's death : Ambrose, Augustine, the j^jjSSine,
great popes) . Moreover since Ambrose they consist- popea
ently advanced to the assumption, that the expiation
(the merit) of Christ was made as manj since hu-
manity is the debtor and since any services rendered
can be ascribed only to the man, who, to be sure,
received his worthiness from his Divinity. Thereby
the West alienated itself from the East : Here is God
who has taken humanity into union with his being,
in consequence of which his constitution as Re-
deemer; yonder is man, the propitiator, whose endur-
ance of death has a Divine value. But the West, it
is true, did not possess as yet a strict theory. It also
still accepted the gnostic-eastern conceptions that a
ransom was paid to the devil, who thereby was de-
frauded.
16

S42 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

CHAPTER VII.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOHOUSION OF THE SON OF

GOD WITH GOD HIMSELF.

Principal sources : The Church historians of the 4th and
5th centuries and the works of the fathers of the 4th century.
Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, 1882; Mdhler, Athanasius,
1827 ; Zahn, Marcell. , 1867 ; Hahn, Bibliothek d. Symbole, 2.
Aufl.

^f FsthI? Is ^^ Divine, which has appeared upon the earth
*" °' and reunited man with God, identical with the high-
est divine Being who rules heaven and earth, or is
the same semi-divine? That was the decisive ques-
tion of the Arian controversy.

1. — From the Beginning of the Controversy until

the Council of Nicosa.

idopuon- At Antioch, 268, the Logos-doctrine had been car-

larn

ried through, but the ^fiooutrto^ was rejected. Yet the
legacy of Paul of Samosata did not perish. Lucian,
the most learned exegete of his time, took it up and
founded a popular, influential exegetico-theological
school, which for a long time held aloof from the
Church, but later made its peace with the same, and
became the foster-mother of Arianism. Lucian
started from adoptionism; the high value which he
placed upon the development of Christ (t^pozotctj)
proves this. But he condescended to introduce the
hypostatic Logos, still as Xoyo^^-xrttrfia^ as created,
capable and in need of development, which is to be

DEVKLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP INCARNATION. 243

sharply distinguished from the eternal, impersonal
L(^o8 of Qod. The ego in Christ is therefore a
heavenly pre-existent Being (no longer man, as with
Paul) — by this admission Lucian made his peace
with the dogma and the Origenists — but human
qualities were attributed to the same, the incarnation
became a mere assuming of the flesh, and by means
of the Aristotelian dialectics and Biblican exegesis
a doctrinal principle was now propounded in which
the unbegotten Creator (the " Eternal ") was placed
in sharp contrast with all created beings, conse-
quently also with the Logos-Christ, and theology
became ** technology", that is, a doctrine of the un-
begotten and the begotten was worked out in syllo-
gisms founded upon the holy codex, without genu-
ine interest in the thought of redemption, yet not
without moral energy, and this was spread abroad
by disciples closely allied and proud of their dialec-
tics and their exegetical art.

To these Arius also belonged, who at a ripe age
became deacon and presbyter in Alexandria. There,
at that time, a tendency was represented in the epis-
copate which mistrusted the fia^ijfiara r?;? 'FMrjVtxr^i:

fiXo(To<pia<; and put aside the thought of the difference
between Father and Logos. Although Arius had
for some time combated Christological errors along
with his bishop Alexander, yet about the year 318
he began to differ with the latter, and the bishop
found it necessary about 320 to condemn and depose
Arius and some of the other clergy, at a synod held

Tbeolofor
Becomes
Technol-
ogy.

Arius.

Eufiebius

244 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

in Alexandria, on account of their Christology.
But he stepped into a wasp's nest. The followers of
of^ic(>" Lucian and above all the influential Eusebius of
Nicomedia took decidedly the part of Arius, and the
majority of the Oriental bishops were indeed in
sympathy with him (also Eusebius of Cesarea) . Let-
ters were written on both sides to gain assistance ;
synods also were held. Arius was able under pro-
test to take up again his work in Alexandria. When
Constantine, 323, became ruler also of the Orient, the
contest spread to all the coast provinces of the East
(Thalia of Arius; derision of Jews and heathen),
tine. The emperor sought at first to reconcile both parties

HOBiUA.

by a letter delivered by the court-bishop, Hosius, of
Cordova (the dispute is an idle, unbecoming quarrel) .
But the letter had no effect, and Hosius, who cham-
pioned the TertuUian-Cyprian doctrine of the trin-
ity, probably at that very time came to an agreement
with Alexander. Through him the emperor also
was gained over and the Nicene decision prepared
for. Following his advice, Constantine called a
council at Nica^a.
^de™" Alexander's doctrine (vid. his two letters and the
epist. Aril ad Euseh,) was, as a matter of fact,
essentially identical with the later one of Athanasius ;
but it was not clear in its formulations. Especially
did he hardly raise the o/ioouffw^ to a rallying-cry,
since the same was repudiated in the East. Hosius
probably introduced it as a translation of the West-
em unius sabstantiae, Alexander's formulas were :

DBVSLOPUENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 245

d£\ "^eoff, a&f olo^j Sfia narrjp^ afia ulo^j (Tu>oi:dpj^et 6 ulof^
aycvvijTfl>9 Toi ^ew, detyevij^^ d^evTfTo^evij^^ our iizv/oia out
drofiw rtvi tzpodytt 6 ^to^ too wfoD, dti dcoy, dti uf«9, i^ atnoi)

Tou {^eou 6 ulo^. Alexander asserted the eternal co-ex-
istence without beginning of the Father and the Son
(influence of Irenseus?) He included the Son in the
being of the Father as a necessary constituent part ;
he refuted the tenets, that the Son is not eternal, that
he was created out of nothing, that he is not ^otret
Gk>d, that he changes, that he has passed through a
moral development and is only adopted Son. He
consciously contended for the common faith in the
Church, for the Divinity of Christ, and he rejected
above all the dialectics about " begotten " and ** un- i52£rt^
b^otten*'. He quoted in favor of his view the Scrip- BegpSen

End unbe-

ture proofs (John 1: 1-3; 1: 18; 10: 30; 14: 8, 9 gotten,
and 28; Math. 3: 17; 11: 27; I. John 5: 1; Col. 1:
15, 16; Rom. 8: 32; Heb. 1: 2 seq,; Prov. 8: 30;
Psa. 2: 7; 110: 3; 35: 10; Isa. 53: 8). Hewasfond
of using the favorite expression of Origen : The Son
is the perfect reflection; but even the following ex-
pression does not satisfy him : ^v ahrai xapaxr/jpt^erat 6

itarrjp. He approaches Sabellianism, but desires to ^^SS^u*
reject it strongly, and asserts that the Father is
nevertheless greater than the Son who belongs to
his being. He wants to see the " coming forth " of
such a Son revered as a mystery : It is a question of
faith, not of speculation. Still he often uses unin-
telligible, confused and contradictory expressions,
among which even narptxii ^soyovia is not wanting,

246 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

which contrast unfavorably with the plain, clear
sentences of Arius, for whom it was an easy task
to show that the doctrine of Alexander was neither
protected against dualism (two »^i'^rjTa)^ nor against
gnostic emanationism (r/*«/5«Aiy, ditoppota)^ nor against
Sabellianism (of«r«rai//), nor against the representa-
tion of the corporeality of God, and had the character-
istics of a chameleon and was Biblically untenable.
Doctrine. Arius taught the following (see his own letters
and the letters of his friends, the fragments of the
Thalia, the characterization in Alexander and Atha-
nasius, the writings of the later Arians) :
<^2gAione (1) The one God, besides whom there is no other,
is alone unbegotten, without beginning, eternal ; he
is inexpressible and incomprehensible; furthermore
he is the cause and creator of all things. In these
attributes consists his nature (the unbegotten Gen-
erator). His activity is in creating ("to beget** is
only a synonym). Everything which is, has been
created — not out of the nature of God (otherwise he
would not be simple and spiritual), but out of his
own free will. Accordingly Qod has not always been
Father, else the created would be eternal ; the created
also can never receive the essence of God ; for this
precisely is uncreated.
Him* nlfeii (^) Within this God dwell, as inseparable poti;ers,
and ix^ Wisdom and Logos; there are beside many created
powers.

wS?8on (^) Before the world was, God created out of his
Was Not. ^^^^ ^^^ ^jjj g^ independent Being (ou<re'a, Ondcrairtf)^

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP INCARNATION. 247

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

(4) This " Son " therefore is, according to his ^ gj^
being, an independent magnitude, totally distinct

from the " Father". He has neither one being with
the Father, nor like qualities of nature (otherwise
ihere would be two Gods) . Rather has he a free will
and is capable of changing. But he has resolved
permanently upon the good. Thus by virtue of his
choice he has become unchangeable.

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

with the Father.

(6) Still he differs from all creatures; he is the ^"f^l?^"
xria/ia riXecovj through whom everything has been
created ; he stands in an especial relationship of grace

to OtoA. Through God's communication and his own
progress, he has become God, so that we may call
him " only begotten God".

(7) This Son has truly assumed a human body, son Truly

Incar-

The attributes, which the historical Christ mani- "•'^^
fested, show that the Logos to which they belonged
is a being capable of suffering and is not perfect.

248 OUTLtNKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Scripture
Proof.

"si^A*^' (S) By the side of and below the Son stands the
natetoson. jj^j^ gpj^j^. j^^. ^j^^ Christian believe* in three

separate and different odtriat {ojroffTdirtig ) ; the Holy
Spirit was created through the Son.

(9) Scripture proofs for these doctrines were : Deut.
6: 4; 32: 39; Prov. 8: 22; Ps.45: 8; Math. 12: 28;
Mk. 13: 32; Math. 26: 41; 28: 18; Lk. 2: 52; 18:
19; John 11: 34; 14: 28; 17: 3; Acts2: 36; I. Cor.
1: 24; 15: 28; Col. 1: 15; Phil. 2: Q seq.; Heb. 1:
4; 3: 2; John 12: 27; 13: 21; Math. 26: 39; 27: 46,
etc. Dialectically the sophist Asterius above all de-
fended this doctrinal conception. With strict Arian-
ism the tradition coming from Paul and Lucian had
most weight; with the more liberal party (Eusebius
of Cesarea) the doctrine of subordination as taught
by Origen.

Athanasius' doctrine, in its dogmatico-scientific
SS^ne*^ delineation not important, was great in its victorious
perseverance in the faith. It comprises really only
one tenet: God himself has entered into humanity.
It is rooted wholly in the thought of redemption.
Judaism and paganism have not brought back hu-
manity into communion with God : Only God could
deify us, t.6., adopt us as his sons. He who denies
that Christ is very God, is still a Jew or a heathen.
Athanasius has in fact no longer a Logos-doctrine ; he
is a Christologian. He thinks only and always of that
Christ who is God. He did not care for a formula;
even the 6fioootrto^ is not so often used by him as one
might think. His main principles are the following :

Athana^

SiUB*

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 249

(1) If Christ is God— and that he must he as Re- ^^li^J*
deemer — ihen he has as such nothing creature-like in creatures.
him and belongs in no sense to created existences.
Athanasius makes just as strict a distinction be-
tween created and uncreated as Arius, but he sets
the Son aside as belonging to God in opposition to
the world.

(2) Since the Divine in Christ is not created, do^^"

Done Away

it can also not be postulated of the world and with.
the creation of the world; besides, God needs no
mediation for the creation of the world. Conse-
quently the idea of the Divine, who has redeemed
man, is to be separated from the idea of the world;
the old Logos-doctrine was done away with. Nature
and revelation were no longer considered identical.
The Logos-Son is the principle of salvation, not the
principle of the world.

(3) But since Divinity is a unity (jtiovdy) and the ^g^
Son does not belong to the world, he must belong to ^°^^®*^-

this very unity of the unbegotten Power which is the
Father.

(4) The very name " Father " signifies that there p^Sia^lm-
is present in Divinity a second being. God has p"®*^*^
always been Father; he who calls him this, names

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

(5) Consequently the Son is yivvrifia rod narpo^j be- ^ oSfof
gotten out of the being of God, as the light from the ^gSl.^'

250 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

sun, through an inner necessity. He is the likeness
proceeding from the divine Being. '^To be begot-
ten " means nothing else than to have complete par-
ticipation by nature in the whole nature of the
Father, without the Father thereby suffering loss in
any way.
Eterua. (C) Therefore the Arian assertions are false; the

leDtially

ood. Son is rather (a) alike eternal with the Father, (&)
out of the being of the Father, (c) in all parts as to
nature equally endowed with the Father, and he is
all this because he has one and the satne essence
with the Father and forms with him a strict unity
— " essence", however, in regard to Qod means noth-
ing else than '^ being". It is not true that the
Father is one Being in himself and the Son another
in himself, and that these two have like qualities —
that would annul the unity of the Divinity, but the
Father is the Divinity ; this Divinity, however, con-
tains within itself as self-sufficient and self -efficient
product a "going forth" which also possessed from
eternity, and not by virtue of a commimication, the
same divine nature — the true Son, the likeness pro-
ceeding from the divine Being. Father and Son are
one Being, which includes in itself the distinction
between a/o/17 and rivvr^fia^ consequently between prin-
ciple and derivation and, in this sense, a subordi-
nation, which however has nothing to do with the
subordination of the created — this is the meaning of
the o/xoouffto^ in Athanasius.

(7) All creature-qualities which the Scriptures

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 251

ascribe to Jesus Christ have reference merely to hia oSm^"
human nature. The exaltation also refers to the H?f '"^

1 • ^ ■% . t> 1 Human

same; t.e. to our exaltation; for the union of the Nature.
Gk>d- Logos with human nature was from the begin-
ning a substantial and perfect one (Mary as t^eoroxo^) :
The body became his body. Proverbs 8: 22 seq.
also has reference to the incarnate Logos.

Both doctrines are formally in this re8i)ect alike, that in
them religion and theology are most intimately mingled and
grounded upon the Logos- doctrine. But Arianism is a union ^f^'*™*
of adoptionism with the Origenistic-Neo- Platonic doctrine of Bianiam.
the subordinate Logos which is the spiritual principle of the
world, carried out by means of the resources of the Aristo-
telian dialectics ; the orthodox doctrine is a union of the al-
most modalistically colored dogma, that Jesus Christ is Qod
in kind, with the Origenistic doctrine of the Logos as the
perfect likeness of the Father. In the former, the principal .
stress was placed upon the cosmological and rational-ethical
side (descending trinity, enlightening and strengthening of
freedom) ; in the latter, upon the thought of redemption, but
under a physical conception. In the former, the formulas
are apparently free from connivance and contradictions ; but
the speculative mythology, strictly viewed, is as bad as pos-
sible ; furthermore, only as cosmologians are the Arians mono-
theists ; as theologians and in religion they are polytheists ;
finally in the background lie deep contradictions : A Son who
is no Son, a Logos which is no Logos, a monotheism which Contradic-
does not exclude polytheism, two or three ovctia who are to be -Arianism.
adored, while really only one differs from the creatures, an
indefinable being who only becomes God in becoming man,
and who is neither God nor man. Besides, there was no vig-
orous religious interest, and also no real philosophical inter-
est* much more was everything hollow and formalistic, even

252 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Orthodox

Doctrine,

Value and

Defects.

Inconceiv-
able
Formulas.

Contradict
Scripture.

a puerile enthusiasm for sporting with husks and shells and
a childish self-sufficiency in setting at work unmeaning syl-
logisms. The opponents were quite right : This doctrine leads
back to paganism. A relative value only is due to it, when,
coming in contact with uncultiued and barbarian nations, it
was obliged to strip off its philosophical garments and in that
way was able to pass itself off essentially as adoptionism, as
the veneration of Christ by the side of Gkxi based upon Bib-
lical passages (German adoptianism) . The orthodox doctrine,
on the contrary, possesses its lasting value through its main-
tenance of the faith that in Christ Qod himself has redeemed
mankind and brought us into communion with himself. But,
since the God in Christ was conceived as '^ alter ego " of the
Father, and since redemption was conceived in a mystico-
physical form, there residted,

1. Formulas, the direct gainsaying of which is evident
(one = three) , and ideas, which cannot be conceived, but only
asserted in words. Thereby in the place of the knowledge of
Qod which Christ had promised, was put a mystery, and this
was to be recognized as the most profound knowledge. By the
side of the miracle, as characteristic of religion, was placed
the miracle of ideas as characteristic of the true theology ;

2. The assertion that the Person in Christ is the Logos, one
being with God, could be maintained only when one reversed
the interpretations of all evangelical reports concerning him,
and understood his history docetically. Therefore, the in-
troduction of the absurd, and the abandonment of the histor-
ical ClHirist in his most valuable traits, is the consequence of
the orthodox doctrine. But the claim that Jesus Christ has
led men back to God, and given to them Divine life, was
still maintained. This conviction of faith was saved by
Athanasius against a doctrine which, upon the whole, did not
appreciate the inward nature of religion, which sought in
religion only instruction, and finally found satisfaction in
an empty dialectics.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINS OF INCARNATION. 253

It is easy to see that with Arius, as well as with Athana- «^^^
sins, the contradictions and weaknesses flow from the reception Theology.
of Origenism, that is, from the scientific theology. Without
this, that is, without the doctrine of the pre-existent, hypo-
statical Logos, Arianism would have been adoptionism, or
pure rationalism, and Athanasius woidd have been forced
either to turn to modalism, or to relinquish the idea of the
Divine ''nature" of Christ.

At the synod of Nicaea (325) the homousios TrtSS^h?
(Hoeins) finally conquered, thanks to the awkward * **^
tactics of the Arians and Eusebians (Origeni»tic
middle party), to the decisiveness of the orthodox
and to the determination of the emperor. Into the
Caesarean creed the watch-words r€v\^^ivTa ob jroty^f^iv.
Tfl, ix T^y ob(tia<: TOO narpo^j ^fiooufftov r^ itarpi were in-
serted, the Arian formulas expressly condemned, and
this creed was made the law of the Chiux;h. Almost
all the bishops (300? 318?) submitted, Arius and a
few companions were excommunicated and their fol-
lowers persecuted. Athanasius attended this synod
as deacon, probably not without taking an important
part.

2. — Until the Death of Constantius.

The victory had been gained too quickly. Neither p,^JSJSS«
formally, nor essentially had it been sufficiently
worked out, therefore the contest had really only
begun. Men saw in the homousios an unbiblical,
new formula, the making of two Gods, or the intro-
duction of Sabellianism, and, in addition, the death

254 OtJTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

of clear science. Among the opponents who together
came forward as conservatives, two parties now be-
came clearly prominent, the Arians and the Origan-
ists (Eusebians) to whom the indifferents joined
themselves. But they were united in the contest
against orthodoxy (principal champion against it
was Eusebius of Nicomedia).
^JlSSedL* Constantine soon understood that he would have
to come to an agreement with the anti-Nicene coali-
tion, which after 328 bec€kme anti-Athanasian, for
the young bishop was the most decided Nicene.
Personal differences arose at a time when the ambi-
tion and power of the ecclesiastics could finally
reckon upon the highest gratification. In 335 Atha-
nasius was declared deposed at Tyre, and in 33G he
was banished by the emperor to Trier. The solemn
reception of Arius into the Church was frustrated by
his death. In 337 Constantine died, really approv-
ing the promulgating, under the cover of the Nicene
creed, of hostile doctrines.

tiu?¥a?or8 ^^® ®^^® divided the empire. Athanasius (337)
Arians. rctumed. But Constantius, the ruler of the East,
rightly understood that he could not govern with
orthodoxy, and he did not feel himself bound, like
his father, to the Nicene creed. He deposed^, the
orthodox bishop of the capital; Eusebius of Nico-

Eueebius ^ *^

Nicomedia. '^^^^ *<^^ ^^^ place. In CsBsarea an Arian, Acacius,
succeeded Eusebius; Athanasius was deposed, but
he anticipated his banishment by flight to Rome
(339), leaving Egypt in wild disorder. The Euse-

DBVELOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 255

bians were not masters of the situation, but the West
was true Nicene and the stronghold of Oriental ortho-
doxy. The Eusebians did not wish to break with
the West; they were, therefore, obliged to try to
quietly push aside the Nicene creed, replacing in
mere pretence the homousios by better Biblical
formulas and demanding the carrying out of the de-
position of Athanasius. It was of great advantage
to the Orientals that a strict Nicene and a friend of
Athanasius, Marcellus of Ancyra, did not sanction iiaroeiius

' "^ ' of Ancyra.

the common foundation of the teaching, the philo-
sophical-Origenistic Logos-doctrine, but declared the
Logos to be the Power of God, which only at the in-
carnation had become divine Person and '' Son", in
order to return to the Father when once he had fin-
ished his work (the Orientals saw in this doctrine
^ Sabellianism ") . Julius of Rome and Athanasius
declared Marcellus to be orthodox, and proved there-
by that they were concerned alone about redemptive
faith and laid aside the formulas set up by the
Orientals at Antioch (341), although the latter now
f ormaUy renounced Arianism and established a doe
trine which could be taken for Nicene.

Political reasons compelled Constantius to be oblig- ^^^}^'
ing to his orthodox brother, Constans, the ruler of
the West. The great council of Sardica (343) was
intended to restore unity of faith in the empire.
But the Occidentals refused the preliminary demand
of the Orientals to acknowledge the deposition of
Athanasius and Marcellus, and proclaimed after the

256 OUTUNBS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

exodus of the Orientals (to Philippopolis) the deposi-
tion of the leaders, taking their position rigidly upon
the basis of the Nicene creed. The opponents reit-
erated the 4th Antiochian formula. Constantius
himself seems to have mistrusted them for a time;
he certainly feared to irritate his brother who was en-
deavoring to gain the supremacy. The Orientals re-
iterated once more in a long formula their orthodoxy
(Antioch, 344) and the minimum of their demands.

^ffiuS,** Although the West at the Milan synods (345-347)
rejected the doctrine of Photinus of Sirmiiun, who
from the doctrine of his master, Marcellus, had de-
veloped a strictly adoptian conception (the Logos
never became a person), it yet remained otherwise
firm, while in the East political bishops already
meditated peace with Athanasius. The latter was
restored by Constantius, who was hard pressed by
the Persians, and he was greeted with great rejoic-
ings in Alexandria (346). About 348 it appeared as
if orthodoxy had conquered; only Marcellus and the
word ofiooOaio^ seemed still to give oflfence.

con^- But the death of Constans (350) and the defeat of
Ruler. ^YiQ usurper Magnentius (353) changed everything.
If Constantius during the last years was obliged to
bow before a few bishops, his own subjects, who
had ruled his brother, he now as sole ruler was de-
termined to govern the Church and pay back the
humiliations. Already in 351 (2d Sirmian synod)

Synods of ^® Oriental bishops had returned to action. At the

^MnaS""* synods of Aries (353) and Milan (355) the Western

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 257

episcopate was obliged to come to terms. At first
nothing further was demanded of it than the con-
denmation of Athanasius, but this meant a diver-
gence on the question of faith, and the bishops al-
lowed it to be forced upon them (a few exceptions :
Paulinus of Trier, Lucifer of Cagliari, Eusebius of
Vercelli; also Hosius, Liberius, Hilarius had to go
into exile) . Athanasius anticipated his deposition by
flight into the desert (356). Union seemed restored,
but it was as state ecclesiasticism, against which
orthodox Western bishops fiercely inveighed, now
only remembering that emperor and state should
not meddle with religion.

The union of the victors was only a seeming one, -^^J^
for it became apparent that it did not go beyond
negations. Strict aggressive Arianism again came
forward in Aetius and Eunomius and wanted to
carry through the " anomoian " doctrine {dvofioto^ xai

Mara itdyra xai xar' oufftav) , In opposition to this, Semi-

Arianism placed itself in sharp contrast (the ''un-
changeable likeness", Sfioto^ xard, Ttdvra xa) xara rr^v oo-

fficv). These homoiusians (Qeorgius of Laodicea, ^^m:""

Ooorffius

Eustathius of Sebaste, Eusebius o{ Emesa, Basilius of
of Ancyra) had learned that the Son must be, as to ^^^ew,
being, of like essence with the Father ; as scientific ^SSi^^'
men (cosmologians) they did not wish to abandon
the cosmic potentiality of the Logos and the descend-
ing trinity. They xmderstood how, with the Scrip-
tures as a basis and in connection with Christology,

to so formulate their doctrine that it made an im-
17

258 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

From
857-361

OODBtAD-

Openly

FaTors

ArioDism.

Semi-

Arians,

Synods at

Seleucia

and
Rimini.

pression even upon Nioene Occidentals, who, to be
siire, were still half idiots in scientific theology. The
third party was that of the politicians, who applauded
that formula which had the best prospect of settling
the contest (Ursacius and Valens: S/wto^ xard rd^
Ypaipd^). The period from 357-361 is the time during
which the emperor, openly dropping the Nicene
creed, sought for a Christological imperial formula,
and proposed with all energy to carry it through at
the synods. Here, finally, only the " ofioioi: xard. rd^:
Ypa<pd<: " could be presented; for with this unmeaning
formula, the Arians, semi- Arians and even the ortho-
dox could make friends, since it directly contra-
dicted no doctrine. The Sirmian synods had not as
yet accomplished what they ought, and they even
showed a passing tendency to strict Arianism. At
Ancyra (358) the semi-Arians rallied powerfully.
Two great contemporaneous synods in the East and
West (at Seleucia and Rimini) were expected to pro-
claim the 4th Sirmian formula, a dogmatico-political
masterpiece of the emperor. But when the one as-
sumed a homoiusian, the other an orthodox attitude,
they were terrorized, kept in suspense, and the ho-
moiusian imperial creed was forced upon them in
exchange for concurrence in the expulsion of strict
Arianism (synods at Nice and Constantinople 360).
Afterward all homoiusians were nevertheless ban-
ished from the influential positions, so that, in spite
of the expulsion of Aetius, an Arianism, moderated

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 259

through want of principle, actually established itself
in the Church as the state religion.

3. — Until the Councils at Constantinople^ 381, 383.

In the year 3G1 Constantius died. Julian sue- c^San-
ceeded him, and accordingly, instead of the artificial juiiittEiD-

peror.

union, the real parties succeeded again to their rights.
But the homoiusians were no longer the ^middle
party^, no longer the *^ conservatives " in the old
sense; for in opposition to Arianism, they had deep-
ened and strengthened their doctrine (conservatives
possess elasticity). Conservative and conciliatory
were the homoians who inclined toward Arian-
ism. Here the change in the Orient — at first, in-
deed, only in the minds of the most prominent theo-
logians— is shown. The homoiusians^ disciples of
Origen, distinguished alike for ecclesiastical feeling,
asceticism and pure science^ capitulated to the
hom^ousioSy an alliance which Hilarius zealously
urged forward.

Julian permitted the banished bishops, therefore ^Jiffi^^*
also Athanasius, to return. The synod of Alexandria ^iS^
(362) marks the turning-point in so far as Atha-
nasius there admitted that the Nicene creed sans
phrase should be valid; that is, he expressly re-
nounced the phrase ^one being *^ (one hypostasis)
and thus allowed such an interpretation of the
ofiooufftoif as made it " one essence " (instead of " one

Bzlla

260 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

being "), which constituted therefore three hyposta-
ses. But this concession and the great leniency
toward those who once had signed the 4th Sinnian
formula provoked the displeasure of some of the
Lucifer, prominent Occidentals (Lucifer) and martyrs of the
faith. In the West one felt that the old doctrine
(the substantial unity of the Deity is the rock and
the plurality is the mystery) had been inverted (the
trinity of the divine Persons is the rock and the
unity is the problem), and Athanasius himself was
not able to add real friends to his new scientific
friends in Asia Minor, Cappadocia and Antioch ; for
now the science of Origen had been rescued for ortho-
^SS"of^' doxy. The great theologians, ApoUinaris of Laodicca
and the and the three Cappadocians, started from Origen and

Three Cap- ^ '^'^ . ^ **

padocians. the (j/iotouffto^ ; but they recognized the ofioouffto^ now
and were able to carry on their philosophical specu-
lations with it and by the side of it; for one could
say that there are three hypostases, and stiU be ortho-
dox. By creating a firm terminology, they suc-
ceeded at the same time in producing apparently
clear formulas. Ou<rta now received the middle sense
between the abstract idea of '' being " and the con-
crete idea of " individual being " ; so, however, that
it very strongly inclined to the former. 'TnSirccurtf re-
ceived the middle sense between person and attri-
bute (accident, i.e. modality), in such away, how-
ever, that the conception of person was the stronger.
///io«Ta».T«v, since it sounded Sabellian-like, was
avoided, but not rejected. The unity of the Deity,

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 261

which the Cappadocians were concerned about, was
not the same as Athanasius and the Occidentals had
in mind. Mia obtria iv Tpttfiv oTzofrrdffeatv became the
formula. In order to render clear the real difference
in the Persons within the unity of the Deity, Greg-
ory of Nyssa added to them rpoirtn tizdft^tw^ {idtoTT^Te^

j[apaxTJQpiZooffat, i^aipera idtwfiara)^ and indeed to the

Father the dytwr^ffla (not as being, but as mode of
being [^x'^^"^^ of the Father), to the Son the y^^'^*^^^ —
even the older homoiusians had been here more re-
served than Gregory — and to the Spirit ixniipeuiTt^.
The Origenistic-Neo-Platonic trinity-speculation be- ^^!!j^^}^
came rehabilitated. The Logos idea again came to tion^ha-
the front. The unity of the Deity was again proved
from the monarchy of the Father, not from the of^u
ouffto^. Thus "science" formed its alliance with the
Nicene doctrine. While in the beginning scientists
— also among the heathen — acknowledged Arius to
be in the right, now men became champions of the
Nicene doctrine, to whom even a Libanius extended
the palm branch. They stood upon the soil of a
scientific contemplation of the world, were in ac-
cord with Plato, Origen and Libanius, and refuted
Eunomius amidst the applause of the philosophers.
At the same time it was a victory of Neo-Platonism
over Aristotelian dialectics. Thus orthodoxy in ^me^t
union with science had from about 370-394 a beauti- doxy,
ful spring-time, followed, however, by destructive
storms, or, rather, by the blight of traditionalism.
Men dreamed the dream of an eternal union between

262 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Fblitlcal
Events
Favor

Homo-

UfllOS.

Gratian

Succeeds

Valentin-

ian.

Theodo-
Hius Be-
comes Em-
peror
in Orient.

faith and science. True, it was not undisturbed.
Tlie old-faith orthodoxy in the Occident and in An-
tioch remained distrustful, even repellent. In Anti-
och a kind of schism broke out between the old and
the new scientific orthodoxy. The latter considered
the former Sabellian, although it could hardly shake
oflf the suspicion of teaching " homoiusian".

But not only did science prepare the victory for
the homousioB, the course of the world^s events did
so as well. In Valens the Orient obtained a power-
ful Arian emperor. The orthodox and homoiu-
sians had to go into exile, and they drew nearer to
each other. They again sought support from the
orthodox West. Liberius of Rome was not disin-
clined, and Basilius of Csesarea was after 370 in vig-
orous activity. Yet Damascus of Rome returned to
the old harsh standpoint, and it needed several
synods (in the seventies) to convince him of the
orthodoxy of the new orthodox Orientals. These at
last signed (at Antioch 379) the formulas of faith of
Damascus, without, however, being able to settle the
schism in Antioch. But the subscription was already
a sequence of the world-historical events that in the
year 375 in the West the youthful Gratian, wholly
devoted to the Church and orthodoxy (Damascus,
Ambrose) succeeded the tolerant Valentinian, and
after 378 became sole ruler (Valens died at Adri-
anople contending against the Qoths). In the year
379 the orthodox Spaniard Theodosius was elevated
to be co-regent and emperor of the Orient. He was

nople.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 263

determined to govern the Church like Constantius,
but in the sense of strict Occidental orthodoxy : The
celebrated edict of Thessalonica showed this in the
year 380 (issued by the emperor immediately after
hiB baptism *). He deprived the Arians of all their
churches in Constantinople and forbade the heretics
in general to worship in the cities. But he soon per-
ceived that he could rule in the Orient only with
Oriental orthodoxy, that he dare not apply the severe
standard of the West, and that he must win half-
friends entirely over. He called, therefore, in 381 an
Oriental council at the capital and appointed as pre- ^^^l^t?^
siding officer Meletius, that is, the leader of the new
orthodox party in Antioch. Thereby he of course
gave offence to the Occidentals and Egyptians, but
secured to himself the Cappadocians and the Asia
Minor theologians. At the synod the contrast was
so strongly expressed that a rupture was near at
hand (the new presiding officer, Gregory Nazian-
zen, had to resign). But finally the synod (150 bish-
ops) proclaimed the Nicene doctrine sans phrase, the
complete homoousion of the three Persons, and also
expelled the Macedonians. In fact, however, " equal-
ity of being " conquered in the sense of " equality of es-

**^Cuncto8 popvloB . , , in tali volumtu reliffione veraariy qtMm di-
vinum Petrum a^itoatolum trcididiMe Romania religio tuque ad nunc ab ip»o
inainttata deelarat quanique pontificem Danuuum aegui claret et Petrum
Alexandriae epitcopwn virum apoatolicae tanctitatis^ hoc etty ut aecundum
apostoUeam diaciplinam evangelicamque doctrinam patria et jSiti et
tpiritvs »ancti unam deitatem tub pari maiettate et tub pia trinitate
eredamut. Hanc legem tequentet Chriatianorum catholicorum nomen
ivbemuM amplecti^ reliquot vero dementet vetanotque iudicantet hoBretici
dogmatia infamiam auatinere^ divina primum vindicta^ pott etiam motua
noftrj, quern ex cctletti arbitrio tumpaerimua, ultione plectendoa^.

264 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Creed of

GoDstanti-

nople.

Eccleelas-

tical
Leeend-
Ifakiiig.

sence*^, not uniiy of essence. But the symbol, which,
since about 450 in the Orient and 530 in the Occident,
is considered to be that of this synod and obtained the
highest consideration in the Church and which has
supplanted the Nicene as being only a mere nominal
enlargement of it, is not the symbol of this synod,
which, moreover, was only by a quid pro quo after-
ward stamped as ecumenical. The so-called Con-
stantinopolitan creed is older; it is the baptismal
symbol of Jerusalem, probably edited by Cyril soon
after 362 when he accomplished his transition from
semi-Arianism to the 'Ofioootrw^, In it the "^x r^^
oixTia^ TOO Tzarpd^ ^ is wanting, and it contains a formula
about the Holy Spirit which does not proclaim the
orthodox doctrine, but avoids the question at issue

(rd xbptovy TO Z^ortoioVy rd ix too irarpo^ ixnopeoofuvov^ rd
ffuv narp) xat ulip (TUVTtpoffxuvoofievov xdl ffuvdo^aZo/ievov^ rd

XaXr^ffav dtd riov -npoipy^ribv) , How it came into the rec-
ords of the synod (through Cyril? Epiphanius?) and
how it afterwards became the symbol of the council
is quite obscure. Still ecclesiastical legend-making
has here exercised a strange justice in appending to
the synod of the newly orthodox bishops a symbol
in which the anti-Arian anathemas and Nicene
watch-words are wanting. In reality under the
cover of the 6/ioo6<rw^ men indeed continued in the
Orient in a kind of liomoiuaianism^ which is to
this day orthodox in all their churches.*

^Oonoeming the gymbol see my article in Henog^s R Encydop. S.
Aufl.

L -

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP INCARNATION. 266

The Occident was highly displeased with the iS^^J^S^
course of the synod, since, among other things, it oSimcw.
had acknowledged the orthodoxy of men who in
Rome were strongly suspected. Representations
were made, a schism was threatened. But the Orient
was no longer disposed to bend further under the
dogmatic rule of Rome, and Theodosius, keeping the
two halves of the empire separate, remained firm
and prudent, and avoided consenting to a general
council, which Gratian (Ambrose) wished to call.
In the year 382 they drew nearer together, since in
Rome, as well as in Constantinople, synods were
contemporaneously in session, and since these showed
themselves more conciliatory regarding personal
questions — to this point the controversy had nar-
rowed down inasmuch as the Antiochian schism
continued. But, above all this, circumstance greatly
contributed to a reconciliation; the spiritual leader
of the Occident, Ambrose, went to school to the
science of the Cappadocians and became powerfully
influenced by it.

In the year 381 perhaps nine-tenths of the Orient nidS?
was Arian. Theodosius endeavored to frighten ^rifnt
them, later, however, also to win them (synod of
383 at Constantinople; even Eunomiuswas invited).
But soon he abandoned the gentle method and Am-
brose seconded him in the West. One dare assume
that most of the Arian and semi- Arian Greek bish-
ops did submit; only the extreme left remained firm
(Eunomius) . More rapidly than Hellenism did Arian

Arian.

266 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

ism die out among the Greeks. True, the orthodox
laymen, always conservative, considered the ortho-
dox formula more as a necessary evil and an inex-
plicable mystery than as an expression of their faith.
The victory of orthodoxy was a triumph of priests
and theologians over the indeed deeply rooted faith
of the people; but it did not make this faith any
clearer.

Supplement : The Doctrine op the Holy Spirit

AND op the Trinity.

DooMneof 1. Since the early days, alongside of a belief in the
Spirit Father and Son, there was a belief in the Holy Spirit ;
but what the latter was, or what significance it has,
became wholly obscure after the declining of Mon-
tanism and the retiring of the combination *^ spiritus-
ecclesia". The scientific theology of the apologists
did, in general, not know what to do with it, and
even in the 3d century the majority viewed the Holy
irenoBus, Spirit as a power. However, already Irenseus and
Tertullian tried to honor it as a divine power within
the Deity. Tertullian admitted it as '^ God " and as
'' Person" into his descending but consubstantial
trinity (filio subiectus). Now the Neo-Platonic
speculation, science, also found three Divine hy-
origen. postascs uccessary. Origen in accordance with and
following the Bible took the Holy Spirit into his
theology as the third constant Being ; to be sure as a
creature subordinate to the Son, governing the small-

DEVKLOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 267

est sphere, the circle of the sanctified. The manner
of disposing of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit by
Tertullian and Origen, wholly analogous to their
treatment of the Logos-doctrine, shows that in gen-
eral there did not exist a specific Christian interest
in this point of doctrine. That Sabellius also was sabeUius.
ohliged to take into view the Holy Spirit is only a
proof that the claims of the general scientific doctrine
of the trinity and of the Biblical formulas could no
longer be passed over.

Nevertheless within the churches and among the StJ^^,

I'&kfi 111)

majority of the bishops no notice was taken of these Question

till 4th

scholarly advances, even by the beginning of the 4th century,
century ; the Nicene creed itself merely gives a place
to the belief in the Holy Spirit, without addition or
explanation . Athanasius during the first decade never
thought of it. Whoever considered it Divine in the
full sense deemed it a power ; he who conceived it as
personal, took it for something quite subordinate : In
fact it was really only a word and it remained such
within the trinity even afterward.

The Arians solicited the farther formulation of the dSc™
doctrine, since, by the concession of the inferiority "** ^°*
of the Holy Spirit, they were able to support easily
the subordination of the Son. Exactly for this rea-
son, however, the orthodox became thoughtful.
Athanasius, after about 358, gave his attention to ^e^^SJS*
the Holy Spirit and never wavered a moment in re-
gard to the formula : Since he must be worshipped,
he is ^ed^ 6/Aoouffto^ like the Son, and belongs in no

268 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

iDwrted In sense to the world {epp. ad Serap.). At the synod
^*^^ of Alexandria this doctrine of the Holy Spirit was
placed under the protection of the Nicene creed : He
who denies it is a hypocritical Arian (the attempts,
it is true, to discriminate between the agency of the
Holy Spirit and that of the Son, remained empty
^ words) . But thus strongly did the Occident ag^ree
to this formula — in the Orient not only the Aiians
but also the semi-Arians saw in it a manifest inno-
vation; even those who in the doctrine of the Son
accepted the homousios refused to acknowledge the
novuniy and took under Macedonius, bishop of Con-
stantinople, a firm stand. Yet more — even the Cap-
padocians, although they countenanced the formula,
and confessed the lack of all tangible tradition, ad-
vised the greatest caution and considered it necessary
to keep back the formula at first as a mystery, ap-
pealing to the fact that it was indeed sustained only
by a 7:af)ddoffi<; aj-pa^ot^. In their embarrassment in as-
signing to the Holy Spirit a proper kind of being in
relation to the Father, they decided to attribute to
him, according to John, the eternal ixTzsfif/n^ and Ix-op.
^^r ^^'^'^. But after 302 the theologians in the Occident

on Orient, worc indefatigable in imposing upon the half-won
Oriental brethren the Holy Spirit as *£09 6pLO€Wffio^,
and, in union with the Cappadocians, they succeeded.
It is true that still in the year 381 the Macedonians
(pneumatomaehoi) were invited to the synod, but
only to hear their condemnation and to be expelled.
The anathemas of Damascus strengthened the situa-

DSVELOPHENT OF DOCTRINB OF INCARNATION. 269

tion. Henceforth one was no longer permitted to
teach that the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Son ;
indeed, since to the Qreek the Father remained the
root of the Deity, the homousios of the Spirit seemed
safely secured only when he is traced back to the
Father alone, the Son thereby not being taken at all
into account.

2. The Cappadocians, and before them their great <SJSJ"doo-
teacher ApoUinaris, established the orthodox doctrine THnitj.
of the trinity (vid. page 260) : One Divine essence
in three Subjects, the equal nature of which contained
in their consubstantiality is distinctly stamped in
their qualities and activities; their differences in the
characteristics of their mode of being ; but the Father
alone is aUtov^ the two others ahtard^ yet not as the
world is (really TertuUian had already used the for-
mulas " nature " and " person " ; to him, however, the
trinity was still entirely a triniiy of revelation, not
of immanence). By means of the trinity, so they
now said, Christianity is distinguished from the
pagan polytheism and the ''stark" Jewish mono-
theism.

Ever since the appearance of the homoiusians, re- D^^t^^of
gard for Christology exerted in the Orient an influ- hm 8it£>r-

di nation

ence upon the establishment of the doctrine of the Element
trinity (there also nature and person; ij/ioiat/ia origi-
nated there, and also the turning to account of ihe
analogy of the conceptions " humanity " and " Adam "
in their relation to the individual man.) A subor-
dination and Aristotelian element remained in the

270 OUTUNES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOlfA.

trinity-doctrine of Oriental orthodoxy, and in the
later Christological contest the latter was drawn into
sympathy with it (however not strongly ; for it had
grown already too stubborn). A f ew Apollinarian
monophysites worked after 530 upon the conceptions
" nature " and " person " in Christology in an Aristo-
telian way, and thus also arrived in the doctrine of
the trinity at tri theism or at modalism (f>6<rc?-»
vr^oaToffir^ Askusnages, Johannes Philoponus, Peter of
Kallinico; against these Leontius of Byzantium and
John of Damascus). The latter, in opposition to tri-
theism, gave to the dogma of the trinity a turn ap-
proaching the Occidental conception (the fl^ewi^crca is
formally declared equivalent to the r^^n^ffia^ the ^v
dXXrjXoii of the three Persons is strongly emphasized,
thereby the -r/>r/<«/>ryrr«9, but not (ruvaXonfrj and irnfi^upfft^ ;
the difference existing only for the Irroota) ; this con-
ception, however, remained without eJBfect, since in
the most decisive point it allowed the fine subordina-
tionism to continue : John also taught that the Spirit
proceedctli alone from the Father {i,e. through the
Son). The Father, therefore, remains the dpxTJ of the
Deity. Consequently it is one spiritual picture which
and^ooM*- the Orient, and again another which the Occident,
ceptions formed of the trinity ; in the former the Father re-

Dissimilar.

mained the root of the two ahiard ; the full reciproc-
ity of all three Persons appeared to the Orientals to
jeopardize the monarchy, and especially the deduc-
tion of the Spirit from the Son to jeopardize the
homousion. Here Photius (867) struck in, search-

DETEL.OPHENT OP DOCTBINB OP INCARNATION. 271

ing for a dogmatic point of dispute, and reproached ^j^SST-'
the Occidentals, who taught the immanente pro- piSoS^o.
cessio of the Spirit from the Father and Son^ with
innoTations, even with Manichaean dualism, and
heightened this reproach with the still severer charge
of falsifying the holy symbol of Constantinople by
the addition of ^filioque ". This word was really an
innoration therein that had originated in Spain. A
contest broke out which has never been settled, and tween East

and West:

in which to the Greek even the " ^ta toj uIoj ^ became Fiiioque.
suspicious. The Occidentals, however, were obliged
to cling to their doctrine, because, according to their
spiritual picture of the trinity, they found the true
faith expressed only in the full imity, therefore also
only in the full reciprocity of the Persons. The
Greeks did not understand this, because secretly they
always remained cosmologically interested, just as
the doctrine of the trinity, under incessant scientific
treatment, has remained the vehicle which the phi-
losophy of antiquity has handed down to the Slavic
and Germanic nations: It contains the Christian
idea of the revelation of God in Jesus and the testa-
ment of the ancient philosophy in a most peculiar
mixture.

In the Occident the doctrine of the trinity had not DiSSSe'Sr
as a rule been treated as an object of speculation. The
unity was the safest thing, discrimination between
substance and person was understood more in the
sense of a (through the jurisprudence) cm-rent /ormaZ
distinction. Augustine in his great work, " de trin-

272 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

itate "y intended to give expression to this conception
of the trinity by means of (Neo-Platonic) science,
but he was guided also by his religious consciousness
which knew only one God.* The consequence -was
a complete obliteration of every remnant of subordina-
tionism, the changing of the Persons into relations
(the old Occidental modalism merely veiled) ; but
at the same time there arose such a mass of contra-
dictory and absurd formulas as to cause a shudder
even to the author himself, now exulting in the in-
comprehensible and now skeptical (the three together
are equal to one ; the absolute simple must be under-
stood as triple ; the Son takes an active part in his
generation; sunt semper invicefin^ neuter solus; the
economical functions, also, are never to be thought
of as separate — therefore: dictum est ^tres per-
sonae ", non ut illud diceretur^ sed ne taceretur) .
This confession and the analogies which Augustine
makes use of regarding the trinity (they are alto-
gether modalistic) show that he himself never could
have hit upon the trinity, if he had not been bound
to tradition. His great work, in which naturally
also the procession of the Spirit from the Father and
Son is emphasized — for in every act all three are
concerned — became the high school for the technioo-
logical cultivation of the intellect and the mine of
scholastic divinity in the Middle Ages. Through
Augustine, first the Spanish church, then others also,

* In regard to Augustlne^s relation to the establliihment of the Oriental
doctrine of the trinity, see Renter, Zeltschrift f . Kirchengesch. V. 875 teq,
find VI. IS&aeq.

DBVEIiOPMBMT OF DOCTRINE OF INCABNATION. 273

pennitted themselves to be induced to proclaim the
filioque.

The paradoxical formulas of the Augustinian doc- ^•^i**'
trine of the trinity, which deny every connection ^**™"^*
with the history of revelation and with reason, but
possess their truth in the endeavor to sustain com-
plete monotheism, became wide-spread in the Occi-
dent and were comprised in the so-called Symbolum ®^Sanl^*
AtJianasianuniy which arose gradually during the "™*
early part of the Middle Ages, and was on its recep-
tion (8th to 9th century) proclaimed as holy Church
doctrine.* **He who will be saved must believe
them", i.e. must submit to them. In the Athanasian
creed as a symbol stands foremost the transforma-
tion of the trinity doctrine, as an inwardly-to-be-
adopted thought of faith, into an ecclesiastical
law, upon the observance of which salvation de-
pends. With Athanasius the oiiooixno^ was the de-
cisive thought of faith ; with the Cappadocians the
intellectually over-subtle theological dogma; with*
the later Qreeks the hallowed relic; with the later
Occidentals the ecclesiastical law which demands
obedience.

^ On the **Atluuia8laniim " see KOllner, Sjrmbolik I. 68 9eq. and the
works of Foulkes 0871), Swainaon C1875)i Ommaiiey (1875), Lumby (13B7).

274 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE PERFECT EQUALITY AS TO
NATURE OF THE INCARNATE SON OF GOD AND
HUMANITY.

Sources: The fragments of ApoUinaris, the writings of
Athanasiufl, of the Cappadocians and of the Antiochians.

ofTSiS^* The question of the Divinity of Christ was only
preparatory to the question of the union of the Divine
and human in Christ. Into this problem the whole
of dogmatics flowed. IrensBUS, and afterward Atha-
nasius, had established the Divinity of the Redeem-
er with respect to redemption, i.e. upon that assump-
tion.

But the question of the union presupposed not only
a precise conception of the Divinity, but also of the
humanity of the Redeemer. True, in the gnostic
contest the reality of the ffdpS of Christ had been
secured (TertulL, de came Christi); yet a fine
docetism had in spite of it continued to exist, and
that not only with the Alexandrians but also with
all teachers. Scarcely one of them thought of a per-
fect human self -consciousness, and not a single one
attributed to the human nature of Christ all the limi-
tations which surround our nature. Origen cer-
tainly— ^and not as the first — attributed to Christ a
human soul and a free will ; but he needed a connec-
tion between the Ood-Logos and matter, and he has
shown definitely in his Christology — in so far as he

DEVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 275

did not separate the Jesus and the Christ — that the
most evident docetism remains active when one
conceives the ^dpS^ hecause whoUy material, as with-
out quality and capable of every attribute.

With the Origenistic theologians, and among the '^^^^'Ij*
Christian people generally, existed at the beginning carnation.
of the 4th century the most varied conceptions re-
garding the incarnation and humanity of Christ.
Only a few thought of a human soul and many
thought of the flesh of Christ as heavenly, or as a
transformation of the Liogos, or as a vesture. Crass
docetic conceptions were softened by Neo-Platonic
speculative ideas (the finiteness a moment within
the unfolding Deity itself) . No one in the Orient
really thought of two natures; one eternal God-
incarnate nature, one nature having become God-
incarnate, a Divine nature having been changed for
a time into human nature, a Divine nature dwelling
in the human, i.e. clothed in the covering of human-
ity— these were the prevailing conceptions, and the
answers were just as confused to single questions
(Was the flesh bom of Mary, or the Logos with the q"^^^^
flesh? Was the Christ made man, or did he assume
human nature? How much can be wanting to this
nature and it still be considered human?) and to the
Biblical considerations (Who suffered? Who hun-
gered? Who died? Who acknowledged his igno-
rance? The God or the man, or the God-man?
Or in reality are not all these '?«»?'? only apparent, i.e.
economic?). A more or less fine docetism was also

276 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

in concreto taught in the Occident. But by the
side of it, after Tertuilian and Novatians, stood upon
the basis of the symbol the juristic formula : Two
substances, one person. This formula, as thoug^h it
were a protection and boundary thought, was never
further investigated ; but it was destined to become
some day the saving phrase in the conflicts of the
Orient.
Perwn. The Unity of the supernatural personality of Christ

^°taL ^^^ ^^'^ ^® common starting-point. How to pro-
vide a place for humanity in it was the problem,
which in its sharpness and gravity ApoUinaris of
Laodicea first discerned. The Arians had given the
impulse, since they conceived the humanity of Christ
merely as <ra/9c in order to express the full unity of
the personality of the Redeemer and at the same
time to be able to attribute to their half -divine Logos
the limited knowledge and capability of suffering
found in the Christ. They threw it up to the ortho-
dox, that their doctrine leads to two Sons of Gkxl,
or to two natures (which were stiD considered iden-

Apoiuna. tical) . ApoUinaris now recognized that this reproach
was justified ; he made the problem of his theology :
(1) To express just as strict a unity in the person of
Christ as Arianism did in its Logos clothed merely
with the <rfl/>$, (2) To unite with itihefull humanity
of Christ. Here is the problem which occupied the
Church of the 3d century, and indeed ApoUinaris sur-
veyed it in its whole range as the chief problem of
Cliristian theology, as the nucleus of all expressions of

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP INCARNATION. 277

faith, and he treated it accordingly with the greatest
ingenuity and with a dialectics that anticipated all
terminologies of the future. With the orthodox ortbSS!
(Athanasius) he found fault, because they, in order
to escape the objections of the Arians, and in spite
of their better intentions, constantly discriminated
in Christ between what the man and what the Qod
did; thereby is the duality established and redemp-
tion is made dependent thereon; for Christ must so
hsLve been made man, that everything which is valid
of humanity is also valid of the Deity and vice versa
(true, Athanasius never used the expression f^oo ^uffst^
like Origen; but he was obliged against his will to
divide the unity of the Xoyo^ tfapxw^ei^ in its applica-
tion). He censured the Arians because they also Ariwos.
take away the comfort of redemption in so far as
Christ did not assume entire humanity, but only the
flesh. He himself, holding fast to the idea of unity
as to a rudder, but not rejoicing like an Aristotelian
in the mystery of the faith, as did Athanasius, estab-
lished the doctrine that the Gk)d-Logos had taken
unto himself human flesh and a human soul (which
constitute human nature as nature), but not a human
Logos, i.e. — ^as we should now express it — not that
which in man constitutes the (individual) person,
therefore not free will. With the thus-constituted
human nature, however, the Logos was able to fuse
into a complete tmity, because there never existed
two subjects; for the rocks which Apollinaris had
recognized as dangerous were:

278 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

(1) The idea of two Sons, i.e. the separating of
the man and the God, the Jesus and the Christ (" two
natures are two Sons '^),

(2) The conception that Jesus was an av*/>«wro9

(3) The idea that he had a free, changeable nature.
The subject must be removed from the human

nature of Christ, otherwise one would arrive at a
, double-being (hybrid, minotaur) ; whereas his concep-
tion renders the m<^ ^otrt^ rob Xdyoo nt^apxtofUvri clear.
ijoTMhis This ApoUinaris proved soteriologically (what the
toSy^BiE ^*^ di^ Ck)d must have done and suffered, other-
Bpecuia. wise the same has no power to save : dvt^pwTsoo ^varo^
ou xarapytt rdv ^dvaTov ; the Deity became through Christ
the voui and Xoyo^ of the entire humanity ; the human
nature became through Christ the <r«/>* of the Deity),
Biblically — he was a very able exegete — ^and specula-
tively (the human nature is always the thing moved,
the Divine is the mover; this relationship comes in
the Xfir^9 irapxw^^et^ to its perfect development and
manifestation; Christ is the heavenly Adam, who
consequently possesses incarnation potentially ; in a
hidden way he always was V0D9 ivtrapzo^; his flesh is
6/ioooino9 to his Divinity, because he was fitted for
incarnation ; therefore is the incarnation in no way
accidental and differs from all mere inspiration ; the
Logos is always Mediator — fietrdry^^ — between Deity
and humanity; however, one does not know how far
ApoUinaris went here).
T^ro^'Xiwf If the mystery two = one (see the parallel to the

OBIV^LOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OP INCARNATION. 279

my^stery, three » one) is at all to be described, then
tlxe doctrine of Apollinaris, measured by the presup-
positions and aims of the Qreek conception of Chris-
tianiiy as religion, ia perfect. For this reason, too,
lie found faithful disciples, and all monophysites,
yes, even the pious Qreek orthodox are at the bottom
A^pollinarists : The acceptance of an individual human
personality in Christ does away with his power as
Xledeemer, just as the idea of two unmixed natures
robs the incarnation of its effect. For that reason'
Apollinaris struck out the human voD? like all Greek
believers before and after him — he, however, openly
and energetically.

But the demand for a complete human nature once
proclaimed could no longer be passed over in silence :
One could still say according to Apollinaris, that
the human V009 would not be saved; the doctrine
of Grod also appeared to totter, if God was made
to have suffered. Therefore the full humanity was
already acknowledged at the Synod of Alexandria,
362, and the Cappadocians rose against their revered
teacher, who was obliged (375) to withdraw from the
Church, but formed a church of his own ; the West
also condemned him. The full homousios of Christ
with humanity was exalted to a doctrine. Certainly
the gospel reports had a part therein ; but that which
the Cappadocians were able to set up in opposition
to Apollinaris were only wretched formulas, full ""^cSS**^
of contradictions: There are two natures, and yet
only (me; there are not two Sons, but the Divinity

Synod of
Alexan-
dria, 808.
Apollina-
ris
SecedML

280 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

acts in Christ in one way, the humanity in another ;
Christ had human freedom, but acted under Divine
necessity. In reality the Cappadocians thoug^ht like
ApoUinaris, but they had to make a place for the
** perfect man", while the Oreek piety did not de-
mand this consideration. The sovereignty of faith
had dictated the doctrine to Apollinaris; he added
to the Athanasian ofxooutrio^ the corresponding Chris-
tolc^y; like Athanasius he hesitated at no sacrifice
for the sake of his faith. His opponents, however,
in upholding the full humanity (human subject) did
after all a great service to the Church of the future.
They were now obliged to try and reconcile the con-
tradictions (not two Sons, and yet two independent
natures) . In what form that was to issue no one
knew as yet.

CHAPTER IX.

CONTINUATION: THE DOCTRINE OF THE PERSONAL.
UNION OF THE DIVINE AND HUMAN NATURE IN
THE INCARNATE SON OF GOD.

Sourcee : The writings of Cyril and of the Antiochians,
the acts of the councils., Hef ele, Conciliengesch. , Bd.I.and II.

