- f) jt }■ 3?'< President White Library Cornell University _^_ Cornell University Library BT21 .S45 1905 Text-book of the history of doctrines olin 3 1924 029 300 064 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029300064 TEXT-BOOK OF THE HISTORY OF DOCTRINES BY DR. REINHOLD SEEBERG, Professor of Theology in Ordinary in Berlin. REVISED, 1904, BY THE AUTHOR. TRANSLATED BV CHARLES E. HAY, D. D. COMPLETE IN TWO VOLUMES. VOL. I. HISTORY OF DOCTRINES IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH. PHII^ADEIvPHIA, PA.: LUTHERAN PUBLICATION SOCIETY. COPYiaGHT, 1905, BY THE LUTHERAN PUBWCAXION SOClETy. TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. The appearance of the present work is in response to the ex- pressed desire of the teachers of Dogmatic Theology in a number of institutions in various portions of the Church. In a department which at so many points vitally affects the conceptions of fundamental truth, and which has to do with the entire historical development lying back of the Protestant Refor- mation, as well as with the formulations of doctrine then made, which have proved regulative in the sphere of dogmatics to the present day, it is imperative that our students of theology should enjoy the benefit of the very best modern scholarship, and that they should be led through the maze of conflicting views under the guidance of one who, while impartial as a historian, yet rec- ognizes the validity of our ecclesiastical inheritance as embodying and expressing the essential results of both ancient and modem religious thought. The *'Lehrbuch" of Dr. Seeberg has since its appearance been constantly used as a book of reference in our theological seminaries. The unchallenged pre-eminence of the author in this his chosen field, the conservatism of his views, so well re- flecting the spirit of our churches in America, and the condensa- tion and lucidity of his style combine to commend his work as the most suitable for the purpose above indicated. It is confidently expected that the Text -book will find a circu- lation far beyond the limits of the class-room. To the busy, working pastor it will prove a welcome companion as with ripened powers he reviews from time to time the field of his early studies, enabling also the intelHgent layman to scan the field of ancient religious thought through the field-glass of a living his- torian of his own church. The unusually full treatment of the doctrinal history of the Reformation will be found peculiarly helpful, displaying the lines of continuity connecting the theology of the Reformers with the central truths of the original Christian revelation, and indicating, at the same time, the sufficiency of the principles then enunci- ated to direct the religious activities of the present age. It has been thought best, in order to facilitate the use of the work in wider circles, to translate the large number of citations (iii) iv translator's preface. from the Greek and Latin, but the pivotal words are in such cases also presented in the original form. The translation of citations has been made as literal as possible, sacrificing elegance of English idiom to exactness in reproducing the originals. I desire gratefully to acknowledge the courtesy of the dis- tinguished author in so cheerfully furnishing the large amount of valuable new material for this edition, thus anticipating future editions of the original. Charles E. Hay. Baltimore. AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO ENGLISH EDITION. The extracts from the prefaces to the German edition, appear- ing upon the succeeding pages, give a sufficient indication of the character of the present work. I have not endeavored to pre- sent to the reader historical constructions of doctrine, but I have sought to display the actual course of doctrinal develop- ment as objectively as possible and in strict harmony with the sources. The prevalent and controlling view-points have, how- ever, in each case been kept steadily in mind and prominently indicated. I have carefully revised the present English edition, amending and enlarging it at many points. This is true especially of the first volume, which has in various parts been very largely re- written. I felt it to be particularly fitting to introduce a brief historical sketch of the development of the New Testament doctrine. May the work in this English edition, by the blessing of God, prove a