%S!?* 1- ^^ Nestorian Controversy. — How can the
complete God and the complete man be united in one
being? The most zealous opponents of Apollinaris
were his compatriots, and in part also his philosoph-
ical sympathizers, the Antiochians. They deduced
from the formula, ^' complete Qod and complete man".

Contro-

DSVELOPMBNT OP DOCTRINB OF INCARNATION. 281

ttie consequence of two different natures. Diodonis
of Tarsus and above all Theodore of Mopsuestia,
» distinguished for their sober theology, excellent exe-
gesis and severe asceticism, were thorough Nicenes,
but they at the same time rightly i-ecognized that
complete humanity without freedom and changeable-
ness is a chimera; consequently Deity and human-
ity are contrasted and cannot by any means be fused
into one (incapable of suffering, capable of suffering) .
In accord therewith they constructed their Chris-
tology, which was therefore not fashioned according
to soteriological conceptions, but rather by the evan-
gelical picture of Christ. Christ consists of two sep-
arate natures (no ivottrt^ ^utruij) ; the God-Logos as-
sumed the nature of an individual man, that is, he
dwelt therein; this indwelling was not substantial,
and also not merely inspirational, but xardxdptv^ i.e.
Qod united and joined {(rovd^eta) himself to the man
Jesus in an especial manner, yet analogous to his
union with pious souls. The Logos dwelt in Christ
as in a temple; his human nature remained substan-
tially what it was; but it developed itself gradually
to a perfect condition and constancy. The union was
therefore only a relative one {ivw<rt^ ffx^ixyj) and it
was in the beginning only relatively perfect; it is in
itself a moral union; but by the verification and ex-
altation one adorable subject was finally and forever
exhibited {j^wpiZtit ray ^o^et^^ ivw rijv npotrxovy^triv), The-
odore uses the later formula : '' Two natures, one per-
son " ; but with him the unity of the person is merely

Dioclorus
of T<trBU8
and Theo-
dore of
Mopsu-

Two
Separate
Natures.

TwoNa-

tores, One

Person.

282 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

one of names, of honor and adoration ; in no sense a
substantial unity. He has quite distinctly two per-
sonSy because two natures (person » nature) and,
besides, for believers an adorable rpotratiTov, Of an
incarnation, therefore, one may not definitely speak,
but only of an assumption of the man on the part of
the Logos. The functions of Jesus Christ are to be
strictly distributed between the Deity add humanity.
To call Mary ^toroxo^ is absurd.
^^t^ This doctrine is distinguished from that of the
Samosatians only by the assertion of the personal-
ity of the God-Logos in Christ. In truth is Jesus —
invito ITieodoro— nevertheless an Siv^panro^ ev^eov.
That the Antiochians contented themselves with
this was a consequence of their rationalism. How-
ever deserving of acknowledgment their spiritual
conception of the problem is, still they were farther
removed from the conception of redemption as a
new birth and as forgiveness of sin, than the repre-
sentatives of the realistic idea of redemption. They
knew of a Perfecter of humanity who conducts it
through knowledge and asceticism unto a new xard-
tnafft^^ but they knew nothing of ^ a Restorer. But
since they did not docetically explain away, or by
accommodation set forth the human qualities of
Christ, they held before the Church the picture of the
historical Christ, at a time when the Church was
obliged to depart in its formulas of doctrine farther
and farther from the same. True, a picture could
have no great effect in which they emphasized the

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 283

points of empty freedom and capacity of suffering
equally with wisdom and asceticism.

Their opponents, the Alexandrians, relied upon ^^^,
the tradition which embarrassed the Antiochians, ^^
that Christ possessed the Divine physis and that he
really became man ; their deductions lacked till 431,
and even later, apprehensible clearness; but that
could not be otherwise ; and their faith was all the
snrer. Cyril of Alexandria, in many respects de-
serving of little esteem, strove for the fundamental
idea of piety, like Athanasius, and had tradition on
his side. This piety demanded only a strong and
sure declaration of the mystery, nothing more {(rtwr:^
TzpofTzuveiffi^w TO appfjTov). Upon the theoretical state-
ment of the faith Cyril never wasted many words;
but he was immediately in danger of transgressing
the limits of his idea of faith, whenever he sought
to explain the mystery, and his terminology was in-
definite. His faith did not proceed from the histor- "^^2^-^'
ical Christ, but from the Ood who was made man.
This Ood was incorporated in the complete human
nature^ and yet he remained the same. He did not
transform himself, but he took humanity into the
unity of his being, without losing any of the latter.
He was the same afterwards as before, the one sub-
ject. What the body suffered, he suffered. There-
foie Cyril used with special preference the following
phrases : eh xai 6 awro?, namely, the God-Logos, i^iav

icoteiv TTjV fffipxa olxovo/xtxio^^ jiEfiiyr^xev Snep ^v, ix duo if'Uirewy
elf, (TUviXeuiTtf duo ^offsiav xa^' iyaiffiv adtdffizaffrov dffuv^urto^

284 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Logos

Aflsumes

Human

Nature.

Cyril Roal.
ly Mono-
phyiitic.

xa\ drpinrwf, Hence: iytturt^ tpoatxij (xa^* VTzotnafft)^ and

fxia ^f)(Tt^ Ttn f^f oD X6you treffapxw/iivTj) , The difference be-
tween f w<r«ff and uTtoarafft^ Cyril hardly touched upon.
ITet he never said Ix ddo uKoardffswv^ or ivwat^ xard ^uctv.
With him fpdat^ and ovoarattt^ coincide as regards the
Divine nature; as regards the human nature they do
not. He rejected the idea that Christ became an
individual marij although he acknowledged all the
constituents of humanity in Christ. Christ is the
Logos which has assumed human nature; only thus
can he be the Redeemer. Before the incarnation
there were, according to Cyril, two natures, there-
after only onCy to wit : The Gk)d-incamate, which is
distinguished as ^etopta ixovr^. The Deity's capacity
for suffering is, to be sure, not the consequence of
the unity; but the Logos suffers in his own flesh.
Nevertheless he is *'£^9 araopto^ti^ and Mary is ^^ortixo^.
For that reason, also, can the ff^p^ Christi in the
eucharist give Divine life ; for the same is filled with
the Deity.

This conception is at the bottom pure monophys-
itism ; but it does not wish to be so, and, in assert-
ing the humanity of Christ as not to be explained
away, it guards against the consequent monophys-
itic formula. Cyril was really orthodox, that is, he
taught what lay as a consequent in the orthodox doc-
trine respecting Christ. But the contradiction is
apparent — both natures were to be present, una-
bridged and unmixed, inclusive of a human Logos,
and yet there should be but one Gk)d-incamate na-

DEVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF INCABNATION. 285

ture, and the human part is subjectless. It is also
apparant that the picture of the real Christ cannot
be maintained by this view: Docetic explanations
must necessarily be admitted (i.e. accommodation).
But this doctrine is after all more valuable than
that of the Chalcedon creed, because by it faith can
make it clear to itself that Christ assumed the com-
plete human nature, substantiaUy united it with
himself and elevated it to the Divine. The contro-
versy broke out in Constantinople through the vain,
blustering, but not ignoble bishop Nestorius (•428), NatoHua
who, hated by the Alexandrians as an Antiochian
and envied for his chair, stirred up hatred impru-
dently by his sermons and by his attacks upon those
favoring Cyril, and speciaUy by branding the word
^ot6xo9 and the like as heathenish fables. He sought
now to eradicate the ^ rottenness of Arius and Apol-
linaris" ; as a Christologian, however, he by no means
stood at the extreme left of orthodoxy, like Theodore.
He stirred up an agitation in the capital ; the monks
and the imperial ladies were against him, and Cyril
now to<^ a hand in it. The formulas which each
used did not sound very difEerently— Nestorius him-
self was rather inclined to agree, with reservations,
to the ^soToxo^ ; but behind the formulas there lay a
deep dogmatic and ecclesiastico-political contrast.
Cyril fought for the one God-incarnate nature, and
for primacy in the Orient. He was able to gain over
for himself the Roman bishop, to whom at that time
the bishop of Constantinople seemed a more power-

286 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ocBieiUuB. fui rival than the one of Alexandria. Coelestius,
also personally irritated at Nestorius, repudiated his
own Christological view which approached very
nearly to that of Nestorius, joined the anathematiza-
tion of Cyril and demanded of Nestorius a recanta-
tion. Cyril, hurling counter-anathemas against
Nestorius, compelled the calling of a general council
by the emperor who favored him. But he was able

Council of to direct the general council at Ephesus (431) in
such a manner, that from the beginning it beg^an to
split. The decrees of the Egyptian-Roman party
were recognized afterwards as the decrees of the
council, while the emperor did not originally recog-
nize either these, or the decrees of the Antiochian
party. Cyril allowed no new symbol to be estab-
lished, but caused the deposition of Nestorius and the
declaration of his own doctrine as orthodox. Con-
traryivise the Council which was held by the Anti-
ochian S3rmpathizei's deposed Cyril. The emperor
at first confirmed both depositions and as regards

Nestorius Nestorius tho matter rested there. He died in exile.

Dies In

But Cyril, influential at court, succeeded in main-
taining himself, and- in order not to lose his influ-
ence, he even formed in the year 433 a union with
the Antiochians, whose ambiguous creed stood, ac-
cording to the text, nearer to the Antiochian theol-
ogy. Yet for that very reason Cyril remained master
of the situation, and he knew how to strengthen more
and more the Alexandrian doctrine and the ecclesias-
tical domination.

Exile.

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 287

2. The Eutychian Controversy (vid. Mansi, Acts *^^5^
of the Councils, VI., VII.).— Cyril died in the year ^^^•
444, and there were people in his own party who had
never forgiven the union of 433 which he made
through the desire to rule. Dioscuros became his !>*<»»«»•
suooessor; he was not equal to him and yet he was
not unlike him. Dioscuros endeavored to carry*out
the scheme of his predecessor in the chair of Alexan-
dria, to make of Egypt a domain, to rule the Church
of the Orient as pope and to actually subject to him-
self emperor and state. Already Theophilus and
Cyril had relied upon the monks and the masses in
this matter, and also upon the Roman bishop, who
had an equal interest in suppressing the bishop of
Constantinople. They had, furthermore, relaxed the
union with Greek science (contest against Origen-
ism), in order not to displease the great power of
the age, pious barbarism, Dioscuros seemed to
really gain his object under the weak emperor The-
odosius II. (council of Ephesus, 449) ; but close upon
the greatest victory followed the catastrophe. This
was brought about by the powerful empress Pulcheria, EmprenB
and her consort Marcian, who recalled to mind once
more the Byzantine state-idea of ruling the Church,
and through Leo I., who at the decisive moment '^i-
relinquished the traditional policy of the Roman
chair to assist Alexandria against Constantinople,
made common cause with the emperor and bishop
of the capital and overthrew Dioscuros. But at the
moment of his fall, the opposition between the hith-

288 OUTUNBS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

erto united powers (emperor and pope) was destined
to come out. Both wanted to take advantage of the
victory. The emperor was not willing to surrender
the Church of the Orient to the pope (who had been
called upon for assistance), although he set up the
dogmatic formula of the pope as the only means of
saving the Oriental Church; and the pope could not
endure that the patriarch of the capital should sup-
plant the other patriarchs of the Orient, that this
church as a creature of the emperor should be at the
latter's beck and call, and that the chair should be
placed on a level with that of St. Peter's. In con-

^gjjw^i^^ sequence of the Chalcedon council the state indeed
momentarily triumphed over the Church, but in giv-
ing to the same its own dogmatic formula, which had
more than half the faithful against it, it split the
empire, laid the foundation for the secession of large
provinces, south and north, strengthened its most
powerful adversary, the bishop of Bonie, at a mo-
ment when by the fall of the West Roman empire
the latter was placed at the head of the Occident, and
thus prepared a condition of affairs, which limited
the Byzantine dominion to the eastern Mediterra-
nean coast provinces.

These are the general circumstances under which
the Eutychian controversy occurred, and thereby
is declared what an important part politics had
in it.

Eutyche«. Through the union of 433 the Christological ques-
tion had already become stagnant. According to

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 289

the interpretation of the formula, everybody could
be taken for a heretic. The Alexandrian doctrine,
which really tallied with the faith of the Orientals,
made in fact more and more progress in spite of the
energetic counter-efforts of the honest and best-hated
Theodore; and Dioscuros carried himself like a chief
bishop over Palestine and Syria. The emperor
smrendered the Church to him outright. Dioscuros
persecuted the Antiochian sympathizers, endeavored
to exterminate the phrase ^two natures", and even
allowed creeds to pass which sounded suspiciously
Apollinaristic. But when the old Archimandrite
Eutyches in Constantinople expressed his CyriUian
Christology in terms like the following : '' My God is
not of like essence with us, he has no <rdi/c£a d^i'^pwicou^
but a tftti/ia av^p6T:iJov*\ personal opponents (Domnus
of Antioch, then Eusebius of DorylaBum) took this
occasion to denounce him to the patriarch Flavian,
who, himself no decided Christologian, profited by
the opportunity to get rid of an ecclesiastic favored
by the court. At a synod in Constantinople (448) ^^^^ ^
Eutyches was condemned as a Valentinian and S^^TSm!
Apollinarist, although he after some hesitation ac-
knowledged the formula : " Out of two natures, one
Christ". From both sides, the court, the capital
and the Roman bishop were now set in motion.
Dioscuros saw that the moment for settling the ques-
tion of power had come, but not less did Leo I.
While the former obtained from the emperor the

calling of a council and was being equipped for it
19

290 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

with unheard-of sovereignty as the true pope, the
latter now saw — in spite of the decision of his prede-
cessor, Coelestius, in favor of Cyril — in Eutyches the
worst heretic, in Flavian his dear, persecuted friend,
and sought to frustrate the council by numerous
letters to influential persons and he wrote to Flavian
the celebrated epistle, in which, as respects Chris-

^litod**" Oology? h© veered toward the TertuUian-Augustinian
conception. In this letter tiie doctrine of two natures
is strictly carried out (" agit utraque forma cum
alterius communionej quod proprium est^ verbo
acil. operants quod verbi est et came exaequenti
quod camis 6^^"), and the old Occidental, juristic
expedient expounded, that one must believe in
one Person, which has two separate natures (sub-
stances) at its disposal, — an expedient which is
truly neither monophysitic nor Nestorian, since it
sharply distinguishes between the Person and the
two natures, and therefore really introduces three
magnitudes ; but it certainly stands nearer to Nesto-
rianism and does not do justice to the decisive inter-
est of faith, but excludes every concrete form of
thought and consequently satisfies neither piety nor
intellect. Besides this Leo knows only the heresies
of docetism and Samosatianism. Leo certainly ac-
knowledges in his letters the interest of our redemp-
tion; but he gave an interpretation which Cyril
would have strongly repudiated.

^Eph^' In August (449) the great council of Ephesus as-
^* sembled imder Dioscuros' direction. Home was at

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINB OF INCARNATION. 291

first treated as non-existent, then humbled in the
persons of its legates, who, moreover, acted with
uncertainty. DioscurcNS put through the resolution
that the matter must stop with the synods of Nicsea
and Ephesus (431), which expressed the old creed:
'^ After the incarnation there exists one incarnate
nature^; no symbol was established; Eutyches was Related.
reinstated and, on the basis of the Nicene creed, the
chiefs of the Antiochians; but at the same time Fla-
vian, Eusebius of Dorylseum, Theodoret, and Dom-
nus of Antioch were deposed ; in short, the Church
was thoroughly purified from " Nestorianism". AH
this was done with almost imanimity. Two years
later this unanimity was declared as enforced by
many bishops who had taken part {latrocinium niumEphe-
Ephesinunij says Leo). Dioscuros certainly, with
the aid of his fanatical monks, terrorized the synod,
but a far stronger pressure was afterwards necessary
at Chalcedon. Dioscuros in reality raised the faith of
the Orient to a fixed standard, and the incomparable
victory which he enjoyed had, unless foreign powers
(the state, Rome) should interfere, the guarantee of
permanence. But Dioscuros roused against himself
the pope and the Byzantine state-idea, and did not
calculate upon the wide-spread aversion to the right
wing of his army, the masked ApoUinarists. He
rehabilitated Eutyches, without expi*e8sly condemn-
ing the doubtful terms which he and his followers
habitually used.
On the 28th of July (450) Pulcheria and Marcian and Leo.

292 OUTLINBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGICA.

succeeded Theodosius; until then Leo had Tainly
endeavored to raise opposition to the coundL Now
Marcian, who was determined to break the indepen-
dence of the Alexandrian bishops, stood in need of
him. Leo desired the condemnation of Dioecoroe
and the acceptance of his own didactic epistle with'
out a council; but the emperor was obliged to in-
sist upon one, in order to bring about a wholly new
order of things. Such a one could succeed only if a
new dogmatic formula were established, which placed
the Egyptians in the wrong and still did not yield
the point to the Antiochians. Politics counselled the
formula of the Occident (Leo's) as the only way out.

chSKedoSf The council really took place at Chalcedon in 461 ;
to the pontificial legates were conceded the places of
honor ; Leo had instructed them to derogate nothing
from the dignity of Rome. The greater part of the
600 to 600 bishops were like-minded with Cyril and
Dioscuros, highly opposed to all Nestorianism, hos-
tile to Theodoret; but the emperor dominated the
council. It was settled that Dioscuros must be de-
posed and a dogmatic formula in the sense of Leo's ac-
cepted, since the decree of 449 was annulled as having
been "extorted". But it was just as sure that the
memory and doctrine of Cyril must not be sacrificed.

^^Saed" Dioscuros therefore was deposed after a most shame-
ful process, not as an heretic, but on account of his
disobedience and irregularities. The majority of
the bishops disavowed their past before the face of
the imperial commissioners and abandoned Dioscuros

• I

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 293

and the decree of 449; but only by false representa-
tions and threats did the bishops allow themselves to
be induced to acknowledge the canon of Leo, which
every Oriental could not but understand as Nesto-
rian, and to sanction the doctrine that also after the
incarnation there were two natures existent in Christ.
Even at the last hour it was attempted — although in
vain — to exalt to a dogma a merely notional distinc-
tion between the natures. At the 5th sitting the de-
crees of 325, 381 and 431 were confirmed and their
suflSciency acknowledged, but it was remarked, that
on account of the heretics (who, on the one side, re-
jected the ^eoT/Jz(>9 and, on the other, desired to intro-
duce a (TnYxunti and xpamis of the natures, " irrationally
inventing only one nature of the flesh and the Deity
and considering the Divine nature as capable of
suffering ") it was necessary to admit the letters of
Cyril to Nestorius and the Orientals, as well as the Letters of

Cyril and

letter of Leo. The declaration reads : roh^ duo jnh i^^d-

mitted.
irpij rij^ kv(oneu>^ (pntrei'^ roT> xupiou fiof^toovTa^^ fiiav dk fierd

njv tvwffVJ dvanXaTTovTa^^ ava^^e/xartZet (this was the Sacri-
fice of the thoughts of the heart). "Er.ofievot rohuv toT?

Ayiot^ -KOTpdatv fva xai rov abro)f ofioXoytlv uldv tov xnptov i
Tffiwv V. Xp. ffoiJL<p(i)vto(^ aTTaure^ ixdtddtrxofxgv^ riXsiov tov abrov
iv i^erfnyTC xa) riXetov rdv abrov Iv dv^^potTOTTfTt^ i^eov dXiif^w^
xa) Slv^pionov dXjj^aif tov mnov^ then it reads : ^va xai ruv
afrri)'* Xptarov . . . iv $bo ^baetrtv (^x duo ipuatwv is a

later correction, favorable to monophysitism) dtruyx^-

Ta#^, drpiirrw^^ ddtatpirw^^ d^wptfrrw^ "pfoiptt^ofievy ondafioj t^9
Twv ^bifewv dtatpopd^ dvT^prjfiivj^^ did ttjv Svwfftv^ (TioZofiivTj^

294 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

^£ [laXkov rijf e^jorijTo^ ixarifta^ ^ntrsw^^ xai ei^ iv rpoffofzov
xai fitav UTroaraffiv 4ru>Tp€][oiP4r^^^ oox e^9 Jioo npotrafTra
fupt^ofieyov ^ dtaipooftsvov^ dXla iya xdi tov aurdv utdv xai

Pull By this distinction between nature and person the

*****"^* power of the mystery of faith was paralyzed, a con-
ceivable mystery established, and yet the clearness
of the Antiochian conception of the humanity of
Jesus was after all not reached. The formula is
negative and cold ; the pious saw their comfort, tho
tvunft^ fu(rtxTj^ vanish. How shall our nature profit
by what occurred in the Person of Christ^ The
hated " moralism", or the mysticism of the union of
the Logos with every human soul, seemed to be the
consequence. And, besides, one was expected to be-
lieve in a f i»<Tf9 auundffrafft^^ of which hitherto in the
Orient only a few had known anything ! The gain
in having now secured the full humanity of Jesus
as an incontestible article of faith, invaluable for the
future, was too dearly bought. Peace was also not
restored. Emperor and pope were at variance over
the 28th canon, even if they did not allow the mat-
ter to come to a rupture, and the Church of the
Orient fell into dissolution.
Ste^OT-' ^' ^^^ Monophysite Contests and the 5th Coun-
cil, (Mansi, T. VII-IX; Loofs, Leontius von By-
zanz, 1887). — The century between the 4th and 5th
councils shows the most complicated and confused
relations; during the time the dogmatic situation
also constantly changes, so that a short survey is

troveraies.

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP INCARNATION. 295

impoBsible. Therefore only a few principal points
can be here stated.

(1) The opponents of the Chalcedon creed, the ^^gfgS?
monophysites, were superior to the orthodox in cra^.
spiritual power and activity. In Egypt, parts of
Syria and Armenia, they kept the upper hand, and
tiie emperors succeeded neither by threats nor by
concessions in gaining them over for any length of
time; these provinces rather alienated themselves
more and more from the empire and joined the
monophysitic confession with their nationality, pre-
paratory to founding independent national churches
hostile to the Greek. In the main persevering
steadfastly in the doctrine of Cyril and rejecting
the farther-reaching Apollinarian-Eutychian form-
ulas, the monophysites showed by inward spiritual
movements that in their midst alone the dogmatical
legacy of the Church was still alive. The newly-
awakened Aristotelianism, which as scholasticism
took the place of Platonism, found among them
learned defenders, who (John Philoponus), to be sure,
approached in their speculation very near to trithe-
ism. In regard to the Christological question there
were two main tendencies (Gieseler, Comment, qua
Monoph. opin. illustr., 2 Part., 1835 seq.). These
(Severus, Severians, " Agnoetians", "Phartola-
treans ^) were really opposed to the Chalcedon creed
only as a formal innovation, but agreed even to a
notional distinction between the two natures in
Christ, and, still more, were zealously anxious to

296 OUTLINES. OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

keep the natures unmixed and to lay stress upon the
creature-ship and corruptibility (in theory) of the
body of Christ as well as upon the limits of knowl-
edge of the soul of Christ, so that they offended even
the orthodox. They might have been won, if the
Chalcedon formula, i.e. the epistolary teaching of
Leo, had been sacrificed. The others, on the con-
trary (Julian of Halicamasses, ^ Aktistetes," '' Aph-
thartodoketes'"), rejecting it is true the transforma-
tion of the one nature into the other, drew all the
consequences of the iytotrt^ ^uaixij : From the moment

phuauca of the ossumptio the body also should be consid-
ered as imperishable and, indeed, as uncreated; all
the attributes of the Deity were transferred to the
human nature; accordingly all affections and re-
strictions, which one observes in the evangelical pic-
ture of Christ, were assumed by him freely ^ara
/a/oev, but were not the necessary consequences of his
nature. This conception, influenced solely by the
idea of redemption, alone corresponds to the old
tradition (IrenaBus, Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa,
etc.). Finally there were also such monophysites —
yet certainly they were not numerous — as advanced

'^hS?*^ to a pantheistic speculation (" Adiaphorites ") : The
creature is in a mysterious manner altogether con-
substantial with Qod; the tvu}<n<: ^o^txyj in Christ is
only the expression for the general consubstantiality
of his nature and the Deity (Stephen bar Sudaili;
the mystics; influence upon the Occident; Scotus
Erigena). Since the 5th Coimcil and still more since

DEVBLOPMSNT OF DOCTRINB OF IKCARKATION. 297

the advent of Islam, the monophysitic churches have
pined away in isolation, the wild national and relig-
ions fanaticism and the barren phantasy of thenKmks
have delivered them over to barbarism.

(2) Since coercion had no effect, a few emperors H»otikoa
sought, in order to maintain the unity of the empire,
to suppress temporarily the Chalcedon creed (EIn-
cyclica of Basiliscus, 476), or to avoid it (Henotikon
of Zeno, 482). But the consequence of this policy
always was that they won over only a part of the
monophysites and that they fell out with Rome and
the Occident. Thus arose, on the account of the
Henotikon, a thirty-five years' schism with Rome
(484-519), which served only to make the pope still
more independent. The emperors could not reach a
decision to sacrifice either Rome or the Orient, and
finally they lost both. ^ In the year 519 the Chalce-
don creed was fully restored, in alliance with Rome,
by the emperor Justin, who was influenced by his
nephew Justinian. But the theopaschite contest cwtT^-
(enlargement of the trishagion by the addition: o' '^^^^y-
trraopw^ti^ dl ^jtiay, i.e., the validity of the formula:
" One of the trinity was crucified " : They are not
identical, for the one was a cultish innovation and
could be understood in a Sabellian way, while the
other is good orthodoxy) shows, since 518, that in
the Occident every Cyrillian explanation of the
Chalcedon creed was regarded with suspicion, while
the orthodox in the Orient would tolerate the Chal-
cedon creed only with a Cyrillian interpretatioui

208 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

hoping thereby still $dways for a reconciliation with
the monophysites.

iffiyiSS- (3) While in the 5th century the Chalcedon ortho-
"^ doxy had upon the whole no noted dogmatic repre-
sentative in the Orient — the strongest proof that it
was foreign to the spirit of the Orient — several ap-
peared after the beginning of the 6th century. The
formula had not only in time become more venera-
ble, but the study of Aristotle above all furnished
weapons for its defence. The scholasticism not only
permitted the retention of the Chalcedon distinction
between nature and person, but even also welcomed
it and gave to the formula still a strong Cyril-
Han interpretation. This was brought about by
the Scythian monk, Leontius of Byzantium, the most
eminent dogmatist of the 6th century, the forerunner
of John of Damascus, and the teacher of Justinian.
He pacified the Church by a philosophically conceiv-
able exposition of the Chalcedon creed and buried
the dogma in scholastical technicalities. He is the
father of the Christological new-orthodoxy, just as
the Cappadocians were the fathers of the trinitarian
new-orthodoxy. Through his doctrine of the en-
hypostasis of the human nature, he paid, in the
form of a fine ApoUinarianism, full regard to the
idea of redemption.

^?oi?cy° * (^) Henceforth the policy of Justinian, the royal
dogmatist, must be understood as a religious policy.
By unexampled luck he had brought the whole em-
pire under his sway, and he wished in like manner to

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 209

settle finally the law and the dogmatics of the em-
pire. The following points of view guided him : (a)
Strict adhesion to the verbal text of the Chalcedon
creed as a capital decision equal in standing to
those of Nicada, Constantinople and Ephesus, (&)
Strict Cyrillian interpretation of the symbol (the
emperor was inclined to go as far as aphthartodoket-
ism), in order to gain over the monophysites and to
follow his own inclination. The means to it were : umST
(a) Numerous imperial religious edicts in the sense
of the Christology of Leontius, (6) Public religious
discourses, (c) The carrying out of the theopaschitic
formula, (d) Suppression of every more liberal and
more independent theology; therefore, on the one
side, that of Origen, who had many sjTnpathizers
among the monophysitic monks, especiaUy in Pales-
tine, and, on the other side, of the Antiochian theol-
ogy, which also still possessed ntunerous adherents
(as the emperor had closed the school at Athens, so
he intended likewise to close all Christian scientific
schools; only the scholastic should remain), (e)
Enforced naturalization of the new-orthodoxy in the
Occident. The execution of these plans was rendered
difficult : (1) By the secret monophysitic co-regency ^jj^u"®*
of the empress Theodora, (2) By the refusal of the ^^^'
Occident to consent to the rejection of the Antioch-
ians, i. e. of the ** three articles " (person and writ-
ings of Theodore, anti-Cyrillian writings of Theo-
doret, letter of Ibas to Maris) . In the later condem-
nation of the Antiochians, the Occident (Facundus

300 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

of Hermiane) rightly recognized an attempt to do
away with the doctrine of the two natures, as Leo
had meant it, and to substitute in its place a fine
monophysitism. However, the emperor found in
Rome a characterless pope (Vigilius), who, in gprati-
fying the emperor, covered himself with disgrace
and jeopardized his position in the Occident (^reat
schisms in the Occident). The emperor obtained
'*fbree the Condemnation of Origen and of the.^ three chap-
^1^^^^ ters"; he restored the dogmatic ideas of the two
^^ Ephesian councils of 431 and 419 without touching
the Chalcedon creed, and he caused all this to be
sanctioned by obedient bishops at the 5th council
in Constantinople, 553. But in spite of the fact that
one could now speak with Cyril of one Gkxi-incamate
nature (by the side of the doctrine of the two natures)
and that the spirit of Oriental dogmatism had thus
gained the victory, the monophysites would not be
won ; for the Chalcedon creed was too much detested
and the antagonisms had long since become national,
ucan/" 4. The Monergistic and Monotheletic Contro-

Hono-

rvSlfaSt? versieSj the Qth Council and John of Damascus
(Mansi, T. X. and XI.). — With the decisions of the
4th and 5th councils, the doctrine of one will in
Christ would agree, as well as the doctrine of two
wills. In fact before the 6th century, no one had
spoken of two wills in Christ; for the Antiochians
also had said, as once Paul of Samosata, that the
human will was entirely blended with the Divine
will (unity of will, not singleness of will). But

Gontro-
▼enies.

DBVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 301

the theology of Leontius tended on the whole toward
the doctrine of two wills. Yet it would hardly have
come to a controversy — ^the dogma had already, since
553, been smTendered to theolc^cal science (scho-
lasticism) and the cultus (mysticism) — if politics
had not taken possession of the question.

The patriarch of the capital, Sergius, counseUed ^v^i^^
the powerful emperor Heraclius (610-641) to 8«^"^
strengthen his reconquered territory in the south
and east by making advances to the monophysites
with the formula: The God-man, consisting of two
natures, effected everything with one Qod-incamate
energy. Upon this basis a union was really formed
in 633 with many monophysites. But opposition
arose (Sophronius, afterward bishop of Jerusalem) , Hononus,
and Sergius in union with Honorius of Rome now x^^a.
sought to do justice to all by giving out the watch-
word : One should be silent in regard to the energies
(that Christ had only one ^'^iXr^fj-a was still considered
self-evident). Thus also ran an imperial edict, the
ekthesis (638). But not only in the Occident were
the consequences of the doctrinal letter of Leo re-
membered, but in the Orient the ablest theologians
(Maximus the Confessor) were also so attached to
the Chalcedon creed through Aristotelian scholas-
ticism, that they classed the will with the nature (not
with the Person) and therefore demanded the dual-
ity. Now even monotheletism was condemned at a iJJJJJJJcon-
Roman synod, 641 (Pope John IV.). The Orientals, ^^S^,
who rejected the ekthesis, fled to Carthage and

049.

302 OUTLINES or THE HI8T0BT OF DOGMA.

Rome and prepared, in union with the pope, a formal
revolution. This, indeed, was thwarted (the ques-
tion was as to the freedom of the Church in relation
to the state; the effort continued in the image con-
troversy). Yet the emperor foimd himself obliged
to surrender the ekthesis, replacing it by the typos
which forbade, under severe penalties, the contro-
versy over one or two wills. But Rome did not
consent to this either. At the Lateran synod, 649
(Martin I.), which many Orientals attended, the con-
spiracy continued against the emperor, who dared
Two-Will to give orders to the Church. The two-will doc-

Doctarine

at Rome, trine was formulated in strict language, but,
strangely enough, the right of the correctly under-
stood sentence : f^ia ^6<n^ rob t^coD X6/OU aeaapxwfiivTi was

conceded. A large number of Constantinopolitan
patriarchs of the latter days were condemned. Mar-
tin showed signs, like a second Dioscuros, of ruling
and stirring up the churches of the Orient, but the
emperor Constans, the sovereign of the pope, suc-
ceeded in subduing him (653). Dishonored and
disgraced, he died in the Chersonesus. Majtimus
the Confessor also had to suffer. Constans soon
found in Rome more accommodating popes, and
remained until his death (668) master of the situa-
tion, making the typos of importance and putting
forward the reasonable expedient, that the two nat-
ural wills had become, in accordance with the hypo-
static union, one hypostatic will.

The reaction which followed in Constantinople is

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 303

not perfectly clear. Perhaps because one needed no S^5**^
longer to pay regard to the monophysites, perhaps S&S^
because ^ science " was favorable to the doctrine of two
wills, perhaps because men desired to fetter, through
dogmatic concessions, the uncertain Occidental pos-
sessions and bind them more firmly to the capital,
the emperor Constantine Pogonatus made advances
and sought to entice the powerful pope Agathon
to new negotiations. The latter sent a doctrinal
epistle as Leo I. once had, which proclaimed the in-
fallibility of the Roman chair and the dyotheletism.
At the 6th council in Constantinople (680) it was ^^^^9'
carried through after diverse proposals of intermedi- ^^^^^' ^^
ation and under protest, which however finally ceased,
i.e. the formal consequences of the decree of 451
were deduced (two natural ^eXrj/iara and two natural

energies adtatpirw^^ arpiizrui^^ d/iepitmo^^ d<ru/^uTw^ in

the one Christ; they were not to be considered as
contradictory, for the human will follows and does
not resist nor contradict, rather is it subject to the
Divine and almighty will; the human will is not
suspended, but, on the other hand, a communication
takes place: It is the will of the God-Logos, just
as the human nature, without suspension, neverthe-
less became the nature of the God-Logos). At
the same time many of the Constantinopolitan patri-
archs and pope Honorius were condemned. Thus
Rome again dictated its formula, balanced the 5th
council by the 6th and insinuated itself into the
Orient. But the agreement was of short duration.

304 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Already at the second Trullan council in 692 the
Orient took a strong position against Borne in mat-
ters of cult — and these were already the more de-
cisive things.
'gSg^^ The formulas of the Byzantine dogmatics are Oc-
DanuuKua. cideutal; but the spirit, which in 431 and 553 had
expressed itself, retained in the interpretation of
the formulas the upper hand, and the cultus and
mystic-system have always been imderstood mono-
physitically. On the one side, this was shown in the
image-controversy, on the other, in the Christologic-
al dogmatics of John of Damascus. In spite of the
dyophysitical and dyotheletical formula and the
sharp distinction between nature and person, a fine
Apollinarianism, or monophysitism, has been here
preserved, in so far as it is taught that the Gk)d-
Logos assumed human nature (not of a man) in
such a manner that the same was first individualized
by the God-Logos. That is the intermediate thing
already recognized by Leontius, which has no hypo-
stasis of its own, yet is also not without one but
possesses in the hypostasis of the Logos its indepen-
dence. Furthermore, the distinction between the na-
tures was adjusted by the doctrine of the ngpixmpiitn^
and the idiomae-communication. The fJtsTddofft^ (oixsi-
c£)tf«9, dvTtdoat^) of the attributes of the two natures, the
Damascan will so definitely conceive that he speaks
of an c^ff ^XXriXa Twv fiipwv izept^wpt^fft^. The flesh in-
directly became truly Qod and the Deity pervades the
deified flesh.

DBVSLOPMENT OF DOCTRIKB OF INCABNATION. 305

C— THE TEMPORAL ENJOYMENT OP REDEMP-
TION.

CHAPTER X.

THE KYSTERIE8 AND MATTERS AKIN TO THEM.

Already in the 6th century the dogmatic devel- J^^^gy^
opment of the Qreek Church was concluded and ^^^'^
even before that each advance was obliged to con-
tend ag^ainst aversion and suspicion. The reason
for it lay in the traditionalism or, more correctly, in
the ritualism^ which more and more gained the
upper hand.

This ritualism also has a tender, religious, even ^^J^^^
Christian root. It originated in the endeavor to "y^"^®^
point out and realize the enjoyment of an already
present salvation, which springs from the same
source from which the future redemption flows — from
the God-incarnate Person of Christ— and which,
therefore, is the same in kind as the latter. Origin-
ally men thought, touching the present enjoyment of
salvation, more of spiritual blessings, of knowledge,
of the strengthening of freedom unto good works,
etc. But since the future redemption was repre-
sented as a mysterious deiflcation**", it was only con-
sistent that they should consider the knowledge also
as mysterious and to be commimicated by holy con-
secrations, and that, in accordance with the idea of
a future physical union with the Deity, they should

^ See page 100, note.

306 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGltA.

endeaTor to verify for the present time also the way
unto, and foretaste of, this divineness.
becomes This tendency, however, leads directly over to the
flfogi* paganizing of Christianity or, rather, is already a

symptom of it. The AMXt^ij<re9 becomes px}<na:fwrfia ; the

latter, however, originally a shadowy union of the
spiritual and sensuous, tends more and more to magic
and jugglery. In this the ritual is the chief thing;
nothing, however, is more sensitive than a cere-
mony; it does not bear the slightest change. In so
far now as the formulas of faith lost more and more
their significance as fid^^rt^ and became in ever
higher degree constituents of the ritual, expressing
at the same time the meaning and purpose of it, i.e.,
to make divine, they permitted no longer of any
change. Wherever the dogma $ippear valuable
only as a relic of olden times, or only in ritualistic
ceremony, there the history of dogma is at an end.
^^^ In its place comes the mystagogic theology, and
®o ogy. indeed the latter, together and in dose imion with
scholasticism, took already in the 6th century the
place of the history of dogma. The mystagogic
theology, however, has two sides. On the one side,
in creating for itself upon the earth a new world
and in making of things, persons and times mys-
terious symbols and vehicles, it leads to the relig-
ion of necromancy, i.e. hack to the lowest grade of
religion; for to the masses, and finally even to
theologians, the spirit vanishes and the phlegma,
the consecrated matter, remains. As the Neo-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 307

Platonic philosophy d^enerated into religious bar-
barism, SO also Qreek Christianity, under the in-
fluence of the expiring antiquity which bequeathed
to it its highest ideals and idols, became image-
-worship. On the other side, the mystagogic theol-
ogy retains for the "knowing ones'* its primitive
pantheistic germ, the fundamental thought that Ood
and nature, in the deepest sense, are one, and that
nature is the unfolding of the Deity. The Christian
mystagc^c theologians also more or less clearly
thought out and retained these ideas. Through specu-
lation and asceticism one can emancipate oneself from
all mediums, mediators and vehicles. Mysterioso-
phy takes the place of the mysteries ; these, like every-
thing concrete and historical, become for the know-
ing ones pure symbols, and the historical redemp-
tion through Christ especially is explained away.

It is not strange that two such different forms as S^>^^i"°^i
pantheism and fetishism, although balanced by ritu-
alism, should be the final product of the development,
since both were lodged already in the beginning of
the movement and are blood-relations; then they
have their loot in the conception of the substantial
imity of God and nature. The history of the devel-
opment of the mysteries and of the theology of mys-
teries, strictly taken, does not belong here, therefore
only a few hints will follow.

1. At the beginning of the 4th century the Church i^SboYiSi
already possessed a great array of mysteries, the SSJ'X*
number and bounds of which, however, had by no

308 OUTUNS8 OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

means been definitely determined. Among them
baptism, together with the accompanying unction,
and the eucharist were the most esteemed; from
these also some of the other mysteries have been
evolved. Symbolic ceremonies, originally intended
to accompany these mysteries, became independent.
Thus confirmation had its origin, which Cyprian al-
ready niunbered as a special " sacramentum*^, Augus-
tine pointed it oUt as sacramentum chrismatiSy and
the Areopagite called it fioimjptoy rtky^rit^iiopoo. Later
men spoke also of a mystery of the sign of the
cross, of relics, of exorcism, of marriage, etc., and
siacMjs- the Areopagite enumerates six mysteries: ^ioTi<s-

TsXetwffswv^ poi^a^txij^ Tsketw^ew^ and pocnjpta i7c\ rotv Upw^

. xsKotpr^pi^wv, The enumeration was very arbitrary;
mystery was anything sensuous whereby something
holy might be thought or enjoyed. They corre-
sponded to the heavenly mysteries, which have their
source in the trinity and incarnation. As each fact
of revelation is a mystery, in so far as the Divine
has through it entered into the sensuous, so in turn
is each sensuous medium, even a word or action, a
mystery, so soon as the sensuous is a symbol or
vehicle — there has never been a strict distinction be-
tween them — of the Divine. The effects of the mys-
teries were celebrated in the highest terms as union
with the Deity; but since they cannot restore lost
communion with Qod (only Christ and freedom are
able to do that) , strict dogmatics was able to say very

DEVBLOPMBNT OP DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 309

little about them. The true effect is purely one of
feeling, i.e. is experienced in the fantasy: Men
saw, heard, smelt, and felt the celestial, but a dis-
turbed conscience they could not comfort with the
mysteries, nor did one hardly try to do so.

On this basis, since the coarse instinct of the ^S^^':

masses pressed forward, mysteriosophy was devel- ochian

.-ij^,i ***** Alex-
oped. Its roots are as old as the gentile Church and andrian.

two converging developments may be discerned, the
Antiochian and the Alexandrian. The first (Ignatius,
the Apostolic Constitutions, Chrysostom) attaches
itself to the cult and priests, the second to the true
gnostic, i.e. to the monk. The first sees in Divine
worship and in the priest (bishop) the true bequest
of the Gfod-incamate life of Christ and binds the
layman, viewed as entirely passive, to the cultus hier-
archical system, by which one becomes consecrated
to immortality; the second desires to form indepen-
dent virtuosos of religion. The Alexandrian myste-
riosophy is heterodox, but it did not neglect a single
phase of the positive religion, rather did it make
use of them all by the side of the graduated ad-
vancing knowledge (sacrifice, blood, reconciliation,
atonement, purification, perfection, means of salva-
tion, mediator of salvation) ; true, viewing them all
as transition stages^ in order to gain through specu-
lation and asceticism a standpoint from which each
vehicle and sacrament, everything holy which ap-
pears under a sensuous cover, becomes profane, be-
cause the soul now lives in the most holy and be*

310 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

cause in each man a Christ should be bom; ^0^06^199

^iSSSi^ ^^^ ^^^ mysteriosophies, the hierarchical and the
^^ gnostic, converge in the mysticism of the great im-
known Dionysius' Areopagita (preliminary stages
are represented by Methodius, Or^^ry of Nyssa,
Macarius), who, on the one side, viewed the cult and
priesthood as an earthly parallel to the heavenly
hierarchy (to the g^^ded world of spirits as the un-
folding of the Deity), on the other, adopted the in-
dividualism of the Neo-Platonic mysticism. Through
Maximus Confessor this combination became the
power which ruled the Church, tried to monarchiae
it, and inoculated it with the monkish resistance to
the state — the only form in which the Qreek Church
was or is able to assert its independence.

My^gjy ^ The peculiar character of mysteriosophy, as a
speculation regarding the making of the Divine per-
ceptible to the senses and the making of the sensuous
Divine, could in no mystery be more strongly ex-
pressed than in the euchartst (Steitz, Abendmahls-
lehre d. griech Kirche, i. d. Jahrh. /. deutsche
Theol.y Bd. IX-XIII.). This, long since recognized
as the ground upon which the sublimest spiritualism
can extend its hand to the most massive sensualism,
became so developed, that by it the Christological
formula, the fundamental dogma, appeared alive and
comprehensible. Without giving to the speculation
on the Lord's Supper a strictly instructional cast,
the same was so treated in general, especially after

Eucharist

DEVBLOPMIEKT OF DOCTRINB OF INCARNATION. 311

Cyril of Alexandria, that it was considered as the ,„j31|^ti-
inystery which rests directly upon the incarnation *' ^'
and perpetuates the mystery of the ^iwin^. All other
mysteries, in so far as they also contain the blending
into one of the heavenly and earthly, exist in reality
only by reason of the Lord's Supper. Here only is
given an express transmutation of the sensuous into
the divine body of Christ; for this conception gained
more and more ground, abolished symbolism and
finally carried its point altogether. The transub-
stantiation of the consecrated bread into the body of
Christ is the continuation of the process of the in-
carnation. Thereby pure monophysitic formulas
were used in relation to the Lord's Supper — highly
characteristic — and gradually the conception even
made its way, that the body into which the bread
is transformed is per assumptionem the very
body of Christ, borne by the virgin, of which for-
merly hardly any one had thought since the older
theologians also understood under ^rapS Xpttnob some-
thing ^ pneumatic". But as the Lord's Supper as a
sacrament was united in the closest manner with the
dogma of the incarnation and the Christological for-
mula (hence the sensitiveness of thisformtda), so was
it likewise connected as a sacrifice with the death on
the cross (repetition of the sacrifice on the cross ; how- §^^* gj^.
ever, the conception has not been so definitely ex- th?^^
pressed in the Qreek Church as in the Occident) .
Accordingly it re-enacted the most important histor-
ical events, not as a remembrance, but as a continu-

312 OUTLINES OF THE HI8TORT OF DOGMA.

ation, i.e. a repetition, whereby those facts were
deprived of their meaning and significance. At the
same time the immoral and irreligious thirst after
^ realities " changed the sacred act into a repast, in
which one bit the Deity to pieces with the teeth
(thus abeady Chrysostom; completion of the doc-
trine of the Lord's Supper by John of Damascus).
wonSip, ^- The whole development of Oreek Christianity
tionV^7- ii^to image-worship, superstition and poorly veiled
polytheism may, however, also be conceived as the
victory of a religion of the second order, which is
always prevalent in the Churcii, over the spiritual
religion. The former became legitimized and was
fused with the doctrina publica^ although theolo-
gians enjoined certain precautions. As the pagan
temples were reconsecrated and made into Christian
churches, so was the old paganism preserved, as
angel-, saint-, image- and amulet-worship. The re-
ligion whose strength had once been the abomination
of idols, finally surrendered to idols and became in a
certain measure morally obtuse. True, the connect-
ing links are found in the doctrina publica itself; for,
^ll^'Sd^' (1) This was constructed out of the material of the
Order. Qr^^k phOosophy; but this philosophy was inter-
twined by a thousand threads with the mythology
and superstition, (2) It sanctioned the Old Testa-
ment, though originally prescribing a spiritual inter-
pretation of it ; but the letter of the Old Testament,
which in fact expressed a subordinate religious stage
of development, became more and more powerful

DKVSLOPMSNT OF DOCTRIKB OF INCARNATION. 313

and made advances to the inferior tendencies of the
Cburcb, which it then appeared to legitimize, (3)
The acts of baptism and the Lord's Supper, conceived
as mysteries, opened in general the doors and win-
dows to the inroad of the mystery-nuisance, (4)
The faith in angels and demons, handed down from
antiquity and protected by the doctrina publica^
grew more and more powerful, was fostered in a
crude form by the monks, in a spiritual form by the
Neo-Platonic theologians, and threatened more and
more to become the true sphere of piety, behind
which the inconceivable God and the (in consequence
of the Church doctrine) just as inconceivable Christ
was hidden in the darkness, (5) The old idea that wonhipof
there are ^ saints " (apostles, prophets, ecclesiastical
teachers, martyrs) had already very early been cul-
tivated in such a manner that these saints interceded
and made atonement for men and took now more
and more the place of the dethroned gods, joining
themselves to the angel-hosts. Among them Mary of virgin

Mary.

stepped into the fore-ground and she—she alone — has
been specially benefited by the trend of the develop-
ment of the dogma. A woman, a mother now ap-
peared near the Deity, and thereby at last was offered
the possibility of bringing to recognition the thing
after all most foreign to original Christianity — ^the
Holy, the Divine in female form — Mary became the
motherof God, the one who bore God*, (6) From the <»»«"«•

^Conoeniiiig angel-wonhip, In so far as the angels serve as mediators
of the benefits of salvation, see the Areopagite; conoeming the spread of
angel-worship (eqj^eciallj of the idea of guardian angels) as early as the

314 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

earliest times, death bad been sacred to Cbristians as
the birtb-bour of true life; accordingly everything
which had any connection with the death of Chris-
tian heroes obtained a real sanctity. The antique
idol and amulet business made itself at home, but as
relic- and bone- worship in the most disgusting form ;
in the contrast between the insignificant, fright-
ful form and its religious worth Christians made
plain to themselves the loftiness of their faith, and
the more unfiBsthetic a relic appeared, the higher
must be its worth to those who recognized in the dis-
embodiment and obliteration of all sensuous charms,
Miracle^ ^^ guarantee of its holiness, (7) Finally the Church
of oracieS opened its doors to that boimdless desire to live in

etc.

a world of miracles, to enjoy the holy with the five

4th century, see Dldymus, de trinit H., 7.— The worship of aaints
(churches consecrated to a certain saint) was already by about the year
800 highly developed ; but in the 4th century counter efforts were not
wanting (also not concerning angel-worship; see the synod of LAodioea).
The Qallic priest Vigilantius especially fought against it, as also against
the worahip of relics. But the most eminent teachers (Jerome) declared
against Vigilantius and worked out a ** theology of saints", reserving to (3od
the Aarp«ta, but conceding to the saints rifti( ^x*'*'^ (vpoacvnyaif). The relic
business, already in bloom in the 4th century, rose however only In the
monophysitic age to its full height. Finally each church had to have its
relics, and the 7th canon of the 7th council confirmed and solemnly sanc-
tioned the ecclesiastical use of relics. But the principal part in this reli-
gion of the second order was played by Mary. She alone became a dog'
matuxU magnitude, d«or6Ko«, a watch- word like o^oov<rio« : '*The name of the
bearer of Qod represents the whole mystery of the incarnation ** (John of
Damascus in his homilies on Mary). Qen. 8: 8 was referred to her and an
active participation of Mary in the work of redemption was taught (espe-
cially following C^l of Alexandria; yet, see already Ireneeus and Atha-
nasius, Ambrose, Jerome). Mary obtained a sacred history from conception
to ascension, a duplicate of the history of Christ Osgends and feasts of
Mary); she was considered an indispensable mediator. Still with the
Greeks she did not become ** queen of heaven ** and ** mother of sorrows **
as with the Latins (Benrath, Z. (Sesch. der Marienverehrung i. d. Stud,
a. Krit. 1686; Qtess, Symbolik der griech. Kirche, & 188).

DEVELOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 315

seaaaoBy to receive miraculous hints from the Deity.
£ven the most cultured Church fathers of later times
did not know how any longer to discern between the
real and unreal ; they lived in a world of magic and
loofied completely the tie between religion and moral-
ity (aside from asceticism), joining the latter thereby
the more closely with the sensuous. The ceremonies
out of the gray past of religion, little modified, came
to the surface again: Consulting of oracles of all
kinds, judgments of God, prodigies, etc. The syn-
ods, originally hostile to these practices, finally con-
sented to them.'

The newly gained peculiarity of the Greek Church ^^1^',^
found its plainest expression in image-worship and cSSSSh.
the image-controversy. After image-worship had
slowly crept into the Church, it received a mighty
invigoration and confirmation, unheard of in anti-
quity, by the dogma of the incarnation and the cor-
responding treatment of the eucharist (since the 5th
century). Christ is e^jf^y of God, and yet a living
being, yes, ir^sufxa Cwo;ro£»v; Christ has rendered,
through the incarnation, the Divine apprehensible to
the senses; the consecrated elements are elx6ve^ of
Christ, and yet, at the same time, the body of Christ
itself. These ideas called up a new world for con-
templation. Everything sensuous, which pertained
to the Church, became not only a symbol, but also a
vehicle of holy things; thus felt the monks and lay-
men and thus taught the theologians. But among
sensuous things the image shows plainest the union

316 OXTTLIKES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Monasti-
clam.

Image-

of the holy with the material. Images of Christ,
of Mary and of saints were already in the 5th (4tb)
century worshipped after the antique fashion ; men
were n&ive enough to fancy themselves now secure
from paganism, and they transferred their dogmatic-
al representation from the deified matter in an espe-
cial manner to the images, in which — ^the Aristo-
telian scholastics also was called in to aid — they i^ere
able to see the veritable marriage of earthly matter
and the heavenly (holy) form (besides, the supersti-
tious belief in images not painted by hand) . Monas-
ticism fostered image- worship and traded with it;
scholastics and mystics gave it dogmatic form.

But monastidsm also advanced the struggle of the
Church toward independence, in contrast with Jus-
tinian's state constitution which fettered the Church.
In the 7th century the ecclesiastico-monkish resist-
ance to Byzantium retreated behind dyotheletism,
just as in the 5th and 6th centuries it had fled
behmd monophysitism; it grew more and more
powerful and sought to gain ecclesiastical freedom,
which the Occident already partly enjoyed. Power-
ful but barbarous emperors endeavored to put an end
to this effort by substituting the army for priests
and monks, and to break the independence of the
Church by striking at its peculiarity — the image-
worship. Thus originated the frightful image-con'
troverst/y which lasted more than a century. In it
the emperors fought for the absolutism of the state,
and had as an ally only a single power, the military ;

I>EYEIX>PMENT OF DOCTRINE OF IKCABNATION. 317

for the remaining allies, namely, religious enlight-
enment and the primitive tradition of the Church,
iTV'hich spoke against the images, were powerless.
The monks and bishops had on their side the culture,
art and science of that time (John Damsc, Theo-
dorus Studita), the Roman bishop and, furthermore,
piety and living tradition ; they fought for the cen-
tial dogma, which they saw exemplified in the image-
worship, and for the freedom of the Church. The
latter they could not obtain. The outcome, rather,
was that the Church retained its peculiarity, but
definitely lost its independence with reference to the
state. The 7th council at NicsBa (787) sanctioned £«"«" »J

^ ' NiOBft, 787.

image-worship (aaizaafiuv xai TtfiT^TtxifV TTpo^rxuvT^trtv aizo-

/jl6vtq Tg ^eia ^offet . . . ^ rjff €lx6vo^ rifii^ i7c\ rd Trpatrd'

rono\f dtafiaivst). Its logical development in its princi-
pal points was obviously concluded. The Divine and
Holy, as it descended through the incarnation into
the sensuous, created for itself in the Church a sys-
tem of sensuous-supersensuous objects, which offer
themselves for man's gratification. The image-the-
osophy corresponds to the Neo-Platonic idea (joined
with the incarnation-idea) of the One, unfolding him-
self in a multiplicity of graduated ideas (prototypes),
reaching down even to the earthly. To Theodorus
Studita the image was ahnost more important than
the correct dogmatic watch- word ; for in the authen-
tic image one has the real Christ and the real holy
thing — only the material is different.

318 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

CHAPTER XI.

CONCLUSION. — ^SKBTCH OF THE HISTORIC BEGIN-
NINGS OF THE ORTHODOX SYSTEM.

origen^B 1. A CHRISTIAN system upon the foundation of
System. |.|jq f q^. principles : God, world, freedom and Holy
Scriptures, tending toward the doctHna publican
and making use of the total yield of the "^Ekk^vuij
natdet\ Origen bequeathed ; yet it was in many de-
tails heterodox and as a science of the faith it was
intended to outbid faith itself. Moreover the idea of
the historical redemption through the true God, Jesus
Christ, was not the all-controlling one.
Church not 2. The Church could not rest satisfied with the

Content

ByvS^ system. It demanded, (1) The identity of the expres-
sions of faith with the science of faith (especially
since Methodius), (2) Such a restriction of the use of
the 'EkX-^txii 7:atdsia that the realistic sentences of the
regula fidei and of the Bible should remain intact
(the opponents of Origen : Epiphanius, Apollinaris,
the monks, Theophilus, Jerome), (3) The introduction
of the idea of the real and historical redemption
through the God-man as the central idea ( Athanasius
and his followers). These demands, thoroughly car-
ried out, broke down the system of Origen, which at
the bottom was a philosophical system. But break
it down, no one of the cultured Christians at first
either would or could ; for they estimated it as the

BEVBLOPHENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 319

science from which one dare not depart and which
the Christian faith needed for its defence.

3. In consequence thereof, indistinctness and free- ^^ISd"
dom ruled till the end of the 4th century in the On- ^uiTmx^
ental Church, into which, since Constantino, the old
world had gained an entrance. To be sure, through
Anus and Athanasius the idea of redemption had
become a critical problem, and later it obtained
recognition essentially in the conception which the
Christian faith at that time demanded; but every-
thing on the periphery was entirely insecure: A
wholly spiritualistic philosophical interpretation of
the Bible stood side by side with a coarse realistic
one, a massive anthropomorphism by the side of a
Christian-tinted Neo-Platonism, the modified rule of
faith by the side of its letter. Between were innum-
erable shades; steersman and rudder were wanting,
and the religion of the second order, thinly veiled
paganism, forced itself by its own power, not only
into the Church, but also into the Church doctrine.
Right well did the Cappadocians (Gregory of Nyssa)
maintain the science of Origen in the midst of at-
tacks right and left, and they lived in the conviction
that it was possible to reconcile ecclesiastical faith
with free science. Ecclesiastically inclined laymen
like. Socrates acknowledged them to be in the right,
and at the same time Greek theology penetrated into
the Occident and became there an important leaven.
But by the side of it there grew up, especially after
the fall of Arianism, in close alliance with barbar-

820 OUTLINES OF THE HI8TOBT OF DOGMA.

ism a monkish and communal orthodozyy which was
very hostile to the independent ecclesiastical science,
and the latter surely neglected no means of warding
off the heterodox Hellenism. Were there not even
bishops (Synesius), who either gave a different in-
terpretation to the principal dogmas, or denied them?
cx»to$ 4. Under such circumstances the situation nar-
^SSm! rowed down to a contest against Origan. His name
signified a principle, the well-known use of the
*EXXrjvtxii itatdsca in ecclesiastical science. In Palestine
it was the passionate, learned and narrow Epipha-
nius, who disturbed the circles of the monkish ad-
mirers of Origen, together with bishop John of
Jerusalem. In Egjrpt the bishop Theophilus found
himself obliged, in order to retain his influence, to
surrender Origen to the monks and to condemn him.
This is one of the most consequential facts in the
history of theology. Of not less oonsequoice was it,
that the greatest theologian of the Occident (Jerome),
living in the Orient, once an admirer of Origen,
made common cause with Theophilus, in order to
preserve his own ecclesiastical authority, and stamped
Origen as a heretic. In the controversy into which
he on that account fell with his old friend Rufinus,
the Roman bishop took a part. Origen was also con-
demned in Rome (399) and Rufinus was censured.
However, it did not come as yet to general ecclesias-
tical action against Origen. The controversy was
lost sight of in the contest of Theophilus against
Chrysostom. Even in the 5th and 6th century Ori-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 321

gen had numerous admirers among the monks and
laymen in the Orient, and his heterodoxies were
partly hushed up by them, partly approved.

5. The great controversy about the Christological
dogma in the 5th century next silenced all other con-
tests. But the difference between the Alexandrians
and the Antiochians was also a general scientific one.
The former took their position upon tradition and
speculation (concerning the realistically conceived
idea of redemption), counting still on some adherents
on the left wing who inclined toward the Origen-
istic Neo-Platonic philosophy and who were tolerated
if they hid their heterodoxies behind the mysticism
of the cult; the latter were sober exegetes with a
critical tendency, favoring the philosophy of Aris-
totle, but rejecting the spiritualizing method of Ori-
gen. The heterodox element in the Alexandrians,
in so far as they had not fully thrown themselves into
the arms of traditionalism, pointed still in the direc-
tion of pantheism (re-interpretation of the regula) ;
in the Antiochians it lay in the conception of the
central dogmas. Forced to stand on guard against
the old heresies which had wholly withdrawn
to the East, the Antiochians remained the "anti-
gnostic " theologians and boasted that they carried
on the battles of the Lord. The last of them, Theo-
doret, appended to his compendium of heretical fables
a 5th Book : " ^Mtav ioyfidrtav imTo/nj ", which must be
recognized as the first systematic effort after Origen,

and which apparently had great influence upon John
21

ChristoloK-
ical Con-
troTeraies
in the 6th
Century.

Tfaeo-

doret^s

OompeH'

dium.

322 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

of Damascus. The "epitome" is of great impor-
tance. It miites the trinitarian and Christological
dogmas with the whole circle of dogmas depending
upon the creed. It shows an attitude as obviously
Biblical, as it is ecclesiastical and reasonable. It
keeps everywhere to the "golden mean". It is al-
most complete and also pays especial regard once more
to the realistic eschatology. It admitted none of the
offensive doctrines of Origen, and yet Origen was
not treated as a heretic. A system this epitome is
not, but the uniform soberness and clearness in the
treatment of details and the careful Biblical proofs
give to the whole a unique stamp. It could not of
course satisfy ; in the first place, on account of the
person of its author, and then because everything
mystical and Neo-Platonic is wanting in its doctrinal
content.
Mysteii- 6. After the Chalcedon creed all science came to

oflopbyand

scBofaati- a stand-stiU in the orthodox Church : There were no

ciBm.

longer " Antiochians", or " Alexandrians " ; free theo-
logical work died out almost completely. However,
the century preceding the 6th council shows two
remarkable appearances. First, a mysteriosophy
gained more and more ground in the Church, which
did not work at dogmas but stood with one foot upon
the ground of the religion of the second order (super-
stition, cult), with the other upon Neo-Platonism
(the pseudo-Areopagite) ; second, a scholasticism
grew up, which presupposed the dogma as given and
appropriated it by means of apprehensible distinc-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 323

tions (Leontius of Byzantium) . In the spirit of both
tendencies Justinian carried on his religious politics.
Relying thereon he closed the school of Athens,
also the old ecclesiastical schools, the Origenistic and
Antiochian. The 6th council sanctioned the con- P^i^en's

Teaching

demnation of Origen (in 15 anathemas his heterodox demnSi by
sentences were rejected) and the condemnation of the council.
" three chapters". Henceforth there was no longer a
theological science going back to first principles.
There existed only a mysticism of cult (truly, with a
hidden heterodox trend) and scholasticism, both in
certain ways in closest connection (Maximus Con-
fessor). Thereby a condition was reached for which
the ^conservatives" at all times had longed; but
through the condemnation of Origen and the Anti-
ochians one was now defenceless against the massive
Biblicism and a superstitious realism, and that was
a result which originally men had not desired. In
the image-worship, on the one side, and the fussy
literal translation of Gen. 1-3, on the other, is re-
vealed the downfall of theological science.

7. As to the fid^ffi^^ the Cappadocians (in addition {^^p^^
to Athanasius and Cyril) above aU were considered ^t£
authoritative; as to the fio<na^w^ta^ the Areopagite andchry-

806tom

and Maximus; as to fpiloaofpia^ Aristotle; as to the ^^Jjjj*^'
6fjiiXia^ Chrysostom. But the man who comprehended
all these, who transferred the scholastico-dialectic
method, which Leontius had applied to the dogma
of the incarnation, to the whole compass of " the di-
vine dogmas" as Theodoret had established them,

324 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Da^Lt^os ^'^ John of Damascus. Thiough him the Qreek
orth^z Church gained its orthodox system, but not the Qreek
Church alone. The work of John was none the less
important for the Occident. It became the founda-
tion of mediaeval theology. John was above all a
scholastic. Each difficulty was to him only a chal-
lenge to artfully split the conceptions and to find a
new conception to which nothing in the world corre-
sponds, except just that difficulty which is to be
removed by the new conception. The fundamental
question also of the science of the Middle Ages was
already propounded by him : The question of nomi-
alism and realism ; he solved it by a modified Aris-
totelianism. All doctrines had already been provided
for him; he finds them in the decrees of councils
and the works of the acknowledged fathers. He
considered it the duty of science to work them over.
Thereby the two principal dogmas were placed within
the circle of the teachings of the old anti-gnostically
interpreted symbol. Of the allegorical explanation
of the Holy Scriptures a very modest use is made.
The letter of Scripture dominates on the whole, at
any rate much more decidedly than with the Cappa-
docians. In consequence of this, the natural theol-
ogy is also closely concealed ; highly realistic Scrip-
ture narrations, which are piously received, twine
themselves around it. But what is most perplexing
— the strict connection which in Athanasius, Apol-
linaris and Cyril unites the trinity and the incarna-
tion, in general, the dogma which is associated with

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 326

the benefit of salvation, is entirely dissolved. John '^qu",^
has innumerable dogmas, which must be believed; numerable

Dogmas.

but they stand no longer clear, under a consistent
scheme. The end to which the dogma once contrib-
uted as a means still remained, but the means are
changed; it is the cult, the mysteries, into which the
4th book also overflows. Consequently the system
lacks an inward, vital unity. In reality it is not an
explanation of faith, but an explanation of its pre-
suppositions, and it has its unity in the form of treat-
ment, in the high antiquity of the doctrines and in
the Holy Scriptures, The dogmas have become the
sacred legacy of the classical antiquity of the Church ;
but they have sunk, so to speak, into the ground.
Image-worship^ mysticism and scholasticism dom-
inate the Church.

BOOK 11.

EXPANSION AND RECASTING OF THE DOGMA
INTO A DOCTRINE CONCERNING SIN, GRACE
AND THE MEANS OF GRACE UPON THE BASIS
OF THE CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.

HISTORICAL SURVEY.

Baur. Vorl. ab. d. christl. DO., 2. Bd., 1866. Bach, Die
DO. des MA., 2 Bde., 1873 seq, Schwane, DO. der mittl.
Zeit. 1882. Thomasius Seeberg. Die christl. DO.. 2. Bd., 1.
Abth., 1888.

Basal Eie- rTlHE history of dogma in the Occident during

menUi of I

Hwtopy ot JL the thousand years between the migration of
Occident, ^jj^ nations and the Reformation was evolved from
the following elements : (1) From the distinctive pecu-
liarity of Occidental Christianity as represented by
Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius, etc., (2) From the
Hellenic theology introduced by the theologians of
the 4th century, (3) From Augustinianism, i.e. from
the Christianity of Augustine, (4) — in a secondary
degree — From the new needs of the Romano-Gter-
manic nations. The Roman bishop became in an
increasing measure the decisive authority. The his-
tory of dogma in the Middle Ages is the history of

826

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 327

the d(^ma of the Roman Church, although theology
had its home, not in Italy, but in North Africa
and France.

2. The carrying out of spiritual monotheism, the ^^^^
disclosure of individualism and the delineation of the ^^^
inward process of the Christian life (sin and grace)
indicate the importance of Augustine as a pupil of

the Neo-Platonists and of Paul. But since he also
championed the old dogma and at the same time
brought forward new problems and aims for the
Church as the kingdom of God upon the earth, his
rich mind bore within itself all the tensions whose
living strength determined the history of dogma in
the Occident. Even the system of morality and the
sacramental superstition, which later almost absorbed
Augustinianism, were placed by Augustine among
the first principles of his doctrine of religion. As a
new element, Aristotelianism was added during the
later Middle Ages, and this strengthened the afore-
said system of morality, but on the other hand it
beneficially limited the Neo-Platonic mysticism.

3. The piety of Augustine did not live in the old ^f^
dogma, but he respected it ad authority and used it ^i^io^^
as building-material for his doctrine of religion. Ac-
cordingly dogma in the Occident became, on the one

side, Church discipline and law and, on the other,
far-reaching transformations within theology it-
self. The consequence was that during the Mid-
dle Ages, in spite of all changes, men surrendered
themselves to the illusion of simply persisting in the

328 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

dogma of the 5th century, because the new was either
not recognized as such, or was reduced to a mere ad-
ministrative rule in the indeed still controverted au-
thority of the Roman bishop. The Reformation, i.e.
the Tridentine council, first put an end to this state
of affairs. Only since the 16th century, therefore,
can the history of dogma in the Middle Ages be sep-
arated from the history of theology^ and described.
^sSS^ 4. Especially to be observed are, (1) The history of
™^uflo ' pietism (Augustine, Bernard, Francis, so-called re-

Tbeology. -r^ v

formers before the Reformation) in its significance
for the recasting of dogma, (2) The doctrine of the sac-
raments, (3) Scientific theology (Augustine and Aris-
totle, ^6^ et ratio) in its influence upon the free cul-
tivation of doctrine. Back of these developments
there lay in the later Middle Ages the question of per-
sonal surety of faith and of personal Christian
character, which was repressed by the active power
of the visible Church. The latter was the silent co-
efficient of all spiritual and theological movements
until it became plainly audible in the contest over
the right of the pope.
i?^HiSS^ ^' Division: (1) Occidental Christianity and Oc-
of mnfetc. cidentcd Theology before Augustine, (2) Augustine,
(3) Provisional Adjustment of Prse-Augustinian and
Augustinian Christianity until Gregory I., (4) The
Carolingian Revival, (5) The Clugnian-Bemardine
Epoch, (6) Epoch of the Mendicant Orders, of Scho-
lasticism and of the Reformers before the Reforma-
tion.

DEV£IX)PHBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 329

CHAPTER II.

OCCIDBNTAL CHRISTIANITY AND OCCIDENTAL THEO-
LOGIANS BEFORE AUGUSTINE.

N51dechen, Tertullian, 1890. O. Ritschl, Cyprian, 1885.
Farster, Ambrosius, 1884. Reinkens, Hilarius, 1864. Zdckler,
Hieronymus, 1865. Volter, Donatismus, 1882. Nitzsch,
Boethius, 1860.

1. Occidental Christianity, in contradistinction "^f^J^j]^*^'
to Oriental, was determined by two personalities — fop^
Tertullian and Augustine — and, in addition, by the
policy, conscious of its aim in serving and ruling, of

the Roman Church and its bishops.

2. The Christianity of Tertullian was determined ^^^''
through contrast by the old, enthusiastic and strict '^^^'^"**"-
faith and the anti-gnostic rule of faith. In accord-
ance with his juristic training he endeavored to secure
everywhere in religion legal axioms and formulas,

and he conceived the relationship between God and
man as that of civil law. Furthermore his theology
bears a syllogistic-dialectical stamp ; it does not phil-
osophize, but it reasons, alternating between argu-
ments ex auctoritate and e ratione. On the other
hand, Tertullian frequently strongly impresses one
by his psychological observation and indeed by an
empirical psychology. Finally his writings man-
ifest aprac^icaZ, et^angreZtca/ attitude, determined by
the fear of God as the Judge, and an insistance upon
will and action^ which the speculative Greeks lacked.

330 OUTLINES or THB BISTORT OF DOGMA.

Naturml-
Ized in
Occident
by Cyp-
rian.

Occident

Receives

Origt'Distic

Theology

and Mo-

nasticism

from

Orient.

In all these points and in their mixture his CSiris-
tianity hecame typical for the Occident.

3. The Christianity of Tertullian, blunted in many
respects and morally shallow {'^ de opere et eleemos-
ynis "), yet clerically worked out (" de unitate eccle-
siae")^ became naturalized in the Occident through
Cyprian, the great authority of Latin Christendom ;
side by side with it that Ciceronian theology with
apocalyptical additions, represented by Minucius and
Lactantius, maintained itself. Religion was ^'the
law", but after the Church had under compulsion de-
clared all sins pardonable (Novatian crisis), religion
was also the ecclesiastical penitential institute. No
theologian, however, before Augustine was able to
really adjust "Zea;" and "venia". In Rome and
Carthage they labored at the strengthening of the
Church, at the composing of an ecclesiastical rule of
morals possible of fulfilment, and at the education of
the community through divine service and peniten-
tial rules. The mass-Christianity created the clergy
and the sacraments, the clergy sanctified the mon-
grel religion for the laity. The formulas were al-
most entirely Tertullianic, yet his spirit was being
crushed out.

4. The Occident and the Orient were already sep-
arated in the age of Constantine, but the Arian con-
test brought them again together. The Occidental
orthodoxy supported the Oriental and received from
it two great gifts : Scientific (Origenistic) theology
and monasticism. These were in reality a single

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 331

gift, for monasticism (the ideal of divinely inspired
celibacy in close union with God) is the practical ap-
plication of that "science**. Thus the Occidental
theology of the last half of the 4th century is repre-
sented by two lines which converge in Augustine :
The line of the Greek scholars (Hilary, Victor-
inus Rhetor, Rufinus, Jerome) and the line of the
genuine Latin scholars (Optatus, Pacian, Pruden-
tius). In both lines, however, must Ambrose be
named as theologically the most important fore-
runner of Augustine.

5. The Greek scholars transplanted the scientific ^^J[J^
(pneumatic) exegesis of Philo and Origen and the ^StSViM^*
speculative orthodox theology of the Cappadocians iSigit^
into the Occident. With the first they silenced the
doubts in regard to the Old Testament and met the
onset of Manichseism, with the second they, espe-
cially Ambrose, relaxed the tension which existed
imtil after the year 381, between the orthodoxy of the
Orient and that of the Occident. Through three suc-
cessive contributions Greek speculation entered into
the theology of the Occident, (1) Through Ambrose,
Victorinus and Augustine, (2) Through Boethius in
the 6th century (here Aristotelian), (3) Through the
Areopagite in the 9th century. In Victorinus is al-
ready found that combination of Neo-Platonism and
Paulinism, which forms the foundation of the Au-
gustinian theology; in Ambrose is already conspicu-
ous that imion of speculation and religious individ-
ualism, which characterizes the great African.

332 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

^^^^'^^ ^ 6. The real problem of the Latin Church was the
^"^*^ application of the Christian law, and the ecclesiasti-
cal treatment of sinners. In the Orient they laid
greater weight upon the effects of the cultus as a
single institution and upon silent self-education
through asceticism and prayer; in the Occident they
had a greater sense of standing in religious relations
to law, in which they were responsible to the Church,
but also might expect from it sacramental and pre-
catory assistance through individual appropriation.
The sense of sin as open guilt was more strongly
developed. This reacted upon their conception of the
Church. As regards the development of the latter,
Optatus {de schismate Donatistarum) was the fore-
runner of Augustine, as regards the stricter concep-
tion of sin, Ambrose.

^^o^^ The Donatist controversy, in which the Montanist
^*"^* and Novatian controversies were continued under a
peculiar limitation, had its roots in personal quar-
rels ; but it soon acquired an importance on principle.
The Donatist party (in the course of development it
became an African national party, assumed in oppo-
sition to the state, which oppressed it, a free, eccle-
siastical attitude and even cultivated a revolutionary
enthusiasm) denied the validity of an ordination
administered by a traitor, and therefore also the
validity of the sacraments which a bishop, conse-
crated by a traitor, administered (consequently the
demand for re-baptism). It was the last remnant of
the old demand that in the Church not only the in-

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 333

stitution, but above all the persons must be holy,
and the Donatists were able to appecd for their theses
to the celebrated Cyprian. At least a minimum of
personal worthiness in the clergy should still be
necessary, in order that the Church might remain
the true Church. In opposition to it the Catholics
drew the consequences of the "objective" Church
idea. Optatus above all asserted that the truth and Ov^^^^
holiness of the Church resides in the sacraments, and
that therefore the personal quality of the adminis-
trator is immaterial (" ecclesia una est^ cuius sane-
titaa de sacramentis colUgitur^ non de superbia
personarum ponderatur") ; he furthermore showed,
that the Church, in contrast with the conventicle of
the Donatists, held the guarantee of its truth in its
Catholicity. They also hit upon an evangelical prin-
ciple in so far as they emphasized faith at the side
and with the sacrament, in opposition to personal
sanctity. Thus already prior to Augustine the found-
ation for the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Church
and the sacraments was laid by Optatus. But Am- Ambrose.
brose especially had emphasized faith in connection
with a deeper conception of sin. Since Tertullian
the conception of sin as vitium originis and as sin
against Ood was known in the Occident. Ambrose
extended the view in both directions and appreciated
accordingly the importance of the Pauline idea of
gratia J justification and remissio peccatorum ('* il-
lud mihi prodest^ quod non justificamur ex operi-
bus legis . . . gloriabor in Christo; non gloriabor^

334 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

quia ivstua sum^ sed gloriabor^ quia redemptus ^
sum ") . It was of epochal significance that people
in the Occident became attentive to Pauline ideas of
sin and grace, law and gospel, at the very time
when they externalized the conception of the Church
and created a doctrine of the sacraments. Ambrose *
himself, it is true, was strongly influenced by the '
common Catholic views respecting law, virtue and
merit.

Pecuiur- The more vital conception of God, the strong feel-
^ri^ran- ^^S ^^ responsibility to the Judge, the consciousness
^^* of God as a moral Power restrained or relaxed by no
speculations concerning nature, the conception of
Christ as the man whose work for us possesses in the
sight of God an infinite value, tiieplacatio {satis-
/actio) Dei through his death, the Church as a peda-
gogical institution securely relying upon the means
of salvation (the sacraments), the Holy Scripture as
lex Dei^ the symbol as the sure content of doctrine,
the conceiving of the Christian life from the points of
view of guilt, atonement and merit, even if conceived
more ecclesiastically than religiously, — in these are
represented the peculiarities of Occidental Chris*
Augustine tianity prior to Augustine. He affirmed and yet

\ti\rma

*"foSr- transformed them. Above all the soteriological ques-
Them. ^^^^ awaitod a solution. By the side of Manichsean,
Origenistic-Neo-Platonic and stoic-rationalistic con-
ceptions of evil and of redemption there flickered

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 335

also near the year 400 here and there in the Occident
Pauline conceptions, which, as a rule, covered moral
laxities, yet nevertheless in some representatives
were expressions for evangelical convictions which
did not harmonize with the times and would there-
fore of necessity be fatal to the Catholic Church ( Jo-
vinian) . If one considers in addition that about the
year 400 paganism was still a power, one can com-
prehend what a problem awaited Augustine! He
would not have been able to solve it for the whole
Occidental Church, had the latter not been still a
tinit at that time. The Western Roman empire
still existed, and it almost seems as though its miser-
able existence had only been prolonged to make the
world-historical work of Augustine possible.

CHAPTER ni.

THE WORLD-HISTORICAL POSITION OF AUGUSTINE
AS REFORMER OF CHRISTIAN PIETY.

Bindermann, der h. Aug., 3 Bde., 1844-69. Bdhrisgcr,
Augustin, 2. Aufl., 1877 f. Reuter, August. Studien, 1887.
Hamack, Aug. 's Confessionen, 1888. Bigg, The Christian
Platonists of Alex. , 1886.

One may seek to construct Augustinianism from ^^^^TiSSS
the premises of the current Occidental Christianit}"
(see the previous chapter) or from the course of the
training of Augustine (the pagan father, the pious
Christian mother, Cicero's Hortensius, Manichseism,
Aristotelianism, Neo-Platonism with its mysticism

in Aui
tinian

Km-
lism.

336 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

and skepticism, the influence of Ambrose and of
monasticism), but neither of these methods of proced-
ure, nor even both of them, will entirely accomplish
^iSS2°* *^® ®°^ ^^ view. Augustine in religion discovered
Million, religion; he recognized his heart as the lowest,. the
living God as the highest good ; he possessed an en-
chanting ability and facility for expressing inward
observations: In this consist his individuality and
his greatness. In the love of God and in the sub-
dued grief of his soul he found that elation which
lifts man above the world and makes him another
being, while prior to him theologians had dreamed
that man must become another being in order to be
able to be saved, or had contented themselves with
striving after virtue. He separated nature and gn^ace,
Vi^on ^* l>ut bound together religion and morality and gave to
^^ ' the idea of the good a new meaning. He destroyed
the phantom of the popular antique psychology and
moralism; he discarded the intellectualism and
optimism of antiquity, but allowed the former to re-
vive again in the pious thought of the man who found
in the loving God true existence; and in terminat-
ing Christian pessimism, he at the same time passed
beyond it through the surety of pardoning grace.
^\^u>^ But more than all, he held before every soul its own
t2« HwL glory and responsibility — God and tie soul, the soul
and its Gk)d. He rescued religion from its com-
munal and cultus form and restored it to the heart
as a gift and as a gracious life. Love, unfeigned
humility and strength to overcome the world, these

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 337

Pne-Au-

gustinian

Piety.

are the elements of religion and its blessedness; they
spring from the actual possession of the loving God.
"Happy are the men who consider Thee their
strength, who from their heart walk in Thy steps".
This message Augustine preached to the Christianiiy
of his time and of all times.

1. The PrsB-Augustinian piety was a wavering be-
tween fear and hope. It lived not in the faith.
Knowing and doing good, it taught, brings salvation,
after that man has received forgiveness for past sins
through baptism ; but man does not experience sal-
vation. Neither baptism nor asceticism freed from
fear; men did not feel strong enough to trust in their
own virtue, nor guilty and believing enough to take
comfort in the grace of Qod in Christ. Fear and
hope remained; they were tremendous forces. They
shook the world and built the Church ; but they were
not able to create for the individual a blessed life.
Augustine advanced from sins to sin and guilty from ^^^J*^**
baptism to grace. The exclusiveness and firmness
with which he affiliated the guilty man and the liv-
ing God is the new teaching which distinguishes
him from all his predecessors. ** Against Thee, Thee
only, have I sinned " — " Thou, O Lord, hast created
us in thy likeness, and our heart is restless till it
finds its rest in Thee" — ^da quod iuhes^ et iube
quod vis " — " eo, quod quisque novit^ non fruitur^
nisi et id diligit^ neque quisquam in eo, qtiod per-
cipit^ permanet nisi dilectione*\ This is the mighty

concord which his ear caught from the Holy Scrip-
ts

Fear and
Hope.

338 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

All Bin is

Bin

Aminst

God.

Mlhi Ad-
haerere
Deo Bo-

num Est.

Gratia
Gratis
Data.

tures, from the deepest contemplation of the hmnan
heart and from the speculation concerning the first
and last things. In a spirit devoid of God all is sin ;
that the Spirit exists is the only good remaining.
Sin is the sphere and the form of the inner life of
every natural man. Furthermore, all sin is sin
against Qod ; for a created spirit has only one last-
ing relationship, namely that to Ood. Sin is the
disposition to be an independent being {superbia) ;
therefore is its form desire and unrest. In this un-
rest is revealed the never appeased lust and fear.
The latter is evil, the former when striving after
bliss (blessedness) is good, but when striving after
perishable goods is evil. We must strive to be happy
{"infelices esse nolumus sed nee velle possumus^-)
— this striving is the life bestowed upon us by Qod
which cannot be lost — but there is only one good, one
bliss and one rest: ^^ Mihi adhaerere deo bonum
est," Only in the atmosphere of Qod does the soul
live and rest. But the Lord who created us has re-
deemed us. Through grace and love which have
been revealed in Christ, he calls us back from dis-
traction to himself, makes ex nolentibu^ volentes and
bestows upon us thereby an incomprehensible new
being which consists of faith and love. These orig-
inate in Qod ; they are the means by which the living
Qod imparts himself to us. But faith is faith in the
" gratia gratis data^\ and love is joy in Qod blended
with that humility which renounces all that is indi-
vidual. The soul regards these favors as a perpetual

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 339

gift and a holy mystery, in which it acquires every-
thing that God requires ; for a heart endowed with
faith and love acquires that justice which prevails
before God and possesses that peace which exalts
above unrest and fear. It cannot indeed for a mo-
ment forget that it is still entangled with the world
and in sin, yet it always associates grace with sin.
Sin and misery overcome by faith, humility and love
— ^that is Christian piety. In the absorbing thoughts
of faith which thus continually recur the soul is at
rest and yet it ever strives irrepressibly upward.

In this mode of feeling and thinking religion dis- f^^^*^°"
closed itself more deeply, and the Augustinian type SSSdaM

of piety became the authoritative standard in the oocident
Occident till the Reformation, yes even till this day ;
however a quietistic^ one might almost say a nar-
cotic element is hidden therein which is not found
in the Gospel.

2. In the foregoing the piety of Augustine is only j;J^^\*®in
one-sidedly defined. There was also in his piety a ^^ ^*^*
Catholic spirit; yes, he first created that intermin-
gling of the freest, individual surrender to the Divine
with the constant, obedient submission to the Church
as an institution endowed with the means of grace,
so characteristic of Occidental Catholicism. In de-
tail the following points are especially to be empha- .
sized, in which he affirmed the " Catholic " element,
and even enhanced the same: (1) First, he trans-
formed the authority of the Church into a religious Authority
power and gave to practical religion a doctrine con- ^^^^^

340 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Church

OrKan of

Grace.

ceming the Church. In this he was guided by two
considerations, viz. : Skepticism and an appreciation
of the value of ecclesiastical communion as an histor-
ical power. In the first place, he was convinced that
the isolated individual could not by any means arrive
at a full and safe understanding of the truth of the
revealed teaching — it presents too many stumbling-
blocks; like as he therefore threw himself into the
arms of the authority of the Church, so he taught in
general, that the Church stands for the truth of
the faith, where the individual is not able to rec-
ognize the same, and that accordingly acts of faith
are at the same time acts of obedience. In the sec-
ond place, while breaking with moralism he recog-
nized that the gratia had had an historical effect and
had made the Church its organism. Insight into the
position of the Church in the tottering Roman em-
pire strengthened this view. But not only as skeptic
and historian did Augustine recognize the import-
ance of the Church, but also by virtue of his strong
piety. This piety wanted external authority as
every living religious faith has always wanted it and
will want it. Augustme found it in the testimony
Smii^ of the Church. (2) Although he unequivocally ac-
and p2^ knowledged in his Confessions : Religion is the pos-
sessing of the living God, yet in the interpretation
of his theology he exchanged the living God for
the gratia, the latter for the sacraments, and thus
compressed, as it were, that which is most living
and most free into a material benefit entrusted to the

nients.

DHSVKLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SlN, ETC. 341

Church. Misled by the burning conflicts of the time
(Donatist controversy) he thus paid the heaviest
tribute to current ideas and founded the sacramental
Church of the Middle Ages. But wherever he goes
beyond the sacraments back to God himself, there
in subsequent times he has always been in danger
of neutralizing the importance also of Christ and of
losing himself in the abyss of the thought of the
sole-eflSciency of God (doctrine of predestination).
(3) Although he acknowledged with all his heart '^^ij?^*
the gratia gratis data and, consequently, the sover-
eignty of faith, yet he also united with it the old
scheme, that the ultimate destiny of the single indi-
vidual depends upon ^' merits " and upon these only.
He accordingly saw in the merita resulting from
the fides caritate formata, which indeed are Dei
muneray the aim of all Christian development, and
he thereby not only made it easy for futurity to re-
tain the old scheme under the cover of his words,
but he himself also failed to perceive the real essence
of faith (t.6. steadfast confidence in God, result-
ing from the assurance of the forgiveness of sin) as
the highest gift of God. His doctrine, however, of
instilled love was neutral as regards the historical
Christ. (4) Although Augustine was able to testify ^^^"f^'®
to the joy of that blessedness which the Christian ""*** ^*'®*
already possesses in faith and in love, yet he was
not able to present a definite aim to the present life;
he shared in general the traditional Catholic disposi-
tion of mind, and the quietism of his piety imparted

342 OUTLINES Off TH& HISTORY OF DOGMA.

to Christian activity no new impulses. That it
should receive such through the work " de dvitate
dei " was in reality not intended by Augustine.

Augustine's theoI(^y is to be understood upon the
basis of the peculiar form of his piety. His religious
theories are in part nothing else than theoreticaUy
explained frames of mind and experiences. But
in these were also collected the manifold religious
experiences and moral reflections of the old world :
The psalms and Paul, Plato and the Neo-Platonists,
the moralists, Tertullian and Ambrose, — all are
found again in Augustine.

CHAPTER IV.

THE WORLD-HISTORICAL POSITION OF AUGUSTINE
AS TEACHER OF THE CHURCH.

Augustine The ancient Church expounded its theology from

DoctfiDM. *^® centres of Christology and the doctrine of
freedom (doctrine of morals) ; Augustine drew the
two centres together. The good became to him the
axis for the contemplation of all blessings. Moral
good and redemptive good should include each other
{ipsa virtus et praemium virtutis) , He brought
dogmatics down from the heavens ; yet did not dis-
card the old conception but amalgamated it with
the new. In his interpretations of the symbol this

trtSl,^;. ^J^io^ is most clearly manifest. Through his pr».

^pficaSu*" Catholic development and conversion, then through

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 343

his conflict with Donatism and Pelagianism, Chris-
tianity appeared to him in a new form ; but inas-
much as he considered the symbol as the essence of
doctrine, his conception of doctrine necessarily be-
came complicated — ^a union of the old Catholic theol-
ogy and of the old ecclesiastical scheme with his
new thoughts on the doctrine of faith compressed
into the frame of the symbol. This mixture of ele-
ments, which the Occidental Church has preserved
until this day, subsequently caused contradictions
and rendered the old dogma impressionless.

In detail the following discrepancies in the theol- SS^^Jf^
ogy of Augustine are especially to be noted : (1) The ^ **^'
discrepancies between symbol and Scripture. Those
who place Scripture above the symbol, as well as
those who prescribe the opposite order, can refer to
him. Aug^tine strengthened Biblicism and at the
same time also the position of those ecclesiastics who
with Tertullian refuted the Biblicists. (2) The dis-
crepancy between the principle of Scripture and the
principle of salvation. Augustine taught, on the
one hand, that only the substance {i.e. salvation) is
of importance in the Scriptures; yes, he advanced
as far sometimes as that spiritualism which skips
over the Scriptures ; on the other hand, he could not
rid himself of the thought that every word of the
Scriptures is absolute revelation. (3) The discrep-
ancy between his conceptions of the essence of relig-
ion; on the one hand, it is faith, love, hope; yet, on
the other, knowledge and super-terrestrial, immortal

344 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

life; it should aim to secure blessedness through
grace, and again through the amor intellectualis.
Faith as conceived by Paul and a non-cosmic mys-
ticism contend for the primacy. (4) The discrep-
ancy between the doctrine of predestined grace and
a doctrine of grace that is essentially an ecclesias-
tical and sacramental doctrine. (5) Discrepancies
within the principal lines of thought. Thus in the
doctrine of grace the thought of the gratia per
(propter) Christum not infrequently conflicts with
the conception of a grace flowing independently from
Christ out of the original being of God as the siini'
mum bonum and summum esse. Thus, in his
ecclesiastical doctrine, the hierarchical-sacramental
basal element is not reconciled with a liberal, uni-
versal view, such as originated with the apologists,
narianl" One cau distinguish three planes in the theology
logic, and of Augustiuc : The predestinarian, the soteriologic,

Ecclesias-

^'mentaf*" ^^^ *^® plane of the authority and of the sacraments
Elements, ^f ^j^^ Church; but oue would not do him justice,

if one should describe these elevations separately, for
ill his summary of the whole they are united. Just
because his rich spirit embraced all these discrepan-
cies and characteristically represented them as ex-
periences, has he become the father of the Church
of the Occident. Ho is the father of the Roman
Church and of the Reformation, of Biblicists and of
mystics; yes, even the Renaissance and modem
empirical philosophy (psychology) are indebted to
him. New dogmas^ in the strict sense, he did not

•^

Predesti-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 345

introduce. It was left to a very much later period
to formulate strictly definite dogmas out of the trans-
formation wrought by him in the old dogmatic
material, i.e. the condemnation of Pelagianism and
the new doctrine of the sacraments.

1. Augustine'' s Doctrine of the First and Last

Things.

Siebeck, in d. Ztschr. f. Phil. u. phil. Kritik, 1888. 8. 161
ft. G^angauf, Metaphys. Psychol, d. h. Aug., 1852. Storz,
Die Phil. d. h. Aug. , 1882. Scipio, Des Aurel. Aug. Metaph. ,
1886. Kahl. Primat d. Willens b. Aug. , 1886. Kahner, A. 's
Anschauung v. d. Erloe. bedeutung Christi, 1890.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom : >"5™^*p«
With the life of prayer Augustine united an inward ***<**«>®*''-
contemplation which led him, the pupil of the Neo-
Platonists and of Paul, to a new psychology and
theology. He became the " alter Aristoteles '' in
making the inner life the starting-point for thoughts
concerning the world. He first absolutely put away
the naive-objective frame of mind and with it the
antique-classical, at the same time, however, the
remnants of the polytheistic view also. He was
the first monotheistic theologian (in tke strict
sense of the word) among the Church fathers,
since he lifted the Neo-Platonic philosophy above
himself. Not imfamiliar with the realm of knowl- kLow oniy
edge of the objective world, he yet wished to know th?8^?.
but two things, Ood and the soul; for his skepticism
had dissolved the world of external phenomena, but

34C OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOQMA.

in the fiight of these phenomena the facts of the
inner life had, after painful struggles, remained to
him as facts. Even if there exists no evil and no
God, there still exists unquestionably the fear of evil.
Out of this, I.e. through psychological analysis, one
can find the soul and God and sketch a picture of the
world. Hence the skeptic can arrive at the knowl-
edge of truth, for which the marrow of the soul
sighs,
^phi^. "^^^ fundamental form of the life of the soul is the
desire for happiness {cupido^ amor) as a desire for
blessedness. All inclinations are only developments
of this fundamental form (as receptivity and as
activity) and they are valid for the sphere of the
spiritual life as well as for that of the sensuous.
The will is connected with these inclinations, never-
theless it is a power rising above sensuous nature
(Augustine is an indeterminist). In concreto it is
indeed bound to the sensuous instincts, i.e. not free.
Theoretical freedom of election becomes real freedom
only when the cupiditas (arnor) boni has become the
oniv the ruling motive for the will, i.e. only the good will is
is Free. free. Moral goodness and freedom of will coincide.
The truly free will has its freedom in the impulse of
the good {beata necessitas bont). This bondage is
freedom, because it withdraws the will from the do-
minion of the lower instincts and realizes the destiny
and disposition of man to be filled with true exist-
ence and life. In attachment to the good, therefore,
is realized the higher appetitus^ the true instinct of

deVelopmeKt o^ doctrine of sin, etc. 347

self-preservation in man ; while he gradually brings
about his own destruction, if he follows his lower in-
stincts. For these lines of thought Augustine claimed
strict validity, for he knew that every man, meditat-
ing about himself, must afiSrm them. With them
Augustine united the results of the Neo-Platonic cos- Neo-pia-

^ tonic C'-os-

mological speculation; but the simple greatness of specuia-*
his living conception of God worked powerfully upon Adopted.
them and coerced the artificially gained elements of
the doctrine of God again and again into the sim-
plest confession : ^ The Lord of heaven and earth is
love; he is the salvation of the soul; whom should ye
fear"?

Through the Neo-Platonic speculation (through ^"^^^
proof of the nothingness of phenomena and through oniy^nie
progressive elimination of the lower spheres of the ^'
sensuous and conceivable) Augustine arrived at the
conception of the one, unchangeable, eternal Being
{incorporea Veritas, spiritalis substantia^ lux in-
commutabilis) . At the same time this summum
esse alone corresponds to the simplicity of the high-
est object of the soul's desire. This summum esse
alone is in reality the Being, since every other being
has the quality of non-being, and can indeed not ex-
ist but really pierishes. But, on the other hand, it can
also be conceived as the development of the sole Sub-
stance, as the radiant artistic expression of the latter,
and in this conception the metaphysically dissolved
phenomena and the interest therein recur in an aes-
thetic form. Yet this natural feeling is still only

348 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the establishing of the Augustinian conception. He
does not surrender himself to it, but rather passes
over at once to the observation, that the soul strives
for this highest Being and seeks it in all lower good
with indestructible, noble concupiscence; yet after
all it hesitates to seize the same. Here a dreadful

M^^us paradox presented itself to him, which he designates
as ^^monstrum ", viz., that the tvill does not octM-
ally want J what it wantsy or rather what it seems to
want. Together with the whole weight of man's in-
dividual responsibility Augustine conceived this state
of the case, which was ameliorated by no sesthetic
consideration, yet at times was so smooth to him
(the cosmos with light and shadow as the ^^pul-
chrum ", as the simile of the fidness of life of the

SfS^ universal One). Hence metaphysics was trans-
'^nST* formed for him into ethics. Through the feeling
of responsibility, God (the summum esse) appeared
to him as the summum honum; and the selfish, in-
dividual life, which determines the will, as the evil.
This summum honum is not only the constant rest-
ing-place for the restless thinker, and the intoxicat-
ing joy of life for the life-loving mortal, but it is also
an expression for the shall-he^ for that which shall
become the ruling fundamental motive of the will,
for that which shall give to the will its freedom and
therewith for the first time its power over the sphere
of the natural, for that which shall free the inde-
structible inclination of man toward the good from
the misera necessitas peccandi — expression of the

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 349

good. Thus for him all inferences of the intellect
and all eudemonistic wrappings dropped from the
conception of the good to the ground. For this
line of thought also he claimed general validity.

But still another experience now followed and it ^J^p^""
scorned all analysis. Yonder good not only con- ita^
fronted him as the '^ shall be", but he felt himself into

Bellgion.

seized by it as love and lifted out of the misery of
the monstrous contradiction of existence. Accord-
ingly the conception of God received an entirely new
meaning : The good which is able to do this, the Al-
mighty, is Person, is Love. The summum esse is the
holy good in Person, working upon the wiU as al-
mighty Love. Metaphysics and ethics are trans-
formed into religion. Evil is not only privatio
svbstantiae and therefore not mere privatio ^onij
but godlessness {privatio Dei) ; the ontological defect
in the creature existence and the moral defect in the
good is a defect in the attitude of love toward Qod ;
but to possess God is everything, is being, good being,
free-will and peace. Henceforth a stream of Divine
thought flowed forth freely from Augustine. It is
just as inherently natural to God to be gratia^ im-
parting himself in love, as to be caiisa causatrix non
causata; man however lives by the grace of love. ^J^^
That he — embarrassed by a monstrous existence,
which points back to a serious fall into sin — can live
only by grace, may still be explained ; but that the
grace of love really exists is a transcendent fact.
Man does not arrive at freedom through indepen-

350 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

dence as regards God, but through dependence upon
him : Only that love which has been bestowed upon
him by God renders man blessed and good.
Only Roi' ^^ *^® detailed deductions of Augustine respecting
God and the soul the notes of metaphysics, ethics
and of the deepest Christian experience vibrate with-
in one another. God is the only " res *', which may
be enjoyed {frui = alicui rei amove tnhaerere
propter se ipsam)^ other things may only be used.
This sounds Neo-Platonic, but it is resolved in a
Christian sense into the thought : fide^ spe et caritate
He is colendum deum. God is Person, whom one can trust

Person. '

above all other things and whom one should love.
The fides quae per dilectionem operatur becomes
the sovereign expression of religion. The aesthetically
grounded optimism, the subtile doctrine of emana-
tion, the idea of the sole agency of God (doctrine of
predestination), the representation of evil as the
" non-existent " which limits the good, do not indeed
entirely disappear, but they are joined in a peculiar
manner with the representation of God as the Crea-
tor of mankind which has through its own fault
become a viassa perditionis, and of God as the Re-
deemer and ordinator peccatorum. The striving
also after absolute knowledge and the conception of
the Christian religion in accordance with the scheme
^ASopts*^ of the apologists (rationalistic) never failed in Au-
ApofoKiste. gustine, and the love of God which he felt was secure
to him only under the authority of outward revelation,
to which he obediently submitted ; but in his relig-

[

DEVELOPHBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 351

ious thinking, in which the appreciation of the im-
portance of history was indeed not so well developed
as the capacity for psychological observation, the
Christian spirit nevertheless ruled.

From his youth up Christ was the silent guiding ^g^Jj J*"
principle of his soul. And the apparently purely Prt««*pi«-
philosophical deductions were in many ways influ-
enced by the thought of him. All of Augustine's
attempts to break through the iron plan of the im-
mutability of Qod, and to discriminate between God,
the world and the ego^ are to be explained by the
impression of history upon him, i.e. of Christ. Thus
Christ appeared to him, the religious philosopher,
more and more plainly as the tvay, the power and
the authority. How often did he speak of revela-
tion in general and mean only him ! How often did
he speak of Christ where his predecessors spoke of
revelation in general! The speculative representa-
tion of the idea of the good and of its agency as love
became a certainty to him only through the vision of
Christ and through the authoritative proclamation
of the Church respecting him. The vision of Christ ^(^^st ^
was a new element, which he first (after Paul and t^m^ui.
Ignatius) again introduced. Just as his doctrine of
the trinity received a new form through the convic-
tion, experienced through faith, of the unity of God,
although he adopted the old formulas, so also did his
Christology, in spite of all adherence to tradition
(rigid combating of Apollinaris), receive a new con-
tent through the preaching of Ambrose and his own

352 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP POGMA.

experience. (1) In the first place as regards Christ
Md" Hu^ the representation of his sublimity in his humility
°(^8t was of decisive importance to him, the actual veri-

Medivral

K^-noto. fying of the sentence, omne bonum in humilitate
perficitur (the incarnation also he represented from
this point of view) ; in this he began to strike the
mediaeval key-notes of Christology, (2) He laid the
whole stress upon the possibility now won, that man,
lying in the dust, can apprehend Qod since he has
come near us in our lowliness (the Greek waits for
an exaltation to be able to grasp Qod in Christ), (3)
He construed not infrequently the personality of
Christ also from the human soul of the Redeemer
and he saw in the endowments of the same the great
example of the gratia praevenienSj which made the
man Jesus what he became, (4) He conceived the man
^^t^T Jesus as Mediator, as Sacrifice and Priest, through
aod Priest, whom wc have been reconciled to the Deity and re-
deemed, whose death, as the Church proclaims it, is
the surest foundation of our faith in redemption. In
all these respects Augustine introduced new ideas
into the old dogma, joining them thereto indeed only
insecurely and artificially. A new Christological
formula he did not create ; to him Christ became the
rock of faith, since he knew that the influence of
this Person had broken his pride and given him
strength to believe in the love of God and to let him-
self be found by it. The living Christ is the ti-uth,
and he who is proclaimed by the Chtirch, is the way
and the authority.

DEVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 353

The soul is guided hjthequc^per dilectionem vitaBeata.
operatur unto the vita heata. This is the blessed
peace in the vision of Gbd. Therefore knowledge
still remains the aim of man. It is not the will that
holds the primacy, but the intellect. Finally Augus-
tine retained the vulgar Catholic form of thought
which confines man in the hereafter to an adoring
knowledge; in this life asceticism and contemplation
answers to it (hence Aug^tine's defence of monas-
ticism as against Joviuian). The kingdom of Qod,
so far as it is earthly, is also perishable. The soul
must be freed from the world of appearances, of sim-
ilitudes and compulsory conduct. Nevertheless Au-
gustine exerted indirectly a powerful influence upon
the current eschatological ideas: (1) Virtue is not Depend-

^ ^ ' eDce upon

the highest good, but dependence upon God (in the ^^'
representation of the decisive significance of the
merita this point of view was indeed abandoned),

(2) The priestly ascetic life should be a spiritual ^Jjj^j**

one; the magico-physical elements of Greek mys- ^*™™*

ticism recede entirely (no cultus mysticism), (3) In inteiiectu-

. . alism Dis-

the thought, " mini adhaerere deo honura est ", in- counted,

tellectualism was broken down ; the will received its

due position, (4) Love remains even the same in eter- Love

, Abides.

nity as that which we possess in this life; therefore

this world and the other are still closely imited, (5) i^/^^.

If love remains also in the other world, then intellec- *'**™*

tualism reappears in a modified form, (G) Not the Eccieeian-

earthly life, but the earthly Church has a higher

meaning; the latter is, so to speak, the holy above
28

354 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

all that is most holy, and it is a duty to build it up;
not a religion of a second order supersedes the relig-
ion, but ecclesiasticism, the service of the Church as
a moral agency for reforming society, as an organism
of the sacramental powers of love, of the good and of
Fides, the right in which Christ works, (7) Higher than
uw. all monasticism stand fideSy spes and caritas; hence
the scheme of a dreary and egotistical contemplation
is broken. To be sure, Augustine succeeded in unit-
ing in all directions, although indeed with contradic-
tions, the new lines of thought with the old.

2. The Donatist Contest. The Worky **De Civi-
tate Dei,'* The Doctrine of the Church and of
the Means of Grace.

Reuter. a. a. O. ReinkinB, Gesch. phiV d. h. Aug., 1866.
Ginzel, L. Aug. v. d. Kirche in d. TTib. Theol. Quartalschr. ,
1849. Koetlin, D. Kathol. Au£fas8. v. d. K. in d. deutschen
ZtBchr. f . christl. Wissensch. , 1856, Nr. 14. Schmidt, Aug. *s
Lehrev. d. K. ind. Yahrbb. f. deutsche Theol. , 1861. Seeberg,
Begriff d. christl. K. I. Th., 1885. Ribbeck, Donatus u.
Aug., 1888.

Aujnistine In the contest with Manichaeism and Donatism

Adopts

^Strineof Augustine, following Optatus, formulated his doc-
churoh. trine of the Church upon the basis of Cyprian's con-
ception, excluding, however, the Donatistic elements
of Cyprian and moderating the hierarchical. In
describing the Church as authority, as an indesla-uc-
tible institution of salvation^ he believed that he
was merely describing a divinely produced verity ; in
representing it as comrnunio sanctorum^ he followed

DBVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 355

his own religious experience. In the former he op-
posed the critical ^ subjectivism " of the Manichseans
and the puritanism of the Donatists who desired to
make the truth^of the Church dependent upon the
purity of the priests; in the latter he used his
doctrine of salvation in defining his conception of
the Church. Complicated views were the conse-
quence. Not only does the Church appear, now as
the goal of religion, now as the way to the goal, but
the conception itself becomes a complexity of divers
conceptions. FinaUy the doctrine of predestination
presented itself to him as out-and-out questionable.

I. 1. The most important characteristic of the %J2^'
Church is its unity (in faith, hope and love, on the
one side, in Catholicity on the other), which the same
Spirit produces that holds the trinity together; this in
the midst of the disruption of humanity is a proof of
the divineness of the Church. Since unity flows
only from love, the Church rests upon the governing
power of the divine spirit of Love; community of faith
alone is not entirely suflScient. From this view there
follows : Caritas Christiana nisi in unitate eccles-
iae non potest custodiri, etsi baptismum et fidem
tcneatisj i.e, unity only exists where love is and
love only where unity is. The application of this
phrase with its consequences declares : Heretics not
only do not belong to the Church (for they deny the
unity of the faith), but schismatics also stand out-
side of it; for their very separation from the unity
proves that they are wanting in love, i.e. in the

356 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

operations of the Holy Spirit. Therefore only the
one great Church is the Church, and outside of it
there can indeed exist faith, heroic deeds, even
means of salvation, but no salvation.
^chunS.**' 2. The second characteristic of the Church is its
holiness. The Church is holy as the place of the
activity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, and as the
possessor of those means which sanctify the indi-
vidual. That she does not succeed with all, cannot
rob her of her holiness; even a numerical superiority
of the mall et hypocritae does not endanger this;
otherwise one unholy member would already ren-
der her right questionable. The Church exercises
discipline and excommunication not so much to pre-
serve her holiness as to educate. She herself is al-
ready secure against contamination with that which
is unholy, in view of the fact that she never sanc-
tions it, and she demonstrates her holiness, since in
her midst, and only within her, real saints are be-
gotten, and since she everywhere elevates and sanc-
tifies the morals of men. In the strict sense only
the boni et spirituales belong to her, but in a wider
sense the unholy also, in so far as they are still able
to be spiritualized and remain under the influence of
the sacraments {^ vasa in contumeliam in domo
del " ; they are not the house of God, but " in domo " ;
thoy are not "in communione sanctorum^ but
" sacramentorum"). Thus the Church is a ^^ cor-
pus permixtum ", and even heretics and schismatics
ultimately belong to her, in so fai* as they have ap-

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 357

propriated the meaxis of grace and remain under the
discipline of the Church. But the holiness of the
Church includes as its aim the pure communio sanc-
torum {communio fidelium)^ and all religious predi-
cates of the Church are valid for this communion.

3. The third characteristic of the Church is its
Catholicity (universality as regards space). This
furnishes the strongest outward proof of the truth of
the Church ; for it is a fact perceptible to the senses
and at the same time a miracle with which the
Donatists have nothing comparable. The great
church at Carthage evidences itself as the true
Church by its union with Rome, with the old Orien-
tal churches, and with the churches of the whole
world (in opposition the Donatists rightly said:
" Quantum ad totius mundi pertinet partes, modi-
ea pars est in compensatione totius mundi, in qua
fides Christiana nominatur ").

4. The fourth characteristic is its apostolicity,
which manifests itself, (1) in the possession of the
apostolical writings and doctrines, (2) in the ability of
the Church to trace back its existence as far as the
apostolical churches by the line of episcopal succes-
sion (this point Cyprian emphasized more strongly).
Among these churches the Roman is the most im-
portant on accoimt of its first bishop, Peter. He is
the representative of the apostles, of the Church, of
weak Christians and of the ecclesiastical function of
the bishops. The old theory that it is necessary to
be in union with the sedes apostolica and cathedra

Catholic-
ity of
Church.

tolio-

ApostolJ
Ity of
Church.

358 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Petri^ Augustine retained; but as regards the infal-
libility of the Roman see, he expressed himself just
as undecidedly and oontradictorily as in regard to
the councils and the episcopate (naturally to him a
council stood higher than the Roman bishop) .

^"i t^"?^" ^- The infallibility of the Church Augustine con-

Church. gi(jere(j as firmly established ; but he was able to re-
produce the arguments for it only as relatively sound
and sufficient. In like manner he was convinced of
the indispensableness of the Church; but he pro-
pounded ideas (regarding the doctrine of predestin-
ation and the immutability of the eternal working
of God), which annulled the same.

Church is 6. The Church is the kingdom of Ood upon earth.

°'Earth?° -^^ ® ^® Augustine, indeed, in making use of this
conception had no reference to the Church, but to the
entire result of the work of God in the world, in con-
trast with the work of the devil. But whenever he
identifies Church and kingdom of God, ho means
by the former the communio fidelium {corpus
verum). But since there is only one Church, he
could not but consider, in a given case, the corpus
permixtum also as the kingdom of God ; and since
with the abolition of all apocalyptic representations
he saw the millennium now already realized in the
Church, in contrast with the perishing evil state of
the world, he was driven almost involuntaiily to the
consequence that the visible Church with its ruling
priests and its regulations is the kingdom of God
(de civitate deiy XX. 9-13). Thus the idea of the

DBVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 359

kingdom of God passes with him through all stages, ^£^7
from a historico-theological conception, which is
neutral as regards the idea of the Church (the king-
dom of God is in heaven and has been organizing it-
self since Abel upon the earth for heaven), to the
Church of the priests, but it has its centre in the ec-
clesia as a heavenly " communio sanctorum in ter-
ris peregrinans". Parallel with this conception
goes that other of the societas of the godless and re-
probates (including the demons), which finally passes
over into the idea of the earthly kingdom (the state)
as the magnum latrocinium. In opposition to this
communion originating in sin and condemned to eter-
nal strife, stands in general the state of God as the
only rightful union of men. But the latter points of
this form of statement which ends in a real theocracy
of the Church and in a condemnation of the state, Au-
gustine neither elaborated nor especiaUy emphasized.
He had in mind almost throughout spiritual powers
and spiritual strife ; the popes of the Middle Ages
first drew the theocratic consequences. He also gave ^^n^ted"
to his view respecting the state the turn, that, since ^ church.
the pax terrena is a good (even if a particular one),
a commimity (the state) which protects it is also
good. But since the pax terrena can be brought
about only by justice, and inasmuch as the latter is
undoubtedly in possession of the Church alone (be-
cause as resting upon the caritas it originates with
God), the state can obtain a relative right only by
submission to the state of God. It is clear that this

360 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

view also, by which the earthly state receives a cer-
tain independence (because it has an especial mis-
sion), can be easily introduced into the theocratic
scheme. Augustine himself drew only a few con-
sequences, yet he drew these : That the state must
serve the Church by means of compulsory measures
against idolatry, heretics and schismatics, and that
the Church must in general exercise an influence
upon the state's right of punishment.
Word and n. 1. The Donatist contest also necessitated a

Sacnuneot.

closer consideration of the sacraments (vid. Optatus) .
In the first place, it was the greatest advance that
Augustine recognized the word as a means of grace.
The formula, "word and sacrament"^ originated
with him, yes, he esteemed the " word " so highly
that he even called the sacrament "verbum visi-
bile^y and with the sentence: "crede et mandu^
casti " he opposed all working through mysteries and
gave to the conception " sacrament " so wide a range
itat every sensible sign with which a redemptive
word is joined may be so named (" accedit verbum
ad elementum et fit sacrainentum "). An especial
doctrine of the sacraments is not to be drawn there-
from; Augustine indeed not seldom goes so far in
spiritualization, that the sensible sign and the aud-
ible word need only to be considered as signa and
imago of the invisible act accompanying them (for-
giveness of sin, spirit of love) .
Baptism 2. But, on the other hand, the sacraments — Au-

and Lord*8

Supper, gastine has reference as a rule in this connection only

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 361

to baptism and the Lord's Supper — are after all some-
thing higher. They are signs, instituted by Ood,
of a higher object, with which, by virtue of the con-
stituted order of creation, they stand in a certain re-
lationship, and through them grace is really imparted
to him who makes use of them (assurance of the
misericordia Christi in the sacrament, but on the
other hand, actus medicinalis). This communica-
tion is dependent upon the administration (objectiv-
ity of the sacraments), but it is redemptive only
where the spirit of love (the true Church) exists.
Thereby arose the double contradiction, that the sac-
raments are effective everywhere and yet only in the
Church, are independent of men and yet bound up
with the Church in their redempti veness. Augustine
resolved this contradiction by discriminating between
the character which the sacraments impart (stamp-
ing it, as it were) and the real communication of
grace. The sacraments " sancta per se ipsa " can
be purloined from the Church and yet retain their
eflBcacy, but only within the Church do they tend
effectively to salvation (" non considerandum^ quis
det sed quid det,^ but on the other hand, " habere "
is not yet " utiliter habere ").