service to the church and to ecclesiastical science among my brethren in the faith in the distant West. R. Seeberg. Berlin, March lo, 1904. FROM AUTHOR'S PREFACES TO GERMAN EDITION. PREFACE VOL. I., 1895, PP. 5, 6. The work whose first volume is herewith presented to the theological public claims to be but a text -book, and I have been at special pains to adapt it in all parts to the requirements of academic study. I have endeavored to condense the material as far as possible without allowing it to become obscure or unin- telligible. I have, therefore, commonly contented myself with literal quotation of the original sources, and it is my hope that the most important passages from them will be found here col- lected. Historic and dogmatic criticisms are merely suggested. In my lectures upon the History of Doctrines I am accustomed to lay stress upon the ecclesiastico-historical setting of doctrinal development and to accompany its presentation with the appro- priate biblico-dogmatic criticism. But in this work, with the exception of a few brief hints, I have refrained from such at- tempts. Many comments of this kind which I had at first in- cluded were stricken out in the last revision of the manuscript, in order that the work, which has nevertheless, despite the com- pact printing, somewhat exceeded the dimensions originally contemplated, might not become too large for its designed use. Such discussions, moreover, are not, strictly speaking, in place in a work of the present character. Perhaps an opportunity may be elsewhere found to offer some '* Comments upon the History of Doctrines." That I do not entirely agree with Baur and Harnack, nor with Kliefoth-Thomasius, will be evident from occasional hints in the following pages. As the work owes its existence to my desire to secure relief from the burdensome task of dictation in the delivery of my lectures, it takes for granted that students, at least, will in the use of it have the assistance of academic lectures. But it is my further hope that, even for advanced theologians, the earnest study of the material here fur- nished may bring vividly before the mind the wealth of questions and problems embraced within the range of the formula, '* Faith and Doctrine." It cannot be sufficiently emphasized in our day that a real answering of these questions and an inward emancipation from these problems can never be attained without (vi) FROM author's PREFACES TO GERMAN EDITION. vil thorough -going studies in dogmatic history. The revelations and ' ' evidences ' ' of that theological Dilettanteism, which selects the sphere of dogmatics as the field for its antics, must come to naught despite the favor or disfavor of parties. The History of Doctrines demands a hearing and requires an intelligent under- standing. The general plan and arrangement of the present work have been fixed in my mind since the preparation of my lectures upon the History of Doctrines in the year 1885 -1886. That it is based upon a study of the original sources will be sufficiently -evident to the reader. I would not fail to acknowledge with gratitude the frequent suggestions and enlarged fund of informa- tion which I have derived from the newer works upon the His- tory of Doctrines, especially from Baur, Thomasius and Har- nack, as also from the many faithfully executed Patristic mono- graphs of the last decennia. PREFACE VOL. II., 1898, PP. 3, 4. It is manifest that the acquaintance of any single individual with the immense historical material embraced within the scope of the present volume must be far from exhaustive, especially since there is a great lack of preparatory monographs, such as exist in abundance for the earlier periods in the History of Doctrines. It may be readily understood also that the historian, in seeking to delineate the course of development, should en- deavor, so far as his time and strength may permit, to fill up the existing gaps by original research. The delay in the appear- ance of the present volume is to be thus accounted for, as pains- taking investigations were necessary in various fields, the results of which may, I trust, be recognized as constituting an enrich- ment of our Science. I mention, for example, the full pre- sentation of the Scholastic theology, particularly that of the later Scholasticism, and the attempt to give to the teaching of Luther and the other Reformers its rightful place in the History of