3. Only with baptism (character : Inalienable re- ^^^^gjj^,®'
lation to Christ and his Church) and ordination "JfitiSned"'
(character: Inalienable preparation to offer sac-
rifice and to administer the sacraments), however,
could this view be harmonized, not indeed with the
Lord's Supper; for in this the res sacramenti is the

362 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOQMA.

invisible incorporation into the body of Christ (con-
cerning the elements Augustine taught symbolically),
and the Lord's Supper is the sacrificium caritatis;
therefore the Catholic Church was ever allied
with the Lord's Supper {sacramentum unitatis)
and there could exist no " character", which was in-
dependent of this Church. Augustine glided over
this difficulty. His general doctrine of the sacra-
ments was obtained from baptism, and he discrim-
inated therein thus artificially, in order that he
might, (1) place the Donatists in the wrong, (2)
maintain the characteristic of the sanctity of the
Church, (3) give to faith a firm support, upon which
it could rely — independent of men. Afterward the
discrimination was made the most of, especially in
the hierarchical sense. But Augustine's emphasis
upon the " word " and his spiritualism have given
simultaneously offence in another direction {to Lu-
ther and to the Prce- Reformers),

^ouirch^® Augustine's ideas in regard to the Church are full
^ctJS^ of contradictions. The true Church should also be
visible, and yet to the visible Church belongs also
evil men and hypocrites, nay even heretics. The ex-
terna societas sacramentorum^ which is communio
fidelium et sanctorum and finally also the nume-
rus praedestinatortim are one and the same Church !
The " in ecclesia esse " has in truth a triple sense.
"In ecclesia" are only the praedestinatiy including

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 363

those still unconverted; "in ecclesia^ are the be-
lievers, including those who will relapse; " in eccle-
sia " are all those who have part in the sacraments !
The Church is properly in heaven and yet visible as
civitas upon earth! It is from the beginning and
yet first instituted by Christ! It is founded upon
predestination, no upon faith, love, hope, no upon
the sacraments ! But while taking account of these
divers important points which are contradictory if
there is to be only one Church, one must not forget
that Augustine lived as an humble Christian with
the thought that the Church is the communio fide-
Hum et sanctorum^ that faith, hope and love are its
foundation, and that it " in terris stat per remissio-
nem peccatorum in caritate." The predestinarian
idea of the Church (in reality the dissolution of the
Church) belongs to the theologian and the theoso-
phist, the empirical idea to the Catholic polemic. It
is not to be overlooked also, that Augustine first
rescued the sacraments from the magical aspect
under which they were to counterbalance a moralistic
mode of thinking, and coordinated and subordinated
them to faith. He first rendered the doctrine of the
sacraments reformable.

3. The Pelagian Contest. Doctrine of Grace and

of Sin.

Renter, a. a. O. Jacobi, Lehre d. PeiagiuB, 1842. Wdrter,
Der Pelagianismus, 1866. Klasen, Die iunere Entw. d.
Pelagianismus, 1882. Wiggers, Augustinismus and Pela-

364 OUTLINES OP THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

gianiRtnus, 2 Bdd. , 1831 f . Dieckhoff, A. *s Lehre v. d.
Onade (Meckl. Tlieol. Ztsckr., I., 1860). Luthardt, L. v. f r.
WiUen. 1863.

Doctrine of Aufinistine had not formulated his doctrine regard-

SiD and ^ °

Once, jjig gxtice and sin when he permitted himself to be
baptized into the Catholic Church (see his anti-
Manichfiean writings), however he had done so be-
fore he entered into the Pelagian contest. Pelagius
also did not formulate his doctrine first during the
contest, but he held it when he took offence at
the Augustinian expression, ^*da quod jubes et
jube quod vis"^. The two great modes of thought
^ — whether grace is to be reduced to nature or whether
it sets nature free — rose in arms against each other.
The Occident, prepared through Ambrose, accepted
Augustinianism with incredible alacrity. Augus-
tine, the religious man and the virtuoso, encountered
in Pelagius an earnest ascetic monk, in Cfi&lestius a
eimuch, in Julian a gay man of the world who was
also a resolute, determined rationalist and an inexor-
able dialectician.
i8m*f8^ Pelagianism is Christian rationalism, consistently
Monastf-^ developed under the influence of Hellenic monas-
Redemp. ticism ; it is stoic and Aristotelian popularized Occi-

tion. "^ *^

'^ dental philosophy, which made the attempt to subor-
f dinate to itself the traditional doctrine of redemption.
The influence of the Antiochian theology can be
shown. The sources are the writings and letters of
Caelestius, Pelagius and Julian (mostly in Augustine
and Jerome), the works of Augustine, Jerome, Oro-

DBVELOPHBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 365

sius, Marius Mercator, the papal letters and synodal
decreeB. Pelagius himself was more cautious, less
aggressive and less truthful than Cselestius and
Julian. The latter first completed the doctrine
(without him, Augustine says, ^ Pelagiani dogma-
tis inachina sine architecto necessario remansis-
set^^). Formally Aug^tinianism and Pelagianism Elements
are herein related and opposed to the previous mode of ii^lSf Md
thought, (1) Each is founded upon the desire to unify ^5^*°'
the religious, ethical knowledge, (2) Each expelled
from tradition the dramatico-eschatological element,
(3) Each was not culto-mystically interested, but kept
the problem within the sphere of the spirit, and (4)
Neither puts the highest emphasis upon traditional
proof (Augustine often confesses that the proof is
difficult to deduce from the extant writings of the
fathers). Pelagius was anxious to show that in the
whole controversy it was not a question of dogma,
but a practical question ; Augustine carried on the
contest with the conviction that the essence and
power of the Christian religion must stand or fall
with his doctrine of grace; Caelestius was especially
interested in overthrowing the doctrine of hereditary
sin ; Julian was consciously defending the cause of
reason and freedom against a *' stupid and impious
dogma" through which the Church was being
plunged into barbarism and the educated minority .
given over to the masses who do not understand
Aristotle.
I. Pelagius appeared in Rome and proclaimed to ^^Roil?. ***

366 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

CVlestius

S**CODd8

his
TeachlDg.

the oommon Christians monasticism and the ability
of every man to rise in his own strength unto virtue,
avoided theological polemics but contended against
the quietism of the Augustinian confessions. His
Roman friend Caelestius seconded him. Both went
to North Africa, from which Pelagius however soon
departed. Caelestius applied at Carthage for a pres-
byter's office. But he was complained of (412 or 411)
by the Milanese deacon, Paulinus, at a synod at
Carthage, because he considered mortality as some-
thing natural (to Adam and to all men), denied the
universal^ consequences of Adam's sin, taught the
perfect innocence of the new-bom babe, esteemed the
benefit of the resurrection of Christ as not necessarily
attributable to all, misunderstood the difference be-
tween law and gospel, spoke of sinless men before
the appearance of Christ and thought in general
superficially of sinlessness and the fulfilment of the
commandments of Christ, if only one has goodjn-
tentions. In spite of his assertion that he acknowl-
edged the baptism of children (but not unto the for-
giveness of sin) and was therefore orthodox, he was
excommunicated. He went to Ephesus and Constan-

Exoom-

municat€d. tinoplo. Pelagius was in Palestine and sought to
maintain peace with Augustine and Jerome. His
keen friend with his polemic against the traduxpec-
cati and the baptism of infants in remissionem pec-
catorum was uncongenial to him ; more valuable were
his more recent friends in the Orient, especially John
of Jerusalem. He and others pronounced him in-

CeelcstiuB

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 367

Zoeimiu.

nocent (at the synods at Jerusalem and Diospolis S^lfmi
415), while the Augustinian disciples, Orosius and atsym^of
Jerome, accused him of misunderstg^ing the Divine i^ 4i5.
grace. But only with a mental reservation did Pela-
gius give up the incriminating tenets of CsBlestius,
which accordingly remained condemned in the Orient
also. In his literary labors he became simply more
cautious, but did not give in. The North African
churches (synods of Carthage and Mileve, 416) as
well as Augustine applied to Innocent I. in Rome for innocent i.
the condemnation of the two heretics. The pope,
glad to have been approached by North Africa, com-
plied (417), yet kept a pathway of retreat open for
himself. Although Zosimus, his successor, induced
through a cunning confession of faith by Pelagius
and won over by CaDlestius who now also grew more
cautious, reinstated them and at first remained deaf
to the representations of the North Africans ; yet a
general synod at Carthage (418) and an imperial
edict, which expelled both heretics with, their fol-
lowers from Rome, made an impression also upon the
pope, who in an epistula tractoria assented to the
condemnation and required the Occidental bishops
to sign the same (418). Still this imputation strengt.h-
oned the opposition party. Eighteen bishops de-
clined. Their leader was Julian of Eklanum. This
juvenis confidentissimus now took up his sharp
pen. He wrote daring letters to Zosimus and Rufus
of Thessalonica, which Augustine answered (420).
Therewith began a ten years' literary feud between

Julian of

368 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the two (fragments of the Julian writings in Aug.
de nuptiis et concupisc.^ libri sex c. Jul. and opus
imperf. c. Jul.). During the same Augustine was
often driven into a close comer by Julian; but the
feud took place post festum: Augustine was already
victor; Julian wrote like one who has nothing more
to lose. He evolved therefore his naturalism and
moralism out of his royal reason with great license,
casting aside all monkery, yet without any compre-
hension of the needs and right of religion. He was
finally forced to flee with hi^ companions into the
Orient and he there found protection with Theodore
^oon^ ^^ Mopsuestia. The Ephesian coimcil, i.e, Cyril,
coundu ^ did the Roman bishop the favor of condemning the
^481?"*' Pelagians (431). In the Orient men had no compre-
hension of the contest ; indeed at the bottom they were
inclined toward Pelagianism as regards the freedom
of the will ; but in the Occident also men were agreed
only on the points, that every baptism is in remis-
sionem peccatorum^ that there exists since the fall
of Adam a tradux peccata which delivers the chil-
dren of Adam over to death and condemnation, and
that the grace of God as a power for good is neces-
sary unto the salvation of every man.
g^^jJJ^ II. Pelagius cared nothing for new dogmas and a
system ; Julian's stoical system with its Aristotelian
dialectics. Christian etiquette and tendency toward
naturalism belongs to the history of theology. Yet
it is important to note the principles of the Pelagian
doctrine; for it has made its appearance in a subtle

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTBINE OF SIN, ETC. 369

form again and again. The monastic tendency was
not an essential thing with Pelagius, but subordinate
to the aim of the spontaneous development of good
character, and to the ancient idea of moderation.
Just on that account one may class Pelagius and
Julian together. Courageous faith in man's ability
to do that which is good, and the want of clearness
of thought on religio-ethical questions unite them.

Because there is righteousness, there is a Qod.
God is the kind Creator and the just Leader. Every-
thing that he has created is good, therefore also the
creature, the law and free-will. If nature is good, it
is then not convertible; accordingly there can exist
no peccata naturalia^ only peccata per accidens. ^J^^
Human nature can be modificated only incidentally.
The most important and best endowment of this
nature is free-will (** motua animi cogente nullo ") ;
reason is comprised within the latter. Both bring
it to pass that man does not live under the condi-
tio necessitatis and does not need help. It is the
glorious gratia prima of Gkni, the Creator, that we
may do both and can do either. The possihilitas ^f SliV
honi comes from Qod, the voluntas and actio is 'voFuntaa'
our concern. Evil is a momentary, false self-de- Oun.
termination without consequence to the nature,
originating in the sensuous faculties. According to
Pelagius these are bad in themselves, but can be
subdued; according to Julian they are not bad in
themselves, only so "in excessu^. Were it other- *

wise, then must baptism abolish concupiscence ; and

370 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

if ooDCupisoence is bad, then the Creator Gkxl is not
good. Man is able to resist every sin, therefore he
must do so; there have indeed been sinless men.
According to Pelagius everybody goes to hell who
acts contrary to his better ability. The attempt to
adjust these teachings to the Scriptures and ecclesi-
astical tradition was fraught with difficulties. It was
admitted that Adam, endowed with freedom of
choice, fell; yet natural death, since it is natural,
was not the consequence of his sin, but spiritual
death. Inasmuch as death has not descended from
him, much less has not sin; for the acceptance of a
tradux peccati (original sin) leads to the absurd as-
sumption of soul-generation and to Manichseism (evil
nature), abolishes the Divine justice, causes matri-
mony to appear unholy, therefore unlawful, and de-
stroys all possibility of a redemption (for how can a
Bin iB an redemptive message or a law influence nature?) . Sin

Affair of '^ °

the Will, always remains an affair of the will and each is
punished only for his own sin. All men stand in
the condition of Adam before his fall {^liberum
arhitrium et post peccata tarn plenum est quam
fuit ante peccata ") ; only a sinful habit keeps them
down, the power of which is certainly to bo acknowl-
edged. On that accoimt grace also must be acknowl-
edged as adjutorium. According to the degree of
convenience, the Pelagians declared grace as simply
necessary, as alleviating, ^s superfluous. They con-
sidered it in truth only a comfortable crutch for
Christians; for the sentence, ^'homo libero arbitrio

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 371

emanctpatus est a Deo ", excludes grace in princi-
ple. There exists also in truth only one grace, the ®olS**
enlightening, deterring, reward-offering law; but one
may also distinguish, (1) creational grace (endow-
ment), (2) the law (illuminatio et doctrina)^ (3)
gratia per Christum: (a) his example, (b) the fruit
of his work applied by baptism to our benefit as for-
giveness of sin. On this point the Pelagians were
not permitted to waver; but they disclaimed the
gratia praeveniens^ did not see in the baptism of
infants a baptism in remissionem peccatorum and
did not acknowledge the absolute necessity of for-
giveness. Children dying unbaptized are also saved,
but are not admitted into the regnum cae'loruin.
The thesis of the Pelagians, that Christian grace is ?^J^^";
conferred only secundum merita, abolishes grace *^m€?1L*°
just as much as the other thesis, that it works es-
sentially in the same manner as the law. While
judging Augustinianism, now as an innovation, now
as Manichseism, now as inward contradiction, they
themselves brought forth the greatest contradictions
(dialectically concealed), and were innovators in so
far as the)' really held fast to the old ecclesiastical
doctrine of freedom but not to the opposite pole, the
mystical doctrine of redemption, and they accord-
ingly sold religion to an irrational rationality and to
a profoundly immoral theory of morality.

III. Augustine did not start from the liberum ^J^'
arbitrium, but from God and the soul which feels ^^^'^°««-
its guilt in his presence and yet has experienced his

872 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

grace. In seeking to explain therefrom nature, the
history of the world and the history of the individual,
he fell into many contradictions and into assumptions
too easily gainsaid. But there are theses which are,
outwardly considered, entirely untrue, but, inwardly
considered, true. Thus is Aug^tine's doctrine of
grace and sin to be judged. As an expression of
psychological religious experience it is true; but
projected into history it is false. Besides it is in
itself also not consistent; for it is dominated by the
thought that ^ Qod in Christ creates faith '', as well
as by the other thought that '' Qod is the only Causal-
ity ", and these are brought only seemingly into con-
sonance by the definition of grace as gratis data,
^^l^^S^ Besides Manichsaan elements are visible; the letter
of Scripture (generally misunderstood) had also an
obscuring effect, and the religious view is accom-
panied by a moralistic (merita) which finally
makes the decision.

Humanity is, according to experience, a massa
peccatij i.e, void of Qod; but the God-man, Christ,
— he alone — by his death brought the power to re-
plenish empty humanity with Divine love: that
Gratia is the gratia gratis data^ the beginning, middle

Oratia

i>a^ and end of our salvation. Its aim is that out of the
massa perditionis there shall be saved a certus nu-
merus electorum. Such will be saved because Gknl
has predestined (Augustine is an infra-lapsarian),
elected, called, justified, sanctified and preserved
them by virtue of his eternal decree. This takes

DEVBLOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 373

place in the Church through grace, which, (1) isprae- pj^even-
venienSy i.e. withdraws mau from his condition of sin opSii^
and creates the good will ( =» vocation but this and lis.
all further acts of grace take place in those also who
finally are not saved, because they are not elected),
(2) cooperans — this is developed in a series of gra-
dations as far as the entire and actual regeneration of
man, which makes it possible for him, when filled
with love, to earn merita. Out of the vocatio fol-
lows the ^de«; this is gradually augmented, since it
is developed upon the stages of belief, obedience,
fiducia and love. Parallel with it goes the actual
(visible) working of grace in the Church, which be-
gins with the remissio peccatorunij i.e. with bap-
tism, which removes the reatus of hereditary sin and
blots out past sins. It terminates in the justification
which is not a judgment upon the sinner, but the
completing of the process by virtue of which he has
actually passed from an impious to a just state.
This takes place through the infusion of the spirit of
love into the heart of the believer (and through the
Lord's Supper), whereby, admitted into the unity of
the communion with Christ (Church), he receives
as sanctus and spiritalis a new disposition and
desire (" mihi adhaerere deo honum est ") and now
has the capacity for good works {^ fides impetrat^
quod lex imperat^^). Justification depends upon JusstifUsa-
WiQ fides and is sub specie aetemitatis a concluded ^^»
act; empirically considered, it is a process never ^"^^
completed in this world. The being filled with faith.

374 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

hope, and love is evidenced by the demoDstration of
love and by withdrawal from the world (asoeticiam).
This is in turn evidenced in good works, which now
have merit before Qod {merita), although they are
his gifts since they are begotten of his grace. Not to
every one are perfect works granted {consilia evan-
gelica) ; but every justified person has works of faith,
hope and love, (3) the highest and best gift of the
gratia is the perseverantia which is irresistihilis in
the elect. The vocati {et sanctificati ?) who do not
have this will be lost. Why some only receive it,
since it is not bestowed secundum meritaj is Gk)d's
mystery. But certain is it — in spite of predestina-
tion and sovereign grace — that at the final judgment
not the " adhaerere Dei " but the moral habitus will
be decisive. He only who can show merita (but
such are Dei munera) will be saved. The signifi-
cance of the forgiveness of sin and of faith is how-
ever misconceived. Augustine's thesis is: "Where
love is, there also is bliss corresponding to the mea-
sure of love",
sin. Fall On this basis Augustine formed his doctrine con-

ond Origin-
al State, ceming sin, the fall and the original state. Sin is

w^io privatio boni (lack of being and of true being),
turning of man unto himself (pride) and concu-
piscence (sensuality) : " misera necessitas non posse
non peccandi ", although formal freedom exists —
dominion of the devil (therefore redemption from
without is necessary). Augustine desires to retain
the " anior sui " as the principal conception of sin.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF StN, ETC. 375

but in reality he ranks concupiscence above it. The
latter manifests itself above all in sexual lust. Since
this acts spontaneously (independent of the will), it
proves, liiat the nature is vitiated {natura vitiata). ^iSSL
For that reason it propagates sin : The act of genera-
tion, consummated with lust, is a testimony that
humanity has become a mcissa peccati. Since Au-
gustine hesitated to teach traducianism as regards
the origin of the soul, the body — contrary to the orig-
inal deposition — ^becomes the bearer of sin which
infects the soul. The tradux peccati runs as vitiam SS^;
originis through humanity. This hereditary sin is orisinis.
sin, punishment for sin and guilt; it destroys the true
life and surrenders man to the non posse non mori
(unbaptized children also — however ^mittissima
poena "), after it has defiled all his acts {^ splendida
vitia^). Thus testify Scripture, the practice of the
Church (infant baptism) and the conscience of the
sinner. Since Adam this hereditary sin exists as
natura vitiata. His fall was terrible, a complexity
of all heinous sins (pride and concupiscence) ; it was
the more terrible, since Adam had not only been
created good, but also possessed as adjutorium the
Divine grace (for without this there exists no spon-
taneous goodness) . This grace he forfeited, and so
great was its loss, that '' in him " the whole human
race was corrupted (not only because all were that Race

Sinzied

Adam, but also because from him the evil contagion ^ ^^"•™-
spread), and even baptism is not able to eradicate he-
reditary sin (hmnan lust) , but can only remove its

37G OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

reatus. Augustine's idea of the original state ( posse
nonpeccare and adjutorium) stands in flagrant con-
tradiction with his doctrine of grace ; for gratia as ad-
jutorium in the original state is the grace of redemp-
tion, in so far as, totally unlike, it leaves the will free
and really has no effect, but is merely a condition of
the free decision for good, therefore not irresistibilis.
This adjutorium is in truth conceived in a Pelagian
way (his doctrine of the original state and of the stand-
ard of the final judgment is not compatible with his
doctrine of grace) and the natura ri7taf a (when taken
as human lust) gives no longer a place for holy mat-
rimony, and is therefore ManichsBan. But all these
grave offences cannot dim the greatness of the truth
that God works the " willing and doing **, that we
possess nothing which we have not received, and that
to adhere to God is good and our good.

4. Augv^tine^s Exposition of the Symbol. The

New Doctrine of Religion.

ttoe^^- ^^ order to understand how Augustine transformed
chiridJon. ^^ traditional doctrine of religion (the dogma) , and
to know which of his thoughts have passed into ec-
clesiastical possession, it is necessary to study his ex-
planations of the symbol, especially his Enchiridion.
In the first place the common Catholic trend of his
teaching is here revealed. Conformably with the old
symbol, the doctrine of the trinity and of the double-
nature is explained ; the importance of the Catholic

DBVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 377

Ohundi IB strictly maintained. Baptism is placed in |^^^.
the foreground as the most important mystery, and ^S^S^.
is referred back to the death of Christ, by which the
dominion of the devil, after he has received his dues,
is broken. Faith often appears as something prelim-
inaiy ; eternal life is granted o&ly to those meriting
it; these continue in works of love, lastly however
in asceticism. But all are not obliged to live thus;
one must distinguish between mandata and consilia.
His treatment of alms is broad; it constitutes
penance. Within the Church there is forgiveness
of all sins, under the assumption of the satisf actio
congma. There are degrees in sin, ranging from 'X^-'*
crimes to insignificant every-day sins ; in the same
manner there are also degrees of good and of bad men ;
even the best {sanctiy perfecti) are not free from light
sins. There is a gradation of bliss (according to the
merita). The departed, but not perfected good souls
are benefited by the sacrifice of the mass, alms and
prayers; they are in a purifying fire of punishment.
The common, superstitious views were in many ways ^JSSSu
farther intensified by Augustine; thus in regard to vfeWEm.
purgatory, to the temporary amelioration of the pun- ^
ishment of the condemned, to the angels who aid the
Church of this world, to the completing by the re-
deemed of the heavenly Church which was deci-
mated through the fall of the angels, to the virginity
of Mary in partu and to her singular purity and
conception, to the mild beginnings toward the calcu-
lation of the value of the sacrificial death of Christ,

378 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

finally — ^to the oonception of salvation as visio et
fruitio De% which again and again comes to the
surface, and to the joining of the spiritual powers to
mysteriously operating sacraments,
i^nta Add- ^^^> ^^ ^^^ other side, the doctrine of religion in
Church the Enchiridion is new. To the old symbol material

DoctiineB.

was added which could be united with it only very
loosely and which at the same time modifies the orig-
inal elements. In all three articles the treatment of
sin, forgiveness of sin and perfection in love is the
main thing (Ench. 10 seq. 25 seq. 41 seq. 64-68).
Everything is represented as an inward process, to
which the very briefly treated old dogmatic material
appears as subordinate. Therefore the 3d article
is treated the most explicitly. Already in the brief
sketch the new appears : Everything depends upon
faith, hope, love; so truly inward is religion (3-8).
In the 1st article no cosmology is given; indeed
physics as the content of dogmatics is expressly put
aside (9,16 seq. ) . Hence the various Logos-doctrines
are also all wanting. The trinity, handed down as
dogma, is compressed into a unity : It is the Creator.
In reality it is one person (the persons are moments
in God and have no longer any cosmological mean-
^\n^ ing) , Everything in religion is related to Gk)d, as the
sole source of all good, and to sin; the latter is dis-
tinguished from error. Thus was a break made with
the old intellectualism. Whenever there is a refer-
ence to sin, there is also one to the gratia gratis
datay the predestining grace, which alone frees the

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 379

shackled will. With a reference to the misericordia
praeveniens and subsequens the exposition of the 1st
article closes. How differently would its words have
sounded, had Augustine been able to treat it unre-
strainedly ! — ^In the 2d article is touched quite briefly
that which the symbol really contains (the return of
Christ, without chiliasm) . But the following come
to the front: The unity of Christ's personality as to^^'of
the homo with whose soul the Word imited itself, ^^^^ °®'
the predestining grace which brought this homo into
unity of person with the Divinity, although he pos-
sessed no deserts, the close connection between the
death of Christ and the redemption from the devil,
the atonement and baptism, on the one side, the
thought of the appearance and history of Christ as
exaltation in humility and as the prototype of the
vita Christiana, on the other. The redemptive im- ^^p^*»
portance of Christ was to Augustine as strongly ex- tion.^
pressed in this humility in exaltation and in the
prototype (vid. Bernard and Francis) as in Christ's
death. The incarnation as such recedes, i.e. is placed
in a light which was entirely foreign to the Greeks.
Accordingly the 2d article was quite changed ; the
old dogmatic material is only the building mate-
rial.— In the 3d article the unrestrainedness and as-
surance with which an ever-enduring forgiveness of
sins within the Church is taught is the principal
and the new point. Among the masses the growing
laxity had called forth the inexhaustible sacrament
of atonement; but with Augustine the new knowl-

Paul

380 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

edge had been given through an intensifying of the
consciousness of sin and a burrowing into the grace
Au^tfne, of Gk>d, as Paul has taught it. True, the question of
the personal assurance of salvation had as yet not
touched his soul — he stands between the ancient
Church and Luther — ; the question, How can I be rid
of my sins and be filled with the power of God? was
his fundamental question. In following the vulgar
Catholic teaching he looks about for good works ; but
he conceived them as the product of grace and of the
will which is dependent upon grace; he accordingly
warned men against relying upon outward acts. Cul-
tus and even alms he put aside; he knows that it is
a question of inward transformation, of a pure heart
and a new spirit. At the same time he is sure that
'^sSi. *^*®^ baptism the way also to forgiveness of sins
ever stands open to the penitent, and that he who
does not believe in this commits the sin against the
Holy Spirit. This is an entirely new interpretation
of the Gospel passage. Very explicitly was the con-
clusion of the symbol {resurrectio camis) explained.
But the main point here, after a short explanation
of the real theme, is : The new doctrine of predesti-
nation as the strength of his theology ; furthermore
the idea, essentially new as a doctrine (it stands in
place of Origen's doctrine regarding the apokatas-
tasis), of a purification of souls in the hereafter, to-
ward which the prayers and sacrifices of survivors
are able to contribute.
Piety. Piety: Faith and love in place of fear and hope;

DBVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, BTC. 381

religion : Something higher than all that is called
doctrine, a new life in the strength of love; the doc-
trine of Scripture : The things (the Gospel, faith, love,
hope — God) ; the trinity : The one living God ; Chris-
tology : The one Mediator, the man Jesus, with whose
soul the Divinity has been united, without the former
having deserved it; redemption : Death for the ben-
efit of enemies and humility in exaltation; grace:
The new creative, changeless power of love; the sac-
raments: The Word along with the sign; bliss: The
heata necessitas of the good ; the good : Dependence
upon God; history: Ood does everything according
to his pleasure. Compare with this the Greek dog-
matics ! True, the old dogma grew the more rigid,
the farther they were pushed into the background
(not abolished) ; they became ecclesiastical law and
order. The new doctrines remained still fluid; they
had not as yet received the form and value of dog-
mas. Through Augustine Church doctrine became
more indefinite as regards extent and importance.
On the one hand it was traced back to the Gospel, on
the other it defined its limits less sharply in relation
to theology, since a definite formulation was lack-
ing. Around the old dogma, which maintained
themselves in rigid validity, a large indefinite circle
of doctrines was formed, in which the most impor-
tant thoughts concerning faith lived, and which not-
wifchstanding could be surveyed and firmly fixed by
no one. That was the condition of the dogma dur-
ing the Middle Ages. By the side of the rigidity

BeUgloii.

Doctrine.

Trinity

ChH»-
tology.

Redemp-
tion.

Graoe.

mentBb

Hie Good.
History.

382 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGlfA.

there had abeady b^un the process of inward dis-
solution.

CHAPTER V.

HISTORY OP DOGMA IN THE OCCIDENT TILL THE
BEGINNING OF THE MIDDLE AGES (430-604).

Mdller, Semipelagianismus R. E.* Wiggers, i. Z. f. h. Th.,
1854 f., and elsewhere. Lau, Gregor d. Gr., 1845.

Catholic
Church

The Western Roman empire coUapsed. The
^wJJTiSi^ Catholic Church stepped in as the heir of the empire,
Empire, tho Romau bishop as the heir of the emperor (Leo I.
and his successors in the 5th century). But the
papacy, scarcely put at the head, experienced in the
time of Justinian a severe reverse, from which Gre-
gory alone succored it. During the 5th and 6th cen-
turies the Roman church was not as yet able to disci-
pline the barbarian nations; for they were Aiian
and Rome was not free but chained to the Orient
from the 6th century on. The Franks alone became
CathoMc, yet they at first remained independent of
Rome. Nevertheless just at this time the claim of
the Roman bishop, that everything valid of Peter
(especially Mt. 16 :17 seq.) was also valid of him, ob-
tained recognition. Dogmatic efforts were limited
to the reception and toning down of Augustinianism
in the sense of gluing it on to the common Catho-
lic teaching. As regards the old Roman sym-
bol, it obtained in Gaul at that time its pres-
ent form, in which especially the new expression

The
Franks.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 383

^^communio sanctorum^ (Faustus of Reji) is of
importance.

I. Contest between Semi-Pelagianism and

Augustinianism,

Grateful esteem for Augustine, rejection of Pe- Ppedcatinar
lagianism, recognition of the universal hereditary ^^ibiJfi.
peccability and of the necessity of grace (as adiuto-
rium) did not as yet mean the recognition of predes-
tination and of the gratia irresistibilis. Justifi-
cation by works, for which Augustine himself left a
concealed place, and a correct instinct of ecclesiasti-
cal self-preservation reacted against these doctrines.
During Augustine's life-time they had already called
forth uneasiness and doubt among the monks of
Hadrumet (Aug, de gratia et libera arbitrio and de
corruptione et gratia) . A year or two later (428-429)
his devoted friends reported to him that in the south
of Gaul (monks at Massilia and other places) there ^J||^j^^
was an opposition to the doctrine of predestination
and of the inability of the will, because it paralyzed
the Christian preaching. Augustine by his writings
de praedest. sanct. and de dono perseverantiae con-
firmed his friends, but rather goaded his opponents.
After his death the " servi dei " in southern Gaul
advanced more daringly, yet not quite openly
for Augustine possessed great authority. The
Commonitorium of Vincent, which formulates the
strictly ecclesiastic traditional point of view (see
above, p. 221), is aimed, at least indirectly, against

384 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGHA«

Q^^^ the newness of Augustine's doctrine; John Cassi-
an, the father of the south Gallic monks, gave in
his ^ collationes " expression to semi-Pelagianism^
although he had learned much from Augustine. The
poinu of decisive points of semi-Pelagianism are the acttial
giAnism. universality of grace, the accountability (responsi-
bility) of man — therein is it evangelical — ^and the
importance of good works. Accordingly the gratia
praeveniens is in general admitted only as outward
grace. QoA created the conditions, opportunity and
possibility of our salvation ; but inward (sanctifying)
grace concurs with the free will, which is accord-
ingly a co-ordinate factor. Therefore the one as well
as the other may lead the way, and a gratia irre-
sistihilis is as much excluded as a predestination in-
dependent of the Divine prescience (of free actions).
The latter involves an ingens sacrilegium {i.e. fatal-
ism), even if the reservation must stand that Gtxl's
HiiaHufl ways are incomprehensible (like Hilarius of Aries,
'"praedes- and morc decidedly, but at the same time given to
lying, the unknown author of the " Praedestinatus '*,
the origin of which is still a riddle — the representa-
tion is fairly in keeping with that of Jerome, as
general doctrine it is more hesitating than that of
Augustine, as an expression of Christian self- judg-
ment it is a desertion of the truth). The defendeis
of Augustine, Prosper and the unknown author of
the libri II. de vocatione gentium (milder th«n
Augustinianism), did not produce a decisive eflFect,
although pope Colestius reprimanded their opponents

tiDatua.**

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINB OF SIK, ETC. 385

as over-curious people. During the last decades of
the 5th century semi-Pelagianism obtained an excel-
lent representative in the renowned teacher of south-
em Gaul, Faustus of Beji, an amiable and mild ^f^^
abbot and bishop, who turned as weU against Pe-
lagius ""pestifer ^, as against the grave error of pre-
destination (in his writing, de gratia dei et humanae
mentis libero arbitrio)^ and who induced the strictly
Augustinian presbyter Lucidus to recant, after that
the doctrine of predestination had been condenmed
at the synod of Aries (475). Faustus in his doctrine
is still more monkish than Cassian and less influenced
by Augustine. He already brought forward implic-
itly the doctrine of meritum de congruo et condigno, Meritum

DeCon-.

In the fides as knowledge and in the endeavors of ^^o et
the will to reform itself there lies a merituniy bom
of the gratia primay which participates in the re-
deeming grace that now works in union with the
will, so that perfect merita are produced.

Like as Pelagianism and Nestorianism, which are
inwardly united, were once drawn into a conunon
fate, so also was semi-Pelagianism entangled in the
Christological controversy and found therein its pro-
visional end. The theopaschite Scythian monks in ^£*^
Constantinople (see above, p. 297), who in their ^^'^^JS"'
Christology especially emphasized the Divine factor,
denounced the Occidental theologians (Faustus) as
enemies of the correct Christology and as opponents
of grrace, taking their stand with Augustine. The

pope gave an evasive decision, but the monks found
25

386 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOBY OF DOOMA.

allies among the bishops who had been banifihed
'J^^Jjf from North Africa into Sardinia. Fulgentius of
Buspe wrote about 520 several important letters
against the authority of Faustus, in which complete
Augustinianism is set forth (particularity of grace,
praedestinatio adpoenam). These and the reading
of Augustine's sermons had its effect also in south-
ern Oaul. The age saw but the one dilemma, either
Augustine is a heretic, or a holy teacher. The great
Gallic preacher, who had obtained his education en-
3^/^ tirely from Augustine, Caesarius of Aries (f 542),
averted the South-Gallic opposition, which had be-
come boisterous at the synod of Valence; supported
by the pope he gained the victory at the small synod
86 of Orange (526) with the 25 " Chapters", which the
pope had extracted from the writings of Augustine
and Prosper and sent to the southern Gauls as the
doctrine of the early fathers. A few only in south-
em Gaul supported CsBsarius (Avitus of Vienne, f
523) ; but most of the bishops were perhaps no longer
capable of following the point under controversy.
Boniface The approval of pope Boniface II. streng^ened the
authority of the decrees of Orange, which were later
tolerantly considered by the Tridentine council. The
^Chapters" are Augustinian, but predestination is
wanting; and the inward process of grace upon
which for Augustine the principal emphasis lay is
Gratia not descrviugly appreciated. The gratia praeveniens
^^^ is taught unequivocally, because the strict conception
of hereditary sin and with it the doctrine of grace

DBYELOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 387

were emphasized by the monkish views i-egarding
the impurity of matrimony. But otherwise the doc-
trine is in reality an AugHStinianism without Augus-
tine, or could easily be understood as such; i.e. the
vulgar Catholic views concerning outward grace and
works could and would maintain themselves along-
side of it.

2. Gregory the Oreat (690-604) .

Rome finally advanced the formulas of Augustin- orogoryi.
ianism to victory, although its bishops in the 6th
century withdrew far from the same. Gregory I., a
pope highly influential through his personality (a
monk), his letters, writings (regula pastoralis^ dia-
logiy expos, in Job seu moralia^ homih in Ezeck.)
and liturgical reforms, under the cover of Augus-
tinian language strengthened the vulgar Catholic
type, by means of superstitious elements, then gave
expression to it again, and brought forward into
prominence the old Occidental conception of religion
as legalistic organization. The miraculous became 'Hf^l*'"®
characteristic of religion. The latter lived among ^^^
angels, devils, sacraments, sacrifices, penitential
rites, punishment of sins, fear and hope, but not in
sure confidence in God through Christ €uid in love.
Even if Gregory personally indulged in Augustinian
thoughts and manifested in his own way justice,
gentleness and freedom, yet the variegated form
of his theology testifies that even the best men at
that time were not able to withdraw from the relig-

388 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ious barbarism into which antiquity had dissolved.
Gregory was in after time more read and lauded
than Augustine. For nearly half a millennium he
igl^fj^j^ dominated without a rival the history of dogma in
&S7Sm- the Occident, and he really dominates Catholicism
even now. He indeed created nothing new; but by
the manner in which he ctccenttuited the various
doctrines and Church customs and introduced a sec-
ond-rate religion into theology, he created the vulgar
type of Roman Catholicism. Especially worthy of
Bepro- mention are the following: (1) He reproduced the

dUOM

A^iu^ most valuable series of Augustine's thoughts con-
£^|^^^. ceming the inner effect and appropriation of grace,
in part even independent of the latter, attributing
also to the Word {verbum fidei) great importance;
but he gave to all phases of the Augustinian ordo
salutis a semi-Pelagian cast, since he conceived the
liberum arbitrium as a factor coordinate with grace
{**nosmet ipsos liberare dicimury quia liberanti
sacriflce of nos domino consentimus ") ; (2) He felt the impor-

Christ Re-

pej^,*"* tanoe of the death of Christ, perhaps more intensely
Supper, ^j^j^j Augustine, but among the different points of
view under which he placed it the apocryphal pre-
dominates: Through Christ's death the devil was
overcome, after he had been cheated ; in the Lord's
Supper the sacrifice of Christ is actually repeated
(here Gregory's doctrine has become especially the
standard), and thus an imaginary sacrifice takes the
place of the historical ; but otherwise also the his-
torical Christ appears supplanted, viz. by his own

bfiVKLOPMEKT O^ DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 389

merituniy which as the result of a sinless life and
holy death is separated from him, an actual good
necessary to every one in order to appease the angry
Qody but in its value to the individual quite an un-
certain treasure ; (3) With this conception of the in-
tercession of the meritum ChristL Gregory united interow-

^ '' 8ion of

the hitherto uncertain thoughts regarding the inter- Sainto, eta
cession of the saints and the service of the angels,
and exalted them to the lofty plane of ^' theology".
He legitimized the pagan superstition which had
need of demi-gods and graded deities, had re-
course to the holy bodies of martyrs and joined the
service of Christ closely with that of the saints,
classifying and commending the archangels and
guardian-angels, and fortifying the evil practice by
his doctrine; (4) Hierarch more in practice than in ^'Jj^,.
doctrine, he brought out strongly the similarity of *"'^-
the Church and the civitas Dei, for he lived at a
time when nothing of value existed save the Church.
He extolled the latter as the congregatio sanctorum^
but in reality it was to him an educational institu-
tion, repelling the evil and dispensing grace ; a higher
idea the men of that day dare not set before them-
selves. To him the Roman bishop was the master
only of the sinning bishops (the laity no longer play
any part at all), but sinners were they all (" si qua
culpa in episcopis invenitur^ nescio quis Petri
succesaori subiectus non sit; cum vero culpa non
exigity omnes secundum rationem humilitatis ae-
qualea sunt^)\ (5) Gregory still knows what inner

390 OUTUKSS OP TRtt HiSTOtfcY OP DOGMA.

»ulSliM7^ gifts of grace and virtue are, but the exterminated
^i:&. Roman paganism had notwithstanding transmitted
to him also its inventory and its religious mode of
thought in such a perfect way that he encased all
religious duties and virtues in statutory, firmly out-
lined ceremonies, which were in part adopted old
Soman customs; here also he created in reality lit-
tle that was new, but he elevated to ecclesiastical
ordinances of salvation of the first rank the Roman
^ religio** together with the remnants of the mysteries
which long since had obtained civic rights in the
Hiffl^ity, Church ; (6) Gregory had a feeling for true humil-
'^""***- ity, but he strengthened the trend which this virtue
had taken toward monastic " humilitas^y self -dental
and spiritual self-deception : With the simple sense
of truth the sense of truthfulness died out — it became
night; and the world of the inner life also, which
Augustine had enlightened, grew dark again; (7)
Gregory's deductions concerning penitence became
the most consequential ; in these his theology lived
and from them one could wholly construe it. The
inscrutable God is the Requiter and leaves no sin
unpunished; in baptism he has overlooked inherited
sin, but it is our concern to gain blessedness through
penance and good works by the aid of the hand of
grace. Of the three parts of penitence {conversio
m^ntisy confessio oriSj vindictapeccati) the penally
to be paid for sin becomes in reality the most impor-
tant. By Gregory the fatal transposition was first
carried out that the " satisf actionem ^ which origin-

DEVSLOPICSKT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 391

ally were considered a sure attestation of repentance, ^SS'ta-
are the satisfying penalties for sin, to which one ^'
submits in order to avoid eternal punishment. The
merit of Christ and the power of the Church seem to
consist in the very fact that eternal punishment is
changed into temporal; these temporal penalties,
however, are again diminished, abbreviated, or pre-
vented by the intercession of Christ and the saints,
by masses for the soul, relics, amulets, etc. The
fact which has always been observable in the history
of religion, that wherever religion takes its aim from
morals it becomes immoral, is exemplified here also.
In the main principle the severe idea of retribution
dominates, in the subordinate all possible means of
salvation come into play, in part not even with Chris-
tian etiquette, and in the final instance casuistry and
fear rule. Long before this view sufficed no longer
for this life and for time, and yet men had not dared
to reach over into eternity — for who could then be
considered saved? — but Gregory was the first to se-
curely introduce purgatory into theology, thereby
conquering an immense province for the Church, to
remove hell farther away, and thus to procure for
uncertainty a new comfort, but no rest.

892 OtTTLtNBS OF TH« flISTDRV OV DOGkA.

CHAPTER VI.

HISTORY OF DOGMA IN THE TIME OF THE
CARLOVINOIAN RENAISSANCE.

Bach, DO. des MA., 2 Bdd., 1878 f. Reuter, Geech. d. re-
lig. Auf kl&rung im MA. , 2 Bdd. , 1875 f . Hauck, KG«8ch.
DeutBchlands, 2 Bdd. , 1887 f . Schwane, DG. d. mittleren
Zt. , 1882. SpieflB, Gesch. d. Unterrichtswesen i. Deutachl. bis
B. Mitte d. 18. Jahrh., 1885. Hatch, The Growth of Church
Institutions, 1887.

cooTis. Clovis' oonversion to Christianity and Qregoiy's
missionary efforts among the Anglo-Saxons laid the
foundation for the history of the Roman Catholic
Church among the Germans. In the 7th century
Arianism died out; in the 8th Rome was forced to
transfer the centre of gravity of its politics to the
Romano-Gbrmanic empire. Newly conyerted Ehig-
^^"gjjgj^ land and Germany became at once Roman. Pepin
and Charles the Qreat made advances to the pope.
At first the new kingdom of the Franks gained more
than the pope; but it soon became apparent that the
latter obtained the highest benefit from the oonf eder^
ation, not because the idea in itself of the Christian
conqueror signified less than that of the successor of
Peter, but because it demanded the foundation of an
actual world-empire, wtich, however, could be only
temporarily created.

Spiritual life and theology had, prior to the time
of Charles the Qreat, no progressive history; the

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 393

Carlovingian epoch was a great and, in many respects,
abortive attempt at a reviyal of antiquity and likewise
also of the theology of the fathers. Whatever of
theology was at hand prior to about the year 800 is
compendium and excerpt (Isidore of Seville, Bede, ^tStSS
later Babanus), is in a certain measure "institu- S^tii,
ticm^y like the whole of religion. Through Bede and
Alcuin, Augustine was revived. It was a great ad-
vance when men began to really understand him
again — in some respects better than did Gregory (Al-
cuin, Agobard and others) — ; still as an independent
thinker Scotus Erigena alone can be named, whose sootcui

SrtgenA.

mystical pantheism, derived from the Areopc^te
and Augustine ("dc divisione naturae") ^ remained
however wholly without effect. The effort at cul-
ture in the 9th century was a very respectable one
(see the manuscripts preserved to us). Starting in
EIngland (Theodore of Tarsus, Bede, Alcuin) it swept
over the continent and was strengthened by the cul-
ture 'of Italy, which had never been entirely extin-
guished. But during the great convulsions after the
third quarter of the 9th century everything seemed
again to be engulfed. The dogmatic controversies
of the age originated, in part, in the hitherto hidden
but now strictly drawn consequences of Augustinian-
ism, cmd, in part, in the relationship then sustained
toward the Orient. The farther development of the
mass and of penance, in practice and in theory, de-
serves especial attention.

394 OTTTLINBS OF THfi HISTORT OF DOGltA.

1 A. The Adoption Controversy.

Hauck, a. a. O. II. ; Qams, Kirchengeschichte Spaniens II.

(S'^^ In the Occident after severe contests the Christol-
i>omiM«t ogy of the 5th council gained the victory, and in
Occident spite of the 6th council this mystical view, under
the g^ise of monophysitism, supplanted the strict
Chalcedon, since the superstitious ideas about the
Lord's Supper favored it. Spain was less influenced
by this development. In the Muzarabic liturgy stood
the Augustinian formula of the passiojUii adop-
of '1^^ <i«;t. Elipandus, the tyrannical bishop of Toledo,
full of national pride, brought into notice about the
year 780 the old doctrine that Christ as regards his
himian nature v&filius dei adqptivus^ the redeemed
therefore in the fullest sense brethren of the man
Jesus. Very likely he desired a formula different
from that of Rome as an expression of the orthodoxy
which was to be found only in Spain. From inward
conviction and with high regard for the hunian per-
iSpies' ^^ Jesus, Felix, bishop of Naples, who occupied
a chair in the empire of Charles, championed the
same (reading of Antiochian scriptures is probable).
After that Beatus and Eterius had defended the op-
position doctrine in Spain, the Franconian theolo-
gians, especially Alcuin, interfered. Monophysites
and Nestorians faced each other under new hehnets;
but to Charles the opportunity of proving himself
the guardian of orthodoxy and the master of the

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCtlllNE OF SIN, ETC. 396

Chmch was welcome. Adoptionism was oondemned {^Pq^J;
at the synods of R^;ensburg (792), Frankfurt (794), **^°"^
and Aachen (799), Felix was repeatedly forced to
recant, and Frankish Spain was recalled through
theology and gentle pressure (wheel of torture) to
the unity of the mystical faith. The doctrine of
John of Damascus, which conceived the human na-
ture in Christ as impersonal and placed it as the as-
sumed nature of the Logos in complete unity with
him, gained the victory in the Occident also. Tet
in spite of the realistic doctrine concerning the Lord's
Supper which crowded out the historical Christ and
demanded a fine monophysitism, Augustinian-adop-
tion ideas were preserved through the later theolo-
gians of the Middle Ages.

1 B. The Predestination Controversy.

Wiggera, i. d. Z. f. h. Th., 1859. Weiias&cker, i. d. Jb. f.
d. Th., 1859. Monographs on Hinkmar, by von Noorden
u. SchrOn.

The dominating ecclesiastical system was semi- ^^Jji^"
Pelagian; hut in the 9th century Augustine was ^™*"^^
again diligently studied. That during the crisis
which arose Augustinicmism was after all not rein-
stated, notwithstanding all the good Augustinian
phrases, is a proof of the power of ecclesiasticism.
The monk Qottschalk of Orbais maintained the doc- S^^ortS
trine of predestination with the power of Augustine,
likewise as the chief and original doctrine, finding
in it the key to the riddle of his own life. He pro-

396 OtrTLlNES OF THB tilSTORY O^ I>00]|jt4.

claimed the praedestinatio gemina {ad vitam etad
mortem) , yet was of the opinion that Gknl predestined
only the good and that he merely had a fore-knowl-
edge of the evil. Not what he said (Fulgentius and
Isidore had taught nothing different) but the man-
ner in which he presented it to the Church aroused
enemies against him. He was condemned at May-
gJjMj ence (848) by Rabanus, at Chiersey (849) by Hincmar
and taken into custody as a "^ miserabilis monachus^^
from which he never escaped, since he persistently re-
fused to recant. But the most eminent theologians
went over to his side, not so much because they were
in earnest about Augustinianism, as to make difficul-
ties for Hincmar and to preserve as traditionalists
the Augustinian '^ language''. From the kingdom of
Lothar especially came the opposition to the Raban-
Hincmar thesis, that predestination should be deduced
from the prescience and be limited to the saints. Hinc-
mar tried to defend himself at the synod of Chiersey
(853) against the herd of Alcuin disciples (Prudentius
of Troyes, Ratranmus, Lupus of Ferridres, Servatus
Lupus, Remigius of Lyon, the provincial bishops)
by making in the '^ Chapters'* large concessions to
Augustinianism, yet retaining in his doctrine of
one predestination, God's purpose of universal salva-
tion, etc. In these objective and subjective untrue
" Chapters" the point under consideration was no
longer clearly expressed. Those who by word of
mouth acknowledged the whole of Augustinianism
meant at that time only the half, and those who, like

DEVELOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 397

HincmaTy rejected a part did in truth not want
any at all. In the archbishopric of Sens and in
the south of France the resolutions of Chiersey did
not give satisfaction. At Valence, 855, the gemina p^S^.
prctedestinatio was proclaimed and Augustinianism °*"^*
in general announced. At the great synods of the
three empires at Savonidres (859) and Toucy (860) a
unification was not so much secured as a paralyza-
tion of the controversy through agreement. Hinc-
mar's conception of the doctrine, i.e. Gregory the
First*s, was in reality victorious. The doctrine of
God's purpose of imiversal salvation, of the quick
cmd sure efficacy of the sacraments and of the con-
currence of free-will continued in force; the doctrine
of predestination reappeared as a decorative element
in theology. Only in this form was it compatible
with empirical ecclesiasticism.

2. The Controversy about the Filioque and about

Images.

Hefele, Ck)ncil. Gesch., Bd. III. Pichler.Gesch. d. kirchl.
TrennuDg zwischen dem Orient und Occident. 2 Bde. , 1864 f .

The Augustinian-Spanish formula ^^ filioque^ (see ^"fJJJ^*°*
I. p. 271) had been accepted in France (see the FiKIqu©.
synod of Qentilly, 767) and was defended by the theo-
logians of Charlemagne {libri Carolini; Alcuin, de
process, s.s.). At Aachen, 809, the Frankish church
resolved that the filioque belonged to the symbol.
This resolution was provoked by a grave injustice

398 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOKA.

which the Western pilgrims were called upon to en-
dure in Jerusalem. Although the pope approved the
Spanish-Frankish doctrine, he nevertheless refused
^^n« wd admittance to the watch-word in the symbol. Not
' Oentur^ ^uitil the 10th ceutury does Rome appear to have ac-
cepted it. If Charlemagne widened the opening
breach between the Orient and Occident by the ^^f -
ogue" and had therefor only a half -ally in the pope, he
alienated himself still more from the orthodoxy of the
Orient by his rejection of image-worship, which
^^^ the pope also still approved. The barbaric tradition
of the Frankish church and an Augustinian element
(with Charlemagne perhaps also an enlightening
one) determined the attitude of the Occidentals. At
Frankfurt, 794, the decrees of the 7th council were laid
aside, yet the resolutions of the synod of 754 were
also rejected. The self-confidence of the Frankish
church accepted the first six councils as an expres-
sion of ecclesiastical antiquity, refused, however, to
be dictated to by Byzantium at the modem councils,
ubri The " libri Carolini " retain the old ecclesiastical

Carolini.

standpoint: We will neither worship images, nor
attack them, but treat thorn piously. This attitude
was still taken by Louis the Pious (synod of Pans,
825) and Hincmar. The pope preserved a discreet
silence, and the 7th council, which was favorable
to images, gradually obtained through Rome's influ-
ence recognition in the Occident also.

DBVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINB OF SIN, ETC. 399

3. The Development^ in Practice and in Theory^
of the Mass {Dogma of the Eucharist) and of
Penance.

Bach, a. a. O. I. RUckert, i. Hilgenfeld's Ztchr., 1868.
Beuter, a. a. O. I. Choisy, Paschase, 1888. G^chichte d.
Abendmahlslehre v. Dieckhoff, Ebrard, Kahnia. Steitz, D.
r6m. Busflsacrament, 1854.

The thought of image-representation was kept aloof ^'gi^.
in an increasing measure from the Lord's Supper; ^o^u^
men lived in a world of miracle and of sacraments,
so much did the tendency necessarily increase to por-
tray the content of the highest sacrament in an ex-
travagant manner, in order to give it prominence
among the multitude of holy things ; the Christology
which allowed the historical Christ to disappear be-
hind the unity of the two " natures" tended toward
an ever-present Christological mysterium, which
could be felt and enjoyed; the mass was considered TheMMs.
the chief characteristic and compendium of religion ;
the idea of the attributes of God was more and more
concentrated in the one, that he is the almighty,
wonder-working Will — all these forces worked to-
gether to bring about the following result : The his-
torical body of Jesus Christ is present in the eucha-
rist, since the elements are transformed into it. The Docetism
identification of the sacramental and the real (histor-
ical) body of Christ could the more easily be carried
out, since men considered it from the moment of in-
carnation a pneumatic (mysterious) body assumed

400 OUTLINES OF THR HISTORY OF DOGMA.

by the Divinity, and held dooetic views in regard to

it| as is proven, e.g., by the controversy in regard to

the birth of Jesus out of Maria clauso utero. The

Doctrine of now doctrine of the eucharist would have been for-

Euduuiflt

mulated without difficulty during the Carloving^an
age, because it already actually existed, had not the
then- revived study of the Augustinian ooncepti(»i
of sacrament and his spiritualistic doctrine of the
puduuiiiis eucharist had a restraining influence. Paschasius

Badbertus.

Badbertus, abbot of Corbie, who wrote the first mon-
ograph on the Lord's Supper {decorpore et sanguine
dominiy 831), was, on the one side, an Augustinian
and reproduced without inward sympathy or real
comprehension the Augustinian doctrine, that the
act belongs to faith and represents a spiritual eat-
ing; but, on the other side, he carried it on to the
realistic, popular doctrine, that in every mass by a
miracle of the Almighty the elements are transformed
inwardly but actually into the body which was bom
of Mary^ and are now brought to Qod as a sacrifice.
Outwardly as a rule no change takes place, in order
that the body of Christ may not be bitten by the
ic^'^M- *®®^' (^^ performs this miracle, which Paschasius
foriMtion cQiiceives as a miracle of creation ; the priest simply
directs his supplications to God. But even if the
holy food is in reality now the real body of Christ
himself (the obvious appearance of the elements is
the symbol), the fact still remains that only be-
lievers partake of the spiritual food unto immortal-
ity— not, however, unbelievers. Paschasius drew

Elements

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 401

neither all the hierarchical, nor '^objective" conse-
quences of the doctrine of transubstantiation, but at-
tempted to adjust the miracle to faith. He was not
a theologian primarily of the mass, but wished to
be- a theologian in the sense of Augustine and the
Greek mystics. Nevertheless he encountered an un-
expected contradiction. Babanus expressed himself,
in a letter to Eigel, in opposition to this doctrine,
and Ratramnus, a monk of Corbie, found in his writ- Batatmi-

nua.

ings to Charles the Bald {de corpore et sanguine
domini) that Paschasius had not done justice to the
** spirituale " of Augustine. But his own explana-
tions suffer from old ecclesiastical cloudiness. Ap-
parently he desires, as in the controversy about the
uterus clausus^ like a good Augustinian to set aside
the unwieldy miracle of almightiness contra natu-
ram and to place, in the interest of faith, the whole
stress upon the " spiritualiter geri " ; but since he
likewise does not doubt the presence of the corpus
domini after the consecration, he is compelled to dis-
tinguish between the real body and the body. The
bom, crucified body is not in the sacrament — ^that
was the old churchly idea — but in the sacrament
there is the power of the body of Christ as an invis- invisibiiis

SubstaDtia.

iMlis substantia and, in so far, the pneumatic body,
receivable only by the mind of the faithful. More-
over Ratramnus in a few deductions made still far-
ther advances toward Paschasius; nevertheless the
plainest conception is that of the " potentialiter ^*j^*"
creari in mysterio^^ ; but even this conception was S^^o°

402 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGKA.

no longer clear to their superstitioiuB contemporaries;
men wanted more than faith reality and soul nour-
ishment. Paschasius had spoken the deciding word.
The awe inspired by every mass seemed to confirm it
and the same was even heightened by the power of
uon'and ^^^ definite formulation of the doctrine. Incarnation

RdbMnedL? and crucifizional sacrifice were repeated at every
mass. What then could even approximate this? It
was not necessary to change the old wording of the
prayers of the mass, which, if they treated of sacri-
fice, emphasized the sacrifice of praise; for who
gave heed to the words? The mass, however, as a
sacrificial act, in which the Gk)d-man was offered up
to Gk)d, had its culmination long since no more in
real enjoyment, but in the consimimation of the blot*
ting out of sin and removal of evil. It had been
adopted into the great institution of atonement, and
mmw« masses without communion (requiems) were multi-

uSSpnSl plied to pacify God. The primitive commemorative
element of the celebration had become independent,
especiaUy since the days of Gregory I., and the
communion was changed, as it were, into a second
celebration. The first celebration, the mass, belonged
to the laity only in so far as it represented an espe-
cially efficacious form of the Church's intercession
for the lightening of the punishment of sins. This
was the only apparent effect of the act — an insignifi-
cant one, important only through its summarizing
of an immense mystery !
The mass was subordinated to the institution of

DEVBLOPMENT OV DOCTRIinB OV SIN, BTC. 403

penanoe; in the latter was reflected the religious life. JJSnate to
Punishment ruled the world and the conscience. ^**°*°**'
The conception of Qod as almighty Willj as Retri-
bution and Indulgence (a Christian modification of
the old Boman idea) was the ruling one. The con-
sequence thereof was the idea that merits and satis-
factions were needed to compensate for the breaches
of contract occasioned by sin and oft repeated. Thus church

and State

bad Gregory I. taught ; moreover this view blended Blended,
in the G^erman nations with their national ideas of
law and with their legal restrictions. Since, how-
ever, the Occidental Church did not, like the Oriental,
relinquish the administration of law and questions of
morality entirely to the state, but rather interposed
to discipline and punish, there was developed, parallel
to the state institution of law, the Church institu-
tion of penance. The detailed development of this
institution was a consequence of the transfer and
application of the discipline of penance within the
cloisters to the secular clergy and to the laity, and
it originated with the Irish-Scottish, i.e. with the
Anglo-Saxon church.* But through the fear of the Fear of

® ^ Pnntah-

punishment of sin, of hell and purgatory, the laity Heu^'pnr-
favored the practice and established the influence of «****^-
the Church in its entire range, even over private life
itself. A certain deepening of the conception of sin
was the consequence : The people had recourse to the
Church, not only in the case of grave sins, but also

* WasMTSchleben, Die irische Kanonensammlungf 2. Aufl., 18B5. Brun*
ner, Deatacfae Rechtageschichte I., 1888.

404 OUTLINBS OF THE HISTORY OV DOOKA.

SatiBfao-

tlODB.

Prayers,

Alms,

Exclusion:

O. T. and

German

Ckxlea.

Rehearsal

of Death of

Christ

on account of the ^ roots of sin'' and the hidden
faults (gluttony, sexual lust, avarice, anger, humor,
anxiety, heartfelt aversion, arrogance, pride), which
they now considered also deadly sms ; however, this
deepening was counterbalanced by the stupefying
readiness with which men acknowledged themselves
ever as sinners, and by the thought that intercession
and satisfaction possess the power to cancel the mer-
ited punishment. In truth men bestowed more
thought upon punishment and the remission of the
same than upon sin. During the Carlovingian age
the hierarchical side of the institution of penance
was as yet little developed, and the dogmatic theory
still lagged behind ; but the sa^t^/ac^tOTi^ experienced
a new development in connection with the exercise
of penance in the form of voluntary confession: (1)
To the old, more or less, arbitrary rules in regard to
the choice and duration of the compensating punish-
ment (prayers, alms, lamentations, temporary exclu-
sion) were added, in increasing measure, rules from
the Old Testament and from the German code. The
consequence was that the measure of the compensa-
tory punishment itself appeared in the light of a
Divine ordinance, (2) The compensatory means were
looked upon as things pleasing to God, which there-
fore, if nothing had been omitted, in themselves es-
tablish merits; the sacrificial death of Christ must
be considered as the most efficacious; therefore the
rehearsal of this death {pretii copiositas mysterii
pctssionis) was the efficacious and convenient means

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 405

(masses for the dead) ; besides, one should gain the
good will of the saints for their intercessions ought
to be efficacious, since God can demand nothing from
them, while they are able to bring him valuable giftSj
(3) Since the exercises of penance have a material chaoges,

Indulgen-

value before God, they can be exchanged, i, e. lessened ^^
by a repentant disposition ; here especiaUy the Church
steps in, since it institutes such exchanges; thus
originated a whole system of indulgences, exchanges,
and remissions, to the establishing of which the
Germanic law contributed (origin of indulgences;
remissions are of primitive antiquity), (4) In addi- Subatitu-
tion to exchanges, however, substitution is also pos-
sible; here the Germanic law had a still stronger in-
fluence; yet the idea has also an ecclesiastical root
in the conception of Christ and the saints as substi-
tutes, (5) The consequence of the whole conception Augustin-
was that in the doing of penance men sought not so inverted.
much to reconcile God, the Father, as much more to
escape from God, the Judge ! This soul-killing prac-
tice entirely inverted Augustinianism; it had influ-
enced Christology in the time of Gregory I., and it
operated decisively during the classic times of the
Middle Ages upon all dogmas of ancient standing
and created new ones.

406 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGKA.

Adnunoe

MOTBBieDt

of Ohurch.

Christian-
ity as
Doctrine
or Life.

Monastl-
ciaot

CHAPTER VII.

history of dogma in the time of clugnt,
anbblm and bernard to the end of the
12th century.

Reuter a. a. O. v. Eicken, Gesch. a. System d. MAlic^wgi,
Weltaofichauung, 1887.

Through the institution of penanoe the Church
became the decisive power in men's lives in Occi-
dental Christendom. An advance movement of the
Church, therefore, must of necessity benefit the whole
of Occidental Christendom. This advance took place
at the end of the 10th century and continued until
the 13th century, during which time the supremacy
of the Church and the mediseval ecclesiastical con-
ception of the world attained their perfection. If
one regards Christianity as doctriney the Middle
Ages appear almost like a supplement to the histoiy
of the ancient Church; if one regards it as life^ then
ancient Christianity only attained its full devdop-
ment in the mediseval Occidental Church. In the
ancient age the motives, standards and ideas of
ancient life confronted the Church as barriers. It
was never able to overcome these barriers, as is
shown by the Greek Church : Monasticism stands by
the side of the Church ; the earthly Church is the old
world supplemented by Christian etiquette. But the
Occidental Church of the Middle Ages was able to
carry out much more securely its peculiar standards

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 407

of monkish asceticism and of the domination of this

life by the one beyond, because it did not have an

old cnltus alongside of it. Gradually it gathered

strength so as to be able finally to enlist into its ser^

vice even the old enemy, Aristotelian science, and to

transform the same into an instrument of power. It

made all the elements of life and knowledge subject

to itself. The inner strength of its activity was the

Angustinian-ascetic piety, which broke forth in ever

new creations of monasticism; the mter power wbb

9- ■

the Roman pope, who, as'^e successor o^ Peter,
secured for hin^elf both Christ's right and that of
the Roman usBsar^^J^ v

1. The Revival of Piely,

Hamack, Das Monchtbum, 3. Aufl.^^l886. Neander, d. h.
Bernard (hisg. v. Deutech, 188(!). Htlffer, d. h. Bernard I.,
1886. RitBchl, i. d. Stud. u. Kritri679, S. 317 f.

From Quedlinburg (Matilda) and Clugny the re- Quediin-

hOTg Mid

vival of piety had its rise. The Gregorian popes, ciuiniy.
the ^ new congregations'' and Bernard enforced it;
the laity received it more readily than the worldly
clergy, upon whom it made greater demands. It is
most plainly represented by the crusade enthusiasm
and by the founding of innumerable convents.
Strict discipline in the convents, monkish regula-
tion of the secular clergy, the domination of the
monkish-regulated Church over the laity, princes
and nations — these were its aims. Upon this found-

408 OUTLnVBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ation alone it appeared possible to create a truly

Christian, i.e. an unworldly life. The whole tem-

f^of^ poral life should serve the life hereafter: Supreme

World.

effort of the world dominion of the Church to gain
the most perfect victory over the world, i.e. escape
from the world. Freedom from the world appeared
possible only under the condition of universal do-
minion. Many monks also permitted themselves to
be blinded by this dialectics, who felt the contradic-
tion between the aim and the means, and preferred
for themselves the direct way of popularizing flight
from the world by fleeing from the world. But the
Church was indeed also Qod's state and not simply
the bestower of individual bliss! Therefore did it
incite the courageous to battle against Simonistic
princes and worldly clericals. To perfectly exemplify
the difficult trait of a renunciation of the world,
the German and the Romance peoples were still too
youthful. The violent disposition toward the con-
quest of the world united with this and produced
that strange frame of mind, in which the conscious-
ness of strength alternated like a flash with humility,
longing after enjoyment with resignation, cruelty
with sentimentality. Men desired nothing from
this world, they desired only heaven, and yet they
wished to own this beautiful earth,
pid^of At first religious individualism was not as yet
kindled (yet take note of the heresies which found
access in the 11th century, partly imported from the
Orient — Bogomils — partly springing up spontane-

DBVBLOPMBNT OB* DOCTRINfl OF SIN, BTC. 409

ously), still visions were brought back from the Holy
Land crusade for which indulgences had been
granted. The picture of Christ was recovered and
piety was enlivened by the most vivid representa-
tions of the suffering and dying Redeemer: We
should follow him in every step of his passion jour-
ney. Accordingly in place of the defunct " adoption-
ism", the man Jesus came again to the front and
negative asceticism received a positive form and a
new, fixed aim. The cords of Christie-mysticism, ,chri8tio-

KyniciflnL

which Augustine had struck only with uncertainty
grew into a rapturous melody. By the side of the
sacramental Christ stepped — penance formed the
medium — the image of the historical Christ sublime
in his humility, innocent, suffering punishment, life
in death. It is impossible to estimate the effects
which this piety, newly induced through the " Ecce
homo", had, and in how many forms it has developed.
St. Bernard first gave it a strong and effective ^JS^
form; he was the religious genius of the 12th cen- ^!^
tury, and therefore also the leader of the epoch —
Augustinus redivivuSy at the same time however
the most powerful ecclesiastic. In so far as Bernard
offers a system of thought and portrays the gradual
progress of love {caritas and humilitas) even to ex-
cess, he revived Augustine. His language is deter-
mined by that of the ^ Confessions". But in passion-
ate love for Christ he went beyond Augustine. ** Ven-
eration for that which is beneath us", for suffering
and humility (devotion), dawned upon him as never

tury.

Bong or

410 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

before upon any Christian. He venerated the cross,

shame and death as the form of the Divine appearing

Bonga fwd upon earth. The study of the Song of Songs and

CroMda.

the crusade enthusiasm conducted him before the
image of the crucified Redeemer, the Bridegroom of
the sold. Into his image he sunk himself; from it
there beamed for him true love and shone the living
truth. To him the sensuousness of the contemplaticm
of Christ's wounds melted into spiritual exaltation,
which, however, always rested upon the foundation
of the ecclesiastical system of penance. Bernard
united the Neo-Platonic exercises of ascent unto Qod
^with the contemplation of the crucified Redeemer
^^^ and unfettered the subjecti veness of the Christic-mys-
^^im^' ticism and Christie-lyricism. This contemplation
led him in his sermons on the Song of Songs to a
self-judgment, which not infrequently gains the
height of Pauline and Lutheran faith unto salvation
C' non modi Justus sed et heatus^ cut non imputabit
deus peccatum"). But, on the other side, he also
had to pay the tribute of all mysticism, not only in
so far as the feeling of especial exaltation alternated
with that of abandonmenty but also in his not being
able to ward off a pantheistic tendency. LikeOrigen,
Bernard also taught that it was necessary to rise
from the Christ in the flesh to the Christ xara
TBenaad ^^^M^j that the historical is a step. This trait has
a« Prophet clung to all mystlcism since his time; mysticism has
learned from Bernard, whom men reverenced as a
prophet and apostle, the Christ-contemplation; but

DBVSL0PH8NT OF DOCTRINB OF BIN, ETC. 411

at the same time it has adopted his pantheistic
trend. The ^ excedere et cum Christo ess^ means,
that in the arms of the Bridegroom the soid ceases
to be an individual self. But where the soul is merged
in the Divinity, the Divinity is dissolved into the
All-in-One.

Immeasurable for Christology has the significance ^|^^J^^
of the new vision of Christ been. The scheme of the p«"*«*«*.
two natures was indeed retained, yet there was in
truth by the side of the sacramental Christ a second
Christ, the man Jesus^ whose sentiment^ sufferings^
and deeds portrayed and propagated Divine life.
He is prototype and power; his death sacrifice, also,
is the sacrifice of the man, in whom Gk)d was. Thus
the Augustinian conception, already inaugurated by
Ambrose, attained here its perfection. In the second ^^ ^^
half of the 12th omtury this new piety (love, suflfer- °^*^-
ing, humility) was a mighty power in the Church.
But as Bernard represented in himself the contrast
between the world of pious Christian sentiment
and the hierarchical policy of the world-dominat
ing Church, so also most believers, naively attached
to the Church, considered the ideals of worldly
power and of humility reconcilable. As yet the
great beggar of Assisi had not stepped forth, whose
appearance was destined to create a crisis in the tur-
bulence of flight from the world and dominion over
the world; still at the end of the 12th century there
already hovered about the Church angry curses of
^^ heretics" who recognized in its secular rule and in

412 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the sale of its dispensations of grace the traits of the
old babel, and Bernard himself warned the popes.

Pieudo-
Isidorean
Decretals.

Clugny,
Gregory

2. On the History of Ecclesiastical Law.

y. Schulte, Gesch. d. Quellen d. Kirchenrechts I. u II.
HinschiuB, Kathol. Kirchenrecht. Denlfle, UniverB. d. HA.,
1885. Kaufmaxm, Oeech. d. deutchen Univ. I., 1888.

All that had ever been claimed by popes appeared
gathered together in the great falsification of Pseudo-
Isidore and was represented as ancient papal law: The
independence of the Church and its organs as regards
the laity, and the papal supremacy over the bishops
and* the national churches. Upon the foundation of
Pseudo-Isidore the popes of later times built. To
them it was not a question of theology, but, as Bo-
mans, of the perfection of the law^ which they had
obtained for themselves as a Divine law. In the
contest between emperor and pope the question was
as to which should be the real rector of the state of
Ood, and as to whom the bishops should be subject.
The reformed papacy was developed under the im-
pulse of Clugny and Gregory VII. into an autocratic
power in the Church and formulated its legislation
accordingly through numberless decretals, after hav-
ing freed itself in Rome from the last remnants of
older constitutional conditions. Allied with the
best men of the times the popes of the 12th century,
having obtained the investiture, began to design a
new ecclesiastical law. The decretals took their

Dogma and
Law Amal-

DKVBLOPMKNT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 413

place by the side of the old canons, even by the side
of the decrees of the old councils. Still, strictly
taken, their authority as yet remained uncertain.

The papacy while developing into a jurisdictional
supreme court would never have been able to gain **™**^
the monarchial leadership as regards faith and mor-
als in the Church, which is indeed communion of
faith and cult, had not in this period the amalgama-
tion of dogma and Zat£; become perfect. In Bome it-
self the form of the dogmatic retreated completely
behind that of the law {lex dei)y and the Germano-
Romance nations at first were defenceless; for the
Church had once come to them as Roman law and
order. The great popes were monks and jurists, j*^^^
The juristic-scientific treatment of all functions of J'*'"****-
the Church became the highest aim. The study of
law exercised an immense influence upon the
thoughtful contemplation of the Church in all its
length and breadth. That which formerly had
been evolved under constraining influences, viz., the
Church as a legal institute, now became strength-
ened or developed by thought. The spirit of juris-
prudence, which spread over the faith of the Church,
began also to subordinate to itself the traditional
dogmas. Here scholasticism had a strong root; but ^^^Ratta
one must not forget that since TertuUian the Occi-
dental dogmas were prepared for a juristic treatment,
out of which they partly originated. Upon auctor-
itOrS and ratio the dialectics of the jurists is founded.
It also belongs to the great contrasts of the Middle

414 OUTUKBS OF THE HISTOET OF DOGMA.

Ages, — Bemardine piety and Roman juristic think-
ing. In this way the Church was to become a
court of law, a merchant house and a robbers' den.
But in this epoch it still stood at the beginning of
the deyelopment.

3. The Revival of Science.

EUstorieB of Philosophy by 'Oberweg, Erdmann, Stockl.
Q66ch. der Logik v. Prantl, Bd. II.-IV. Reuter a. a. O.
Nitnch. i. d. RE?. YTTT. S., 650 ff. Denifle a. a. O. Kaof-
mBnn, a. a. O. L6we, Kampf Zweiachen d. Nominal, u.
Realism. 1876. Deutach, P. Abelaid, 1888.

8<^oy- Scholasticism was the science of the Middle Ages.
In it there were strikingly displayed the power of the
thinking faculties and an energy capable of reduc-
ing everything real and valuable to thought, such
as perhaps no other age offers. But scholasticism is
in truth thinking ^ from the very centre outward ",
for while the scholastics always went back to first
principles, these were not gained from experience
and real history, though in the course of the develop-
ment of medisBval science increasing regard was paid
DiAioe- to experience. Auctoritas and ratio (dialectical-de-

tioal-

DaducUye ductivc method) dominate scholasticism, which dif-
ered from the old theol(^y, in that the authority of
the dogma and the practice of the Church were more
firmly adjusted, and in that men no longer lived in
the philosophy (the antique) which went with it, but
added the same from without. Its principal presup-
position was drawn — ^at least until the time of its

Mflthod.

DBVBLOPMENT OF DOCTBINE OF SIN, ETC. 415

dissolution — from the thesis, that all things must be
understood from theology and that therefore also all
things must be traced back to theology. This thesis
presupposes that the thinker himself is sensible of
his full dependence upon God, Piety therefore S®^**'®
is the presupposition of mediseval science. But in gJ^lSuMrti-
the 'nature of the medisBval piety itself lies the *'*™*
foundation for that contemplation which leads to
this science; for piety is the advancing knowledge
obtained by constant reflection upon the relation of
the soul to God. Therefore scholasticism, since it scIioUbu.
deduces all things from God and again comprises q^^^^^
them in him^ is piety become conscious and mani- ^^'
fest On that account it does not differ in its root
from mysticism ; the difference consists only herein,
that in scholasticism the knowledge of the world in
its relation to God gains a more independent, objec-
tive interest and the theological doctrines are, if pos-
sible, to be proven; while in mysticism the reflective
trend of the process of knowledge (for the increase
of one's own piety) comes out more strongly,
In the former, as a rule, more use is made of dia-
lectics, in the latter of intuition and inward experi-

^ Theology

ence. But the theology of Thomas, for example, can of Thomas

is MystiCAl*

also according to its end and aim unhesitatingly be
designated as mysticism and, vice versa, there are
theologians, who from custom are called mystics,
but who in the strength of their desire to know
the world and to imderstand correctly the doctrine
of the Church do not lag behind the so-called scho-

416 . OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

"•^f^l^ lastics. The aim not only is the same (mysticism is
s^iMti!^ the practice of scholasticism), but the means are

CiSDL

also the same (the authoritative dogma of the Church,
spiritual experience, the traditional philosophy).
The difficulties which at first made their appearance
in mediffival science were therefore removed, after
men had learned the art of subordinating the dia-
lectic method to the traditional dogma and to the
thirst for piety.

£jJ?Ji The Middle Ages received from the old Church
A^ ^ the Holy Scriptures, the essentially completed dogma,
the theology which led to this dogma, and a treasure
of classical literature loosely connected with this
theology and the philosophico-methodical doctrines.
With these additions to the dogma elements were
transmitted, which were hostile to the dogma, or at
least threatened to become so (Neo-Platonism and
jJ^J^^ Aristotelianism). In the theology of John of Damas-
cus the attempt was made to reconcile scientifically
everything that was contradictory, but the Occident
could not thereby be spared the work of adjustment.
During the Carlovingian age the strength of the Oc-
cident was still too weak to work independently u{)on
the capital it had inherited. A few theologians
made themselves at home with Augustine, still this
undertaking was already followed, as we have seen,
by a partial crisis, — others clothed themselves in the
foreign garment of the classical authors; in the

Boethius schools they learned from the writings of Boethius and

and

Isidore. Isidore the rudiments of the dialectical method and a

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 417

mild use of the ratio. No theologian except Scotus ^S^
Erigena was independent. As soon as they became
more self-conscious, they rejected the knowledge of
nature, the devil's mistress, and antiquity. Indeed
as a formal means of culture they could not do with-
out these, and dialecticism, that is, that method
which first exposes contradictions in order to recon-
cile them, made an increasing impression. From
the Carlovingian age there runs through the learned
schools a chain of scientific tradition as far down as
into the 11th century. But Qerbertof Rheims did ^/^SJeimB.
not as yet bring it to an epochal climax; the theo-
logical dialecticians did so first after the middle of
that century. Already at that time the principal
philosophico-theological question of the future was
considered, viz. whether the conceptions of species
exist respecting things or within things, or whether
the same are merely abstractions (Boethius in Por-
phyry, realism and nominalism). The ecclesiastical
instinct of self-preservation turned toward realism,
which mysticism demanded. When Roscellin in k««»i**»-
consequence of his nominalism arrived at the con-
sequent tritheism, both he and his way of thinking
were rejected as heretical (1092). In the 11th cen-
tury the dialecticians were viewed with great dis-
trust. Indeed they frequently not only attacked the
coarse superstition in religion and the barbarian way
of thinking, but they also jeopardized orthodoxy, or
rather what was thought to be orthodoxy. But " en-

lighteners" they were not. Looking at them more
27

418 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

closely, even the boldest of them stood upon the basis
of the Church, or, at any rate, were bound to the
gJ[2S same by a hundred ties. True, every science, even
^^^' the most trammelled, will always find within itself
an element offensive to that faith which longs for
peace; it will display a freshness and joyfulness,
which to devotion will appear like boldness; it wiU
never be able, even when it agrees with the Church
in end and aim, to disclaim a negative tendency, be-
cause it will always rightly find, that the principles
of the Church in the concrete expression of life have
deteriorated and have been marred by superstition
and inclination. Thus was it also at that time; but
as the revival of science was a consequence of the
revival of the Church, so the Church also finally
recognized in theology its own life.
Revival of By the elevation of science three results were ob-

Scienoe; ^

i2^i^ tained : (1) A deeper insight into the Neo-Platonic-
Augustinian principles of theology as a whole, (2)
A higher virtuosity in the art of dialectical analysis
and rational demonstration, (3) An increasing occu-
pation with the Church fathers and the ancient
philosophers. The danger of this deeper insight
was a non-cosmicomystical pantheism, and the more
naively men devoted themselves to realism, the

Dangers, greater was the danger. The danger of dialecticism
consisted in the dissolution of the dogma instead of
the proof of them; the danger of the intercourse with
the ancient philosophers lay in the reduction of his-
torical Christiemity to cosmopolitanism, to a mere

DBVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 419

general philosophy of religion upon the soil of the
neutralized history. Till the end of the 12th century
there was as yet no real philosophy alongside of theo-
logy; in so far as anything of the kind existed, it
was feared, and thus it happened that the danger al-
luded to under " (2)" (Berengar and his friends) was
first felt. The danger alluded to under "(l)** was
the least noticed, since Anselm, the greatest theo-
logian before Thomas, whose orthodoxy was above
question, moved about most unconcernedly among
the Neo-Platonic-Augistinian principles. Perhaps ^'^i^?"
he would have soon brought the dialectical science, p®**^
which he knew how to use with authority, to full
honors, and have made credible the reconcilableness
of mysticism (meditatio) with reason, of authorita-
tive faith with ratio {credo^ ut intelligam^ on the
one side, rationahili necessitate intelligere esse
qportere omnia ilia, quae nobis fides catholica de
Christo credere praecipit, on the other side), had
not some of his pupils, like Wilh. von Champeaux,
drawn some of the dangerous consequences of Pla-
tonic realism (the one passive substance, the natural
phenomena as mere semblance), and had not in
Abelard a bold scientific talent appeared, which could
not but terrify the churchmen. In Abelard the trait Abeiard.
of the ** enlightener" is not entirely wanting; but he
was more bold than consequential, and his ^'ration-
alism" had its limitations in the acknowledgment of
revelation. Nevertheless he opposed faith in mere
authority, yet by no means at all points; be wanted

420 OUTLINBS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

to know what he believed, and he wanted to show
how unsafe and contradictory was the uncontrolled
orthodoxy and the tradition which pretended to
SicetNoo. be infallible {""Sic et NovT). Thus he looked
upon the foundations of faith just as he looked upon
the theological points represented in thedc^ma. His
opponents, above all Bernard, considered his doctrine
of the trinity and the whole method of his science
(which indeed with him and his pupils often degen-
erated into a formalistic art of disputation and was
coupled with unbearable arrogance) foreign and
heretical ; they therefore condemned him. They did
not at all observe that the questionable sentences of
the bold innovator originated in part from the Church
fathers and in part were the consequences of that mys-
tical doctrine of God, which they themselves shared
(thus his conception of history, which seems to neu-
tralize historical Christianity in favor of Greek phil-
osophy ; compare Justin) . It is still more paradoxical
that Abelard, even while on the one side drawing
these consequences, on the other introduced a kind of
" conceptualism^ in the place of realism, granted to
sober thought a material influence upon the contem-
plation of fundamental principles, rejected the pan-
theistic deductions of the current orthodoxy and thu§
laid the foun<}atipn for the classical expression of
Ecciesiaa- medicRval conservative theology. The ecclesiastical
^^nSnd5^ dogma demanded realism, but was not able to be re-
^^^"*^'" tained in thought under the complete dominion of
the mystical, Neo-Platonic theology. A lowering of

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE 05' SIN, «TC. 421

the Platonic celestial flight was needed, therefore of
^' Aristotelism", as the latter was understood and
used at that time, namely, that view of things ac-
cording to which whatever appears and is creature-
like is not the transitory form of the Divine, but the
supernatural God as creator has, in the real sense of
the word, called forth the creature and endowed the
same with independence. With this view Abelard
began anew, and much of that which at his time pro-
voked opposition afterward became orthodox. Yet it ^j*??'"

^^ Defects.

was his own fault, the fault of his character, the want
of clearness in the positions which he assumed, and
the fault of his many heterodoxies, that he did not
break through. With Bernard and the mystics he
brought science into such discredit that the next gen-
eration of theologians had a difficult footing. The
" sentences" of Peter Lombard, which with a certain ^ ^^l^

liOmbara.

scientific freedom gather together the patristic tradi-
tion, opinion and contrary opinion, and which give
a judicious review of doctrine in the spirit of the
Church, came near being condemned (1164, 1179).
Walther of St. Victor zealously opposed him and
Abelard as well. But the task of theology, to fur-
nish a review of the whole territory of dogmatics and
to think everything out, once undertaken, could no
longer be put aside, and in the carrying out of this
task the followers of Abelard and of Bernard drew
nearer to each other. Moreover, the intercourse
with Jews and Mohammedans demanded an intel-
ligent apologetics. Hugo St. Victor, however, ^v^©?^'

422 OUTLINfiS OF TBS HtSTOBY OF DOGMA.

who had ab'eady influenced the followers of Liom-
bard, contributed most toward uniting the tenden-
^^•iaS^ cies. The new piety, even with its latest require-
ments, exercises, and means of devotion, died out
gradually, though not entirely, during tiie second
half of the 12th century, together with the dialectical
science. Yonder implicit faith, here boldness were
rejected, with which, however, many a fresh truth
was lost. This occurred under the overwhelming im-
pressions made by the Church, radiant in its victor-
ies. Her lato in life and doctrine became the most
worthy object of investigation and exposition. With
this aim was blended another — that of referring all
things back to God, and of construing knowledge of
r**^ie- *^® 'world as theology. However, it was only in the
sialism, cQursc of the 13th century that patristicism, ecclesi-
asticism, mystic theology and Aristotelianism be-
came consolidated into powerful systems. The dog-
matical works of the 12th century — except, perhaps,
the works of Hugo — still bear the stamp of aggrega-
tion. Thought, if it wished to be more than repro-
duction and meditation, was still looked upon with
suspicion.

4. Work upon the Dogma.

Bere^^ar Amoug the number of theological disputes and

^**"®^™- separate condemnations, the controversy with Ber-

engar concerning the eucharist and Anselm's new

conception of the doctrine of atonement acquired

prominence. These alone mark a progress in tiie

DBVBLOPMEKT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 423

history of dogma, which during this period was
otherwise not enriched.

A. The Berengar Controversy.

Bach, a. a. O. I. Reuter a. a. O. Sudendorf , Berengarius,
1850. Schwabe, Stud. z. Gesch, d. 2. AbendmahlastreitB,
1887. SchnitzleT, B. v. Tours, 1890.

The second controversy regarding the eucharist Eucharist
has, aside from the theological, also a philosophical ^^y-
and ecclesiastico-political interest. The latter may
rest here. Berengar, a pupil of Fulbert of Chartres,
was the first dialectician, who, fidl of confidence in
the art which he thought to be identical with reason,
turned against an ecclesiastical superstition which
had very nearly become a dogma. A criticism of
the dogma of the eucharist, however, was, in consid-
eration of the prominent standing of this doctrine, a
criticism of the ruling ecclesiastical doctrine in gen-
eral. Not as a negative " enlightener", but to op-
pose a bad custom by true tradition, and at the same
time also to let his light shine, Berengar wrote (sum- ®®^f"
ming up in the work, de sacra coena adv, Lanfran-
cuniy 1073) and founded a school. He saw in the
ruling doctrine of transubstantiation a want of rea-
son, and he revived the Augustinian doctrine of the
eucharist (like Ratramnus, whose book, however, was
considered as belonging to Scotus Erigena, and as such
was condemned at Vercelli, 1050), in order to restore
the Xo/txii Xarpeta and to combat the barbarous passion
for mysteries. Berengar opened the controversy with

Lanfrano.

424 OUTLINES OF THB BISTORT OF DOGMA.

a letter to Lanf ranc and showed that the acceptance
of a bodily transubstantiation was absurd and that
therefore the words of Christ must be understood
figuratively. A purely symbolic conception he did
signixm et not teach, rather like the fathers, signum et sacra-

meDtum. mentumj in the sacred act: Some holy but invisible
element is added by the ^ conversion ^ which means
however the whole Christ; bread and wine are only
relatively changed. He taught that the opposite
doctrine strives against reason, wherein the Divine
image lies enclosed; he who favors ^ineptia^ casts

denmed. dcmncd at Rome and Vercelli (1050) during his ab-
sence; he himself was forced to recant at Rome
(1059) and he condescended to sign a confession,
composed by Cardinal Humbert, which showed that
Berengar had not exaggerated the ruling doctrine ; for
in the confession it was stated, that the elements
after the consecration are not only sacrament, but
the very body of Christ {sensualiter^ non solum
Sacramento)^ which then is also masticated by
the teeth of the believers. Berengar, protected in
the following years by influential Roman friends
(Hildebrand), restrained himself for some time, but
afterward b^an anew the literary controversy.

vS^*rS- Now the principal writings were first issued (Lan-
franc, de corp. et sang, domini adv. B.C. 1069).
Qregory VII. was in no haste to make heretics; yet
in order not to prejudice his own authority, he fin-
ally forced Berengar for the second time to submit.

DBVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 425

The learned scholar was broken down and his cause
perished. Paschasius' doctrine of transubstantiation
was further developed by the opponents of Berengar
{manducatio infidelium; coarse realism); still
even in these circles one commenced to apply " sci-
ence" to the dogma in the interest of the Church.
The coarse representations were disregarded, the en-
tire Christ (not simply bloody pieces of his body) was
acknowledged in the act (in every particular) , the dif-
ference between signum and sacramentum was taken
into account in order to distinguish between man-
datio infidelium and fidelium (especially important
is Quitmund of Aversa, de corp. et sang. Christi ouitmund

of ATena.

veritate in eucharistia) . The "scientific" concep-
tions also concerning substance and attributes were
already set forth, whereby the coarse " sensualiter^
corrected itself, while a few, it is true, believed in
an incorruptibility of the attributes of the converted
substances. Furthermore there were already begin-
nings of the speculation about the ubiquity of the
substance of the body of Christ. The expression
" transsubstantiatio^ can be traced first to Hildebert HiWebert

of Tours;

of Tours (beginning of the 12th century) ; as the "^^Si?"
final argument there remained always the ahnighty *^*^'
sovereign will of God. As a dogma the doctrine of
transubstantiation was expressed in the new confes-
sion of faith at the Lateran council (1216), which
prior to iheprofessio fidei Trident, was, next to the Doctrineof

*^ ^ ./ ^ > Eucharist

Nicene, the most influential symbol. The doctrine of ^^'^J^
the eucharist was here joined directly to the trinity ^ua^^

Middle

426 OUTLIKBS OF THE HISTOHT OF DOGMA.

and to Christology. Therewith was also expressed
in the symbol that the same is one with these doc-
trines^ and indeed in the form of the doctrine of tran-
substantiation {" transsubstantiatis pane et vino")
and with strict hierarchical trend. Joined thereto
was a statement regarding baptism and penance
{^per veram poenitentiam semper protest repa-
rart"). Therewith indeed this development ended,
and with it the allied one, that every Christian must
BtoWert confess his sins before the parochus (c. 21). The
innovation in the symbol (combination of the doc-
trine of the eucharist with the trinity and Christol-
ogy) is the most peculiar and the boldest act of the
Middle Ages, having much greater weight than the
"^/logwe". On the other side, however, the new
symbol shows still very plainly that only the old
dogma were truly dogma, and not the Augustinian
sentences concerning sin, hereditary sin, grace, etc.
Catholic Christianity is constituted, aside from the
old Church dogmas, by the doctrines of the three
sacraments (baptism, penance and the eucharist).
The rest are dogma of the second order, that means,
no dogma at all. This condition was for the future
(till the Reformation) of the greatest importance.

DBVBLOPMBNT OP DOCTlllNB OP SIN, ETC. 42'}'

B. Anselm^s Doctrine of Satisfaction and the
Doctrines of Atonement of the Theologians of
the 12th Century.

C^esch. d. VerBdhnungslehie v. Baur u. Ritechl. Hasse,
Anselm, 2 Bde., 1852 f. Crexner, i. d. Stud. u. Krit, 1880 S.
Iff.

Anselm in his work " Cur deus homo ^ attempted cSpdSw
to prove the strict necessity (reasonableness) of the ^®™®'
death of a God-man for the redemption of sinful
humanity (even in Augustine are found doubts of
this necessity), and thereby raised the fundamental
principle of the practice of penance (satisfactio
congrua) to the standard of religion in general.
Herein consists his epochal importance. His pre- his Pre-
supposition is that sin is guilty and indeed guilt "on-
against Gk)d, that the blotting out of this guilt is
the main point in the work of Christy that the cross
of Christ is the redemption, and that therefore the
grace of Gtod is nothing else than the work of Christ
(Augustine here still manifested uncertainty). In
these momentous thoughts lies the evangelical truth
of Anselm's deductions. Yet they suffer from grave Qrave im
imperfections; for since they take into consideration uoiuif'
only the " objective'*, they do not contain the proof of
the reality of redemption, but primarily only the
proof of its conditions (they contain no doctrine of
atonement). Furthermore they are based upon a
contradictory view of the honor of God, they place
the Divine attributes at an intolerable variance, they

428 OUTLINBS OF TliB HISTORY OP DOOHA.

make God appear not as the Master and as almighty
Love, but as a powerful private citizen who is man's
partner, they misconceive the inviolablenees of the
sacred moral law and therefore the suffering of pun-
ishment, and finally they allow mankind to he re-
deemed by human sacrifice (!) without making it
plain how in man himself a change of heart is to be
brought about. The great Augustinian and dialecti-
He Did Not cian Anselm really did not know what faith is, and
'^^^^iJ^'** he therefore fancied himself able to formulate a doc-
trine of redemption in strictly necessary categories
(for the conversion of Jews and heathen), without
troubling himself about the establishing of religion
in the heart, that is, about the awakening of faith.
That, however, means a purposing to treat religion
without religion; for the creating of faith is religion,
sundere The old Splitting of the problem into " objective" re-
iS«tive^ demption and "subjective" adoption had its effect
jective." here also, even more than formerly; for Anselm
grappled with the principal problem energetically.
So much the worse were the consequences, which pre-
vail to this day ; for if the problem must be divided
into the " objective" (dramatic management of Qod)
and the " subjective", then has God even in Chris-
tianity proved by the death of Christ only a general
possibility of the true religion; the religion itself,
however, every individual must procure for himself,
be it alone or by means of numerous little assistants
and expedients (the Church). He who shares this
view thinks Catholicly, even if he calls himself a

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 429

Lutheran Christian. Anselm in the moat impor- p^i|~in
tant probleniy which it was his merit to place at jSctrSieot

Qod and of

tJie heady first brought to full view the false Cath- Beiigion.
olic idea of Qod and the false old Catholic con-
ception of religion which had long since found
expression in the practice of penance. In this
sense he is a oo-founder of the Catholic Church,
although his theory in detail has in many respects
been abandoned — in favor of a still more convenient
practice of the Church. Anselm in different writings
(" Monologium^y " Prologium" — concerning the con-
ception of God; ontological proof) gave expression
to the conviction, that one should believe first upon
authority, and then one would be able to prove faith
to be a necessity of thought. However, only in the
dialogically composed writing " Cur deus homo**
has he comprised the whole of the Christian religion
under one head and treated it uniformly and logi-
cally. After a very remarkable introduction, in §S5l^
which especially the old idea about redemption as a ood of hib

Honor.

satisfaction of the lawful claims of the devil is re-
flected, he lays down the principle that the creature,
endowed with reason, has through sin robbed God
of the honor due to him in no longer rendering to
him that which this honor demands, namely, obedi-
ent subjection. Since God cannot lose his honor, and
since freedom from punishment would besides bring
about a general disorder in the kingdom of God,
either restitution (satisfactio) , or punishment is the Restitution
only thing possible. The latter indeed in itself ment.

430 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Guilt of

Sin
Infinite.

God-MAn

Alone

Sufficient.

Acoeptio

Mortis

Infinite

Oood to

Qodl

would be suitable, but since it could result only in
destruction and thus in the ruin of one of the most
precious works of Gtod (the rationabilis creatura)^
the honor of Qod does not permit it. Therefore the
aatisf actio alone remains, which must be a restitution
as well as the price of punishment. Man, however,
cannot render it; for everything that he could give
to Gk)d, he would be compelled from duty to give to
him; moreover the guilt of sin is infinitely great,
since already the slightest disobedience results in
endless sin (^ nondum considerasti quanti ponderis
sit peccatum^). How then shall man restore
" totum quod deo ahstulit"^ " ut sicut deusper ilium
perdidity ita per ilium recuperet"? This the Ood-
man alone is able to do, for only God can offer " de
suOy quod majus est quam omnequodprasterdeum
esV\ and the man must bring it. Therefore a per-
sonality is required who has two natures and who of
his own free will can and does offer to Gted his
Divine-human life (sinlessness) . It must be his life^
for that alone he is not in duty bound to sacrifice to
God ; everything else he also, the sinless one, is hound
to give up. But in this sacrifice full satisfaction is
rendered {^ nullatenus seipsum potest homo magis
dare deo^ quam cum se morti tradit ad honorem
illius^)y indeed its value is infinite. While the least
injury of this life has an infinite negative value, the
free surrender of it has an infinite positive value.
The acceptio mortis of such a God-man is an infinite
good to God (I), which far exceeds his loss through

DEVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 431

sin. Christ has done all this ; his voluntary death
can have resulted only "in honorem dei^y for
another purpose cannot be discovered. For us this
death has a three-fold result : (1) The hitherto crush- d^"\'5«
ing guilt of sin has been removed, (2) We can take ^^Keeiiu!^
to ourselves heartily the example of this voluntary
death, and, (3) GKxl, in acknowledging the rendering
of the aatisf actio as a meritum also of the God-
man, gives us the benefit of this meritum j since he
can indeed give nothing to Christ. Only by reason
of this benefit are we able to become imitators of
Christ. This last turn is a genial attempt of
Anselm's to transmit into the hearts of men the
power of the dramatic scheme of redemption ; but he
suffers from a want of clearness which then prevailed
in the practice of penance. In themselves satis- ^^^'
f actio and meritum are irreconcilable, for one and viewSd*^
the same action can be only the one or the other (the
latter, if there was no occasion for an action greater
than was obligatory) . But from the practice of pen-
ance one was accustomed to see " merits" in actions
in excess of duty, even if they served as compen-
satioD. Thus did Anselm also placed the satis-
f actio Christi under the point of view of merit,
which continues, even after the conclusion of the real
transaction, to pacify and appease God. Anselm
could do this so much the easier, since he considered
the service of Christ far greater than the weight of
sin. But he joined to the thought of meritum^
though rather by intimation, the subjective effect of

Merit.

432 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

AbeUurd
Ignored
Aiuelro^s
Batiaf ac-
tion
Tbeoiy.

Denied the
ClalmBof
the Deril.

the action ; in the framing of the conception of stit-
isf actio he did not find a point where he could pass
over to the *' subjective". Nevertheless, he ended
with the strong consciousness of having reasonably-
proved "per unitLS quaestionia solutionem guicquid
in novo veterique testamento continetur^\

Anselm's satisfaction theory in subsequent times
was accepted only with modifications. Abelard made
no use of it, but went back, whenever he treated of
redemption through Christ (Comm. on Romans), to
the New Testament and patristic tradition, bringing
into prominence the important thought that we must
be led back to God (no change in God's attitude is
necessary). Primarily he refers redemption to the
elect and therefore teaches that the death of the Qod-
man must be conceived only as an act of love^ which
inflames our cold hearts ; however he also gives the
matter the turn, that the merit of Christ as head
of the community benefits its members; this merit
however is no aggregation of certain good deeds, but
the fulness of the love of God dwelling in Christ.
Christ's merit is the merit of his love which con-
tinues in constant intercession ; the atonement is the
personal communion with Christ. Of the claims of
the devil on us, Abelard would also recognize none,
and, together with the idea of the necessity of a
bloody sacrifice to appease Gbd, he repudiated the idea
of the logical necessity of the death on the cross.
The righteousness of the idea of the sufPering of pun-
ishment remained hidden to him as well as to Anselm.

Tlieoriei.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 433

Bernard's thoughts concerning the atonement lag ^^en^
behind those for Abelard ; still he knew how to ex-
press his love for Christ more edifyingly than the
latter. The conception of the merit of Christ (ac-
cording to Anselm) became in after-times the de-
cisive one. Whenever men meditated about the
satisfaction the strict categories of Anselm were
loosened at many points. Indeed even in the disci-
pline of penance all necessity and '* quantity" was
uncertain ! Moreover the Lombard contented himself L^lSid
with recounting all the possible views in which, ac- _ aiT*
cording to tradition, one can look at the death of
Christ, even that of the purchasing of the devil,
together with the deception, and of the value of pun-
ishment, but not of the doctrine of satisfaction, be-
cause it has no tradition in its favor. At the bottom,
however, he was a follower of Abelard (merit, awak-
ening of reciprocal love) . After him the haggling
and bargaining began about the value of sin and the
value of the merit of Christ.

CHAPTER VIII.

history of dogma in the time of the men-
dicant orders till the beginning of the
16th century.

The conditions under which dogma was placed
during this period made it as a system of law more
and more stable — ^f or which reason also the Reforma-
tion halted before the old do^ma — but caused more
?8

434 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

and more an inner dissolution, since it no longer
satisfied the individual piety, or held its ground in
the presence of the new knowledge.

1. On the History of Piety.

Haae, Franciskus, 1856. HCdIer, Anfftnge des Minoriten-
ordens, 1885. Thode, Franciskus, 1885. M€dler, die Wal-
denser, 1888. In addition the works on the Joachimites,
Spiritualists, German Mystics (Preger), XJnltas Fratres, Hus-
sites and heretics of the Middle Ages. Dollinger, Beitr. z.
Sectengesch. d. MA., 1890. Archiv. f. Litt. u. K.-Ge8ch.
des M. A. 1 ff (especially the works of Denifle) .

St The Bemardine piety of immersing oneself en-

Francis :

HwmiHty, tirely in the sufferings of Christ was developed by

ObedWoe. g^ Francis into a piety of the imitation of Christ in
^humilitatey caritate^ obediential. Humilitas is
complete poverty^ and in the form in which he
represented it by his life and joined it with an ex-
ceeding love for Christ, Francis held before men an
inexhaustibly rich, and high ideal of Christianity, ca-
pable of the most widely different individual phases,
and breaking its way through, because first in

SSSSJJn *' ^*^ Catholic piety receive its classical expres-
Piety?^^^ sion. Fraucis was at the same time animated by a
truly apostolic missionary spirit and a most fervent
zeal to enkindle men's hearts and to serve Christian-
ity in love. His preaching was aimed at the indi-
vidual soul and at the restoration of apostolic life.
In wider circles it was to work as a thrilling peni-

S^nu '^^'*^' sermon^ and with this in view Francis re-
ferred believers to the Church, whose most faithful

Bxpn
of Cai

anoe.

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 435

son he was, although her bishops and priests did not
serve, but ruled. This contradiction he overlooked,
but others who had preceded him did not ( Walden-
sians, humiliates), and in their endeavor to restore
apostolic life they suspected the ruling Chiu*ch and
withdrew from it. The mendicant orders have the Mendicant
merit of having kept a great stream of awakened and
active Christian life within the boundaries of the
Church ; not a little of its waters already flowed out-
side, took a hostile direction, stirred up anew the old
apocalyptical thoughts and saw in the Church the
great babel, reserving the approaching judgment at
one time for Gkxl, at another for the emperor. A
small part of the Franciscans made common cause
with them. They spread over Italy, France, and ^^^
Germany as far as Bohemia and Brandenburg, u»Jf«*-
fostering here and there confused heretical ideas,
sharpening however as a rule only the consciences,
awakening religious imrest or icdependence in the
form of individual, ascetic religiousness, and relax-
ing or combating the authority of the Church. A
lay Christianity developed itself within and by ^7 ^^j*»-
the side of the Churchy in which the trend toward ^^«*op«*-
religious independence became strong ; but since as-
ceticism is at last always aimless and can create no
blessedness, it stands in need of the Church, of its
authority and of its sacraments. By a secret but
very firm tie all " heretics", who write the ascetic-
evangelical ideal of life upon their standards, remain
bound to the Church from whose oppression, rule

436 OUTLINES OP THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

S^Not *"^^ worldliness they wish to escape. From the sects
Bnduring. ^£ Biblicists, Apocalyptics, Waldensians and^ Hus-
sites no lasting result was gained. They were truly
^heretical", for they still belonged to the Church
from which they wished to escape. The numerous
pious brotherhoods, which grew up and remained
(although with many sighs) within the pale of the
Church, had still elasticity enough to make room for
** poverty" and evangelical life, and to receive the
mendicant orders into membership. She soon en-
ervated them and they became her best supports.
To the individual piety of the laity, firmly chained to
the confessional, sacraments, priest and pope, a sub-
ordinate existence was accorded in the Church of the
priests. Thus the mediaeval Church wearily fought
its way through the 14th and 15th centuries. For
whatever sacrifices the minorites were forced to
make to the hierarchy, they in a manner indemnified
themselves by the unheard-of energy with which
they served the purposes of the universal Church
Little In- ^J^rough the laity. The universal, historical impor-
by wS?d^- tance of the movements caused by the Waldensians

sians and , i«j.j xi. i_ji«

Mendi. and mendicant orders cannot be reckoned m new
doctrines and institutions, although these were not en-
tirely wanting, but consists in the religious awaJcen-
ing and in an unrest leading to a religious indi-
vidualism, which they caused. In so far as the
mendicant orders and the "ante-Reformation"
movements induced the individual to meditate upon
the truths of salvation, they were the first advance

cants.

DBVELOPMENT OF DOOTRIKB OF SIN, BTC. 437

toward the Reformation. Bat the more religion was
carried into the circles of the third rank and of the
laity in general, the greater was the watchfulness
touching the inviolability of the old dogma, and the 2|^.^^2^
great majority of the laity indeed desired to respect
in the dogma their firm standpoint amidst the un-
certainty concerning the standard of the practical
problems and concerning the correct state of the em-
pirical Church.

To ent»r into particulars, especial attention must Megdi^jt
be paid) for the purpose of the history of dogma, to wt^i^
the union of the mendicant orders with mysticism ^ "^
during this inner religious awakening. Mysticism
is a conscious, reflecting, Catholic piety, which de-
sires to grow by this very reflection and contempla-
tion: Catholicism knew only this or the fides impli-
cita. The model originated from a combination of
Augustine and the Areopagite, enlivened by the Augusuiie

aaoAreop-

Bemardine devotion to Christ. Mysticism has many q^^^^
forms; but national, or confessional the difference
among them is slight. As its starting-point- his-
torically is pantheistic, so is its aim pantheistic (non-
cosmical). In the degree in which it holds more or
less strongly to the historical Christ and the rules of
the Church, this aim comes more or less clearly to
light; but even in the most churchly stamp of mys-
ticism the dominating thought is never wholly want-
ing, which points beyond the historical Christ : Qod
and the soul, the soul and its Gkxl; Christ the
brother; the birth of Christ in every believer (the

438 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

latter conceived now fantastically, now spiritually).
ei^TMg- Mysticism taught that religion is life and love^ and
iwd'iirve? from this lof t}^ idea it undertook to throw lig^t upon
all dogma to the very depths of the trinity, and even
to remodel the same; it created individual religious
life, and the mystics of the mendicant orders were
its greatest virtuosos. But because it did not recog-
nize the rock of faith, it was able only to give direc-
tions for a progressiis infinitus (to Gkxi), but did
not allow the steadfast feeling of a safe possession to
thrive.
Soul Must The admonitions of mysticism move within the

Return to

o<>j by circle, that the soul, alienated from Gk)d, must return

Puriilca- ' ' '

^mftaSon ^ Q^od by purification, illumination and stibstan-

«nd Union. ^^^^ union; it must be " developed*', "cultivated**

and "highly-refined". With the rich and certain

intuition of past experience, the mystics talked of a

turning in upon the soul, of the contemplation of the

outer world as the work of Qod, of poverty and

humility, with which the soul must accord. In all

stages many mystics understood how to draw upon

the whole ecclesiastical apparatus of the means of

salvation (sacraments, sacramental influences); for,

as with the Neo-Platonists, so also with the mystics,

the most inner spiritual piety did not stand opposed

The Sen. to the worship of idols : The sensuous, upon which

Sign and rcsts the sheeu of a holy tradition, is the sign and

PledTOof "^ ' ®

jjj™j pledge of the eternal. The penance sacrament es-
pecially played, as a rule, a great role in the "puri-
fication". In the ^ illumination^^ the Bemardine

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 439

contemplations are very prominent. By the side of
highly doubtful directions regarding the imitation of
Christ, there are also foimd eyangelical thoughts —
faithful confidence in Christ. Besides, there is em-
phasized here the entire immersing in love, from
which was developed a great increase of inner life,
in which latter the Renaissance and Reformation
seem to have been prepared for. In the " stLbstan- FjjtHftiatic
tial union" there finally appeared the metaphysical
thoughts (God as the all, the individual as nothing;
God the ^abysmal substance'', the *' peaceful pas-
sivity^, etc.). Even the normal dogmatist Thomas
here countenanced pantheistic ideas, which gave the
impulse to " extravagant" piety. In recent times it
has been shown by Denifle that Master Eckhart, the J^^^f^

*' ' Eckbart

great mystic who was censured by the Church, was
entirely dependent upon Thomas. But however dan-
gerous these speculations have been — their intention
was nevertheless the highest spiritual freedom (see
for example the " German theology") , which, by en-
tire withdrawal from the world, should be attained
through the feeling of the Supernatural. In this
sense especially the Oerman mystics since Eckhart
have wrought. While the Romance peoples above all g^2^®^
tried to arouse violent emotions by penitential ser-
mons, they undertook the positive task of bringing
the highest ideas of the piety of the times into the
popular language and within the ranks of the laity
(Tauler, Sense, etc.), and to render, through self-
discipline, the mind at home in the world of love.

440 OUTLINBS OF THE BISTORT OP DOGMA.

vi^ or They taught (following Thomas) that the soul can
MfedHere. even here upon earth so receive God within itself
as to enjoy in the fullest sense the vision of his
Being and dwell in heaven itself. Indeed the idea
of full surrender to the Divine verged toward the
other thought, that the soul bears the Divine within
itself and is able to develop it as spiritual freedom
and superiority beyond everything existing and con-
ceivable. The directions for it are sometimes more
intellectually precise, at others more quietistic. The
niomtetio Thomistic mysticism possesses the Augustinian as-
i^^^im. surance of gaining freedom through knowledge and
of rising to Gk>d ; the Scotistic no longer possessed
this assurance, and it sought the highest moods
through disciplining the will : Union of wiU with
Oodf resignation^ tranquillity. Herein indeed lay
a progress in the recognition of evangelical piety,
which was full of import for the Reformation ; but
even the nominalists (Scotists) had lost a clear and
definite apprehension of the Divine will. The way
seemed open here for the question concerning the
certitudo aalutiSy but this remained unanswered so
long as the conception of God was not pushed beyond
the line of the arbitrary Will.
MySSSi ^^® importance of mysticism, especially of German
mysticism, is not to be imderrated even in the direc-
tion of the positive equipment of asceticism as active^
brotherly love. The old monkish instructions were
enlivened by the energetic admonition to the service
of one's neighbor. The simple relation of man to

nysi

Influential.

DEVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, BTC. 441

man, made sacred by the Christian commandment
of love and by the peace of God, is noticeable in all
the persistent organizations and castes of the Middle
Ages, and was preparing to burst them. Here also
the beginning of a new era can be perceived : The
monks became more active, more worldly — ^frequently
in truth run wild therein — and the laity became more
alive and active. In the free unions, half secular,
half ecclesiastical, the pulse of a life of piety throbbed.
The old religious orders were in part kept alive sim-
ply artificially and lost their authority. Among the
Anglo-Saxons and Czechs, hitherto oppressed and
kept in poverty by foreign nations, the new pieiy
allied itself with a politico-national program ( Wiclif wigif and
and Huss movements). This had a most energizing
effect upon Germany, but it never brought about
in patient and divided Germany a national reform
movement. Everything socially revolutionary or
anti-hierarchical remained isolated, and even when
the world-dominating Church had prostituted itself ^f^*^"
in Avignon and when at the reform councils the cry of "^^^
the Romance nations for reform and insurance against
the shameless financial dominance of the curia had
become loud, the German peoples, with few excep-
tions, still kept their patience. An immense revolu-
tion, again and again retarded, was prepared during
the 15th century, but it appeared to threaten merely
the political and ecclesiastical institutions. Piety iSf^tuI*
seldom attacked the old dogma, which through ix^a.
nominalism had become wholly a sacred relic. It

442 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ThomasA
Kempia

turned, it is true, against the new doctrines deduced
from vicious Church practices; but as for itself it
desired to be nothing else than the old ecclesiastical
piety, and indeed it was nothing else. In the 15th
century mysticism clarified itself in Germany. The
^' Imitation of Christ" by Thomas & Eempis is its
purest expression ; but anything like reform in the
strictest sense is not proclaimed in the little book.
The reformation part consists only in its indiyidual-
ism and in the power with which it addresses itself
to eveiy soul.

Code of

Gradan

Basal.

Cpiflcopus
Univer*

salia.

Hierarchv
Easential.

2. On the History of Ecclesiastical Law. The

Doctrine of the Church,

In the time from Gratian to Innocent III. the papal
system secured the supremacy. The whole decretal
legislation from 1159 to 1320 rests upon the code of
Qratian, and scholastic theology became subject to
it. Citations from the Church fathers, in great part,
were transmitted by the law-books. The Church,
which in dogmatics should ever be the communion
of believers (of the predestined), was in truth a
hierarchy, the pope was the episcoptis universalis.
Within ecclesiastical limits the German kings per-
mitted this development, and are responsible for it.

The leading thoughts in regard to the Church,
which were only later finally established, were the
following: (1) The hierarchical organization is es-
sential to the Church, and the Christianity of the

DEVBLOPMBNT OF DOOTRIKB OF SIN, ETC. 443

laity is in every respect bound to the intermediation
of the priests {rite ordinati)^ who alone can perform
the Church functions ; (2) The sacramental and juris- 5^Si
dictional powers of the priests are independent of
their personal worthiness ; (3) The Church is a visible
communion endowed with a constitution originating
with Christ (and as such corpus Christi) ; it has a
twofold potestaSy namely spiritualis et ternpor- J^<jjj**^^
alts. Through both it, which shall endure to the ^*''*^-
end of the world, is superior to and placed above the
perishable states. Therefore all states and all indi-
viduals must be obedient to it {de necessitate salu-
tis) ; even over heretics and heathens the power of
the Church extends (final decision by Boniface VIII.) ;
(4) In the pope, the representative of Christ and w?2S&

Two

successor of Peter, a strictly monarchical constitution swords.
is given to the Church. Whatever is valid of the
hierarchy is above all valid of him ; the remaining
members of the hierarchy are appointed only " in
partem sollicitudinis*\ He is the episcopus uni-
versalis; to him therefore belong the two swords;
and since the Christian can attain unto scmctifica-
tion only within the Church, since however the
Church is the hierarchy and the hierarchy the pope,
all the world must de necessitate salutis be subject
to the pope (bull ** unam sanctam^) . By a chain of
falsifications, which arose especially within the re- p^jJ^Sg.
awakened polemics against the Greeks (13th century) ,
these maxims were dated back into ecclesiastical
antiquity, yet were strictly formulated (Thomas

444 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Aquinas) only after they had long been admitted in
practice. The new law followed the new custom,
which was strengthened by the mendicant orders;
for the latter, thoroughly unsettled by the special
privileges which they received, and the aristo-
cratic, provincial and local powers completed the
victory of the papal autocracy. The doctrine of

S^iii^ papal infallibility was the necessary result of this
development. This also was formulated by Thomas,
but not as yet carried through; for on this last point
both the historical and the provincial ecclesiastical
conscience reacted (the university of Paris; the re-
buke of John XXII. as an heretic). About 1300 the
extravagant exaltation of the papacy in literature
reached its height ( Augustinus Triumphus, Alvarus
Pelagius), but after about 1330 it grew weak, ixygtovr
strong again only after 120 years (Torquemada).
In the interval the latest development of the papacy

Violently was combated violently, but not successfully, first in

Oombatea.

the ghibelline literature, to which for a time the
minorite (Occam) was allied, later from the stand-
point of the supremacy of the councils. Only tem-
porarily was Munich the seat of the opposition and
did German authors take part in it. The real land
of opposition was France, its king and bishops, yes
the French nation. The latter alone preserved the
PragmAUc freedom obtained at the councils (pragmatic sanc-

Sanction. ^ *=•

tion at Bourges, 1430) ; but in the concordat of 1517
the king also sacrificed it to share with the pope,
after the example of other princes, the established

DEVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 445

Church of the country. By about 1500 the old
tyranny had been re-established almost everywhere.
The Lateran council, at the beginning of the 16th
century, defied the wishes of the nations as though
there never had been sessions at Constance and Bale.