Doctrines. No one familiar with the subject can deny that it is amazing to find in the existing Histories of Doctrines very much about Anselm and Thomas, and but little, and that too often untrustworthy, about Duns Scotus and his followers — as though it were possible without a knowledge of this later de- velopment to understand the doctrinal coristruction in the Evan- gelical and Roman Catholic churches, either in its positive or in its negative aspects ! It is just as clearly out of keeping with the fitness of things that we may in many Histories of Doc- trines read much of Origen and the Damascene, and even of Osiander and Chemnitz, but only passing sketches of the four Viii FROM author's prefaces to GERMAN EDITION. great Reformers, and these marred by strong dogmatic preju- dices, I have here attempted to remedy this defect, although the section upon Luther has thus grown almost to the dimen- sions of a small monograph, yet without exceeding the proper limits of a History of Doctrines. The reader will observe that the later portions of the work are somewhat less condensed than the earlier sections. I have thus sought to meet the wants of the general reader as well as of the technical student, without sacrificing the clearness and exactness necessary in a text-book. I have allowed myself also, as the work advanced, somewhat more liberty in the critical estimate. of the positions reviewed. I have not concealed my own doc- trinal views, but have nowhere given prominence to them, seeking only to make proper comment upon the actual historical phenomena. If the hand of the dogmatic theologian is more evident in this than in the former volume, it is to be attributed in part to the nature of the material under review. R. Seeberg. Erlangen, April 27, 1895. CONTENTS. PAGE Translator' s Preface iii Author's Preface to English Edition v From Author's Prefaces to German Edition vi GENERAL INTRODUCTION. Definition, Office, and Methods of the History of Doctrines. ^ 1 . Definition and Office 19 ^ 2. Method and Divisions 22 \ 3. Literature 25 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. \ 4. Greek- Roman Heathenism in its Relation to Christianity 28 ^ 5. Judaism 30 § 6. The Primitive Christian Proclamation 32 BOOK I. DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH. PART I. CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY IN THE POST-APOSTOLIC AND PRIMITIVE CATHOLIC AGES. CHAPTER .1. The Conception of Christianity in the Post-Apostolic Age. \ 7- The Apostolic Fathers 55 Literature 55 1 . Clemens Romanus 5^ a. God 5^ b. Christ 56 CONTENTS. PAGE c. The Work of Redemption 5^ d. Christian Life 57 r. The Church 5^ f. The Resurrection 5^ 2. Hermas 5^ a. The Person of Christ 58 b. The Work of Christ 59 t. Christian Life 60 i-/ou xat dTzi'/oUj bear and forbear (Gel- lius, Noctesatt., xvii. 19. 5, andff., following chiefly Epictetus). Even the slave is free in soul. All men are members of the Greater Republic of this world. Man is a sacred object to man. All have God in themselves: ''The sacred spirit has its seat within us. " ' ' What else is nature but God and divine reason im- planted in the whole world and its parts. ' ' With this combine : *^ A happy life consists in this one thing, that reason be perfect in us." But between the reason (logos), or God within us, and the flesh (caro) there is a conflict : '* None of us is without fault (culpa). But let man do what is good." Seneca's idea was: ''Trust thyself and make thyself happy." To become free from the flesh is the highest goal of man : the way of escape stands open, and beyond it — great and eternal peace (Seneca). In these conceptions of the philosophers, as in the great reli- gious longings of the age, are embedded elements which prepared the way for Christianity (the unity of God, the Logos of God effectually working in the world, the emphasis upon the inner man, the great longing to become God's by becoming free from self and the world, the shattering of the ancient notions of state and rank in the interest of a spiritual fellowship of all men). But, freely as these conceptions were employed by the early Christians, the difference between them and the sphere of ancient Christian thought is no less clear (absence of the divine Person and of personal intercourse with him, and the consequent lack of the idea of moral guilt, resulting in the physical and moralistic conception of morality). The