The new development of the idea of the Church, ^^^.
up to the middle of the 13th century, was brought ^j^rispro^

donoe.

about not by theology but by jurisprudence. This
is explained, (1) By the lack of interest in theology
at Rome, (2) By the fact that the theologians, when-
ever they meditated about the Church, always re-
peated the dissertations of Augustine concerning the
Church as societas fidelium {numerus electorum)^
for which reason also the later ^ heretical" opinions
concerning the Church are found in the great scholas-
tics. Only after the middle of the 13th century did
theology take an interest in the hierarchial, papal
Church idea of the jurists (forerunner : Hugo of St. ^^^^
Victor). The controversy with the Greeks, espe-
cially after the council of Lyons, 1274, furnished
the opportunity. The importance of Thomas con-
sists in the fact that he first developed strictly
the papal conception of the Church within dog-
maticSy but at the same time united it artfully
with the Augustinian idea from which he started,
Thomas adheres to it that the Church is the number iJ^SSSnt
of the elect; but he shows that the Church is author- au^S^o.
ity in doctrinal law, and as a priestly sacramental
institution is the exclusive organ through which the
bead of the Church procures members. Thus he w^

446 OUTLINBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

able to join the new to the old. Neyerthelees till the
Reformation and beyond it the whole hierarchical
and papal theory obtained no sure position in dog-
matics; it remained Roman decretal right, was util-
ized in practice and ruled over the hearts of men
through the doctrine of the sacraments. All that
could be expected in the interest of the hierarchy
from a formulation of the Church idea had indeed
already been acquired as a secure possession.
^J'gjj^ Because it was an opposition from the centre every
F^Sto. opposition against the Roman idea of the Church
which became clamorous in the latter half of the
Middle Ages remained ineffectual. The signifi-
cance of faith to the Church idea no one clearly
recognized, and the final trend of the whole religious
system toward the visio et fruitio dei no one cor^
Common rectcd. The common ground of the defenders of the

Ground or *^

'^^Q^ hierarchical Church idea and their opponents was the
following: (1) The Church is the communion of
those who shall attain unto the vision of God, of
the predestined ; (2) Since no one knows whether he
belongs to this communion, he must make diligent
use of the means of salvation of the Church; (3)
These means of salvation, the sacraments, are be-
stowed upon the empirical Church and attached to
the priests; (4) They have a double purpose, first, to
prepare for the life beyond by incorporation in Ihe
body of Christ, and then, since they are powers of
faith and love, to produce here on earth the ^ bene
vivere*\ i.e. to cause the fulfilment of the law of

ponen

Op-

DEVELOPMENT OP DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 447

Christ; (5) Since even upon the earth the fulfiihnent
of the law of Christ (in poverty, humility and obedi-
ence) is the highest duty, therefore the temporal life,
also the state, is subordinate to this aim and thus
also to the sacraments and in every sense to the
Church. Upon this common ground moved all the
controversies regarding the Church and her reform.
The papists drew the further consequences, that the Hierarchy
hierarchical order, invested with the administration ^tSSaT*"
of the sacraments and with the authority of the
Church to subordinate to itself the temporal life, was
de necessitate salutis; still they permitted the moral
duty of really fulfilling the law of Christ entirely to
recede behind the mechanically and hierarchically
carried out administration of the sacraments, where-
by they degraded the Church idea,as the number of the
predestined (religious) and as the communion of those
living according to the law of Christ (moral) , to a mere
phrase, and sought the guarantee for the legitimacy
of the Church in the strictest conception of the ob-
jective system culminating in the pope, endan-
gering however themselves the finished building
in one point — the re-ordinations. The opponents. Heretical
however, hit upon "heretical" ideas, either, (1) By ^^"""^^
contending against the hierarchical order, since be-
yond the bishop's ofiice the same is neither supported
by the Scriptures, nor by tradition, or, (2) By allow-
ing the religious and moral idea contained in the
thought of predestination and in the conception of
the Church as the communion of imitators of Christ,

448 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

to supersede the idea of the empirical Church as an
institution of sacraments and of law, and (3) By
measuring, therefore, the priests and with them the
Church authorities by the law of Qod (in a Donatis-
tic way), before they conceded to them the right to
administer the keys, " to loose and to bind''. The
opposition of all so-called " pr»-ref ormatory " sects
and men had its root in these theses. From them
one could develop the seemingly most radical anti-
theses to the ruling Church, and has developed them
(devil's Church, babel, anti-Christ, etc.) ; yet this
must not blind us to the fact that the opponents stood
rmi upon common ground. Men placed the moral char-
acteristics of the Church above the juristic and " ob-
jective"— certainly this was a blessed progress — but
the fundamental ideas (Church as sacramental insti-
tution, necessity of priesthood, fniitio dei as aim,
lack of esteem for civil life) remained the same, and
under the title of the societas fidelium in truth
only a legalistic moral Church idea was established.
The Church is the sum total of those who carry out
the apostolic life according to the law of Christ.
Raformere Faith was Considered only as one characteristic

Wisnea to

Improve mjder the conception of the law, and in the place of
the commandments of the priests stepped the Fran-
ciscan rule, or a Biblicism, against whose apocalyp-
tic or wild excrescences one had to take refuge in
the old dogma and in ecclesiastical tradition. Neither
a communion of believers, nor an invisible Church,
Its is falsely believed, did the Reformers have in

DBVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 449

view, but their object was to improve the old Church
of priests and sacraments by dissolving her hierarchic
monarchical constitution, by abolishing her assumed
political powers and by carefully sifting her priests
according to the standard of the law of Christ, or of
the Bible. On these conditions she was also es-
teemed by the Reformers as the visible, holy Church,
through which God realizes his predestinations.
They did not recognize that the carrying out of this
Donatistic thesis was an impossibility and that this
reformed Church must again become hierarchical.
The Waldensians neither contested the Catholic waideo-

bIbdb.

worship, nor the sacraments and hierarchial consti-
tution in themselves, but considered it a deadly sin
that the Catholic ecclesiastics should exercise the
rights of successors of the apostles, without taking
upon themselves the apostolic life, and they protested
against the extensive governing power of the pope
and the bishops. The Joachimites and a part of the ^^^^
minorites imited the apocalyptic with the legal ele- ^^^^^
ment. Here also it was not the question of a sacra-
mental institution and priesthood, but only of the
right of hierarchical divisions of rank, of the Divine
investiture of the pope and of the ecclesiastical gov-
erning power, which was denied to the Church under
the authority of the Franciscan theory. The hand-
ing over of the whole legal sphere to the state was profeiaora

atP&rlB

with many merely an expression of their contempt jj^^^,

for this sphere. The professors of Paris and their ore^rtan

national-liberal coterie attacked the pseudo-Isidorian '^^^
2»

Widif and

450 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA*

and Or^;orian development of the papacy and of tiie
constitution at the rooty and yet they only intended
primarily to paralyze the papal finance system and
to heal the injury to the Church through an episoo-
palianism, which, in view of what the Church
already was as a Roman power, must be desig-
nated Utopian. Wiclif and Huss — ^the latter a
pDwerful agitator in the spirit of Wiclif but with-
out theological independence — represent the ripest
phase of the reform movements of the Middle Ages:
(I) They showed that the cultus and sacramental
practices everywhere were hampered and vitiated
by human tenets (indulgences, confessions, absolute
pardoning power of the priests, manducatio infidd-
iuviy saints-, image-, relic-worship, special masses,
sacramentals, Wiclif also against transubstantiation) ;
they demanded plainness, intelligibleness (language
of the country) and spirituality of worship; (2) They
demanded a reform of the hierarchy and of the secu-
larized mendiccmt orders; these all, the pope at the
head, must return to an apostolic ministry; the pope
is only the first servant of Christ, not his represen-
tative; all governing must cease; (3) They, like
Thomas, brought to the front the Augustinian pre-
destination Church idea, yet while Thomas in join-
ing to it the empirical idea disposes of everything
moral only through the medium of the sacraments,
they, without robbing the sacraments of their im-
portance, raised to the central place the idea that
the empirical Church must be the kingdom in which

Biaed.

DEVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 451

the law of Christ governs. They taught that the ^^^
law of Christ is the true nota ecclesiae; therefore in b^cbu^
accordance with this fundamental principle the right
also of the priesthood and the manner of administering y
the sacraments must be determined. Wiclif thereby
contested the independent right of the clergy to be
representatives of the Church and administrators of
the means of grace and made it dependent upon the
observing of the lex Christi. "Faith" waa also ^^^
passed over by Wiclif and Huss. In turning with all
their might against the hierarchy and against the
objective, legal idea of the Church system, they
placed the legal Church idea in opposition to the
judicial. The ^ fides caritate formata^\ that is,
the observance of the law, alone gives legitimacy to
the Church. Thus much they did for the in-
wardness of the contemplation of the Church — the
hierarchical conception of the Church had still in op-
position to their own an element of truth, though a
perverted one: That God builds his Church upon
earth by his grace in the midst of sin, and that holi-
ness in a religious sense is no mark that can be
recognized by a legal standard (on the Church idea of
Thomas and the PrsB-Beformers, see GK>ttschick i.
d. Ztschr, f, KGesch, Bd. VIII).

452 OUTUNBS OF THB HI8TORT OF DOGMA.

3. On the History of Ecclesiastical Science.

Histories of i^ilosophy by Erdmaim, ttberweg-Heinze,
Windelband, Stdckl, Baur, Vorles (ib. DG. 2. Bd. Werner,
Scholastik d. sp&toron MA. 3 Bde, 1881 ff. Ritschl, Fides
implicita, 1890.

^wjjj <^ The great revival of scienoe after the beginning of
*^««*- the 13th century was occasioned, (1) By the mighty
triumph of the Church and the papacy under Inno-
cent III., (2) By the exaltation of piety since St.
Francis, (3) By the enlargement and enrichment of the
g^eral culture and by the discovery of the genuine
Aristotle (contact with the Orient; transmission of
Greek philosophy through Arabs and Jews; the
Bupematuralistic Avicenna, f 1037, the pantheistic
Averrhoes, f 1198; Maimonides' influence upon
Thomas and others). The two new great powers,

Menud *^^ mendicant orders and Aristotle, were obliged to

^'^■'*^*' secure their place in science by fighting for it; the
latter conquered, since it was plain that he had ren-
dered the best service in opposition to an eccentric
realism, which leads to pantheism. A moderated
realism now developed, which recognized the uni-
versals ** in re", but knew how to add them accord-
ing to need, either ** ante^\ or ^post rem'\

Authori^ The new science like the older sought to ex-

of Churoh

g^g^Sc P^*^'^ ^ things through reference to Gk)d ; but this
reference meant the same as the submission of all
knowledge to the authority of the Church. In a
certain sense men were more fettered in the 13th

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 453

century than formerly; for not only the old dogma
{articuH fidei), but the whole territory of ecclesias-
tical activity was considered absolute authority, and
the pre-supposition that every authority in single
questions is of equal weight with the ratio was
now first fully expressed. The theologians of the
mendicant orders justified ^ scientifically " the whole
constitution of the Church, with its latest institu-
tions and doctrines, upon the same plane with the
" credo** and the " intelligo". Anselm had striven to ^°?g?''
erect a rational structure upon the foundation of
authoritative revelation; with the later theologians
the jumbling of authorities in a most unconcerned
manner was a principle. Although they adhered to
the theory that theology is a speculative science
which culminates in the visio dety yet so great was
their confidence in the Church that they continually
added to the speculative structure the tenets of her
authority. Hence originated the theory that there
exist a natural and a revealed theology; still they ^^J**
conceived these as being in closest harmony, the one "^^S^.
as the supplement and complement of the other; and
they were confident that the whole was tenable even
before the bar of reason. The abundance of the
material to be mastered was unbounded, as well in
regard to revelation (the whole Bible, the doctrine
and practice of the Church), as in regard to reason
(Aristotle). Nevertheless they advanced from the
" Sentences" to a system (" summa") : That which
the Church retains in life, the dominion over the

464 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

^m^ world, is also to be reflected in its theology. The
1^' new dogmatism was the dialectic-systematical treat-
ment of ecclesiastical dogma and of the acts of the
Church, for the purpose of developing the same into
a single system comprehending everything in the
highest sens^ worthy of knowledge, and of proving it,
and then of rendering serviceable to the Church all the
forces of the mind and the whole knowledge of the
world. To this purpose, however, was the other sub-
jective one united of rising to Gkxl and rejoicing in his
SaSui^ presence. But both purposes now coincided : Knowl-
Knowiedge edge of the Church doctrines is knowledge of God,

of God.

for the Church is the present Christ. Therein
were these scholastics not servile workers for the
Church — on the contrary: Consciously they sought
knowledge only for the benefit of their souls, yet
they breathed only within the Church. The struc-
ture which they raised collapsed, but their work in-
deed was a progress in the history of science,
gux^ of *What has been said above, has reference to the
prsB-Scotistic scholasticism, above all to Thomas.
His " summa" is characterized, (1) By the conviction
that religion and theology are essentially of a specie
lative (not practical) nature, that therefore they
must be acquired by thinking, and that finally no
contradiction can arise between reason and revela-
tion; (2) By a firm adherence to the Augustinian
doctrine of God, of predestination, sin and grace
(only upon the conception of God did the Aristotelian
philosophy have an influence; the strict elevation of

DBVEIiOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIK, ETC. 455

the Holy Scriptures as the only safe revelation
Thomas also accepted from Augustine); (3) By a
deeply penetrating knowledge of Aristotle and by an
extensive use of his philosophy, as far as Augustin-
ianism would permit; (4) By a bold justification of
the highest claims of the Church upon a genial
theory of the state and a wonderfully careful obser-
vation of the empirical tendencies of the papal sys-
tem of Church and state. The world-historical Thomas

Unites

importance of Thomas consists in his uniting of '^"^'J*''®
Augustine and Aristotle. As a pupil of Augustine
he is a speculative thinker, full of confidence and yet
in him are already found the germs of the destruction
of the absolute theology. For theology as a whole
he still sought to maintain the impression of absolute
validity; in detail arbitrary and relative ideas al-
ready took the place of the necessary, while he no
longer deduced purely rationally the articuli fidei^
like Anselm.'**

But the strictly necessary was also not in every ^^^j^'
respect serviceable to the Church. She demanded ^JSmi^^"

* The delineation of the summa agrees with the fundmnental idea of
God: Through God to God. The first part (119 quaest.) treats of God and
the issue of all things from God; the second part, sec. Ist (114 quaest.)
of general morality; the second part, sec. 9d (189 quaest.) of special
morality under the point of view of the return of the rational creature to
Gk>d ; the third part, which Thomas was not able to finish, of Qhrist, the sac-
raments and eschatology. The proceeding in eTcry separate question is by
the method of contradiction. All reasons which speak against the correct
conception of Uie doctrine are given expression Cdiffieultate*^, In
general the governing principle is that the whole system must be based
upon the authority of revelation; '*utitur tamen sacra doctrina eiiam ra-
tione humana^ non quidem ad probandam fidem (quia pkb hoc tollbbbtub
MXKiTDif fxdd), aed ad tnanifeatandum aliqua alia, quae traduntur in hoc
doetrina. Oum enim gratia non toUat naturam^ »ed perficiat, oportet
quod natttralia ratio gubterviat fidei".

466 OUTUKBS OF TfiS mstORT OF DOGMA.

here also that the deal should be & deux mains;
She wanted a theology which proved the speculative
necessity of her system and one which taught
blind submission. Thomas* theology alone could not
satisfy. With all its ecclesiastical bent it could not
deny the fundamental thought, that Qod and the
soul, the soul and (3od are everything. From this
Augustinian-Areopagite attitude that '^ secondary-
mysticism^ will always be developed in which Hie
individual endeavors to go his own way. Where
there is inward conviction, there is also indepen-
dence. It was of benefit to the Church that theology
i^io- soon took another turn. It grew skeptical in r^;aid

^ttS^ to the "general", the "idea", which should be the
"substance". Under the continuous study of Aris-
totle causality became the principal idea in place of
immanence. The scientific sense grew stronger;
details in their concrete expression gained in interest :
Will ruled the world, the will of Gkxl and the will
of the individual, not an unintelligible substance, or
a constructed universal intellect. Reason recognized
the series of causalities and ended in the discernment
of arbitrariness and mere contingencies. Duns
Scotus, the most penetrating thinker of the Middle
Ages, marks this inunense change ; but it was first
consummated since Occam.

^'^SSpS ^^^ consequence of this change was not however the
protest against the Church doctrine with its absolute
tenets, nor the attempt to try these by the principles
upon which they were based, but the increasing

■

DEVBLOPMBNT OP DOCTftlNE OP SIN, ftTC. 45^

authority of the Church. At her door was laid s„^5te°to
i^hat ratio and auctoritas once had unitedly ^"*'*^^-
borne, not in an act of despair but as a self-evident
act of obedience. Socinianism first protested. Pro-
testantism examined into the foundations of the
doctrine — post-Tridentine Catholicism pursued the
direction indicated further : In this way^ while nom-
inalism began to rule^ the ground was soon won
for the later trinitarian development of doc*
trine.

Nominalism had great advantages: It began to J^^'^^
see clearly that religion is something else than ?2t^^'
knowledge and philosophy, while Thomas was want-
ing in clearness; it knew the importance of the
concrete in opposition to the hollowness of the ab-
stract (laying the foundation for a new psychology) ;
it recognized the will, laid stress upon this property
also in God, strongly emphasized the personality of
Gkxl and thereby first put an end to the Neo-Platonic
theosophy which mixed up Qod and the world; it
grasped the positiveness of historical religion more
firmly, — but it forfeited, together with confidence
in an absolute knowledge, also confidence in the
majesty of the moral law and thereby emptied the
conception of God and exposed him to arbitrariness,
including in the ** positive", to which it submitted,
the Church with its whole apparatus — the commands
of the religious and moral law are arbitrary, but
the commands of the Church are absolute. It estab- homa
lished in dogmatics the sovereign right of casuis- casuistiy.

458 OXJTLINKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGICA.

try, already anticipated by the discipline of pen-
ance not only, but also by the dialectics of the
Thomists: Everything in revelation depends upon
the Divine will which is arbitrary; therefore intel-
lect is able to prove at most only the ^ conveniens^
of things ordained. In so far however as it has its
own knowledge there exists a double truths the re-
ligious and the natural; to the former one submits
and in this very submission consists the merit of
Ftdn^im- the faith. In g^reater measure (not recoiling even
®""**^** at the frivolous) nominalism acknowledged the suffi-
ciency of the ^ fides implicitaP; true, it here found
an example in the papal decretals. Had not Inno-
cent rV. expressly taught that it was sufficient for
the laity to believe in a requiting God, as for the
tte*Sali^ rest to submit to the Church doctrine? Absurdity
Reiifl^on. Ai^d authority now became the stamp of religious
truth. While freeing themselves from the load of
speculative monstrosities and the deceptive "neces-
sity of thinking", men took upon themselves the
dreadful load of a faith the content of which they
themselves declared to be arbitrary and opaque, and
which they therefore were able to wear only as a
uniform.
^SSJSf * Closely allied with this development was anoth^,
Ourt off.^ the gradual casting off of Augustinianism and the
reinstatement of Roman moralism, now confirmed
by Aristotle. The weight of guilt and the power of
grace became relative magnitudes. From Aristotle
they learned that man by his freedom stands inde-

DBVXLOPMENT OF DOCtKINE OP SIN, fiTC. 45d

pendent before God, and since they had cast off
Augustine's doctrine concerning the '^ first and last
things", they also, under cover of his words,
stripped off his doctrine of grace. Everything in
religion and ethics became only probable, redemp- Probaiity
tion itself through Christ was placed among the most
uncertain categories. The fundamental principles of
a imiversal religious and moral diplomacy were ap-
plied to objective religion and to subjective religious-
ness. The holiness of Qod was extinguished : He is %Hf^^!P'
not entirely severe, not entirely holy. Faith need <»^'«*-
not be a fuU surrender, penance not perfect repent-
ance, love not perfect love. Everywhere a " certain
standard" (Aristotle) is sufficient and whatever is
wanting is supplied by the sacraments and by adher-
ence to the Church; for the religion of revelation
was given to make the way to heaven easy, and the
Church alone is able to announce what " standard"
and what accidental merits will satisfy God. This
is the ^ Aristotelianism" or the ^ reasoning" of the
nominalistic scholastics which Luther hated and
which the Jesuits in the post-Tridentine times fuUy
introduced into the Church.
At the end of the Middle Ages, and even in the Reaction

Against

14th century, this nominalism, which renders relig- ^^j^J**"
ion void, called forth great reactions, yet notwith-
standing it remained in vogue at the universities.
Not only the theologians of the Dominican order
contradicted it again and again, but outside of the
order also an Augustinian reaction broke forth in

460 OUTLINES OF THfi HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Bradwardina, Wicliff, Hubs, Wesel, Weasel and
others. They stood up against Pelagianism, al-
though they allowed wide play to the sacraments,
^Jjjjjjj* the^e^ implicita and Church authority. A power-
ful ally against nominalism, which by its hoUow
formalistic and dialectic principles in the 15th cen-
tury made itself outright despicable, was gained by
an Aug^stinian reaction in favor of Plato who at
that time was being brought to light again. A new
spirit emanated from him and from the rediscovered
antiquity: It sought knowledge from the living^
and reached out toward those ideals which set the
individual free and elevate him above the common
world. Through violent disturbances the new spirit
announced itself and in the beginning it seemed to
threaten Christianity with paganism ; yet those who
NichoUBof represented the renaissance most brilliantly (Nich-
Kn«»^ olas of Kus, Erasmus and others) only wished to
do away with unspiritual ecdesiasticism and its
empty science, but not really to jeopardize the Church
and the dogma. The restored confidence in the rec-
ognizable unity of all things, the bold soaring of the
fantasy inspired by antiquity and the discovery of
new worlds, these founded the new science. Nomin-
alistic science did not become by purification an
exact science, but a new spirit moved among the
withered foliage of scholasticism, and gained confi-
dence and strength to extract the secrets from nat-
ure also, as well as from the vivid speculations of
Plato which inspire the whole man, and from inter-

DBVSLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 461

course with the liring. But theology did not at first
profit by it. It was simply pushed aside. The hSJJSS
Christian humanists also were no theologians, but au^i^^
only learned patristic scholars with Platonic-Fran-
ciscan ideals, — ^at best only Augustinians. No one
really had any longer any confidence in ecclesiasti-
cal doctrine, but through a sense for the original
teaching, which the renaissance had awakened, a
new theology was prepared.

4. TJie Reminting of Dogmatics into Scholastics.

In the scholasticism of the 13th century the Occi- **3J£^
dental Church obtained a homogeneous, systematic ^^^
representation of its faith. The pre-suppositions
were, (1) The Holy Scriptures and the dogmas of the
councils, (2) Augustinianism, (3) The development
of ecclesiasticism since the 9th century, (4) The
Aristotelian philosophy. Individual bliss in the
hereafter is still the finis theologiae^ but in so far as
the sacraments, which serve this purpose, restore the
kingdom of Christ upon earth also as a power of love
(already since Augustine), a second aim was intro-
duced into theology : It is not only food for the soul
but also ecclesiasticism. But the difference be-
tween these two ideas has never been adjusted in
Catholicism. In them grace and merit are the two
centres of the parabola of the mediaeval conception
of Christianity.

Only the old articuli fldeiwere dogmas in a strict

462 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORT OP DOGMA.

Fid^^iy ^^^^^ > l>u^ since the transubstantiation was coasid-
D^^Lfl. ered as conferred together with the incarnation, the
whole sacramental system was in reality raised to
the height of an absolute doctrine of faith. The
bomidary between dogma and theological precept
was entirely uncertain in details. No one could any
longer state what the Church really did teach, and
the latter itself always took care to map out the
province of the necessary faith.
T^^fow The task of scholasticism was a triple one: (1)
^imf* " To treat the old articuli fidei scientifically and to
place them within the line drawn about the sacra-
ments and the merits ; (2) ^o give a form to the doc-
trine of the sacraments, (3) To adjust the difference
between principles of ecclesiastical action and Au-
g^tinianism. These tasks it carried out in a mag-
nificent manner, yet in doing so it soon found itself
at variance with piety, which could no longer find
its true expression (Augustinian reactions) in the
official theology (the nominalistic) and therefore
pushed it aside.

A. The Working Over op the Traditional

Articuli Fidel

^ngof*" ^' ^^ *^® beginning the Augustinian- Areopagite
'^^^GoS*'*^' conception of God governed the theology of the Mid-
dle Ages (conception of the necessary going forth of
the one Being; the Substance determining every-
thing; the virtual existence of God in the world;

DBVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINB OF SIN, BTC. 463

ontological proof of Anselm) ; but later the danger
from pantheism was felt (Amalrich of Bana, David
of Dinanto). Thomas endeavored to unite the
Augustinian and the Aristotelian conception of God : ^ ^ISStS
Qod is absolute substance, self-conscious thinking, ^i^^d'
actvs puru8; he is different from the world (cosmo- lancon-

^ ceptionB.

logical proof) . Yet Thomas also still had the most
lively interest in emphasizing the absolute suf-
ficiency and necessity of God (in God's own personal
end the world is included) ; for only the necessary
can be recognized with certainty; bliss however
depends upon certain knowledge. Yet Duns con-
tested the conception of a necessary outgoing Being,
overthrew all proofs of God, denied also that the
divine Will could be measured by our ethical " modes
of thought", and conceived of God merely as a Free-
will with unfathomable motives, i.e. without these
(arbitrariness). Occam questioned also the conception
of the primum movens immobile and pronounced
monotheism only probabilior than polytheism. The
contradiction between Thomists and Scotists is ^^SSbSS^
found in their different conceptions of the relation ^ and
of man to God. The former looked upon this
as dependence and recognized in the good the
essence of God (God wills a thing because it is
good); the latter separated God and the creature,
conceived the latter as independent but in duty
bound to the Divine commands which originate in
the pleasure of God (a thing is good because God
wills it). Yonder predestination, here arbitrariness.

SooUstB.

464 OUTLINBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Theology indeed uttered the sentence "pater in jUio
revelatus^ with the lips, but heeded it not.

^^5^^^**' 2. The construction of the doctrine of the trinity
belonged entirely to scientific labor, after tritheistic
(Boscellin) and modalistic (Abelard) attempts had
been repulsed. Thomism necessarily retained an
inclination to modalism (even the Lombard was ac-
cused of substantializing the divina essentia and
hence of "quatemity"), while the Scotistic school
kept the Persons sharply separated. In the subtile
researches the trinity became a school problem.
The treatment of it proved that the faith of the
Occident did not live in this transmitted doctrine.

Putheism 3. With Thomas are still found remnants of the

OfTlkOfllML

pantheistic way of thinking (creation as actualiza-
tion of the Divine ideas; everything which is exists
only participatione dei; divina honitas est finis
rerum omnium^ therefore not an independent aim
in the world); yet he by introducing the Aristo-
telian idea had already essentially completed the sep-
aration of God from the creature, and he endeavored
to restore the pure idea of creation. The contrasts
were reflected in the contest about the beginning of
the world. In the Scotistic school Gkxl's own pur-
pose and that of the creatures were sharply separated.
The innumerable host of questions concerning the
government of the world, the theodicy, etc., which
scholasticism again propounded, belongs to the his-
tory of theology. Thomas assumed that Gk)d directs
all things "immediate" and also effects the cor-

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTBINB OF SIN, ETC. 465

ruptiones rerum "quasi per accidena'^ (Origen,
Augustine) ; the Sootists would acknowledge only an
indirect direction and contested the Neo-Platonic
doctrine of a malum in the interest of GKxl and of
the independence of man.

4. Together with a "nota^ against the "nihil- Da^neof
ism** of the Lombard who denied that Qod through ^jot^'*
the incarnation has become something, the doctrine ^Samt
of the two natures was transmitted to the great
scholastics. The conception of John Damascenus
was the prescribed one; but the hypostatical union
was treated as a school problem. The Thomists con-
ceived the human as passive and accidental and
really continued in the monophysitic conception.
Duns endeavored to save the hiunanity of Christ,
to place certain limits to the hiunan knowledge of
Christ and to attribute existence also to the human in-
dividual nature of Christ. Still within this territory
Thomism remained victorious. Practically indeed
men made use of the Christological dogma only in
the dogma of the eucharist, and the latest scholasti-
cism explained the same as necessaiy and reasonable
(Occam. ) (Gk)d might also have assumed the natura
asinina and still have been able to save us). The
doctrine of the work of Christ did not have its root
in the doctrine of the two natures, but in the thought
of the msrit of the sinless man Jesus, whose life had
a divine value. {Christuspassus est secundem car-
nem). The idea of the satisf actio (Halesius, Al- ^5^5^

bertus) was also brought up again. Thomas treated ^^^'"^^
80

466 0UTLINB8 OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

it, but explained the redemption through the deaUi of
Christ as being simply the most fitting way. Be-
cause in it is represented the simx of all imaginary
suffering, this death, which brings before our mind
the love of C}od, becomes an example for us, recalls us
from sin and awakens as a motive our love in return.
Alongside the subjective Thomas also emphasized
the objective: If God had redeemed us sola volun-
tate^ he would not have been able to gain so much
for us; Christ's death has obtained for us not only
freedom from guilt, but also the gratia justificans
and the gloria beatitudinis. Moreover all possible
points of view were quoted, from which the death of
cf**^c- ^^s* °^y ^ regarded. As satisf actio it is super-
^wS!'' abundanSy since as regards all satisfaction the rule
holds good, that the offended one loves the gift
tendered by himself more than he hates the offence
{sacrificium acceptissimum). This apparently cor-
rect and worthy idea became fatal; it is plain that
Thomas also misjudges the suffering of punishment
and with it the full gravity of sin. In the doctrine
regarding merit the reality (not the possibility only)
of our reconciliation through the death of Christ
AnBoim^s was to be expressed. Setting aside the doctrine of

Doctrine *^ °

Extended, the two naturcs the idea of Anselm was further car-
ried out, that the merit gained through the voluntary
suffering descends from the head to the members:
^ caput et membra sunt quasi una persona mystica^
et ideo satisf actio Christi ad omnes FIDELES
pertinety sicut ad sua membra". But the idea of

DBVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINB OF SIN, BTC. 467

faith is instantly replaced by that of love: "fideSy

per guam a peccato mundamur^ non est fides in-

formiSy quae protest esse etiam cum peccato^ sed

est fides formataper caritatem^\ Thomas wavered S»«*2"

between the hypothetical and the necessary, between ^ScMto

the objective (possible) and subjective (real), between j^ive W

demption.

the rational and irrational redemption. Duns drew
the consequences of the satisfaction theory in tracing
everything back to the arbitrary " acceptation of God.
The arbitrary estimation of the Receiver gives the
value to the satisfaction, as it also alone determines

the extent of the offence. The death of Christ was i>sn; Made

Re<f
ion

TBI

rate the idea of "infinite" is to be repudiated; for
neither the sin nor the death of a finite man can have
infinite weight; besides an infinite merit is wholly
unnecessary, since the sovereign will of God decrees
what is good and meritorious in his sight. There-
fore dkpurus homo woidd also have been able to re-
deem us; for there was needed only a first impulse,
the rest in any event the self-sufficient man must
accomplish. Duns indeed endeavored to show also
that the death of Christ was "appropriate"; but
this point was no longer of real importance : Christ
died, because God so willed it. Everything "neces-
sary" and " infinite", which is here only an expres-
sion for the Divine, was cleared away. The predes- ^^!^
tinating arbitrariness of God and justification by ^^^^^
works ruled dogmatics. Duns in truth had already
destroyed the doctrine of redemption and annulled

468 OUTLINBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGHA.

the Divinity of Christ. Only the authority of the
Church kept up its validiiy ; should the former fail,
Socinianism would be established. Acknowledging
this authority nominalistic theologians advanced in
their dialectics to the frivolous and blasphemous.
However, in the 15tb centuiy there reappeared in
connection with Aug^tinianism a more serious con-
ception in Gbrson, Wessel, even in Bid and others,
and the Bernardino view of the suffering Christ was
never lost during the Middle Ages.

B. The Scholastic Doctbine of the Sagba-

UENTS.
Hahn, L. v. d. Sacramenten, 1864.

^it^^^.uMi The scholastic uncertainties and liberties touching
tto^&M»- ^® doctrine of the work of Christ are explained by
™^ the certainty with which scholasticism regarded the
benefit of salvation in the sacraments as a present one.
Faith and theology lived in the sacraments. The
Augustinian doctrine was here developed materially
and formally ; the " verbum^ however was evermore
disregarded in favor of the " sacramentum*' ; for
since by the side of the awakening of faith and love
as means of grace the old definition still retained
its value : ^ gratia nihil est aliud quam participata
similitvdo divinae NATURAE", no other form
of grace could really be thought of than the magic-
sacramental form.
The doctrine of the sacraments was for a long time

DEVELOPHSNT OF BOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 469

developed under the embarrassment, that there was ^'SSS.**'
nothing settled regarding the nimiber of the sacra- '^SSrSda^
ments. Besides baptism and the eucharist there were
an indefinite nmnber of holy acts (compare even Ber-
nard) . Abelard and Hugo St. Victor laid stress upon
confirmation, extreme unction and marriage (five in
number), Robert Pullus upon confirmation, con-
fession and ordination. Out of a combination per-
haps in the contest with the catharists originated
the number seven (Boland's book of tenets), which
the Lombard brought forward as an ^opinion".
Even at the councils of 1179 and 1215 the number
was not settled. The great scholastics first brought
the same to honorable recognition and at Florence, ^^l^"^^ ^
1439, there took place a decided ecclesiastical decla- eidSs ^n
ration (Eugene IV., bull exultate deo). However,
a full equalizing of the seven sacraments was not
intended (baptism and especially the eucharist re-
mained prominent) . The ^ conveniens " of the num-
ber seven and the organism of the sacraments, en-
riching the whole life of the individual and of the
Church, were explained in detail. Indeed the very
creation of these seven sacraments was a master-
piece of a perhaps unconscious politics.

Hugo began the technical treatment of the doc- ^USen^
trine, retaining the Augustinian distinction between
sacramentum and res sacramenti and the strong
emphasis upon the physico-spiritual gift, which really
is inclvded. Following him, the Lombard (IV. 1.
B.) defined: ^Sacramentum proprie dicitur^ quod

470 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF BOGHA.

ita signum est gratiae dei et invisibilis gratiae
fonnUy ut imaginem ipsiiis gerat et causa existat,
Non ergo significandi tantum gratia sacramenta
instituta sunt^ sed etiam sanctificandi ^ (in signifi-
candi gratia the Old Testament ordinances were hit
upon). Still he did not say that the sacraments con-
tain the g^race (Hugo), but that they make it efficient;
he also demanded only a signum as a foundation, not
TiKmiM. like Hugo a corporale elementum. Thomas also
moderated the " continent " of Hugo, he even went
further : Gkxi indeed does not work ^ adhibitis sac-
ramentis ^ (Bernard), they confer grace only "per
aliquem modum^. Gk>d himself confers it; the
sacraments are causae instrumentaleSy they trans-
mit the effect a prima movente. They are also
causa et signa; thus the phrase " efficiunt quod figu-
rant " must be understood. Still there is contained
in the sacraments a virtus ad inducendum scu^a-
mentalem effectum. Later on the relation between
the sacraments and grace was entirely relaxed.
The latter only accompanies the former, for the mere
arbitrariness of God combined them (Duns) by vir-
tue of a "pactum cum ecclesia initum^\ Thus the
Nominaiis- nominalistic conception appears less magical and it
^|^;jj^ prepared the way by its protest against the " conti-
zwfngire. nent" for the sacramental doctrine of the forerunners
of the Reformation and of Zwingli. But this change
did not originate in the interest of the **word'' and
faith, but, as remarked, in the peculiar conception of
Gk)d. The official doctrine remained as in Thomas,

ThomlBtlc

BEVELOPHENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 471

i.e. returned to the ^figuranty continent et confer-
unt^ (Florentine council) . It thereby holds good that
the sacraments, differing from those of the Old Testa-
ment in which faith {opus operandi) was necessary,
work "ex opere opei^ato^ (thus already the Lom-
bard) ; that is, the effect flows from the administra-
tion as such. The attempt of the Scotists to place
the sacraments of the Old Testament on an equality
with those of the New was repudiated.

In detail, the following pointe of the Thomistic ^^ISS
doctrine are still especially important: (1) In genere menta.
the sacraments are altogether necessary to salvation,
in specie this is in the strictest sense valid only of
baptism (otherwise the rule holds good; ^'non de-
fectus sed contemptus damnaV^) . (2) /n genere the
sacraments must have a three-fold effect, a signifi- ^^EflSct^**
cant (sacramentum)^ a preparative (sacramentum
et res) , and a redemptive (res s<xcramenti) ; in specie^
however, the preparative effect, the character ^ can be
proved only in baptism, confirmation and the ordo.
Through these the " character of Christ", as capacity
for the receptio et traditio cultus deij is implanted
in the potency of the soul indelebiliter^ and is there-
fore not capable of repetition (stamping it, as it
were) ; (3) In the definite discussion of the question. Form Must
^quid sit sacramentum'\ it was determined that (^Jji^
the same is not only a holy but also a sanctifying
sign; moreover that the cause of sanctification is
the suffering of Christ, the form consisting in the
communicated grace and virtues, and the aim being

472 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

of Sacra-
menU

DapUo*-

tlon of

Salmtioa

eternal life. The sacrament must always be a res
sensibilis a deo determinata (material of the sacra-
ment), and it is ''very becoming^, that ''words" also
go with it, ** guibus verba incamato quodammodo
conformantur**. These verba a deo determinata
(form of sacrament) must be strictly observed, an
unintentional lapsus linguae even does not allow the
sacrament to become perfect; of course it is rendered
void as soon as one does not intend to do what the
Church does; (4) The necessity of the sacraments
is proved by ** quodammodo applicant passionem
Christi hominibus^y in so far as they ^congrua
gratiae praesentialiter demonstrandae sunt '^ ; (5)
By the effect (character and gratia) it is argued that
in the sacrament to the general gratia virtutem et
donorum is still added ** quoddam divinum aumlium
od consequendum sacramenti finem** ; that as weQ
in verbis as in rebuts there is contained an instru-
mentalis virtue ad inducemdam gratiam. By de-
termining the relationship between sacramental g^ce
and ihepassio Christi it is plainly discernible that
the Catholic doctrine of the sacraments is nothing
else than a doubling of the salvation through Christ.
Since they conceived grace physically, yet were un-
able to join this physical grace directly to the death
of Christ, i.e. deduce it from the latter, another in-
strumentum separatum (the sacraments), in addition
to the instrum^ntum conjunctum (Jesus), had still
to be ascribed to God the Redeemer. But if one can
obtain such an understanding of the life and death

DSVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINB OF SIN, ETC. 473

of Christ, that it of itself appears as grace and sac-
rament, then the doubling is useless and harmful ; (6)
By determining the causa sacramentorum it follows ^uSo^Sie
that Gk>d is the Author, but the priest, €ls minister, ^'^StrS^
the ** causa instrumentalist. Everjrthing which is
de necessitate sacramenti (therefore not the prayers
of the priests, etc.) must have been instituted by
Christ himself (appeal to tradition, while Hugo and
the Lombard still deduced some sacraments from the
apostle^ ; with some this latter continued until the 16th
century; the apostles cannot have been institutorea
sacramenti in the strict sense of the word; even to
Christ as man was due only the po^e^fo^ ministerii
principalis seu excelentiae; he works m^ritorie et
efficienter and could have transferred this extraordi-
nary potestas ministerii^ which however he did
not do) ; bad priests also can validly administer the
sacraments; they need to have the intentio only, not
^e fides; but they incur a mortal sin. Even heretics
can transmit the sacramentum^ but not the res sac-
ramenti.

These doctrines of Thomas are lacking in due re- opusoper-
gard for faith and pass lightly over the question re- phMiMd.
garding the conditions of the salutary reception.
With the nominalists this question, together with that
of the relation of grace and sacrament (see above) and
that of the minister, became most important in the
case of each separate sacrament, and they came to the
decision to allow the factor of merit to encroach up-
on that of the sacraments and of grace^ at the same

474 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

time, however, they ooncei ved of the conditions of the
merit in a looser way and emphasized more strongly
the opus operatum. On the whole they dissolved
the whole of Thomism. They desired here also to
apprehend the doctrine more spiritually and ethically ;
in truth they fell into a disgraceful casuistry and
favored justification by works and likewise the magic
^^eirttion of the sacraments. That some disposition was nee-
tLSnT*' essary to a salutary reception all assumed, but tiie
question was wherein it consisted and what value
it should have. Some saw in it no positive condi-
tioning of sacramental grace, but merely a conditio
sine qua non; they did not think of it as worthiness
and, therefore, declared roundly that the sacraments
were effective only ex opere operato (the disposition
is necessary, but has no causal importance). Others
— they were not numerous — declared that the sacra-
ments can procure grace only when inward repent-
ance and faith exist; these, however, are caused
by Ood as interiores motu^y so that no justification
ex opere operants can be assumed; the sacraments
only announce the inward work of Ood (preparing
the way for the Reformation point of view). Others
stiU, who gained the upper hand, taught that re-
demptive grace is a product of the sacraments and of
penitent faith, so that the sacrament itself only ele-
vates above the death-point, in order to co-operate at
once with the inner disposition. Here the question
first became important, what then the disposition
should be (repentance and faith), in order to allow

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OP SIN, ETC. 475

the sacrament to have its full effect. First of all
they answered with Augustine, that the receiver
must not "obicem contrariae cogitationis oppo-
nere^ . Therefrom the older theologians had inferred
that a bonus motus interior must exist; indeed they
also conceived this already as a merit ; for a mini"
mum of merit (against Augustine) certainly always
must exist, if grace is to he imparted. Duns and
his pupils however taught — a vicious corruption of a
correct idea — that the glory of the New Testament
sacraments consists in not requiring, like the earlier,
a bonu^ motus as a pre-supposition, but rather only
the absence of a motus contrarius malus (contempt
of the sacraments, positive imbelief). Without the
sacraments grace can be effective only where there
exists some worthiness; sacramental grace, however,
is also effective where there is tabula rasa (as if
such a thing exists !) ; yonder is a meritum de con-
gruo requisite, here "solum requiritur opus exte-
riu^ cum amotione interioris impedimenti". But
where this appears mere obedient submission to the
consummation of the sacrament becomes for the re-
ceiver a meritum de congruOy and therewith the
process of salvation begins, which, while the sacra-
mental collations increase, can finally be finished
without the subjects ever overstepping the limits of
the meritum de congruo, that is, of a certain merit
which may exist without real inner faith and love.
Sacramental grace transforms ex opere operato the
attritio into contritio and thereby furnishes a

Augus-

tine^s View

Brought

Forward.

Dims*
Vitiated
Concep-
tion.

Meritum

de
Congnia

478 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the eucharist; but faith, which seeks sureiy, went
empty-handed, and yet the scicrament of penanoe as
sacrament and as sacrifice was finally far superior
to the eucharist : Masses are trifling means, and the
spiritual food blots out no mortal sins. The great
theological problem was transubstantiation itself, and
by reason of its greatness they overlooked the insig-
D^^ina nificai^ce of its effect. Thomas gave form to the doc-
trine regarding the mode of the presence of the body
of Christ in the sacrament (no new creation, no o^-
sumptio elementorum so that they become body, no
consubstantiality) ; the substance of the elements
disappears entirely, but not per annihilationem^
jet per conversionem; the existence of the remain-
ing unsubstantial accidents of the elements is made
possible by the direct working of (Jod ; the body of
Christ enters totus in toto; in each of the elements
is the whole Christ, to wit : per concomitantiam as
regard his body and soul as well as regards his Di-
vinity from the moment of pronoimcing the insti-
tutional words (therefore also extra tLsum) ; the pres-
ence of Christ in the elements has no dimensions,
but how this was to be conceived became a primary
problem for which Thomas and the nominalistic
writers summoned absurd and ingenious theories
of space. They thereby approached very closely
either to the idea of the annihilation of the primary
Duns, substance (Duns), or to consubstantiality and "im-
oocam. panation " (Occam) ; they hit upon the latter be-
cause their metaphysics in general only admitted

BEVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 479

the idea that the Divine and the created accompany
each other by virtue of Divine adjustment (similarly
Wesel, and with other motives Luther). The con-
sequences of the formulation of the doctrine of trari- q^^^f^of
substantiation were, (1) Cessation of infant commun- uonot
ion (this, had also other causes), (2) Increase of the
authority of the priests, (3) Withdrawal of the chalice
(determined upon at Constance), (4) Adoration of the
elevated host (feast of Corpus Christie 1264, 1311).
Against the last two results there arose in the 14th and
16th centuries considerable opposition. — In regard to Rep^uon
the representation of the eucharist as a sacrifice, tbe ^^^
Lombard was still influenced by the old ecclesiastical
motive of the recordatio; however, the idea of the
repetition of the sacrificial death of Christ, confirmed
by Gregory I., crept in more and more (Hugo, Al-
bertus; Thomas really justifies the theory only by
the practice of the Church) and modified also the
canon of the mass (Lateran council, 1215). The
priest was considered the sacerdos corporis Christi.
The attacks of Wiclif and others upon this entirely
unbiblical conception died away; during the 14th
and 15th centuries one really fought only against the
abuses.

4. Penance (great controversy over the material, penanoe.
since no res corporalis exists) is on the whole the
chief sacrament, because it alone restores the lost
baptismal grace. The theory remained yet for a long
time shy of the hierarchical practice, which had been
expressed in the pseudo-Augustinian writing, ^^ de

Ooandl.

480 OUTLINBS OF THE HISTORY OF DOOHA.

vera et falsa paenitentia^ . The Lombard still oon-
sidered the true penitence of a Christian in itself
sacramental, and the priestly absolution merely de-
clarative (ecclesiastical act) ; for Gk)d alone pardons
sin. Hugo and the Lateran council, 1215, prepared
the way for Thomas. The latter recognized the ma*
terial of the sacrament in the visible act of the pen-
itent, the form in the priest's words of absolution,
declared that the priests as authorized ministers are

2J^j£ dispensers in the fullest sense, and gave as a reason
for the necessity of sacramental penance (before
the priest) the perverse sentence: **Ex quo aliquis
peccatum (mortal sin) incurrity caritas^ fides et
misericordia non liberant hominem a peccato sine
paenitentia^ . However, he added that the sacra-
mental absolution did not at once take away the
reatus totius poenae together with the guilt of the
mortal sin, but that it only disappeared ^ completis
omnibus paenitentiae actibus". The ihiee partes
paenitentiae — ^already formulated by the Lombard
as contritio cordis^ confessio oris^ satisfactio
operis — ^were originally not considered of equal value.
The inner perfect penitence was considered res and
sacramentum^ and still dominated with the Lombard
and Thomas the whole representation. Yet already

Haiesius, Alexander Halesius and Bonaventura were of the
^^^' opinion that Gk>d precisely by the sacrament had
facilitated the way to salvation, and they discrim-
inated between contritio and attritio (timor ser-
vilis)y declaring the latter sufficient for admission to

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINB OF SIN, ETC. 481

the sacrament. In spite of its silent rejection by
Thomas this view gained more and more ground:
The sacrament itself will perfect the half -penitence
by the infusio gratiae. The attrition gallows-
repentance, became the bane of the Church doctrine
in the 14th and 15th centuries (Johann von Palltz,
Petrus de Palude and others ; Dieckhoff , Der Ablass-
streit, 1886) ; the Tridentine council sanctioned it
only conditionally. It was well known that the at-
tritio often springs from immoral motives and yet
they built out of it and the sacraments steps up to
heaven. — Thomas is the theologian of the confessio
oris; he placed the obligation thereto under the /us
divinum, stated for the first time exactly the extent
of the new ordinance and deduced the sole right of the
ecclesiastic to hear confessions from the minister-
ium super corpus Christi verum (in case of need one
should confess to a layman, such confession, however,
is, according to Thomas, no longer sacramental).
The Scotists essentially accepted all this. — The sole
right of the priest to grant absolution was also first
strictly brought to an issue by Thomas. However,
upon this sacrament the power of jurisdiction exerted
an infiuence (reservance of cases for the pope). Ac-
cording to the Scotists the priest by absolution sim-
ply induces Ood to fulfil his contract; according to
Thomas he acts independently through the trans-
mitted potesta^ ministerii, — By imposing a satis-
f actio the priest acts as medicus peritn^ et judex

aequus. The practice is an old one, the " mechanic-
81

Gallows-
Bepent-
anoe.

Confessio

Oris:
Thomaa

Absolu-
tion:
Thomaa

Medicus
PerituB.

482 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

ing " and the theoretical rating (alongside the con-
tritio as a part of the penanoe) is comparatively
new. The idea is that the satisfactiOy as a constit-
uent part of the sacrament, is the necessary manifes-
tation of repentance in such works as are fitted to give
a certain satisfaction to an offended Gk)d, and which
become the motive for the shortening of temporal
punishment. In baptism Qod pardons without any
satisfaction, but of those baptized he demands a cer-
tain satisfaction, which then as merit reverts to him
who renders it. Moreover the baptized is really
able to render it; it also contributes to his reforma-

ouB^WOTioi *^^° ^^^ protects him against sin. Meritorious are
only such acts as are done in a state of grace {in
caritatey hence after absolution), but the works
(prayer, fasting, alms) of those who are not in cart-
tate also have a certain merit. Thus finally attritio
and imperfect meritorious works dominate the whole
territory of penance, that is of ecclesiastical life.
S^i ^^^ *^® scholastics admitted also in practice the
idea of the j)ersonal exchange of satisfactions and of
personal substitution. This led to the doctrine of
indulgences (Bratke, Luther's 95 Theses, 1884.
Schneider, Die Ablasse, 7. Aufl., 1881). The indul-
gence joins on to the satisfactiOy i.e, also to the
attritio. In theory it has nothing to do with the
reatiis culpae et poenae aetemae; still in practice
it was not seldom joined with the latter (even the
Tridentine council here complained of abuses) . The
indulgence rests upon the idea of commutation and

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTBINE OF SIN, ETC. 483

its purpose was to ameliorate, t.e. to abolish the tem-
poral punishment of sin, above all the punishment
of purgatory. Through absolution hell was closed; ^^^^^'^
but the homines attriti in reality neither believe in ^®"*
hell nor in the power of grace, for only a contritus
knows anything of such things. But they are afraid
of severe pimishment, and they believe in the possi-
bility of removing it by various " doings", and are
even ready for some sacrifice for this end. Thus pur-
gatory was hell to them and the indulgence became
a sacrament. To these feelings the Church in real-
ity yielded; attrittOj opera and indulgentiahecajne
in truth parts of the sacrament of penance. Thomas ^™<^*

'^ '^ Effort

still endeavored throughout to bring about a com-
promise between the earnest theory and the evil
practice, which he was unable to uproot (" oft omnibus
conceditur indulgentias aliquid valerCy quia im-
pium esset dicere, quod ecclesiae aliquid vane
facereV^) . With him the indulgences had not yet
become a mockery of Christianity as the religion of
redemption, because he really conceives them only as
an annex to the sacrament. Yet he abandoned the
old idea that the indulgence has reference only to
the ecclesiastical punishment imposed by the priest;
and it was he who handed down the theory of in-
dulgences. The latter is composed of two ideas : (1) '^'^j''
Pardoned sin also continues to have an effect through k******-
its temporal consequences, stiU it cannot remain *' tn-
ordinata '% and therefore the temporal punishment
must be expiated ; (2) Christ by his passion has ac-

484 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

oomplished greater things than the blotting out of
eternal g^ilt and punishment; this alone is effective
within the sacrament, t.6. in the absolution; but
outside of it there is a surplus. This surplus merit
{thesaurus operum supererogatoriorum) must of
necessity benefit the body of Christ, the Church,
since it cannot benefit Christ and the saints.

But it can no longer find any other occupation than
that of shortening and blotting out the temporal
punishment of sin. It can be turned only to the
benefit of those absolved, who must regularly offer
in return a minimum (a small performance) ; it is
administered by the head of the Chiurch, the pope,
who however can transfer to others a partial admin-
^^Sj^ istration. This theory of surplus merits, which had
*^*^ a long prior history (Persians, Jews), became espe-
cially pernicious when no decisive weight was placed
upon the condition of repentant faith, or when dark-
ness was intentionally permitted to rest upon the
question as to what it really was that was blotted
out by the indiilgence, or when the question, as to
whether the indiilgence would not also be of benefit
to committers of mortal sin ad requirendam gra-
Ham, was answered in the affirmative as was like-
wise the question whether therefore it could not be
granted in advance, in order that one might make
use of it for an occasional disposition (Scotistic prac-
tice). The theory'of indulgences is comprised in the
Bui^uni- bull, " Unigenitus" , Clement IV., of the year 1349;
here it is also stated that the indulgence has refer-

DEVBLOl^lllBKt O^ DOCtRlNfi OB* SIN, ETC. 486

enoe only to the " vere pa^nitentes et confessi**.
Wiclif above all disputed the practice and theory;
he called the indulgences arbitrary and blasphemous,
paralyzing obedience to the laws of Gk)d, a nefa-
rious innovation. But indulgence was not yet un-
hinged, when one proved it to be unbiblical, the
usurpation of the hierarchy and a moral corrup-
tion. One must show how a dormant conscience is
to be awakened, a disturbed one to be comforted.
But neither Wiclif nor the other energetic contestors
of indulgences (Huss, Wesel, etc.) were able to do
this. Wessel alone attacked indulgences at the root,
for he not only taught that the keys were given alone
to the pious (not to the pope and the priests), and
also pointed out that forgiveness does not depend up-
on arbitrariness, but upon true penitence; moreover,
that the temporal punishments for sin serve for
man's education and therefore cannot be exchanged.
He also doubted the satisf actio operum: Satisf ac-
tio has no place anyhow where God has infused
his love; it would detract from the work of Christ
(the gratia gratis data). And yet indiilgences,
which had also been approved at Constance, pre-
vailed about 1500 more than ever; people knew them
to be ^^ abiisus quaestorum*^ ^ and yet made use of
them.

5. Extreme unction (material: Consecrated oil;
form: A deprecatory word of prayer). Thomas as-
serted its institution by Christ, its promulgation by
James (Epist. 5 : 14). The purpose of this sacrament,

Wldif,
Hum.

68801.

Extreme
UncUon.

486 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

which admits of repetition, is the remissio pecca-
torumy yet only of the venial. As this sacrament
was evolved only because of the need of the dying,
it was also left to practice. Theory had little in*
terest in it.

offtJlSS! ^- Ordination of priests (from the impossibil-
iiy of proving a perceptible material by the side
of the form : ^Accipe potestatemy etc.", — however,
one also thought of vessels of worship or of the lay-
ing on of hands and symbols, — Thomas knew how to

TggnMj* make capital : " Hoc quod confertur in aliis sacra-
mentis derivatur tantum a deOj non a ministro^
qui sacramentum dispensat^ sed illud quod in hoc
Sacramento traditur^ scil, spiritualis potestaSy
derivatur etiam ab eo, qui sa^cram^ntum datj sicut
potestas imperfecta a perfecta; et ideo efficacia
aliorum sa^^ramentorum principaliter consistit
in materia^ quae virtutem divinam et signiftcat
et continet. . . . , se4 efficacia hvjus sacramenti
principaliter residet penes eum^ qui sacramentum
dispensat^). The bishop alone is the dispenser.

^nSo?* Controversies arose, (1) R^arding the seven ordina-
^^"^' tions and their relation to each other, {2) Bearding
the relationship between the priest's and the bishop's
ordination, (3) Regarding the validity of ordina-
tions conferred by schismatical or heretical bishops
(question of reordination ; the Lombard was in favor
of the stricter practice, which however jeopardized

^§2J25^ the entire existence of the priesthood) . Character
was really the chief effect of this sacrament. The

Matri.
monjr.

DBV&LOPMBNT OF DOCTRINB OF SIN, ETC 487

episcopate could, on account of the old tradition, no
longer be counted as a special ordo; but there was
an endeavor to vindicate its higher position €is being
especially instituted by Christ (on the groimd of
jurisdictional power) ; Duns, taking into considera-
tion the real circumstances, desired to acknowledge
a separate sacrament in the consecration of a bishop.

7. jSfaJrimonj/ (material and form: The consent of
those about to be married). As with the former
sacrament, so also with this, every provable redemp-
tive effect was wanting; but it was here still more
difficult to carry out at all the general doctrine of
the sacraments. The treating of marriage as a sac-
rament was already with Thomas a chain of difficul-
ties; in reality ecclesiastical law was alone concerned
with it. There were painful deductions concerning
the import of the copula camalis for the sacrament;
the priestly benediction was considered only ^ quod
dam sacramentale^\

In the doctrine of the sacraments Thomas was the j^^^f
authoritative doctor ; his doctrines were confirmed by ^S^-
Eugene IV. ; but in so far as they were subordinated Bugenei^.
to the doctrine of merits^ a different spirit, the Scotis-
tic, gradually entered into all dogmatics. Thomas
himself even was obliged to emphasize the vulgar
Catholic elements of Augustinianism, since he fol-
lowed the practice of the Church in his Summa.
Later theologians went even much farther. The ^^^^

solved

into

DosfmaticB.

[n-

Dl8-

dissolving of Augustinianism into dogmatics did ^nto^

not really take place from without; it was largely

488 OUTLtKES OF THIS HISfORT OF DOGMA.

the result of an inward development. The three
elements, which Augustine peimitted to stand in and
by the side of his doctrine of grace, merits the gratia
infusa and the hierarchical priestly element, con-
tinued to work until they had completely trans-
formed the Aug^ustinian mode of thought.

Lombard
Repeats

AugUB-

tine*8
Teaching.

Anaelm,
Bernard,
Abelard.

Religioua
View Sup-
planted 07
Empirical.

C. The Rbvisino of Augustinianism in the
Direction of the Doctrinb of Merits.

No ecclesiastical theologian had directly denied
that grace is the foundation of the Christian rdigion,
but since the idea, '' grace'\ is in itself ambiguous—
GK>d himself in Christ, a mysterious quality, love (?)
— it could also be made subservient to different
views. The Lombard, in regard to grace, predestina-
tion and justification, exactly repeated the Augus-
tinian sentences, but concerning free-will he ex-
pressed himself no longer in an Augustinian, but in
a semi-Pelagian fashion, because he also had merit
in mind. With Anselm, Bernard and above all
Abelard a contradiction between the doctrine of
grace and of freedom can be verified, since aU were
governed by the thought which the Lombard formu-
lated thus : ^^ nullum meritum est in homine^ quod
non fit per liberum arbitrium'\ Therefore the
ratio and the power of the wiU for good must have
remained imto man after the fall. The religious
view of Augustine is replaced by the empirical, and
even Bernard failed to mark Augustine's discrimi-

, DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, feTC. 48d

nation between formal and material freedom. Nota-
ble is the attempt of the Lombard to identify sancti-
fying grace with the Holy Spirit. However, this
had no consequences; they did not want Qod him-
self, but Divine attributes, which can become human
virtues.

From Qod to God through grace was the funda- ^^^
mental thought of Thomas, and yet finally it is hah-
itual virtue at which he aims. The fundamental
fault lay already in the Augustinian discrimination
between gratia operans and cooperans. The latter
alone procures bliss, but it cooperates with the will
and together they cause merit. Merits, however,
are the essential point, since the theologian can have
no other conception than that God values a reforma-
tion only when indicated by the habitus. But this
is not the standpoint of religion ; faith thus becomes Fa*th Be-

■^ o 7 comes an

merely an act of initiation, and Qod does not appear "^ uSobT*"
as the almighty Love and therefore as the Rock of
Salvation, but as the Partner and Judge; he does
not appear as the personal Goody which as Father
is alone able to lead the soul to trust, but as the
Giver of material, perhaps very exalted blessings
(communication of his nature) . These theologians,
if they thought of God, did not look upon the heart
of the almighty Father, but upon an imf athomable .t*»«>io-
Being, who, having created the world out of noth- p^^^
ing, likewise also causes superabundant powers of ^'^
knowledge^ reformation and substantial transfor-
mation to go forth. And when they thought of them-

490 OUTLtNKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

selveB, they did not think of the centre of the hmnan
ego, the spirit, which is so free and exalted that it
gains a hold only upon a divine Person and not
upon the most glorious gifts; they taught: God and
the gratia instead of personal communion with
Ghdy who is the gratia. In the beginning indeed
Gtod and the gratia (power of love) lay very close
together in their minds, but in the carrying out of
the thought the gratia was more and more with-
drawn from Gknl, until one finds it in m£^c- working
idols. The double thought, *^natura dimna** and
**bonum esse^y was the ruling one: Physics and
morality, but not religion.
nffSS^w Thomas made law and grace, as the outer princi-
•^iJ2S^* pl^ of moral conduct, his basis. The former, even
as new law, was not sufficient The necessity of
grace therefore was proved, partly by Aristotelian
means. At the same time the inteUectualism of
Thomas comes out strongly : Grace is the communi-
cation of supernatural knowledge. The lumen gra-
tiaey however, is also the lumen superadditum^ that
is, it is not necessary for the accomplishing of the
aim of man, but for the reaching over and beyond
this; therefore it furnishes the reason also with a
Lumen Supernatural worth, i,e. a merit. Man in the state
Lum£ of integrity possesses accordingly the capability of
dJ^T doing by his own strength the bonum suae naturae
proportionatum^ yet he needs the Divine aid in
order to acquire a meritorious bonum superexcedens.
After the fall, however, grace was necessary for both ;

DEVBLOPMBNT OF DOCTRINIC OF 8IN, ETC. 491

aooordingly a two-fold grace is now needed. Thereby
the difference between gratia operans et cooperana
was already established, and at the same time there
was taken into view as the end of man a supernatural
state, which one may reach only by the aid of the
second grace, which creates merits. " Vita aetema ^EtenuJ

° ' life to be

est finis excedens proportionem naturae hu- Earned.
mana^j but with the help of grace one can and
must earn eternal life. Yet Thomas, as a strict
Augustinian, did not admit the idea that a man can
prepare himself for the first grace. He recognized
grace alone for the beginning, not the merita de
congruo. The essence of grace he depicted in such
a manner, that, as a gift, it produces a peculiar
quality of the soul, i,e, besides the auxilium^ by
which Gknl especially induces the soul to good actions,
he infuses into the soul a supernatural quality.
Grace is to be distinguished, first, as the grace of yl^^
salvation {gratum faciens) and as the grace of the et^^J^.
priestly office, second, as operans (praeveniens) and
coqperans (suhsequens) ; in the former the soul is
mota non movens; in the latter mota movens. The
source of grace, which is deifi^ca^ is God himself, who
also creates the preparation for it in man, in order
to render the materia (the soul) ^disposita^\ No
one, however, is able to know whether God is car-
rying on the supernatural work within him. This
sentence (" nullus potest scire^ se habere gratiam^
certitudinaliter^) and the superfluous speculation
about the materia disposita (inspired by Aristotle)

492 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOM A.

Effect of

Grace Two-

Fold : Jus-

tiflcatioD,

Merits.

Confusion

in
Doctrine.

Natural
Man Can
Earn No
Merit, Jus-
tified Man
Can.

became fatal. The effect of grace is two-fold; first,
justification, second, merits, i.e. the real justification
does not yet take place by the remissio peccatorum^
but one may say simply, because of the end in view,
that forgiveness of sin is already justification. But
the gratia infitsa is necessary for the forgiveness of
sin and therefore a motus liberi arbitrii is here
required. Thus the gratia praeveniens in truth
consists in an indefinable act, since every effect al-
ready presupposes cooperation. Looking closer, there
prevails with Thomas a great confusion regarding
the process of justification, because the locating of
the moment of the forgiveness of sin causes difficul-
ties ; it ought to be in the beginning and yet it must
be placed later because the infusion of grace, the
turning to God in love and the turning from sin,
should precede it. By the " optts magnum et mlra-
cxdosum^^ of the justificatio impU the effects are
weighed, which through grace more and more fall to
the lot of the one already justified. They all come
under the head of merit. All progress must be so
regarded that, in so far as it is the work of grace, it
is gained ex condignOy but, in so far as the free
will of the justified is concerned in it, it takes place
ex congruo. Therefore the opinion of Thomas was,
that the natural man after the fall can earn no merit,
but the justified man can do so ex congruo (" con-
gruumest, tit horn ini operanti secundum stiam vir-
tutem deus recompenset secundum excellentiam
suae virtutis^^) ; whereas in regard to eternal salva-

DBVBLOPlfENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 493

tion there exists for man "propter maximam inae-
qualitatem proportionis^^ no meritumde condigno.
This is reserved to the eflScacy of grace. The meri-
torious principle is always love; this deserves the
augmentum gratiae ex condigno. On the con-
trary perseverance in grace can in no sense be ^JJ^JoV
merited : " Perseverantia viae non cadit svb merito, Merited.
quia dependet solum ex motione divina^ quae est
principium omnis meritiy sedd eus gratis perse-
verantiae bonum largitur^ cuicunque illud largi-
tur^. Hereby pure Augustinianism was restored,
which Thomas also admitted unabridged into his
doctrine of predestination, while not only the inde-
fatigably repeated definition of God as primum mo-
venSf but also the whole special doctrine of morals
shows the influence of Aristotle. In the latter is car-
ried out the thought that virtue, by the right ordering
of efforts and instincts, comes through the reason and
later is supematurally perfected by the gifts of grace.
Virtue culminates in the fulfilment of the consilia virtue cui-

minateB in

evangelica (poverty, chastity, obedience). These ^*2Si^;
form the conclusion of the doctrine of the new law; dienoe.
but, on the other side, the doctrine of grace also cul-
minates in them, so that they, properly speaking,
form the apex of the whole scheme. " Praecepta
important necessitatem^ consilium in optionepon-
itur eju^^ cui datur^. Through " counsels'' man at-
tains his aim " melius et expeditius" ; for the pre-
cepts still admit of a certain inclination to the goods
of this world, the counsels wholly discard the same,

494 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOKA.

, SO that in following the latter the shortest way is
given to eternal life. By this discrimination be-
tween precepta and consilia light is once more
^gj^ thrown upon the original state. The original en-
Superaroe- dowment of man was in itself not sufficient to attain
Naturam. unto the Vita aetema; the latter was a honum
superexcedens naturam; but in the additioncU enr
dowment of the justitia originalis man possesses a
fiupematural gift, which enables him to really attain
unto eternal life. Thus one may say that after the
appearance of sin {materialiter = concuptscentta^
formaliter = defectus originalis justitia^) the
precepta correspond to the restoring of the natural
state of man, the consilia to the donum superaddi-
turn of ihejiistitia originalis.
p^l^H^Q Thomas' doctrine of grace has a double aspect; it
FMedT looks backward toward Augustine and forward
toward the dissolution of the doctrine in the 14th cen-
tury. Thomas wanted to be an Augustinian, and
his explanations were already an Augustinian re-
action against the assertions of Halesius, Bona-
ventura and others; but he allowed much wider
play to the idea of merit than did Augustine; he
removed still farther than the latter the doctrine of
grace from the person of Christ (the latter is dis-
cussed before Christology!), and he permitted faith
and the forgiveness of sin to recede still farther.
'^^tSiger*** Faith is either fides informis^ therefore not yet
'^ faith, or fides formata, therefore no longer faith.
In fact faith as fiducia can find no place, if the

DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINB OF SIN, ETC. 495

of Augus-

tineas
Doctrine.

effects of grace are a new nature and a moral refor-
mation. In the ambiguous sentence, "caritas
meretur vitam aetemam^\ the mischief of the time
to come lay already concealed.

The setting aside of the Augustinian doctrine of pf^Siutkiu
grace and sin can be followed up in every point : (1)
Halesius already taught that Adam in paradise
by good works ex congruo merited the gratia
gratum faciens. The Scotists followed in his steps,
at the same time discriminating between the justi
tia originalis and such grace, and reckoning the
latter to the perfection of human nature itself. Al-
though this was an advantage, yet it was neutralized
by the fact that the merit ex congruo had been
placed /rom the beginning alongside of the "only
eflScacious grace". (2) Thomas no longer squarely
admitted the sentence in regard to hereditary sin:
** Naturalia bona corrupta sunt ", in so far as he
defined the concupiscence, which in itself is not evil,
simply as languor et fomeSj emphasized stronger
than Augustine the negative side of sin and, because
the ratio remained, assumed a continued inclinatio
ad bonum. Dims, on the whole, separated the ques-
tion of concupiscence from that of hereditary sin ;
the former no longer appeared to him iheformale
of the latter, but merely the materiale. Thus as
regards hereditary sin there remained only the jprt-
vatio of the supernatural good, which indeed brought
about a disturbance of the nature of man, however
without any of the natural good really being lost.

Thomas.

496 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Even the first sin was very loosely eonoeived of by
Duns (against Augustine): Adam only indirectly
transgressed the commandment to love God and
the commandment to love his neighbor, and only
in so far as by compliance he overstepi)ed the right
measure. Besides it was not at all a question of an
offence against moral laws, but of not obeying a com-
mandment imposed for the sake of probation. With
oocun. Occam everything is entirely dissolved. As in the
case of redemption, the reckoning of the fall of
man appeared to him as an arbitrary act of God,
which became known to us by '^ revelation". Small
sins were even possible in the original state (thus al-
ready Duns). The renouncing of everything ideal,
i,e.y the Neo-Platonic knowledge of the world, led
the nominalists to decompose the conception of guilt
and sin; here also* they made tabula rasa and fell
back upon the practice of the Church viewed
as a revelation, because they were still blind to
history and concrete relations. (3) Duns and his
Hereditary succcssors Considered the guilt of hereditary sin as

Sin.

finite. (4) Dims saw the contagium of hereditary
sin simply in the flesh, and argued against the
Thomistic assumption of a vulneratio nattirae; the
religioiLS view of sin as guilt, jeopardized already by
Augustine and Thomas, fully disappeared. (5) The

Arbitri""^ ^*^^''*^^ arfitYrtMW possessed the widest scope, since
the f imdamental thesis had been sacrificed, that good
exists only in dependence upon God. With Duns
and the leading theologians after him free-will is the

DEVBLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF SIN, ETC. 497

second great power by the side of Gk)d, and what-
ever they correctly established in the sphere of em-
pirical psychology, they gave to it also a material
and positive religious significance. It is the inher-
ited fate of mediaeval dogmatics, that in the amal-
gamation of a knowledge of the world and religion a
relatively more correct knowledge of the world be-
came finally more dangerous to faith than an incor-
rect knowledge. Against Pelagianism, which ever-
more unhesitatingly made use of Aug^stinianism
simply as an ''art language", Bradwardina now
first took a strong stand, and after that the reaction
did not any more wane, but gradually increased dur-
ing the 15th century until Wesel, Wessel, Staupitz,
Cajetan and Contarini appeared. (6) In the doctrine
of justification and of the meritorious earning of eter-
nal life the dissolution manifested itself strongly : (a)
The gratia praeveniens became a phrase, the gra-
tia coqperans was the sole comprehensible grace ; (b)
That which with Thomas was meritum de congruo
became meritum de condignoj merita de congruo^
however, were acknowledged in such affections as
Thomas had not placed at all under the merit point
of view ; (c) Together with the meritoriousness of the
attritio the fides informis^ the mere obedience of
faith, was also valued more highly. At this point
the perversion became greatest. Mere subjection to
the faith of the Church and the attritio became, in
a measure, the fundamental principles of dogmatics.

According to Duns the natural sinful man can still
82

Bradwar-
dina..

Ju8tiflca>
tion and
Meritori-
ous Works.

Sabjection
to Church
Principal
Require-
ment

498 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

prepare himself for grace; he can begin to love Gk>d.
Therefore he must do so. In truth, therefore, merit
always precedes grace; first the meritum de con-
gruOf then after acquiring the first grace the mer-
itum de condigno. Thereby the first and seo(Hid
grace were reduced to the rank of mere expedients.
Indeed the Divine factor appears only in the accqpta-
Ho. The latter, however — here the conception veers
around, — does not in the strictest sense at all admit
of merit. The nominalistic doctrine wiis only in so
far not simple moralism as it was less^ i.e. its
doctrine of Gk>d does not admit in any way of a
^,^g»™j_ strict moralism. This is plainest in Occam, who in
▲^tnL general affords the paradoxical spectacle of a strongly
or God. developed religious sense taking refuge solely in the
arbitrariness of Qod. Reliance upon the latter, as
the Church defined its content, alone saved him from
nihilism. Faith, in order to maintain itself, found
no other safety against the inroad of the flood of
science than the plank of the arbitrariness of the
Gkxl whom it sought. It no longer understood him,
but it submitted to him. Thus Church dogma and
Church practice remained standing, just because
the philosophy of religion and absolute morality were
Neoeasity washed away. According to Occam the necessity
gjg}^ of a supernatural habitus (therefore of grace in gen-
£!thori^ eral) to gain eternal life cannot be proved by argu-

of ChuindD.

ments founded upon reason, since a heathen also
through reascm can arrive at a love of Gk)d. The
necessity is established solely by the authority of

tlODAliSta.

BEYXLOPMENT OF DOCTBINB OF SIN, ETC. 499

the Church. Occam and his friends were as yet no
moralists or rationalists; they only appear so to us.
The Socinians were the first, for they first raised the §t^t^
hypothetical tenets of the nominalists concerning
natural theology to categorical rank. But thereby
they again gained a mighty reliance upon the clear-
ness and power of morality, which the nominalists
had forfeited together with their inward confidence
in religion. If in the 15th century men bewailed the
destruction of theology in religion, they had in mind
the tenets which were put into practice, viz., that good
works are the causae for receiving eternal life, that
even the most trifling works done will ever be re-
garded as merits, and because they considered sub-
mission to the ordinances of the Church a bonus
mottiSj which, supplemented by the sacraments, im-
parts the worthiness necessary for eternal life.

The lax conception of hereditary sin showed itself ^SJgSiF
in the development of the dogma concerning Mary. tS^^^.
Anselm, Bernard, Bonaventura and Thomas still as-
cribed hereditary sin to Maiy, even if they admitted
an especial reservation regarding it; but by the year
1140 at Lyons a feast of the immaculate conception
of Mary was celebrated, and Duns taught that the
immaculate conception was probable (retro-acting
power of the death of Christ). The controversy be-
tween the Franciscans and Dominicans which then
arose was not adjusted in the Middle Ages, but was

500 OVTUKES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

J forbidden by Sixtus IV. The Dominicans did not
^c^^|£ otherwise take a subordinate place in the extrava-
gant glorification of the virgin. Thomas indeed
taught that to her belongs not only *^ dulia^^ as to
the saints, but ^ hyperduliaP. She also was credited
with a certain part in the work of redemption (queea
of heaven, inventrix gratias^ via^ janua^ scala,
domina^ mediatrix). The assumption of the Scot-
ists, that she had cooperated not only passively but
also actively at the incarnation, was a natural can-
sequence of the adoration, especially as Bernard
taught it.

BOOK III.

THE THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF THE HISTORY

OF DOGMA.

lem.

CHAPTER I.

HISTORICAL SUBVBY.

THE elements of the Augustinian theology be- ^SSSSb
came more prominent during the Middle Ages, ^^^^
but they were gradually more widely sundered from
one another. True, Thomas undertook once again
to solve the enormous problem of satisfying within
the bounds of one system all the claims made by
ecclesiastical antiquity as expressed in its body of
dc^ma, by the Holy Scriptures, by the idea of the
Church as an ever-present, living Christ, by the
legal organization of the Boman Church, by Augus-
tine's doctrine of grace, by the science of Aristotle
and the Bemardine-Franciscan piety; but this new
Augustine was not able to create a satisfactory unity.
His undertaking had in part the opposite conse-
quence, as it were. The nominalist's criticism of
the reason and the mysticism of Eckhart went to
school to Thomas; the curialists learned from him

and so did the ^Reformers". In the 15th century

601

502 OUTLINBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

theological doctrine seemed to be settled. But there

appeared at that time two plain tendencies: CuricU-

ism and the opposition thereto.

^^^^J^* Curialism taught that the usages of the Romish

DiTiM Church are Divine truth. It treated Church aSaiis

Truth.

and religion as an outward dominion and sought to
maintain them by means of power, bureaucracy and
an oppressive toll-system. After the unluc^ course
of the great councils a general lassitude succeeded.
The princes who were striving for absolutism found
their match when they bargained with the curia to
share with it in the shearing of the sheep. They
gave back to the curia in ecclesiastical matters the
absolute power, in order to share in the division
of the resultant mixture (the buUs, ^Execrabili^
of Pius II. in the year 1459, and " Pastor aetemus^
prem«ow o^ Leo X. in the year 1516, proclaim the suprem-
^'^ * acy of the pope over the councils). The opinion
that papal decisions are as holy as the decrees of
councils, and that the right of exposition in all
things belongs only to the Church, i.e. Borne, grad-
Decrees of ually established itself. The curia, however, was

Oounclls

Made^o^e very careful to compile from these decisions a book
of laws, a closed dogmatic canon. Its infallibility
and sovereignty were secure only when it still had
a free hand and when men were obliged to accede in
every case to its judicial utterance. The old d<^;ma
was esteemed as formerly ; but the questions which
.it treated in actual life lay no more within its own
province. They were handled by theology. The

THBEB-FOLD ISStTINO OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 503

latter, however, during the 150 years subsequent to
Thomas, came to the conviction of the irration-
ality of the revealed doctrine and therefore gave out
the watchword, that one must blindly submit to the
authority of the Church. This development favored
curialism; long since in Rome men had taught that
submission to the authority of the Church {fides im-
plicita) would secure blessedness, if only one believed
besides in the Divine recompense. In the humanis-
tic circles of the curia men did not in truth whoUy
accept this; yet on the other hand pious sentiment
revered the Divine in the irrational and arbitrary.
That this entire handling of the matter was a way
of burying the old dogma is clear. The end toward
which from the beginning the matter was directed
in the Occident now revealed itself with astounding
clearness : Dogma is institution, is a code of laws. ^|^gj '■
The curia itself respected the same only formally;
practically there lay beneath, as in the case of all codes
in the hands of an absolute master, ^e politics of the
curia. The " tolerari potesf^ and the ^probabile^
indicate a still worse secularization of the dogma
and of the Church than the ^anathema sit^. Yet
there lay a truth in curialistic ecclesiasticism itself
as contrasted with those tendencies which would
found the Church upon the sanctity of Christians.
Against the Hussites and the mystics did Rome pre-
serve the right of the conviction, that the Church of
Christ is the domination of the Gospel over sinful
men.

504 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

oppodtfon xh^ opposition to curialism was held together by a
^^'*'****"*^ negative thought, that the usages of the Romish
Church were become tyrannical and that they had
the testimony of ecclesiastical antiquity against
them. Here political, social, religious and scientific
motives met together. Men reasoned accordingly that
papal decisions do not have the significance of articles
of faith, that Rome is not the only one authorized to
interpret the Scriptures and the fathers, that the coun-
cil should reform the Church in its hierarchy and in
its members, and that the Church, over against the
dogmatic, cultish and ecdesiastico-legalistic innova-
tions of Rome, must return to its original principles
Bfifona*. and to its original attitude. Men believed them-
Som ^ selves able to set aside the evolution of the preceding
'^^'"^^' centuries and planted themselves in thesi upon the
Holy Scriptures and ecclesiastical antiquity; but in
praoci the reformatory aim was either wholly obscure
or contained so many elements of the post- Augustin-
ian development that the opposition was crippled from
the start. Men knew not whether they were to re-
form usages or misusages^ and they knew not what
they should do with the pope, whom they acknowl-
edged and rejected, blessed and cursed with the same
breath (cf . Luther's own attitude, 1517-1620, toward
the pope). But this highly inconsistent opposition
was still a power, save within the realm of doctrine;
for the latter was discredited also within the drdes
^*3^f* of the anti-curialists. ** Practical piety^ was the
^Sl^te!* watchword of humanists like Erasmus and of Au-*

THREE-FOLD ISSUIKQ OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 505

gustinians like Staupitz. Men were surfeited with
that theol(^7 which reasoned over-much within the
safe haven of authority and rendered the truly pious
life more difficult. If the Church doctrine were, only
^' science", then was it given for the sake of the lat-
ter; it ought to step aside and make way for a new
mode of thought (see Socinianism) . But since the socinian-
old dogma was more, it remained — yet here also
as a legal code. With the exception of a few bold
leaders the opposition parties respected the dogma
with the instinct of self-preservation. They felt
it still ever, even if obscurely, as the foundation
of their existence. But they wished no doctrinal
controversies : Scholastic quibblings were as distaste-
ful to them as monkish quarrels, still they wished to
free themselves from scholasticism. What a contra- ^"^^^^P™*-
diction! The ultimate ground lay in the enormous **^*°"'
breach which existed between the old dogma and the
Christian conceptions whose expressed form was the
life of the day. Dogma was the soil and the title-
deed for the existence of the Church — but which old
Church dogma had then still for piety, as it then
existed, a directly comprehensible sense? Neither
the doctrine of the trinity, nor of the two natures.
Men thought no more after the manner of the Greeks.
Piety, as it developed itself in the 15th century, lived
in Augustine, Bernard and Francis. Under the Men

Thought to

shell of an old faith a new piety had been forming fJ^J,^
during the past thousand years and therefore also a '^'""^
new faith. Men here and there thought to assist by

606 OUTLINBS OF THB HISTORT OF DOGMA.

a return to pure Augostinianism. Tet the crisis
at that time, the breach between the dogmatic legal
regulations in the Church and the obscure aim of
piely, sprang out of the soil of Augustinicmism it-
self. The defects lay germinally already in their
premises. This, it is true, no forerunner of the Ref-
ormation perceived; but the fact of the impossibility
of a reformation by the means transmitted by
Augustine is thoroughly apparent. Hie disinteg-
rated Augtuitinianism is still AtAgustinianism;
how then shcUl one permanently help out the same
with the genuine?
gjwgg Still the criticism which applied the revived Au-
gustinianism to the disintegrated had in the 15th
century a beneficial influence, without whose prepa-
ratory work the Reformation and the Tridentine
council were inconceivable. The immoral, irrelig-
ious, yea, heathenish mechanism of the dominant
Church was discredited by this Augustinianism ;
yes even more, the latter unfettered the sense of
freedom in religion and therewith the striving
after real religion. It worked in union with all the
forces which in the 15th century recognized the right
of the individual and of subjectiviiy, and sought to
break the spell of the Middle Ages. It created un-
resty an unrest which went beyond itaelf — How can
one be a free and at the same time a blessed man?
But no one was able to formulate this question,
because no one felt as yet its full force.
With the dose of the 15th century various issu*

THBEB-FOLD ISStJIKG OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 507

ings of the crisis seemed possible : A complete tri- ^i^
umph of curisdism, a triumph of revivified Aug^s- ^oS^
tiniaoism, a smidering of the Church into diverse
groups of the most rigid curialism and of a ceremon-
ial religion verging toward a rationalistic and fanat-
ical Biblical Christianity which should discard the
old dogma, finally a new reformation of religion as a
whole, i.e. an evangelical reformation, which should
root up and discard the old dogma, because the new
point of view — Qod is gracious for the sake of
Christ, and the right and freedom which have come
through him — could permit that only to remain in
theology which belonged to him.

' In reality, however, the issuings were different. ''^^'Jl^
They all remained burdened with contradictions: *^*"^
Tridentine Catholicism^ Socinianism and the
Evangelical Reformation. In the first curialism
prevailed, the monarchical institutional dispenser of
blessedness with its sacraments and its ^merits";
but it found itself compelled to make a compact with
Augustinianism and to reckon with the same on the
basis of the codification of the new dogmas which
had been extorted from it. In Socinianism the socinian-
nominalistic criticism of the understanding and the
himianistic spirit of the new era prevailed; but it
remained entangled in the old Biblicism, and in
setting aside the old dogmas it created for itself new
ones in opposition to the old. FinaDy in the evan- ^SygSJiJ".
gelical Reformation the infallible organization of the "^^'^'^
Church, the infallible doctrinal traditions of the

508 OUTLINB8 OF THB HI8T0RT OF DOGMA.

Church and the infallible canon of Scriptare were in
principle set aside and a wholly new standpoint
secured; but sagacity and courage did not hold out
to apply in each particular instance that which had
been secured in general. On the assumption that
the thing itself (the Gospel) — ^not the authority —
demanded it, men retained the old dogma as the es-
sentifid content of the Gk)spel and under the title
^ word of Qod " they returned to Biblicism. Oyer
against the new doctrine of the hierarchical, cultish,
Pelagianistic and monkish Christendom men saw in
the old dogma only the expression of faith in QoA
who is merciful in Christ, and failed to see tiiat
Do|~i. dogma at the same time is somethmg entirely diflfer-
K^^^^Sge ^1^^} ^^' • Philosophical cosmo-theistic knowledge
uie wwSi and rule of faith. But that which men admitted
under a new title vindicated itself, when once it had
been allowed, by a logic of its own. Men exalted
the true theology, the theologia cruciSy and placed
it upon the lamp-stand ; but in doing this under the
old ecclesiastical forms they obtained in the bargain
the accompanying knowledge and rule of faith;
and the doctrinal controversies of the evangelical
parties appeared like a continuation of the scholastic
school-controversies, only with infinitely higher sig-
nificance ; for now they had to do with the exist-
iS?^^i- ^^^^ ^/ '^^ ^^*^ Church. Thus arose at the very
£^bi^ beginning — at least with the eucharistic controvert

Ck>nfe8-

■ion. and the Augsburg Confession, which now began to
pour the new wine into the old wine-skins — in the

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 509

reformed conception of doctrine a higUy compU-
cated, contradictory picture. Only in the principles
of Luther, and not in all of them, did the new spirit
display itself; outside of these it contained nothing
new, and he who to-day, in the 19th century, does
not take this spirit as his monitor, but rests quietly
beneath the stunning blow which it gave itself at
the end of the 16th century, deceives himself in re-
gard to his own position: He is not evangelical, but
belongs to a Catholic sub-species where he is free, in
accordance with the principles of present-day Protes
tantism, to select the Biblical, dogmatical, mystical
or hierarchical elements. ?*y^'

dentine.

However, the resultants of the history of the ^Sm"'
dogma are clearly represented in the three following
creations : Post-Tridentine Catholicism finally com-
pleted the neutralizing of the old dogma in an arbi- '^^'^J^'
trary papal legal organization; Socinianism appre-
ciably disintegrated and came to an end; the
Reformation, in that it both set the dogma aside and
preserved them outright, looked away from them,
backward to the Gospel, forward to a new formula-
tion of the Gospel confession which shall be free
from dogma and be reconciled with truthfulness and
truth. In this sense the history of dogma should B^^orma-
set forth the issuings of dogma. In the Reforma-
tion it has only to describe the Christianity of Luther,
in order to make the subsequent development com-
prehensible. The latter belongs either as a whole to
the history of dogma (up to the present time) , or not

510 OUTLINBS or THB HISTORY OF DOOMA.

at all. It is more correct, however, to ezclade it
entirely, for the old dogma claimed to be infallible.
This claim the Reformation, so to speak, disclaimed
for its own productions — ^there was silence as to
the old dogmas. Therefore he who still sedos for
a middle conception between ref ormable and infal-
lible would perpetuate forever the confusions of the
epigonoi, if he should recognize dogmias in the
expositions of Protestantism in the 16th century.

CHAPTER 11.

THE ISSUINO OF THB DOGMA IN ROMAN

CATHOLICISM.

1. The Codification of the Mediaeval Doctrines in
Opposition to Protestantism {Canons and
Decrees of Trent) ,

Edition of the decrees, 1564. Earlier works in KdUner,
Symbolik, 1844, later in Herzog, RE', sub verb, TVidenfffium.

curia^ In Borne they wished only to condemn strange
doctrines, not to codify their own; they also wanted
no council. But one was required of the curia by the
princes. In the coming together it became clear that
the mediffival spirit had acquired strength from the
Beformation, humanism and Augustinianism, but
that this spirit itself remained the stronger power.
The curia accomplished the masterful work of ap-
propriating the new, of condemning the Reformation,
of justifying itself and yet of setting aside thereby
the most glaring abuses. In opposing the Luther

THBEE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 511

moYement, they were obliged to transform many
medisBval doctrines into dogmas — the decrees of ^^^rl^t^'
Trent are the shadows of the Beformation. What Beforma-

tlon.

originally to the mind of the curia appeared to be
a misfortune — the necessity of formulating and the
compulsory return to Augustinianism, — ^proved itself
later to be an advantage: They had a new rule of
faithy which could be applied with verbal strictness,
whenever it seemed expedient, and which was, on
the other hand, so ambiguous and elastic as to leave
free play for the arbitrary decisions of the curia.
The latter reserved the right of interpretation and
the council conceded this, and thus already did infal-
libility accrue in principle to the pope. The curia ^SngSd;"
itself was accordingly unchanged, i.e. it came forth improved.
from the purgatory of the coimcil with all its cus-
toms, practices, assumptions and sins; but the inner
condition of the Church as a whole was nevertheless
improved. By reason of its inner untruthfulness and
because the doctrines of the Church of to-day have
been consistently developed in not a few points (re-
cent rejection of Aug^stinianism, decision of the
question, undecided at Trent, whether the pope be
the tmiversal bishop and infallible), the Tridentine
decrees are no longer an unobscured source of Cath-
olicism. Sven at Trent were the dogma transformed
into a d<^ma-politics, and the laity debarred from
faith and dogma : Everything that has been handed
down is most holy as regard its verbal meaning, but
in theology it resolves itself into an array of more or

512 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

less probable meanings, which, in the case of any
controversy, are decided by the pope.
^^fSr Th®y agreed in the rejection of " re-baptism" and
^tSm£^ Protestants. After reiterating the Constantinopoli-
tan creed, they declared in the 4th session, in order
to guard the "purttas evangelii"^ that the apocrypha
are of like rank with the Old Testament, that the
vulgate is to be considered as authentic, and that
the Church alone is permitted to interpret the Scrip-
tures. By the side of the latter, however, they placed
TirwutioiL jjjj^ " trculitiones sine scripto^ quae ab ipsius
Christi ore ab apostolis acceptae aut ah ipsitis
apostolis^ spiritu sancto dictante^ quasi per
mantis traditae ad nos usque pervenerunt^ (in an-
other place the definition expresses the idea some-
what differently). In the 5th and 6th sessions the
decrees in regard to original sin and justification
were formulated. Here under the spell of the re-
awakened Augustinianism and of the Reformation
they did not commit themselves to the nominalistic
doctrine, but approached very near to Thomas; in-
deed their doctrine of justification, although it was
born of politics, is a very respectable prodmct,
in which an evangelical element is not wanting.
But (1) lines were drawn here and there which led
p«SSin- ^ ^ Scotistic (semi-Pelagian) imderstanding of the
luS^ doctrine, (2) it made very little difference what was
Laws, said in the chief sentence about sin and grace, when
in the subordinate sentences the thesis was allowed,
that the practices of the Boman Church are the chief

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 513

law. By the first sin, it was admitted, Adam lost
holiness and righteousness ^in qua constitutus
fueraP*^ became changed " in deterius'^ in body and
soul, and perpetuated his sin " propagatione^ . Yet
they also taught that free will was not destroyed, but Free wiii.
** viribus attenuatus^^ and that baptism really blots
out the reatus originalis peccati^ but the concupis-
centia {fomes)^ which is not to be looked upon as
sin, remains (therefore the religious view was aban-
doned). As regards justification it was explained •'^^J^
that it is the act by which man passes from an un-
righteous to a righteous state (through baptism, i.e.
the sacrament of penance); it arises, however, not
simply through the forgiveness of sin, but also
through the sanctifying and renewing of the inner
man by a free acceptance of grace, although the
man is incapable of freeing himself from the domin-
ion of sin per vim naturae^ or per litteram legis
Moysis. On the one hand, justification appears as
the translatio from one condition to another, viz.
to that of adoption, and faith was looked upon as the
determining power alongside of grace (" Christum
proposuit deus propitiatorem per fidem in san-
guine ipsius pro peccatis nostris") ; on the other
hand, it appears as a sanctifying process through
the inpouring of grace {^ Christi sanctissimae
passionis merito per spiritum sanctum caritas
dei diffunditur in cordibus^y so that man in justifi-
cation receives at the same time with the forgiveness

of sin an inflow of faith, love and hope; with-
33

Two
Views.

514 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

out the last two, man is neither perfectly united to
Christ, nor is his faith a living one). The latter
view is the decisive, and accordingly the stcuiia of
the process of justification (inception et seq.) are

igjjjfj^. set forth in a general way. The gratia praeveniens
'*°** exhausts itself in the vocatio {nullis extstentibus
meritis) ; but therein is the inception not exhaust-
ed, much more does there belong to it the illu-
minatio spiritus sanctty which enables man to turn
toward Hiejustitia and gives him therewith a dis-
position and a free surrender to Qod. In that now
jtistificatio first ensues, the thought of the gratia
gratis data is vitiated. Only in abstracto is the

SfSf^n forgiveness of sin inherently peculiar, and the same
is true of justification ; in concreto it is a gradual pro-
cess of sanctification which is completed in the mar-
tificatio memhrorum camis and made manifest
through manifold grace in an obedience to the com-
mands of Qod and the Church. Unto an assuranoe
of the acquired grace can one not attain in this life;
but the lack of this can be repaired through penance ;
the process also does not need to be begun anew, in
so far as faith has remained in spite of the loss of
the justifying grace. The goal of the process in this
0|2S?the lif© is the bona opera^ which Gbd by virtue of his
grace receives as pleasing to himself and as meri-
torious. Accordingly one must view these on the
one hand as gifts of God and on the other as real
means to blessedness. — The most important thing
is, that (in opposition to the Thomas- Augustinian

THSEE-FOLB ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 515

tradition) the gratia prima does not justify, but
only disposes. Therefore justification arises out of Justinca-
a cooperation. No Augustinian phraseology can f^m'o)-
oonoeal this. Of the 33 anathemas, 29 are directed ^p«*"*^°-
against Protestantism. In the condemnation of the
sentence, ^fidem justificatem nihil aliud esse
quam ftduciam divinae misericordiae peccata
remittentis propter Christum^ vel earn fiducian
solam esse^ qua justificamur^ ^ something more
was implicitly condemned, viz. rigid Augustinian-
ism, — therein does the artfulness of the decree
consist.

In the 7th and following sessions the doctrine of Doctrine of

SBcra-

the sacraments was formulated and the Church was vieiixm,
declared asacramented institution {'^ per sacramenta
omnis vera justitia vel incipit vel coepta augetur
vel amissa reparatur^)\ concerning the word and
faith there was accordingly silence. Instead of a doc-
trine of the sacraments in genere 13 anathemas were
formulated, which contain the real protest against
Protestantism. The institution by Christ of all of
the seven sacraments was affirmed, as well as the
impossibility of being justified per solam fidem^
without the sacraments. These " continent gratiam'^
and accordingly possess a mysterious power, which
they bestow ex opere operato upon those "gut
obicem non ponunV\ In other respects also the
Thomistic doctrine (character, intention, etc.) is
everywhere preserved, yet the theological subtleties
are laid aside, and the transition to the Scotistic form

516 OUTUNBS OF THE HISTORY OF D06HA.

of statement remains possible. At the close of the
anathemas every departure from the onoe established
u««w of usages of the Church was condemned. For the treat-
^ ooB. ment of the individual sacraments the bull of Eugene

00011160.

IV., Eocultate domino (1439), served as a prototype.
The declarations in regard to baptism and confirma-
tion are instructive only in that by the former those
persons are condemned who teach that all subsequent
sins " sola recordatione et fide suscepti baptism^
can be forgiven, and by the latter that the bishop
alone is proclaimed as minister sacramenti. Touch-
ing the eucharist the Thomistic theologumena were

5»n«»^ transformed into a d<^ma. In virtue of the transub-
^^ stantiation the entire Christ is present in each par-
ticle of each of the elements, and such is the case
before their reception ; hence the host is to be wor-
shipped {"in eucharistia ipse sanctitatis attctor
ante usum est^^). All usages were here designated
as apostolic. The effect of the sacrament remains
highly insignificant ; those were expressly condenmed
who held forgiveness to be the principal fruit.
At the most contested point, the mass, the sum
total of tradition was sanctioned, a few supersti-
tious misusages only being discountenanced. Low
and high mass {" sacrificiu7n propitiatorium pro
vivis et defunctis nondum ad plenum purgatis ")
were as much justified — notwithstanding all scru-
ples of princes — as the withholding of the cup and

canones. the Latin language. The canones place all refor-
matory movements imder the ban and thereby

THREB-lroLD ISSUING OP HISTORY OF DOGMA. 61?

Attritio
Equals

Oontritlo
Im-

perfecta*

rigidly exclude the Church of the word from the
Church of the pagan mass-offering. The doctrine of
penance is much more thoroughly handled than
that of the eucharist about which the theologians
alone contended. Even unto the materia and quasi
materia was the entire scholastic labor in respect to
penance received as dogma. Hence a more extended
examination (see above, p. 479) is unnecessary. Yet
it is worthy of remark that the attritio is very cir-
cumspectly handled, and is everywhere looked upon
as contritio imperfecta. So much the more cate-
gorically was the confessio of every mortal sin be-
fore the priest encouraged and ^e judicial character
of the priest emphasized. The satisfactiones were,
as with Thomas, considered just as necessary for the
temporalis poena peccati as the indulgences. Yet ^<*^^'
men spoke very reservedly about the matter. The
scholastic theory is not alluded to, the abuse is per-
mitted ; yet touching the thing itself absolutely noth-
ing is conceded (whoever declares indulgences not to
be salutary is to be condemned) . In regard to the last
anointing, the orders and marriage they rushed to
the conclusion that the septem ordines were already
given ab ipso initio ecclesiae. The old contested
question regarding the relation of the bishops to the
priests was not decided, yet the former acquired a
superiority. Regarding marriage they discoursed Marriage,
only homiletically and ecclesiastically, yet they con-
demned those who denied that it conferred a gratia.
On the questions respecting purgatory, saints, relics

618 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOBY OF DOGMA.

and images they spoke regretfully of the abuses, yet
strongly maintained the tradition, indulging the
spirit of the times in cautious language. Thus did
the Church, in its specific secularization as a sacrifi-
cial, priestly and sacramental institution, round itself
out by the Tridentine decrees and never once sur-
render its idols (See on the practice of benedictions,
sacraments and indulgences, Gihr, d. h. Messopfer,
1887; Schneider, die Ablasse, 1881). The decrees
rooted the Chmrch firmly in the soil of the Middle
Ages and of scholasticism : Sacraments^ obedience^
merit

2. The Post' Tridentine Development as a Prep-
aration for the Vatican Decrees.

Denzinger, Enchiridion, 5. Aufl., 1874.
Ooriaiinn The questions not wholly decided at Trent: Curi-

or Bplfloo-

p«cyr alism or episcopacy, Aug^tinianism or Jesuitic
Pelagianism, moral law or probability, continued
to agitate the three following centuries. The first
question became a double one : Pope or council, papsd
decision or tradition. The Vatican council decided
in favor of curialism and therewith also for Jesuit-
ism.

cat^ 1. (a) At Trent the opposition between the curial-

ohismuB

Bomanua. ists and the champions of episcopacy, touchmg the
article respecting the power of the pope, was not
permitted to come to a decision at all; but the jpro-
fessio fidei IHdentinae had already smuggled the

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 519

Bomish Church and the pope into its credo, and the
Thomistic Catechismus Romanus taught papal au-
tocracy as an article of faith (^ necessarium fuit hoc
visihile caput ad unitatem ecclesiae constituendam
et conservandam^). Yet there arose a vigorous op-
position, viz., in the France of Henry IV. and Louis
XrV. Men reverted there (Bossuet) to Qallicanism ^^^'^^J?""
(in other respects also the Tridentine decrees were not ^^^""^
unconditionally accepted), partly in the interest of
the king, partly in that of the nation and its bishops
(residence of the bishops divinojure). As to the
meaning of the primacy, which was allowed to pass,
they were as little able to arrive at clearness and
unanimity as in the 15th century; but it remained
settled that the king and the bishops should rule the
French church, that the pope has nothing to say about
temporal things, and that in spiritual things also he
is bound by the decisions of the councils (Constance),
his decisions consequently being imalterable only by
the concurrence of the Church (Gallican propositions
of 1682). The popes rejected these propositions, but
did not break vrith France. At the end of his life Louis xrv.
the great king himself discoimted them, without
formally withdrawing them. They were in the 18th
century still ever a power until the monarch who
elevated them to constitutional, law (1810) handed
them over to the curia — Napoleon I. The way in Naiwieoii
which he, with the consent of the popeSy shattered
the Church and ecclesiastical organization which
were overturned by the revolution, in order to rebuild

520 OtTTLINBS OF tHfi HISTORY OP DOGMA.

nODUUltl*

date.

Ems* Pro-

of
VienziA.

Profeflslo
Pldei Tri-
dentinae.

Jeniite.

them in conjunction with the lattery was by a
surrender of the French church to the popes. The
emperor did not intend it as such, but sudi it was.
The romanticists (de Maistre, Bonald, Chateau-
briand et al) completed the work in union with the
restoration. Qallicanism was exterminated. In so
far as France is Catholic to-day, it is papal; howev^*
the official politics also watches over the interests
of ultramontanism in foreign lands. In Qeimany
Febronius (17G3) made a vigorous attack upon
curialism ; but since the one wanted an arch-episco-
pal national church (Ems' '^ programme'', 1786), the
other state churches (Joseph II. et al.), nothing actu-
ally came of it. The old Chm>ch organization and
the new plan for restoring it went down in the
whirlpool of the Napoleonic epoch. In the peace of
Vienna a new Church emerged, which the Curia
directed, and in which the latter with the help of the
princes, the ultramontane romanticists, trustful lib-
erals and Mettemich diplomatists crushed out the
remnant of episcopacy and of national churchdom.

1 . (b) Theprofessiofidei Tridentinae had already
given tradition a far wider range than the Tridentine
decrees themselves {" apostolicas et ecclesuisticas
traditiones reliquasque eiusdem ecclesiae obser-
vationes et constitutiones firmissime admitto et
amplector ") and had raised it above the Scriptures.
The Jesuits subordinated the latter more and more
to tradition and took particular pains on that account
to formulate the inspiration of the Scriptures in as

THRBE-t^OLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 62l

loose a way as possible, so that indeed the Vatican
decrees seem to have done away with the contradic-
tion. Modem Catholicism, however, demands both,
— the holding of Scriptural tradition as inviolably
sacred, and at the same time the putting of the finger
cautiously upon its insufficiency and its defects.
More important was the development of the idea of
tradition. In theory the statement was firmly main- Traditton.
tained that there are no new revelations in the
Church ; in reality the gnostic (secret tradition) and
enthusiastic tradition-principle, against which how-
ever the Catholic Church once arrayed itself, was
ever most boldly contended for. Bellarmine was as P*^^

" mine. cx>r-

yet timid; but Cornelius Mussus, a member of the j^^^
Tridentine council, had already put forth the asser-
tion that in matters of faith he believed one pope
more than a thousand Augustines and Jeromes. The
quite new article, that all practices of the Roman
Church are tradition, the Jesuits enlarged by the
very newest, that every doctrinal decision of the pope
is tradition. Here and there in truth they spoke
disparagingly in regard to councils and proof from
tradition, or declared the best attested decrees as forg-
eries, in order to vanquish history by the dogma con-
cerning the pope. The Church itself is the living ^'^^J"
tradition, the Church however is the pope; there-
fore the pope is the tradition (Pius IX.). And he
exercised this attribute in 1854 by the proclamation
of the immaculate conception of the virgin Mary,
thus solving an old contested question (see p. 449).

iaolflm
lAld Aside.

Domini-
cans and
Jesaits.

MoHua

ReviTM

SemKPela.

tfianism.

522 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

That which could not be accomplished by force at
Trent, propter angustias temporum^ rules to-day, —
an heretical principle when measured by Catholic
antiquity.

(2) In the Catechismus Romanus (1566), which
the Jesuits gladly adopted, Augustinianism obtained
its last official monument. Thenceforth they soug^ht
to prove that the doctrine of grace received its sanc-
tion through the world-shaping practice of the con-
fessional. Already in the year 1567 it came to pass
that Pius V. rejected the 79 articles of the Lyons
professor, Bajus, which in the main set forth the
most stringent Augustinianism, although intermin-
gled with foreign elements and otherwise unfavora-
ble to the Reformation. A long and heated contro-
versy arose between the Dominicans and the Jesuits.
The former resisted the Jesuit educational system,
condemned the most objectionable articles of the
Jesuits (Lessius and Hamel) and sought to maintain
the Thomistic teaching in r^^ard to the gravity of
the first sin, in regard to concupiscence and the
gratia praeveniens. The latter laid particular stress
upon free-will and the ** disposition ". Among them
Molina made the greatest sensation by his work:
" Libert arhitrii cum gratiae donis^ divina prae-
scientia . . . praedestinatione . . . concordia"
(1588). He attempted to read semi-Pelagianism
into Augustinianism ; in reality he gave the latter

away altogether. In order to allay the stormy con-
troversy recourse was had to Rome. She had no in-

THRBB-FOLD I881TINO OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 523

terest in the thing itself, but only in the opportunity;
the controversy however was not about Augustine
and Pelagius, but about Dominicans and Jesuits.
Politics required that neither party should be wholly
sacrificed. The ^congregatio de auxiliis^^ which congreg*-
sat from 1598 to 1607 (the pope during the same time ^9^1007;
being intimidated by the Jesuits), was finally dis-
solved without its arriving at a decision {"fore ut
sua Sanctitas declarationem et determinationem^
qucte eocspectabatuvj opportune promulgaret^) . The
failure to decide was in fact a victory for the Jesuits.
The Jansenist contest was still worse. In Catho- janaeniit

Con-

lic France, which had expelled the Reformation after troveny.
fearful struggles, an earnest piety gradually worked
itself out alongside the frivolous court and state
Catholicism and the lax Jesuitism. The posthumous
work of Bishop Jansen of Ypres, "Augustinus"
(1640), brought the same to an historical and theo-
logical halt. This piety rose right up in order to free
the Church from the Church, the faith from tradi-
tional Christianity, and morality from the refined
and lax morality. The confessional of the Jesuits confes-

aional

seemed to it to be the real enemy (Pascal's Letters: ^^^^*
" Ecce patreSf qui tollunt peccata mundi I ") . The
order of Jesus was able to hold out against this form-
idable attack only by assuming the offensive and
by branding the pure Augustinianism of Jansen and
his friends as heresy ("Jansenism"). The popes
allowed themselves to gain the day. Urban VIII.
(" Jn eminenti^)^ but above all Innocence X. (" Cum

534 OITTLINBS Oi^ tHB HIStORl" OF DOOMA.

occasione*^) and Alexander VII. (**Ad sancti b.
Petri sedem^) forbade, i.e. condemned Jansen's book.
Innocent indicated besides five articles of Jansen's
as objectionable. Then arose a violent opposition :
The ^ Jansenists" refused to acknowledge the incrim-
inating articles as Jansen's and to condenm them.
Agxudflr But Alexander VII. required it, and the crown sup-

•"^ ^ ported him. After a temporary compromise {silen-
ttum obsequiosuniy 1668, Clement IX.), Clement
XI. renewed (1705) the sharp bull of his predecessors.
Port Royal was destroyed. Aug^tinianism, how-
ever, received a still harder blow by the constitution

uidgen- '' Unigenitus'' of Clement XI. (1713). In this 101
articles from a devotional work on the New Testa-
ment by Paschasius Quesnel, which the Jesuits had
extracted, were proscribed. Among them were not
only many pure Augustinian, but also Pauline ideas
(" Nullae dantur gratiae nisi per fidem^ — "fides est
prima gratia et fons omnium aliarum^ — "prima
gratia^ quam deus concedit peccatori^ est pecca-
torum remissid" — "peccator non est liber nisi ad
malum sine gratia liberatoris" ^ etc.) . Again a storm
op^uon arose in France. Those receiving and those opposing

NeSir- *^® ^"^ were arrayed against each other. But as

******* ever in Catholicism — the one finally surrendered with
a sullied conscience, the other went under in ecstasy
and fanaticism. Only in the Netherlands had there
arisen, through the Jansenian contest, a schismatic
old Catholic Church. The bull Unigenitus^ con-
firmed by several popes, is the victoiy of Jesuitical

THREB-FOLD ISSUINO OF HISTORY OF DOQHA. 525

d(^matic8 over Augustinian, and hence is the final
word of the Catholic history of dogma (in the sense
of a doctrine of faith). As in the 19th century the
last remnant of Qallicanism has been destroyed, so
also has that of Jansenism, or the '^after-mysticism",
which was necessarily evolved out of Augustinianism
and quietism and is assuredly a peril to the Catholic
Church. The proclamation of the immaculate con- nogma of
ception of the virgin Mary by Pius IX. marks the ^tSC"
conclusion. As in a formal way (see sub 1) it marks
the definite exaltation of the papacy, so in a material
way it marks the expulsion of Augustinianism.
The indestructible impulse toward inwardness, con-
templativeness and Christian independence Jesuitical
Catholicism now employed with sensuous media of
every kind, with toys and miracles, with fraternities,
disciplinary exercises and scheduled prayers, and
thereby kept it harnessed to the Church.

(3) Already in the Middle Ages had the juristic- ^^^^
casuistic spirit of the Romish Church perniciously
influenced the confessional, ethics and dogmatics.
The nominalistic theology had one of its strong roots
in this juristic casuistry {i.e. in probability). The
Jesuits took it up and in a manner cultivated it, —
this, which several times had jeopardized the pope
himself and even the members of their own order
(Dollinger and Beusch, Gtesch. der Moralstreitigk.
seitd. 16. Jahrh. 1889). The Dominican Bartholo-
mHus de Medina was the first to expound '^ probabil-
ily'' "scientifically'' (1677). The formula runs thus:

526 OUTLINES OF THB HI8TOBY OF DOGICA.

** Si est opinio probabiliSy licitum est earn sequi^
licet opposita sit probabilioi^. Seldom has a word
80 set things on fire. It was the freeing of morality
from morality, of religion from religion. Already
Proba- about 1600 probability was evidenced as the domi-
'"•*®^ nating view, but was especially cultivated by the
Jesuits. Within the realm of faith it exhibited
itself, (1) As laxity (in respect of the granting of
absolution) , (2) As attritionism (fear of punishment).
A great array of sub-species was deduced : Lax, pure,
and rigorous probability, aequi-probability, greater
probability, lax and stringent prudence. The differ-
ences among the first six are fundamentally veiy
slight; the last — ^which alone is ethical — was ex-
pressly rejected by Alexander VIII. in 1690. The
^^Jw^te whole system is Talmudic; very likely from the
Middle Ages on there has been an actual connec-
tion between the two. Jansenism, above all Pascal,
rose in opposition to the destruction of morality. It
brought it to pass that " probabilism" was repressed
after the middle of the 17th century. Several popes
forbade the laxest moral-theological books; Innocent
XI. condemned, in 1679, 65 articles of the ''proba-
bilists", among which were true knavish tricks (see
Denzinger, Enchiridion, pp. 213 seq. 217, 218 seq.).
The worse seemed to be warded off at the time
Tiiyniis when, in the Jesuit order itself. Thyrsus Gbnzales
again revived the doctrine (in 1687 he became the gen-
eral). Still Jansenism and anti-probabilism were
blended. As the former fell the latter was neoes-

THBEB-FOLD ISSUINa OF HISTOBY OF DOGMA. 527

Barily weakened. The popes had as regards ^attri-
tionism" also reduced it to a mere neutrality. Out of
this fountain probabilism burst forth anew in the
18th century. The founder of the " order of redemp-
tionists", Alphons Liguori (beatified 1816, canonized
1839, doctor of the Church 1871), became through his
books the most influential teacher in the Church.
He succeeded in modem Catholicism to the place
once occupied by Augustine. He was, however,
an aequi-probabilist, i.e. probabilist, and no Pascal
came forth any more.

AlphoDS
Liguori.