yearning after another world is the great feature of the *' fullness of time, ' ' but the means by which this yearning might be made permanent and effectually satisfied — this the world did not produce from within itself. The moral life of even the better element seldom corresponded to the lauded ideals, as history testifies. It is, therefore, not diffi- cult to understand the methods employed in the apologetic writings of the ancient church (harsh combating of idolatry, accommodation to the philosophical formulas, yet the constant affirmation that Christians are " a Bew generation "). so HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. § 5- Judaism, Comp. SchOrer, Gesch. des jiid. Volkes, 2 vols., 1890, 1886. Well- HAUSEN, Israelii, u. jiid. Gesch., 1894. Weber, System der altsyLagogalen palast. Theol., 1880. Hilgenfeld, Die jiid. Apokalyptik, 1857. Sack, Die altjiid. Rel. im Uebergang v. Bibeltum z. Talmudism, 1889. Staffer, Les idees religieuses en Palestine &. I'^poque de J6s. Christ, 1878. Siegfried, Philo, 1875. Zeller, Philos. d. Griech., iii. 2. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums in neutest. Zeitalter, 1903. I. It is only the ideas of the later Judaism which are here of interest to us. The relation between God and man is a legal relation. God commands, and man obeys in order thereby to merit the reward : Kn^N NnVJ? D^B^ (Pirqe aboth 5. 23) and "S^ bn£;> TS] r^C^n (ib. 4. 22; of. Tobit 4. 6; 2. 14; 12. 9; 14. 9; 13. 2 J. This connection of ideas explains the efficacy attributed to the ordinances (T\'y>T\ tradition of the elders, Mk. 7.3), deduced by exegesis from (tihno) the text of the Thorah and constantly multiplied without restraint. There are so many com- mandments, in order that there may be great reward (Makkoth 3. 16). For this we wait in perpetual humility (^5^^ DplV) Hence the scrupulous observance of the specific laws (^duauKrir^f) TzpotrraYixdrujv, Ps. SoL, 14. i) and the insistence upon the value of good works (fasting, prayers, alms. Tobit 2. 18 f.; cf. Matt. 6. 16; 6. 2, I ; 5. 20. Sir., 3. 28. Ps. Sol., 3. 9. 4. Esra 7. 7: thesaurus operum repositus apud altissimum ; cf. 8. 36, and Tobit 4. 9; Weber, p. 273 ff. ). This also in part gave vitality to the Messianic hope of the nation, which looked forward to the coming of Him who should deliver his people from all the distress of the present time, bringing reward to the pious and misery to the ungodly. This is the Christ of the Lord (//Jirrro? xupOfo, Ps. Sol., 18. 8, cf. 6 ; 17. 36), the Son of David, the Son of Man (Par. of Enoch, e. g., 46. 2 ; 63. 11 ; 69. 26 ; 62. 7, 14, cf. Son of a Woman, 62. 2, 3, 5 ; Son of a Man, 71. 14; 65. 5; 69. 29), the Son of God (Enoch, 105. 2. 4. Esra 7. 28 f.; 13. 32 ; 37. 52 ; 14. 9). According to some, the Messiah would come himself to bring the condition of eternal blessedness (Sibyll., iii. 766. Ps. Sol., 17. 4. En., 62. 14 f. Jn. 12. 34). According to others, the Messiah but prepares the way for the consummation. He was thought of as a mighty king, who should rule Israel four hundred years and then die (4. Esra, 7. 28, 29 ; cf. Apoc. Baruch, 39. 7 ; 40. 3); only after this should follow the consummation of the world. He JUDAISM. 3^ is, therefore, a man of men (avi'^pwnog ^| dv^^pwrzajv — Trypho in Justin. Dial., 49).^ The Messiah appears to have nothing in common with the spiritual beings who are the media of the divine presence in the world, with the angels who appear with increasing frequency, with the ''great Scribe" of God, nor with the ptptp''p (probably /j.srdi'^povog) and the N^^'P (See Weber, p. 178.) But longing for the Messianic kingdom was awakened especially by the consciousness of sin, which oppresses the entire human race and from which man is ab- solutely unable to free himself. How can the law with its re- wards bring help, if no man since Adam has fulfilled the law ? Through the fall of Adam sin and guilt have come upon the hu- man race (4. Esra; 3. 26; 4. 30; 7. 118 f.; 8. 35, 17. Apoc. Bar., 1703; 23. 4; 48. 42; 54. 15, 19. Cf.Weber, p. 216, 217). We have nothing without the Almighty and his law (Apoc. Baruch, 85. 3). Thus there is a continual advance, as well in pessimistic estimate of self and the universe, as in the vividness of the hope centering in the kingdom of the royal Messiah. We may mention also the rich development attained by cosmology, by a peculiar metaphysics (everything earthly pre-exists in heaven), and in eschatological conceptions. 2. It is of the highest importance to observe the combination formed by Judaism with Greek philosophy, in which are fore- shadowed many of the developments of the earlier Christian theology. Here the chief sources are the Wisdom of Solomon and Philo; cf. also 4 Mace, the Jewish Sibylline books, and the didactic poem of Phocylides : (a) God is conceived (Platon- ically) as abstract Being, without attributes. (<^) There accord- ingly yawns a great gulf between God and the uXtj (matter). (/) This is bridged by the intermediate existences, angels, demons, dovd/istg (powers), Xo^nt (words), comprehended in the idia idecbv (forms of forms) or the /T(npta (wisdom) or the /'>;'"?, o y^o^o? TTpiDToynvo^^ dt6r£po<; 'Vso^ (word, first-born word, other God), neither ungenerated as God nor generated as are we, the 1 The representation of the birth of the Messiah from the virgin is also foreign to Judaism, vid. Seeberg, Glaube und Glaube, p. 28 f., note 2. The announcement of the pre-existence of the Messiah occasionally met with is to be understood in the light of Enoch, 46. 3 : ** Before the sun and the con- stellations were created his Name was mentioned before the Lord of spirits." The later rabbinical literature similarly describes the Name of the Messiah as pre-existent (vid. Weber, 1. c, pp. ^-^^^^ 339 f)» ^^ ^'^° ^^^ Thorah is declared, being involved in the divine wisdom, to be pre-existent and the *' daughter of God." (See Weber, p. 14 ff. ) This is all but a part of the later Jewish metaphysics, according to which everything Judaic has its origin in heaven. 32 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. high-priest mediating between the creature (dem Gewordenen) and him who has begotten it, and representing man as his advo- cate, the bread from Heaven, the source of the water of knowl- edge. He is the instrumentality {opya^^ir^') through which the world was created. But the Logos is neither conceived as a person, nor as bearing any relation to the Messiah, (d) The dualism of this system is seen in its anthropology, in which the body of man is regarded as a prison and the cause of evil : ^•From the way in which it came to birth, sinning is natural {^u!j4'ue^) to it." Vit. Mos. iii., 157 Mangey. ^ {e) Salvation is therefore deliverance from sensuality. This is experienced through the fulfillment of the law, whose external forms must maintain their validity (de migr. Abr., i. 450 Mangeyj, but ultimately through enthusiastic ecstasy. (/) All this is de- duced by allegorical interpretation, after the manner of the Hag- gadah, from the Old Testament. Philo presents it as authorized in the strictest sense by inspiration : *' For the prophets are the interpreters, God using their organs for the proclamation of what- ever things he wished (de monarch., ii. 222, and, especially, Quis div. rer. her. i. 511 Mangey; cf. also Sanday, Inspiration (Bampton Lectures), ed. 2, 1894, p. 74 ff.^ Nagelsbach, Nach- homer. Theol., p. 173 ff. Homer. Theol., ed. 2, p. 187 ff. Pauly Realencycl., ii. 1117). Among the Essenes also similar Hellenistic conceptions exer- cised a formative influence. § 6. The Primitive Christian Proclamation. Cf. B. Weiss, Bibl. Theol., ed. 2, 1901. Die Religion des N. T., 1903. \V. Beyschlag, Neutest. Theologie, ed. 2, 1896. H. J. Holzmann, Lehrbuch der neutest. Theologie, ed. 2, 1897. Hofmann, Bibl. Theol., ed. Volck, 1886. A. Ritschl, Rechtf. u. Vers. ii. Pfleiderer, Das Urchristentum, ed. 2, 1902. Weizsacker, Das ap. Zeitalter, ed. 2, 1892. Nosgen, Gesch. d. neutest. Offenb., 1891-93. P. Wernle, Die Anfange unserer Religion, 1901. H. H. Wendt, Die Lehre Jesu, ed. 2, 1901. H. Cremer, Die paulinische Rechtfertigungslehre, 189S. A. Schlatter, Der Glaube im N. T., ed. 2, 1895. R. Schmidt, Die paulinische Christo- logie, 1870. A. Seeberg, Der Tod Christi in seiner Bedeutung fur die Erlosung, 1895. I . The prophecy of the Old Testament prophets culminates in the idea of the '* new covenant " in Jeremiah (31. 31 ff. ),and in the thought that God shall reign as king over his people and the whole world in righteousness and grace. Jesus Christ and his work constitute the realization of these ideas. He claimed for himself absolute authority. His words take a place of equal 1 This Platonic theory of inspiration, which influenced Christian theology in many ways, leads us back to the Platonic conception of the inspired seer. See Phaedrus, c. 22, p. 244 a. Tim., c. 32, p. 71 e. PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN PROCLAMATION. ;^^ dignity by the side of the declarations of the law (Matt. 5. 