3. The Vatican Decrees.

The Church which had destroyed episcopacy and ^^\
Augustinianism within itself built up probabilism ^^'
and the Church which, in union with the political re-
action and romanticism, had exalted the pope to
londship over herself and proclaimed him as the liv-
ing tradition was finally ripe for the dogma of the
infallibility of the pope. The bishops acknowledged
through the Vatican coimcil (1869-70), that the
primacy is real and direct, that the pope possesses
the potestas ordinaria et immediata Si& plena et su-
prema over the whole Church, and that this power is
episcopal in the fullest sense. Of this universal bishop
they confessed on the 18th of July, 1870: ^ Docemus July i8th,
et divinitus revelatum dogma esse definimus: Bo-
manum Pontificem, quum ex cathedra loquitur id
estquum omnium Christianorum pastoris etdoc-

528 OT7TLINB8 OF THB HI8TORT OF DOGMA.

tarts munere fugens pro suprema stui apostolica
auctoritate doctrinam de fide vel moribus ab uni-
versa ecclesta tenendam definite per assistentiam
divinam^ ipsi in h. Petro promissam^ ea infalli-
hilitate pollere^ qua divinus redemptor ecclestam
suam in definienda doctrina defide vel moribus
instructam esse voluit^ ideoque eiusmodi Romani
pontificis definitiones ex sese^ nan autem ex con-
sensu ecclesiaey irreformabiles esse. Si quis au-
tem huic nostras definitioni contradicere^ quod
deus avertatj praesumpserity anathema sit^ (Fried-
rich, Q^sch. d. vatic. Concils, 3 Bde. 1877 seq.)-
^^l^ The bishops who spoke in opposition soon submitted.
The number of those who refused to accept the new
dogma was and is small (see Schulte, Der Altkatho-
licismus, 1887). The new doctrine is in reality the
cap-stone of the building. Others may follow, e.g.
the temporal dominion of the pope as an article of
faith; but it can have no effect. The Romish Church
has revealed itself as the autocratic dominion of the
pontifex mxiximus — ^the old Roman empire taking
possession of the memory of Jesus Christ, founded
upon his word and sacraments, exercising accord-
ing to need an elastic or iron dogmatic legal disci-
pline, encompassing purgatory and heaven in ad-
dition to the earth.

THBEE-FOLD ISSUINQ OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 529

CHAPTER III.

THB ISSUINO OF THE DOGMA IN ANTI-TBINITABIAN-

ISM AND SOCINIANISM.

1. Historical Introduction.

Erbkam, Geech. d. protetBt. Secten, 1848. Garriere, die
philofl. Weltanschauung d. Ref-Zt. 2. Aufl., 1887. Trecfasel,
die protest. Antitrinitarier, 2 Bde. , 1889 f .

SozziNl was an epigone like Calvin. Socinianism,
viewed from the standpoint of the history of the
Church and of dogma, had for its presuppositions the
great anti-ecclesiastical agitations of the Middle
Ages; but the Reformation also influenced it. It
was evolved out of these agitations; it explained
them and reduced them to a unity. A Scotistic-
Pelagian element and a critico-humanistic are blend-
ed in it; besides one perceives also an anabaptis-
tic element (pantheistic, enthusiastic, mystic, social-
istic elements are wanting) . In it the critical and
rationalistic thought of the ecclesiastical theologians
of the 14th and 15th centuries also have a freer de-
velopment; at the same time, however, it is also the
result of the impulses of the new age (renaissance).
The characteristic thing in the anti-trinitarian and
Socinian agitations of the 16th century is that they
represent the very same destruction of Catholicism,
which it were possible to effect upon the basis of the
results of scholasticism and the renaissance, without

ever deepening and reviving religion. In this sense
84

Socinlaii-
iBm.

Scotlstio,
Pelagian,
Critical
and Hu-
manistio
Elements.

C30 OITTLINB8 OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

is Socinianism also an issue of the history of dogma.
Therein the middle age and the modem strike hands
across the Reformation. The apparently imreoon-

^^^~ cilable, the miion of scholasticism and the renais-
Muioe sanoe, is here actually accomplished. On that very
account there is also not wanting therein a prophetic-
al element. In these agitations a great deal was
anticipated with marvellous certainty which in the
evangelical Churches, following transient articles,
seems entirely suppressed, since in them the interest
in religion under a concise form absorbed everything
for the space of a hundred and fifty years. Anti-
trinitarianismand Socinianism are more enlightened
and free (aufgeklart) than ecclesiastical Protest-
antism, but less capable of development and poorer.

^tJiPi^ Only a hasty review will here be given. Common
GioupIb. to all the anti-trinitarian and anabaptist groups of
Churches is the violent break with history, the re-
nunciation of the Church as it then existed and the
conviction of the right of the individual. From the
most diverse starting-points they not seldom arrive
at the same results, since the spirit which animated

^J^'g}^ them has been the same. The first group allied
^(SSio. itself with the pantheistic mysticism and the new
creation of the renaissance : Not notions but facts,
not formulas but life, not Aristotle but Plato, not the
letter but the spirit. The inner light was placed
alongside the Bible, free conviction above the formal
statement. The Church dogmas were either modified
or allowed to lapse. Freed from the burden of the

THREB-FOLD I8SUINO OF HISTORT OF DOGMA. 531

past and guided by the Gospel, many swung out into ^^J^ck"
the free kingdom of the Spirit, while others were tw^^
caught in the meshes of their own fancies. To these
belong Schwenkfeld, Y. Weigel, Giordano Bruno,
and above all Sebastian Franck and Theobald
Thamer. ^ second grom> that cannot be overlooked Minorites,

^ Walden-

had its strength in its opposition to political and ■'^°*'
sacramental Catholicism and over against the same
it carried on a new social-political world and church
sjrstem (apocalyptic and chiliastic). Within this the
enthusiastic minorite, Waldensian, etc., churches
continued to flourish. Their badge was rebaptism.
Carried forward in many respects by means of Bef -
ormation principles, this baptismal Christianity
played a very important role until the catastrophe at
Munster and even afterward. In a thirds really a itaiun hup
Romance (Italian) group, the consequent development
of nominalistic scholasticism was carried forward
under the influence of humanism ; submission to the
Church ceased; moralism, interpreted humanisti-
cally and in part evangelically, survived. The old
dogma and sacramentarianism were cast aside; but
an historical element was admitted : Return to the
primitive sources, to the philological sense, to re-
spect for the classical in everything that is called
antiquity. The religious motive in the deepest sense
was wanting in these Italians; and they did not
carry the movement forward to a national agitation.
This and the first group stand in many respects in
strong contrast, in so far as the former did homage

632 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF D061CA.

to Bpeculative mysticism and the latter to rational
thought. Still the hmnanistic interests not only
united them by a common bond, but out of the specu-
lative mysticism a pure mode of thought was devel-
oped through experience, upon which stress was laid ;
and, on the other hand, the temperate Italian think-
ers under the influence of the new era stripped off the
crudities of that fanciful mythology in which the
earlier nominalism had paraded. This combination
is most significantly represented by the Spaniard,
>Ocfc><^ Michael Servetus. In his theology is united the
best of all that came to maturity in the 16th century,
if one speaks only of that which lay outside of the
evangelical Reformation.
^^^ With reference to all these groups the history of
j^Sioritr dogma should keep two main points in view : Their
THniiy. relation, (1) To the formal authorities of Catholicism,
(2) To the doctrine of the trinity and Christology.
Concerning the first point they did away with the
authority of the Church, the present and the future,
as a teacher and a judge. The attitude toward the
Scriptures remained obscure. Men played them off
against tradition and stood with unheard-of steadfast-
ness by the letter; on the other hand, the authority of
the Scriptures was derived from that of the inner reve-
gjjj lation, yes, they were also wholly set aside. Still as
'tton!^ & nile their unique value remained unshaken ; Socin-
ianism planted itself firmly upon the Scriptures.
Against these rocks also the Reformers of the 16th
century — certain remarkable men excepted who

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOQMA. 533

really understood what the freedom of a Christian
man is — did not dare to get seriously jostled. The
contradiction in which Protestantism had become
inYolved is found, it is true, in most of the Re-
formers: A comprehensive collection of Scriptures
set up as an absolute norm, but the right understand-
ing of the same left to the painful efforts of each in-
dividual.— As regards anti-trinitarianism the devel- Anu-mni-

^ tarlanism.

opment was carried forward in all four groups, but
in different ways. In the first group it was not
aggressive, but latitudinarian {aa with the earlier
mystics who also indeed recognized only ^ modi^ in
the trinity, considered the incarnation as a special
instance and saw in the dogma in any event only
veiled truth). In the second, anabaptist group j^^gjL
anti-trinitarianism is as a rule a relatively subordi-
nate element, although it is perhaps nowhere entirely
wanting. It is scarcely to be found in the impor-
tant reformer Denck, on the other hand it is clearer
in Hatzer, plainer still in Campanus, D. Joris and
Melchior Hoffmann, who moreover all constructed
their own doctrine of the trinity. The doctrine of
the trinity was in reality grappled with at its root,
i.e. at the Divinity of Christ, only by the Italians
(Pietro Menelfi), that is .to say, within the third
group. The union of humanism and the nominal-
istic-Pelagian theological deposit produced in Italy
as a real factor in the historical movement an anti-
Inrinitarianism in the sense of adoptionism or Arian-
Ism. The setting aside of the doctrine of the Di-

534 OT7TLINBS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

OaTin.

Divinity of vinity of Christ and of the trinity was considered
Rejected, jj^^e as the most important purification and emanci-
pation of religion. In its place stepped the created
Christ and the one Ood; in support of the same,
Scripture proofs were sought for and found (cf . the
Roman Theodotians of antiquity). A whole herd of
learned and for the most part very respectable anti-
trinitarians drove Italy in the middle of ihe 16th
century beyond its own bounds: Camillo Benato,
Blandrata, Q^ntilis, Occhino, the two Sozzini, etc.
In Switzerland the contest about the right of anti-
trinitarianism in the eyangelical churches was
fought out. Calvin decided against it and burnt
Servetus. In Poland and Transylvania the doctrine
found freedom. There anti-trinitarian churches arose,
indeed in Transylvania it was permitted to Blan-
drata to secure for his confession a formal recogni-
tion. Within this anarchy freedom of conscience
also found a place of abode. Unitarianismy as Blan-
drata taught it, saw in Christ a man chosen by Qod
and exalted to Gk)d. A split soon made its SLppesr-
ance. The left wing rejected the miraculous birth
also and the worship of Jesus (non-adorationism).
Its chief champion was Franz Davidis. For the pur-
pose of counteracting this tendency, Fausto Sozzini
(Socinius) went in 1578 to Transylvania and actually
suppressed it. There and in Poland he constructed
out of the anabaptist, socialistic, chiliastic, liber-
tinistic and non-adoration congregations a church
upon the basis of a comprehensive Biblical dogmatics.

UnltariAii-
iaixL

Fausto
SoszinL

THREE-FOLD ISSXJINO OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 535

After a history rich in dramatic episodes Poland
unitarianism in union with Netherland Armenian-
ism found in England and America an abode and
brought forth remarkable men. Nevertheless it was
inspired there more and more by the evangelical
spirit.

2. The Socinian Doctrine.

Fock, der SocinianiBiuus, 1847.

Socinian Christianity is seen best in the Bacovian (?J£SSS.
Catechism (1609). Religion is the complete and
correct knowledge of the doctrine of salvation. This
is to be obtained from the Holy Scriptures as an
outer, statutory revelation, more particularly from
the New Testament. The Christian religion is the
theology of the New Testament^ but it is at the
same time a rational religion. The Book and the
reason are the stamina of the Socinian doctrine.
Hence the proof of the certitudo sacrarum litter-
arum is a principal problem of this supernatural ®J5f2J^
rationalism. It succeeds to the place formerly occu- **o'»*i*«"*-
pied by the proof from tradition. The claims of the
New Testament (the Old Testament was only passed
along) should be demonstrated to the reason, not to
piety. The New Testament however is suflScient, ^.Jji^
since faith which works through love is comprised
^quantum satis^ within it. This faith however is
faith in the existence of God and in his rewards (cf .
nominalism) ; love is the moral law. The Scriptures
however are also plain, if one considers them with

636 OtTTLINlBS OF THS HISTORY OP DOGMA.

Old
ObUioUo

NoUtiA

I[ttowledge

of Qod*8

Unity All-

ImpCNrtant.

the understanding {^itckque cum sacrcts litteras
sufficere ad salutem dictmuSy rectam rationem nan
tantum non excludtmus^ sed omnino includimus**) .
The way of salvation man cannot of himself find,
since he is mortal (old Catholic element). Qod's
image within him consists solely in his dominion
over the beasts of the field. Not temporal, but eter-
nal death came into the world through sin. Finally,
however, man is not able to discover the way of sal-
vation, because he ^ ex solo dei arbitrio etc concilia
pependiV* ; therefore must it be given through an
outer revelation (cf. nominalism). With fear, love
and trust we have nothing to do, but only with nati-
tia dei and the law of the holy life, which must have
been revealed. The natitia dei is the knowledge of
Qod as the supreme Lord over all things, who "pro
arbitrio leges pariere etpraemia ac poenas statuere
potest^ (cf . nominalism). The most important thing
is to apprehend Gk)d's unity; but ^ nihil prohibet^
quominus ille unus detis imperium potestatemque
cum aliis communicare possit et cammunicaveril^
(cf. the old subordinationists and Arians). The at-
tributes of Qod are developed, without reference to
faith in salvation, out of the conception of the ^sur-
premus dominus^ and the '^sumine Justus^ (cf.
nominalism). Very necessary to salvation, if not
absolutely necessary, is the perception of the value-
lessness of the doctrine of the trinity. Ante legem
et per legem did men already apprehend the creation
of the world through Gk)d, the providence of Gk)d de

THRBE-FOLD ISSUIKO OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 537

singulis rebus ( !), the reward and the Divine will (in
the decalogue).

The notitia Christi divides itself into knowledge n?*}**?
of his person and of his office. In respect of the
first it is concerned with the perception that God
has redeemed us through a man (cf . the hypothetical
articles of nominalism) . Christ was a mortal man
who was sanctified by the Father, endowed with
Divine wisdom and power, raised from the dead, and
finally exalted to like power with God. This is the
exegetical result of the New Testament. Otod sent
him in order to lift men up into a new state, i.e. to
exalt the mortal unto immortality (early Church idea;
cf. especially the Antiochians). This was an arbi- '^^^^^
trary decree of God, and the bringing of the same
to pass (miraculous birth, resurrection) was quite as
arbitrary. Christ as SiprqpJiet completed the trans-
mission of the perfect Divine law (explammg and
deepening of the decalogue), declaring with certainty
the promise of eternal life and verifying by his death
the example of a perfect moral life, after that he had
complied with certain sacramental ordinances. By
his preaching he gave a strong impulse toward the
observance of the Divine will and at the same time
established the general purpose of Qod to forgive the
sins of the penitent and of those striving to live
more uprightly (cf. nominalism). Inasmuch as no Nominal-
one can perfectly keep the Divine law, justification
comes, not through works, but through faith. This
faith, however, is trust in the Law-giver, who has

538 OUTLINES OF THB HISTOBT OF DOGMA.

set before us a glorious end, eternal life, and has
awakened through the Holy Spirit the future cer-
tainty of this life; furthermore, it is reliance on
Christ, who, clothed with Divine power, truly frees
those from sin who put their trust in him. In par-

man^ta ticular is noteworthy : (1) The refined, in many re-
spects, excellent criticism of ecclesiastical Christology
from the standpoint of the Scriptures and the reason
— the Scripture statements in regard to the pre-
existence of Christ raised, it is true, some difficulties
— , (2) The attempt to set forth the work of Christ in
accordance with the scheme of the three offices, and
the acknowledged inability to extend it beyond his
prophetical office. Within the limits of the latter
everything was in reality handled : ^^ Comprehendit
turn praecepta, turn promissa dei perfecta^ turn
denique modem ac rationeviy qui nos et praeceptis
et promissionibus dei confirmare debeamus". Be-
yond this, however, Socinianism knew nothing. The

Praecepta. ^^ praeceptd'^ are the interpreted decalogue, with the
addition of the Lord's prayer, and the special com-
mandments of the sure and steadfast peace in (Jod
through prayer, praise and reliance on God's help,
abstinence from love of the world as well as self-
denial and patience. Thereto are to be added the

Baptism special Ceremonial commands, viz. : Baptism and the

and Lord's ^ ^

Supper. Lord's Supper. The former is confession, duty and
symbol ; the forgiveness of sin was also thought of
for the sake of the Scriptures in a disgraceful man-
ner, and infant baptism was discarded, yet endured

THBBB-FOLD ISST7ING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 539

(becautie it has to do with a oeremony). The Lord's
Supper, by the laying aside of all other views, was
conceived of as an ordained memorial meal. The
promissa dei are the promise of eternal life and of ^^^<n&
the Holy Spirit. In setting forth this last Socin-
ianism did great service, contrary- wise it gave to the
forgiveness of sin an ambiguous meaning. In opposi-
tion to the evangelical view it taught : " In vita aeter-
na simul comprehensa est peccatorum remissid".
This eternal life was only very superficially described,
and the fundamental Catholic thought in Socinianism
crops out in the article that the Holy Spirit is
granted only in proportion to moral progress. To the
question as to how Christ has eJffectually guaranteed
the commands and the promises, it was replied : (1)
Through his sinlessness, (2) Through his miracles, (3)
Through his death. The latter was considered as a
proof of his love, and then in an extended manner
the satisfaction-theory was contested. Herein lies
the strength of Socinianism. Although one cannot
accept a great many of its arguments, because they
are founded upon the Scotistic idea of God, yet one
must acknowledge that the juristic satisfaction-
theory is here really answered. The thought of the
merit of Christ is retained. But how meagre is it when
the catechism, once more reverting to faith, explains : ^^^fj^ ^
" Fides obedientiam nostram deo commendatiorem
gratioremque facit et obedientiae defectuSy modo
ea sit vera ac seria^ supplet^ utque a deo justifi-
cemur efficit^\ This is in complete contrast with

Christ's
Sinless-

neea,

Miracles,

Death.

540 OXTTUNES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

evangelical ideas conoeming faith. That which is
afterward said about justification is a worthless
acconunodation of Pauline ideas. Aooonunodations
are, in general, not infrequent. — In connection with

^ r£S^ the priestly office of Christ Hie permanent priesthood
of Christ is emphasized, while that which transpired
once is fundamentally discarded. Christ's dominion
over all beings and things is very briefly touched
upon.

'^^J^^ At the close the catechism reverts to the Chundi
and defines it once more as a school : ** Coetus eorum
haminum^ qui doctrinam salutarem tenent et pro-
fttentur.^ Pastors (doctors) and deacons are neces-
sary to the Church ; but nothing is said about ordina-
tion, and the episcopal succession is contested. The
refiections on the visible and invisible Church are
indefinite and unclear.

^^isn"' In Socinianism the dissolution of dogpoia is ezem-
^£gi>y plified upon Catholic soil, as in Bomanism the neu-
tralization. In the place of tradition the external rev-
elation in the Bible steps in. Religion, in so far as
it is apprehensible, is swallowed up in moraUsm.
Still there remain fortunate inconsistencies and
Socinianism presents, even apart from these, a pleas-
ing side : (1) It had the courage to simplify the ques-
tions concerning the ireality and content of religion
and to discard the burden of the ecclesiastical past,
(2) It broke the contracted bond between religion and

THIUiB-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 541

science, between Christianity and Platonism, (3) It
helped to spread the idea that the religious state-
ment of truth must be clear and apprehensible, if it
is to have power, (4) It tried to free the study of the
Holy Scriptures from bondage to the old dogmas.

CHAPTER rV.

THE ISSUING OF THB DOGMA IN PROTESTANTISM.

1. Introduction,
PoST-TRiDBNTiNE Catholicism and Socinianism are Refomui.

Hon Besto-

in many respects modem phenomena, but as regards p"^!?^;^
their religious kernel they are not modem, but much
rather the consequences of medisBval Christianity.
The Reformation as represented in the Christianity
of Luther is still in many respects an old Catholic
phenomenon, not to say also a mediaeval; yet judged
by its religious kernel, it is neither, but much rather
a restoration of Pauline Christianity in the spirit of
a new age. On this account it happens that the
Reformation cannot be judged solely by the results
which it gained during the first two generations of
its existence; for it did not begin as a harmonious
and consistent manifestation. Luther's Christianity (^J^®^.
was the Reformation ; within the periphery of his ex- Be^ml.
istence, however, Luther was an old Catholic-mediaev-
al phenomenon. The period from 1519 to 1523, the
most beautiful years of the Reformation when it stood
in living relations with all men and seemed to intro-

tion.

642 OUTLINSS OF THB HISTORT OF DOOMA.

Lather**

Gospel

BBliglOD.

dace a new order of things, was only an episode.
Luther soon drew back again within his limitations.
These were not, however, a mere thin shell, so that
Melanchthon and the epigonoi could have forgiven
the shrinkage; but Luther realized that they were
bound up with the very sinews of his power and he
asserted them with this understanding.

Luther's greatness consists in the knowledge of
Qod which he re-disoovered in the Gospel. Living
faith in Qod who in Christ says to the poor soul:
**8alti3 ttia ego sum^^ the certain assurance that
Gh>d is the being upon whom man may absolutely
rely — that was Luther's message to Christendom.
He restored the religious view of the Gk)spel, the
sovereign right of religion in religion, the sovereign
worth of the historical Person Jesus Christ in
Christianity. In doing this he went back beyond
the Church of the Middle Ages and the old Catholic
times to the New Testament, yes, to the Oospel
itself. But the very man who freed the Gk)spel
of Jesus Christ from ecclesiasticism and moralism
strengthened the force of the latter under the forms
^Jgjj^ of the old Catholic theology, yeSy he gave to these
'***™"- formSf which for centuries had lain dormant^
once again a value and a meaning. He was the
restorer of the old dogmas and he gave them back to
faith. One must credit it to him that these formulas
are even until to-day a living power in the faith of
Protestantism, while in the Catholic Churches they
are a dead weight. One will do justice to the ^ en-

THREB-FOLD ISSUING OF BISTORT OF DOGMA. 543

tire Luther ^ only by allowing his two-fold relation
to the old Catholic theology to stand and by try-
ing to explain it. Luther turned his contemporaries
aside from the path of the humanistic, Franciscan
and political Christianity and compelled them to in-
terest themselves in that which was most foreign to
them — the Gospel and the old theology. He pro-
claimed the Gospel anew and was able to defend the
" Quicunqite vult salvus esse " of the Athanasian
creed with a full voice.

In order to understand his attitude, one may refer S^^^
to the following: (1) The difficulties about which i>oc«'»«-
there was a contest flowed especially from mediseval
theology, and Luther's historical horizon shut down
about the time of the origin of the papal Church ;
that which lay back of this was blended for him at
many points with the golden horizon of the New
Testament. (2) Luther never contended against er- ^ooD*«jto

' ^ ' ^ for Purltas

roneous theories and doctrines as such^ but only J'^^'*'**®"*-
against those theories and doctrines which plainly
vitiated ihQ puritas evangelii; in him there did not
dwell the irresistible impulse of the thinker who
strives after theoretical clearness ; much rather did
he have an instinctive dislike and an inborn distrust
of that spirit which, guided solely by knowledge,
shrewdly corrects errors; he also by no means pos-
sessed all the endowments and critical facilities of
the age — " suhlimement bo7mS, gauchement savant^
terriblement natf^^ this hero has been called by one Acoepta
who knows men, (3) The old dogma corresponded to Dogmas.

tlon Only.

544 OUTLINES OF TH^ HISTORY OF DOGMA.

the new conception of tbe Qospel which he preached;
he wanted the correct faith and nothing else; the
ancient dogma, however, in contradistinction to the
medisBval, represented Christianity not as a conflu-
ence of faith and works (the latter did not belong to
the dogma) , of grace and merit, but rather as the act
of Qod through Jesus Christ unto the forgiveness
of sin and eternal life. Luther saw only this
element in the old dogma; he overlooked all elsd.

i^Sannt Hencc he conceived his mission ba that of a reformer :
It is necessary only to place upon the lamp-stand
that which the Church already possesses, but has lost
sight of among its other possessions; it is neces-
sary to restore the Qospel of the free grace of Qod
in Christ by a rehabilitation of the ancient dogma.

Aemitoof Was he really right? Did his new conception
of the Gospel fall in naturally with the ancient
dogma? Men insist upon this even to-day, — it
is true with more or less uncertainty and with the
qualification, that Luther added an important ele-
ment, viz., the doctrine of justification. But did he
not do away with the infallible Church tradition,
with the infallible Church ofiSce, with the infallible
canon of Scripture? And must his conception of
the Qospel be still clothed with the old dogma?
Wherein consists that conception? How far did his
criticism of tradition go? What did he retain?
Was his attitude altogether consistent, or is the
present state of Protestantism, which is so full of in-
consistencies and errors, to be trsvced back to him?

Labon.

THBBE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 546

2. Luther^s Christianity.

Lufher'sTheologievonKAsitlin, Th. Hamack, Lommatzscb.
Hemnaim, derVerkehr des Christen mit €k>tt, 1880. Ritschl,
Bechtfertigong u. Yersdhnung, Bd. I. n. III. Kattenbusch,
Luther's Stellung zu den dkumenischen Symbolen, 1888.
Gottscbick, Luther's Anscbauung von cbristl. Qottesdienst,
1887. Zur altprotest. Recbfert.— Lehre, cf. Loofs undEichbom
i. d. Stud. u. Krit. 1884 u. 1887.

In the cloister Luther thought he was fighting wratoSi

withBe-

ligion of

hlsCShnreh.

with himself and his sins; but in reality he was ugionof

wrestling with the religion of his Church. In the
system of sacraments and observances, to which he
subjected himself, he did not find the assurance of
peace which he sought. Even that which should
have given him consolation revealed itself to him
as an object of terror. In such distress it came
to him slowly and gradually through the corroded
ecclesiastical confession ('^I believe in the forgive-
ness of sins") and the Holy Scriptures, what the
truth and power of the Gospel really is. Augustine's t^fSI^
form of belief concerning the first and last things
was also a guiding star to him. But how much
firmer did he grasp the essence of the thing I That
which he here learned, that which he laid hold of
with all the strength of his soul as the sole thing
was the revelation of the gracious God in the GKxspel,
i.e. in Christ. The same experience which made
Paul Luther underwent, and while it did not come
to the latter so violently and suddenly as to the

former, yet he also learned through this experience
85

star.

546 OUTLINBS OF THB HISTOBT OF DOGMA.

that it is God who bestows faith: ** Since it pleased
Gh>d to reveal his Son in me."
§jy^2^ That which he experienced he afterwards learned
to express, and there resulted, when measured
by the multiforious things which the Church prof-
fered as ^religion", primarily a stupendous reduc-
tion. Out of a multiform system of grace, perform-
ances, penances and reliances he extracted religion
and restored it to its simple greatness. The Chris-
tian religion is living faith in the living Qod who
has revealed himself in Jesus Christ and laid bare
his heart — ^nothing else. Objectively it is Jesus
1^ ojjectr Christ, subjectively it is faith ; its content, however,
Stt^^ve- i^ ^^ gracious Gk)d, and therefore the forgiveness of
f^th, sin which includes sonship and blessedness. With-
in this circle the whole of religion was enclosed for
Luther. The living Qod — ^not the philosophical or
mystical abstraction — the revealed, the assured, the
gpracious God apprehensible to every Christian. Un-
wavering heart trust in him who has g^ven himself
to us in Christ as our Father, personal confidence
in Christ who stands by his work in our stead —
that was for him the sum total of religion. Above
all anxiety and sorrow, above all the artifices of as-
ceticism, above all prescriptions of theology he pressed
on to Christ that he might lay hold upon Gkxl him-
self, and in this act of faith, which he recognized as
the work of God, he won an independence and a
steadfastness, yes a personal assurance and joy, such
as no medifieval man had ever possessed. From the

THBES-FOLD I88UINQ OF HISTOBT OF DOGMA. 547

peroeption : ^ By our power nothing is done", he drew
the highest inner freedom. Faith — that meant for ^JJJSi^
him now no longer an obedient aooeptance of eode- Svi^l^
siastical teaching, or historical facta^ not supposing
and not doing, not actus initiationis upon which a
greater thing follows; but the certainty of the for-
giveness of sin and therefore personal and absolute
surrender to Gkxl as the Father of Jesus Christ, which
transforms and renews the whole man. Faith is a
conscious trust, which then makes man glad and
joyous toward God and all creatures, which as a
good tree surely brings forth good fruit, and which
is ever ready to serve and to suffer. The life of a
Christian is in spite of all evil, sin and guilt hid in
Gk)d. Because this certainty animated Luther, he luUmt ibz-

perlaioes

also experienced the freedom of a Christian man. *'w«do™«
This freedom was not a bare emancipation, or a
certificate of manumission, but to him it was the
triumph over the world through the assurance that
when God is for us no one can be against us. He
next won for himself the right of the individual ; he
experienced the freedom of conscience. But a free
conscience for him was bound up with inner allegi-
ance, and the right of the individual he understood as
a holy obligation to courageously throw oneself upon
GK)d and to serve one's neighbor in reality and in
self-f orgetf ul love.

Therewith is already said what the Church was to ^{JJ*h^
him — the fellowship of believers whom the Holy Beiiwen.
Spirit has called through the word of Gh)d, enlight-

itel

648 OUTLINB8 OF THS HI8TOBY OF DOGMA.

ened and Banctified, who more and more are to be
built up through the Gk)fip6l in true lEaith, awaiting
the glorious future of the children of Gkxl and so
serving one another in love, each in his own place.
This confession concerning the Church effected an
enormous reduction. It rests wholly upon the fol-
lowing simple fundamental thoughts : (1) That the
qSS^ Hdy Spirit founded the Church through the word
of Oodf (2) That this word is the proclamation of
the revelation of Gh>d in Christ in so far as it awakens
fidth ; (3) That the Church, therefore, has no other
province than that of faith, that it is, however, within
the same the mother upon whose lap man attains
unto faith, (4) That because religion is simply faith
no particular performances and no particular prov-
ince, be it now the open cultus, or the chosen course
of life, are the sphere in which the Church and the
individual can verify their faith, but the Christian
in the natural ordering of his life is to prove his faith
through the loving service of his fellows.
^JgjJIf With these four sentences Luther stood over
^!^^ against the old Church. Through the first Jie re-
stored the word of Ood (according to a sound judg-
ment to the fundamental place in the Church.
Through the second he restored, in opposition to all
the theologians, ascetics and sects of the Middle
Ages and of the ancient Church, the Oospel to the
Gospel and exalted the ** consolationes in Christo
propositae^ to be the sole norm. Through the third
be reduced very greatly the idea and scope of the.

THBEB-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOOHA. 549

Church, but brought the Church hack to its faith.
Through the fourth, finally, he restored the natural
status of marriage, of the family, of secular calling
and of the state; he emancipated these from the
guardianship of the Church, but subjected them to
the spirit of faith and of love. Thereby he broke
down the medisBval and ancient ecclesiastical concep-
tion of the world and of the ordering of human life,
and thus transformed the idea of religious perfec-
tion as no other Christian since the apostolic age has
done. In the place of the combination of monastic P^g^g**
witiidrawal from the world and ecclesiastical domin- *'*'™'
ion over the world, he set the Christian the great
task of verifying his faith in the ordering of his
natural life : He is to serve his neighbor in self -forget-
ful love and hallow his occupation. The righteous-
ness of the natural course of life was in no sense for
Luther a realized ideal — he had eschatological pre-
conceptions and awaited the day when the world
should pass away with its lust, its pain, its devilish-
ne»9 and its course of life — ^but because he made
faith so grand and so sovereign he suffered for and
in religion nothing that was foreign to it. Accord-
ingly through his mighty preaching all the vagaries
of the Middle Ages were dissolved. He wished to sdenoe,

® Family,

teach the world nothing else than what it signifies ^^^|^*
to possess God; yet in recognizing this most im-
portant realm in its peculiarity, everything else came
to its true relations, viz. : science, the family, the
state, charity, civil calling. In that he raised to the

650 OUTLINIBS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

first rank that which beneath the rubbish of refined
and complicated ideals had hitherto been least
esteemed — ^humble and safe reliance upon Gk)d'8
bitherly provision and loyalty in one's calliiig — ^he
created a new epoch in the history of the world.

He who takes his position here can hardly per-
suade himself that Luther brought to the old ^ sound"
dogma only a couple of new doctrines :

Luther*B theology should be treated in dose oonnectioii with
the above-mentioDed development of his fundamental views.
In theological terminology he was surprisingly unhampered
and used the doctrinal f onnulaB very freely. The traditiQiial
theological scheme heasarule treated so freely that in each
instance, when coiirrectly understood, he discovered the entire
doctrine. This can be proven from his doctrine of God {Qod
without and within Christ), from his doctrine of Providence
(the first article, rightly understood, is the whole of Christen-
dom), frxnn his Christology (** Christ is not called Christ be>
cause he has two natures, but he bears this glorious and
comforting name on account of the office and work which he
took upon himself ; Christ is the mirror of the Father's hearty ,
from his doctrine of sin (sin is ** to have no Qod"), frofn his
doctrine of predestination and of the will's lack of freedom
(religious experience does not ariie conjointly out of historical
and sacramental acts, which Qod performs, and subjective
acts, which are in any sense man's, but Qod alone works the
willing and the doing) , from the law and the Gospel (distin-
guishing between the possibility and the reality of redemp-
tion) , from his doctrine of penance (this is the humility of faith,
hence the entire life is a continuous penance) , from his doctrine
of justification. In each of these doctrines Luther expounded
the w?u)U'-the free grace of God in Christ— but he made himself
most at home in the Pauline scheme of justification ** propter
Christumper fidem^. The fine-pointed formulas concerning
the fiutitia imputativa and the scholastic sundering of justifi-
cation and sanctification (faith and love) did not originate
with him or with the Melancbthon of the earlier days ; yet each
of these men gave the provocation to the same. ESveEywhere

THBBB-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 551

he was concerned with f aith *s assurance of saltjotion, **• Where
there is forgivenefl^ of sin, there is also life and blessedness**.
In this conviction he won his religious independence and free-
dom as against eversrthing which is not from God ; for inde-
pendence and freedom alone are life. The assurance of the
forgiveness of sin in Christ was to him the sum of religion.
Therefore did he bring religion back to this. But the positive
side of the forgiveness of sin was for him the sonship through
which the Christian comes to a self-sufficient existence as
over against the world, needs nothing and stands neither under
the slavery of the law, nor in dependent upon men^a priest
before God and a king over the world.

3. iMther's Strictures on the Dominating Ecclesi-
astical Tradition and on the Dogma.

Luther always went from the centre to the circum-
ference in his criticism, from faith to institution,
and did not attack doctrines as such, but doctrines
which obscured or destroyed right Uving.

(1) He set aside the dominating doctrine of sal- ^^^
vation as destructive (Apol. IV. init. : " Adversarii^ sSSiSSoa'
quum nequequid remissio peccatorum^ neque quid
fldes^ neque quid gratia^ neque quid justitia sitj
intelliganty misere contaminant locum de justifi-
catione et obscurant gloriam et beneflcia Christi
et eripiuntpiis conscientiis proposit(xs in Christo
consolationes'^)j and in truth showed his opponents
that their doctrine of God (sophistic philosophy and
subtile reasoning), their Christology (they speculate
about the two natures and do not know the beneficia
Christi) J their doctrine concerning the truth, right-
eousness and grace of Gk)d (they do not attain unto
^ consolation" and hence err in blind reason), their

563 OUTLINBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

doctrine of sin and free-will (they are Pelagians),
of justification and faith (they do not know what it
means to have a gracious GK)d, and they rety upon
merits) and of good works were folse and miflleadiTig
to the soul. With this bill of particulars Luther en-
countered not only the scholastics, but also the
Church fathers, yes Augustine himself, therefore
the whole ancient Catholic Church teaching.
oid*oS£c>. (^) Luther attacked the old Catholic (not simply
Ftefeotioo. medifiBval) ideal of perfection and of blessedness.
In destroying the idea of a dual morality to its very
roots he put in the place of monastic perfection the
fidth which relies upon the forgiveness of sin, in the
place of the conception of blessedness as a reyelling
in holy sentiment and in holy knowledge the comfort
of a free conscience and sonship with Qod.
oSSSSo (^) Luther destroyed the Catholic doctrine of the
scuiramentSj not simply the seven. Through the

three sentences : (a) The sacraments contribute unto
the forgiveness of sin and nothing else; (b) Sacrch
menta non implentur dum fiuntj sed dum credun-
tur; (c) They are a peculiar form of the redemptive
word of God (of the promissio det) and therefore
have their virtue in the historical Christ — he trans-
formed the sacramental elements into sacramental
ordinances and recognized in them only one real
sacrament, viz. : the pardoning word of Qod. He
A^Sao. ^01^ opposed Augustine no less than the scholastics,
and in combining the Christus praedicatus^ the
forgiveness of sin and faith in the closest unity he

THBBE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 553

excluded all else: Mystical revellingy material good,
the opiAS operatum^ the haggling for the sake of the
effect and the dispositions. Not as '^ instruments" ^'^'fj^^
of grace, which secretly prepare future life in men "^wSn!^
and by the transfusion of love make good works j>09-
sibley did he apprehend the sacraments, but as the
verbum vistbiley in which Qod himself co-operates
with us and gives himself to us to be one with him
in Christ. Gh>d works through the word in the sac-
rament faith and confidence, i.e. he works the for-
giveness of sin. As regards the Lord's Supper and
baptism Luther carried this out. But he struck the
Catholic Church the severest blow by his criticism ^sS^SS?
of the sacrament of penance; for (a) He restored the '"^
sovereign efficacy of heart-felt penitence, without
doing away with confesstoasid satisfcLctio^ if rightly
interpreted, (b) He conceived of this penitence in
opposition to the attritio^ which was to him a
Satanic work, in the strictest sense as hatred of sin
springing out of the perception of the greatness of
the blessing which has been forfeited: ^Against
thee, thee only, have I sinned" ; (c) He promoted the
constancy of trustful penitence and thereby ex-
plained the penance done before the priest as a special
act ; (d) He did away with the necessity of the priestly
cooperation; (e) He taught the absolute union of
contritio and absolution both of which are included
in the fides; (f) He did away with all the mis-
chief connected with the sacraments : Computations
in r^ard to temporal and eternal benefits, purga-

654 orrruNES of the histobt of dogma.

tory, worship of saints, meritorious satisfactions
and indulgences, in that he reduced eveiything to
eternal g^t. Thus did he destroy the tree of the
Catholic CShurch by creating from its roots light and
inclination and a new impulse.
SiS^SSii- (^) Luther destroyed the entire hierarchical and
^'^bjSSl^ priestly ecclesi<i8tical system^ denied to the Church
the right of jurisdiction over the key {i.e. over
the word), declared the episcopal succession to be a
fiction and proclaimed the right of the special priest-
hood alongside of the general. In that he left but
one office, the preaching of the Cospel, to stand,
he dissolved the Catholic Church of the popes not
only, but also of Irenseus.
^d^liSt^ (5) Luther did away with the traditional culh^

dlUonal

(^,ij»»^- ordinances as regards their form, aim, content and
significance. He would know nothing of a specific
Divine service, with special priests and special offer-
ings. He discarded the sacrificial idea in general, in
lieu of the one sufficient sacrifice of Christ. The
worship of Gh>d is nothing else than the simplicity of
the individual's reverence for Qod in time and space.
He who attributes to it a special merit, for the sake
of influencing Cod, commits sin. It has to do only
with edification in faith through the proclamation of
the Divine word and with the general praise-offering
of prayer. The true service of Qoi is the Christian
life in reliance upon Cod, penitence and faith, humil-
ity and fidelity in duty. Unto this service of God
the public service should contribute. Here also he

THREB-FOLD I8SUINO OF HISTOBT OF DOGMA. 555

shattered the Church, not only of the Middle Ages,
but also of the ancients.

(6) Luther destroyed the formal external author- ^^S^
ities of Catholicism; he did away with the distinc- o^oSof-
tion between thing and authority. Because to him ^^^''™*
the proclaimed Christ (God in Christ, God's word)

was the thing and the authority, he cast the formal
authorities overboard. Even before the letter of
Scripture he did not hesitate. During the very time
when he was contending against the absolute author-
ity of tradition, of the pope and of the councils, he
set that which Christ did over against the clear
letter of Scripture and did not shrink from speaking
of errors in the Biblical writers in matters of faith.

(7) Luther conceded to his opponents their dog- i^^^
matic terminology only so far as he did not dis- ogy inal

leading.

card it. He had the liveliest feeling that the whole
terminology was at least misleading. This can be
proven from his expositions (a) of the various con-
ceptions of justification sanctificatio^ vivificatio^
regenerato^ etc., (b) of the conception satis foe-
tioy (c) ecclesiaj (d) sacramenta^ (e) homousion^
(f) trinitcts and unitas. The terminology of the
scholastics he declared to be false, that of the old
Catholic theologians to be unprofitable and cold.
But the most important is that he distingtdshed in
the doctrine of God and in Christology between that
which pertains to us and that which pertains to the
thing itself, thereby clearly indicating what the doc-
trine of faith really is and what is a matter of

656 OUTLmSS OF THK BISTORT OF DOGKA.

speculative reason^ or at best the indemonstrable
secret of faith.

S^^SSe Luther did away with the old dogmatic Christian-
itr b7 ity and put a new evangelical conception in its place.
ReitoftL The Reformation is in reality an exit of the history of
dogma : This the foregoing survey teaches clearly and
explicitly. That which Augustine began, but was
not able to realize, Luther carried through. He estab-
lished the evangelical faith in the place of the dogma
by doing away with the dualism of dogmatic Chris-
tendom and practical Christian self -judgment and
independence, and thus freed Christian faith from
the trammels of the ancient philosophy, of secular
knowledge, of heathen ceremonies and cunning mo-
rality. 2%« doctrine of faith^ the true doctrine,
he restored to its sovereign right in the Church —
to the terror of the humanists, ecclesiastics, Fran-
ciscans and rationalists (Aufklarer). The true the-
ology should have the deciding power in the Church.
i»g;2^ But what a task! It appeared still almost like a
contradiction : To restore the significance of faith as .
the content of revelation to its central position as
against all subtile reasoning and doing, and thus to
call out the repressed theoretical element ; and still,
on the other hand, not simply to take that^aith
which the past has constructed, but rather to indi-
cate the form in which it is life and creates life, is
practice yet the practice of religion. From the

Tukt

THBEE-FOLB ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 557

greatness of the problem is explained also the insolv-
ency of those elements in Luther's theology which
perverted the same and must qualify the declaration^
that the Beformation was the end of the history of
dogma.

4. The Catholic Elements Retained with and
within Luther^s Christianity.

However much or however little Luther here re-
tained— it belongs indeed to the '^entire Luther",
but not to the " entire Christianity'' of Luther. How
was Luther able to retain Catholic elements, and
wtMt elements did he conserve? Of these two ques-
tions, which should be answered, the first has already
been answered in part (see p. 543) ; only a few things
need to be added here.

(1) Luther defended faith as against the corre- ^!^^
spending works, the doctrina evangelii as against ^^**»-
justifying penances and processes. Hence he stood
in danger of adopting or of tolerating every state-
ment of faith, if only it seemed free from law and
works. He fell into this pitfall. His idea of
the Church was perverted thereby. It became as
ambiguous as the idea of the doctrina evangelii
(fellowship of faith, fellowship of pure doctrine) . — (2) f^,^
Luther thought in general only of contending against ^i^^
the doctrinal errors and abuses of the mediseval
Church, and since he traced all misfortunes to the
pope, he formed too high an estimate of the ante- iKDoraatof
papal ancient Church. — (3) Luther knew the old uc church.

558 OUTLINES OF THB HISTORY OF DOGMA.

Catholic Church very slightly and ascribed to its

decisions in an obscoie maimer still a certain author-

iSSSSa, ^^* — (^) Luther always reckoned himself and his

^^'^'''^^'^ undertaking as within the one Catholic Church,

claimed that this Church gave him the title-rig^t to

his Reformation, and hence he had a lively interest

in proving the continuity of its faith. This proof

seemed most securely supplied in the old faith

,,^22*^ formula8.-(6) Lulher was no systematic theologian,

i^U^ but romped in the Church like a child at home; he

had no long^g after the holiness of a well-ordered

doctrinal structure; but his power was likewise his

weakness. — (6) Luther was able to express his entire

Christianity within the scheme of the traditional

doctrines, and hence he was at i)eaoe with the old

^J^£* formulas. — (7) Luther was in cancreto—not inten-

TnMUtkMui tionally — ^a mediaeval exegete; he found therefore

many traditional doctrines in the Scriptui«B, although

they are not contained therein. As regards history

he had in truth intuitive perception, but he developed

no method. — (8) His perception of the essence of the

word of God did not entirely destroy his Biblicism,

but rather did this return after 1523 more strongly.

That ^ it stands written", remained to him a power.

(tottiu — (d) Also as regards the sacraments there remained

lOMIS of

Gnoe. for him still therein a superstitio as ** means of
grace^ (instead as the one grace), and tiiis had the
weightiest consequences for his doctrinal work. —
(10) He was unable to rid himself of remnants of the
nomtoalistic scholasticism, and these influenced his

THREE-FOLD ISSUINO OF HISTOBT OF DOGMA. 559

doctrine of GKxl, of predestination and of the sacra-
ments.—(11) After that he had learned wisdom in i>w™fcfui
his straggle with fanatics, he was distrustful of the ^**""°^
reason, and went far beyond distrust to antagonism
against it as a prop of self-righteousness. He in
truth hardened himself against reason in clever con-
fidence, and retrograded at several important points
of questionable Catholic belief which recognized the
Divine wisdom in paradoxes and absurdities, before
which man must bow. Especially his haughty re-
pulsion of the ^ enthusiasts'*, who possessed true in-
sight into not a few points, and his aversion to ad-
vancing along with secular civilization struck the
Beformation its severest blows.
The consequence of this conduct was that so far Lather«i

System

as Luther left a system of theology to his adherents j^^i^
it appeared as a highly confused and unsatisfactory
picture: Not as a new building, but as a modification
of the traditional structure. Accordingly it is clear
(according to Sec. 3) that Luther introduced no
finaliiy, but only made a partial beginning of a
reformation even according to his own principles.
The following are the most important confusions and
problems in his legacy :

(1) The confounding of the Gospel and the doc- ^^'^SS^
trina evangelii. Luther in truth never ceased to Dc^na
consider the articuli fidei as a manifold testimony
to that with which the Christian faith is alone
concerned ; yet along with this he gave the same still
a value of its own. Accordingly the intellectual-

Eyaugelii.

660 OUTUNBS OF THB HI8TOBT OF DOGMA.

ity^ of scholasticism, so burdensome to faith, was
not rooted out; rather did it soon become, mider the
title of pure doctrine^ a fearful power and the Church
became a thedpgians' and pastors' Church (cf . the
history of the confessional in the Lutheran church) .
The consequence was that Catholic mysticism again
crept in to counterbalance Luther's peculiar teaching
(especially that of justification) and the evangelical
ideal of life was beclouded (see Ritschl, Qesch. des
Pietismus, 3 Bde.). Thus to the ^ture, instead of
a dear and simple bequest as regards faith, doctrine
and the Church, was rather left a problem, viz. : To
maintain the *^ teaching'' in the true Lutheran sense,
and yet to free it above all from everything which
cannot be appropriated through spiritual submis-
sion, and to stamp the Church as the fellowship of
faith, without giving it the character of a theolc^
ical school.
<^'^g^^ (2) The confounding of evangelical faith and
i£th^ the old dogma. Since Luther expressed his new re-
DognuL demptive faith in the language of the old dogma, it
was not possible to prevent the latter from asserting
its old claims and its old aims, — ^yes, he himself fur-
ther developed the same within the original scheme of
Christology, viz., in his doctrine of the Lord's Sup-
per. In that he however poured the new wine into
the old wine-skins, there arose a speculation r^ard-
ing the ubiquity of the body of Christ which ranged
over the loftiest heights of scholastic inconsistency.
Ilie sad consequence was that Lutheranism imme-

THBBE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 561

diately maintained as nota ecclesiae the most ex- e^^^^
treme scholastic teaching which any Church has
ever maintained. This fact is not strange; for how
can one without absurdity include within the scheme
of the doctrine of the two natures the faith-idea that
the man Jesus Christ is the revelation of God himself,
in so far as Qod has given us in him to know his own
fatherly heart, laying it bare to us? Even because
Luther first really made earnest work with faith in the
Gfod-man (the oneness of God and man in Christ),
must the tisrdpa<n^ to the speculation regarding the
^natures" have the most distressing consequences.
The same can be shown as regards the receptionrof the '^'jS^
Augustinian doctrine of the original state and of orig- ^*«»d<*»*
inal sin. Here also Luther could only increase the
paradoxes and absurdities, in that he sought to express
in these formulas his evangelical conviction that all
sin is godleesness and guilt. Everywhere it is plain
that when the evangelical faith is thrust into the
dogmatico-rational scheme which the Greeks, Au-
gustine and the scholastics created, it leads to bizarre
formulas, — yes, first makes this scheme wholly irra-
tional. Therefore the Beformation of the future
has the task of doing away with this cosmo-theistic
philosophy and of putting in its place the simple ex-
pression of faith, the true self- judgment in the light
of the Gospel and the real import of history.

(3) The confounding of the word of Qod and the ^^^^^J^
Sacred Scriptures. Luther, as has been remarked, aod^bie.

never overcame his wavering between a qualitative
86

562 OUTLINBS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA*

and a literal estimate of the Holy ScriptoreB, and the
controversy r^arding the Lord's Supper only oon-
firmed him in the latter view. He had not yet broken
the bondage of the letter. Thus it happened that his
church arrived at the most stringent doctrine of in-
spiration, while it never quite forgot that the content
of the Gospel is not everything that is contained be-
tween the lids of the Bible, but that it is the procla-
mation of the free grace of Qod in Christ. Here also
remains to the Church of the Reformation the task of
dealing earnestly with the Christianity of Luther
as against the ^entire Luther^,
oorf^ds (4) The confounding of grace and the means of
^o^Qr^" g'f'<^ce (sacraments). The firm and exclusive con-
ception which Luther formed of Gkxi, Christ, the
Holy Spirit, the word of Qod, faith, the forgiveness
of sin and justification (grace) is his greatest service,
above all the recognition of the inseparableness of
the Spirit and the word. But by an apparently
slight modification he arrived at very doubtful con-
clusions, in that he finally transferred that which
pertains to the word (Christ, the preaching of the
Gk)spel) to the idea " vocale verbum et sacramenta ".
Rightly did he contend that Christ himself works
through the word and that one is not to accept an out-
ward union of word and Spirit, sign and thing sig-
nified. But not only by the setting apart of certain
^Jjjj^gjo ordinances and " means of grace" did he return to the
syrtenL narrow circle of the Middle Ages which he had for-
saken— the Christian lives, as he himself best kneWi

THRBB-FOLD ISSUlKG 07 HISTOilir OF DOGMA. 563

not by means of grace, but by personal communion
with Qody whom he lays hold of in Christ, — but
in still greater measure by the effort, (A) To justify
infant baptism as a means of grace in the strictest
sense, (B) To accept penance still also as the means
of grace in the initiation, (C) To maintain the real
presence of the body of Christ in the eucharist as
t?ie essential element of the sacrament.

Note on (A). The forgiveness of sin. (grace) and £|J^^
faith being inseparably united, infant baptism is asHellu^^of
then not a sacrament in the strict sense {^ absente '"^
fide baptismus nudum et inefficax signum tantum-
modopermanet"y says Luther himself in his Larger
Catechism). In order to avoid this conclusion,
Luther resorted to subterfuges which mark a relapse
into Catholicism (fides impUcita^ substitutional
faith) . The worst of it was that he granted the per-
mission— in order to preserve infant baptism as a
complete sacrament — ^to separate regeneration and
justification (objective and subjective). Infant bap-
tism thus became a sacrament of justification (not
of regeneration) ; the worst confusion set in and that
glorious jewel of evangelical Christianity, justi-
fication, became externalized and hastened to be-
come a dogmatic locus along with the others and
lost its practical significance.

Note on (B). Faith and true penitence are accord- p^S^*"^
ing to Luther one, yet so that faith is priv^: In so omSmo.
far as the Christian lives continually in faith, he
lives continually in penitence; special penitential

564 OUTUNKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA.

acts have no value, and withont true faith there is
afaeolutely no tnie penitence. Thus Luther preached
from the standpoint of a believing Christian. The
danger that this doctrine might lead to eUiical laxity
is quite as dear as the other danger, that thereby
one could convert no Turks, Jews, or vile sinners.
Melanchthon first, then Luther felt this. But in-
stead of distinguishing between pedagogical mis-
sionary principles and the statement of faith, they —
because the Catholic sacrament of penance still influ-
enced them — carried the former over into the latter,
and accordingly encouraged an ante-faith penitence,
which could no longer be distinguished from the
attritiOj and then permitted the sacrament of pen-
ance (without obligatory oral confession and satis-
factions) to enter as an act of forensic justification.
True, Luther along with this always retained his
^JS? old correct view; but the idea, when once al-
lowed entrance, developed with frightful rapidity
and created a practice, which was worse, because it
was more lax, than the Romish confessional (see
the reaction of pietism). In it the idea of &dth was
externalized, even to mere attendance upon Chmtdi;
the old accepted efficacious means of grace ex opere
operato came to the front very slightly decked, and
the justification of the sinner was jumbled into an
outer forensic act, a conscience-soothing Divine judg-
ment, which crept in inevitably when the priest ab-
solved the sinner in foro. In order to repress
frivolity, the back-door of the Catholic idea was

THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 565

opened, and the frivolity now first became great I
The thought, however, that justification is the sphere
and the edification of the Christian was hopelessly
obscured; it passed now only as the justificatio
impii. Therefore must the pious look about for a
new means of edification, if now his justification
is only a (repetitious) *' objective" initiation act.
Here lies to-day still the fundamental curse.

Note on (C). Numberless times did Luther reoog- ^"^rS?"
nize that one may seek in the word and in the sac- Euchuteu
rament only for the assurance of the forgiveness of
sin, and with ** grim contempt" did he reject every-
thing which men then made dependent upon the sac-
rament. He also never surrendered this convic-
tion^ which does not allow the question concerning
the body of Christ in the eucharist to crop out as
a theological question at all. But when he saw
that first Karlstadt, then Zwingli and others per- ^^^^
mitted the sign and the thing signified to be sepa-
rated and thus endangered the certainty of the for-
giveness of sin in the sacrament, he sought, influenced
likewise by mediaeval tradition, to securely establish
the latter by laying hold of the real presence in the
sacrament, and he defended this with increasing
temper and complete stubbornness as though the
question was as to the reality or non-reality of
the forgiveness of sin. One can understand Luther's
position in the controversy only when one recognizes
this quid pro quOy and when one further realizes that
Luther instinctively sought for a means of ridding

566 OX7TLIKBS OF THB HISTORY OF DOGIIA.

himself of spirits who crowded about him and to
whom in true self-protection — ^in the interest of his
evangelical perception and of his standing as a re-
former— ^he could not extend the hand. But the

^ISSL thing had its own logic. While contending in the
name of faith for the one point, the real presence,
which did not express the nature and peculiarily of
his own faith, all the mediffival interests in him
were aroused which seemed to have been over-
come. Here awakened Biblicism {^ es^y ** ^^)> bere
scholastic doctrinarianism in the place of i^e fides
solGy here a perverse interest in sophistical specula-
tions, here an unheard-of regard for the sacrament
alongside of and above the word, here a leaning
toward the optis operatuniy and above all a narrow*
hearted and loveless temper! As regards the
statement of the doctrine itself, it could not fail
to be more paradoxical than the Catholic. Transub-
stantiation was not recognized, but the hypothetical

^Jjjjj declaration of Occam and other nominalists, that in
^'^' one and the same space (with, by, and beneath) the
visible elements and the true body of Christ are en-
closed. The same man who earlier had derided the
scholastics now explained: ^'The sophists speak cor-
rectly here'', supplied his Church with a Christology
which in scholastic inconsistency far exceeds the
Thomistic (ubiquity of the body of Christ), eliminated
faith from the sacrament so completely that he raised
the doctrine of the tnanducatio infldelium to the
articultis stantis et cadentis ecclesiae (^ the body

THBEB-FOLD ISSUING OF HISTORY OF DOGMA. 567

of Christ is bitten by the teeth") and trumped the ir-
rationality of the doctrine as a stamp of its Divine
truth.
Through the form which Luther gave to the doc- Luther's

n Ofth flC8S.

trine of the eucharist he is partially to blame that the
later Lutheran church in its Christologyy in its doc-
trine of the sacraments, in its doctrinarianism and in
the false standard by which it measures departures in
doctrine and proclaims them heretical, threatens to
become a scrawny twin of the Catholic Church; for
Catholicism is not the pope, nor the worship of the
saints, nor the mass — ^these are consequences, — but
the false doctrine of the sacraments, of penance, of
faith and of authority in matters of faith.
The form which the churches of the Beformation Luther's

Stieiuctha

took in the 16th century, was not homogeneous, or
definite : This the history of Protestantism indicates
even to this day. Luther once more lifted the Gos-
pel, placed it upon the lamp-stand and subordinated
dogma to it. It now remains to hold fast to and
carry forward that which he began.

Gk>tt schenke uns nur ein festes Herz, Muth,
Demuth und G^uld !

FINIS.

> MS

/ 1

■^

Im^

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Outlines of the history of dogma"

See other formats