7), and will outlast heaven and earth (Matt. 24. 25 f., 35). He announced himself as the promised Messiah. This is the mean- ing of the term which he applies to himself, the ' ' Son of Man (of. Book of Enoch), and more than this is not in the first instance involved in his designation as the ''Son of God." If the term "Son of man " describes the Messiah as of heavenly nature, origin, and goal (cf. Jn. 3. 12 f. ), he is the ''Son of God," as one who derives the content and motive of his inner life from God and therefore lives and works in the power of God (Matt. II. 27 ; 3. 34 f. ). Since now Christ as the Messiah lives, teaches, and works in God and by the power of God, he exercises divine dominion over men (Lk. 22. 29 f. ; 17. 21, 23; I. 33. Matt. 13; 12. 2, 8), and thereby estab- lishes the blessed condition of men as a kingdom of God. Inasmuch as he exercises divine dominion, there belong to him the divine attributes of omnipotence and omniscience, the power to forgive sins — which did not according to Jewish teaching belong to the Messiah — absolute authority, power, over heaven and earth until the end of time. Although John often applies other terms, his ideas do not extend essen- tially beyond the synoptic representations. The conceptions of Christ as the light, the life, the truth and the way merely give fuller expression to the thought that he exercises the divine gov- ernment of the world for the salvation of men. 2. Thus in Christ is the one expectation met. He rules with divine dominion for the salvation of men in the world, imparting to them life and righteousness, and gathering them into a king- dom of God. In this, one aspect of the new covenant is realized. But, according to Jeremiah, that covenant embraces a double purpose. The law is to be written by the power of the Spirit in the hearts of men, and their sins are to be forgiven. This second purpose was placed by Jesus in a peculiar relation to his death, the necessity for which he strongly emphasized ('5^0- Jesus came into the world to minister. This ministry embraces the surrender of his soul to death as a Xorpov, so that many may be thereby delivered from death (Matt. 20. 28. Mk. 9. 35). Since now death may be regarded for us essentially as a penalty, Jesus has designated the giving of his life as a means of deliverance from the penalty of death, availing for many ; or as a means of the forgiveness of sins (cf. Matt. 16. 26). The Gospel of John explains this by the illustration of a shepherd faith- ful unto death (Jn. 10. II, 15, lyf; 12. 24 f.; 15. 13; 18. 11). His conception was, therefore, the same as that of Jesus himself, that the fidelity of Jesus even unto death and his obedi- 34 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. ence to the Father constitute the ground, or ransom, for the sake of which God forgives the sins of many (Matt. 26. 28 ff. ). The declaration in i Cor. 11. 25 expressly represents the new- covenant estabhshed through the blood of Christ as embracing the forgiveness of sins ; but the shedding of the blood of Christ includes also the other aspect of the new covenant, i. e., the awakening of new life and the implanting of the law within the heart. Each of these two cycles of thought — divine domin- ion and new covenant — thus of itself embraces the whole compass of the work of Christ. He is the King, who bestows a new life upon men ; and he does this by achieving for them, through his death, the forgiveness of sins. An analysis of the manifold particulars in which Jesus has established the state of grace under his dominion, or in his kingdom, would carry us beyond our limits. The chief categories are as follows: (iz) Repentance (yCterriynia), with faith, as the consciousness of the divine authority and power of Christ (Matt. 8. II, 13; 9. 2, 22; 15. 28. Lk. 17. 19 ; 7. 48, 50); as a receiving (xad'etV) in relation to Christ and his gifts (Jn. i. 16 ; 13. 20; 17. 18). (i^) The following of Christ, and that which it involves (Matt. 16. 16. Jn. 6. 68f.j 8. 12). {c) The true fulfilling of the law, or true righteousness, love (Matt. 22. 23 f. ; 23- 23)- (^) A prayerful life. According to Matt. 16. 18; 13. 9 ff., Jesus anticipated a historical unfolding of the kingdom of God in the form of a congregation (ixxXTjUia). In this con- gregation he will be present (Matt, 28. 20. i Cor. 11. 24 f.; 16. 22. Matt. 26. 26 ff. ). He will also take part as her Lord in the last judgment. In the final days of his ministry he indicated the tokens which should herald the latter (Matt. 24. 6-31). In various parables he combined the general tenor of these prophecies. We should look for the return of him who will soon come and summon to account, in order that the eternal destiny of men may be determined (Matt. 24. 43 ff . ; 25. I f., 14 ff., 31 ff.). 3. But, according to the Gospel narratives, the revelation of Christ was not completed in these declarations uttered before his death. And that which is said in the reports concerning the words of the risen Christ we find fully confirmed in the other New Testament writings. Everywhere we meet with the same ideas and assertions, which are simply inexplicable in this their absolute harmony if not derived from words of Christ himself ; for they cannot be accounted for by anything contained in the other sources accessible to the writers, /. e. , the Old Testament and Judaism. The risen Christ, first of all, convinced his disciples that he was really alive, and thus at the same time PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN PROCLAMATION. 35 awakened in them the conviction of his victory and his power over his enemies. He then instructed and exhorted them con- cerning his person and their mission. ^Ve unfortunately possess only very brief summarizing accounts of these instructions (Matt. 28. 18 ff. Lk. 24. 44 ff. Acts I. 6 ff. j. The task of their world-mission is revealed to the disciples. With it are com- bined preaching and baptism. At the same time there is imparted to them in the trinitarian formula a knowledge of the position of Christ and of the Spirit promised them in the life of the God-head. The term, ''Son of God," received in consequence a new character. It no longer signifies merely, in the sense of the Old Testament usage, the man beloved and led by God, but the Son, who is in heaven with the Father, eternal and omni- present as the Father. Thus the riddle of the person of Christ was solved for the disciples. His authority, claims, and prom- ises during his earthly life now first attain for them their full significance and force. The Gospel of John in particular under- takes to present the human life of Christ in the light of the religious knowledge afterward attained. The last revelation of Christ serves to interpret his earlier revelations. This finds rec- ognition when John discriminates between a state of divine glory (^do^a) belonging to the past, /. ^., to the pre-existence of Christ, and his present existence (Jn. 12. 16, 23; 17. 5), but in such a way that this glory is manifested in Christ's earthly life ( i. 14 ; 2. II ; II. 4; 17. 10, 6-9), and especially in his sufferings as the consummation of his earthly life (13. 31 f. ; 17. i). The glory of Christ is the unlimited power of divine activity. To the pre-existent Son of God (8. 58 ; 10. 35 f. ) belongs as his pecu- liar nature the divine glory. This was the knowledge of Christ which the disciples received through their communion with the risen Jesus, and by which they became fitted to interpret his earthly life and actions. The immense historical significance of the Gospel of John consists in the fact, that it makes it possible for us to understand how the disciples of Jesus were enabled and compelled to associate the historical events which they witnessed with the religious experience of the eternal, omnipotent Lord : '' The Word became flesh." The Spirit, hitherto regarded, in harmony with the Old Testa- ment conception, as a revelation of the presence of the divine power (Matt. i. 18. Lk. i. 35), as a creative source of reli- gious knowledge and power (Lk. i. 15, 41, 67 ; 24. 49. Acts 1.8. Matt. 10. 19 f.; 13. II. Jn. 3. 6; 20. 22), or of mirac- ulous works (Matt. 12. 28, 32), is by the last declarations of Christ described as likewise a personal principle, as the aA/.o>g TrapdxXyjTog^ who, coming from the Father (Jn. 15. 26J, sent by 36 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Christ (16. 7), makes the revelation of Christ effectual in the disciples, and thus becomes the medium of the coming of Christ to them (14. 18 f.; 16. 12 ff.). These were the chief features of the revelation of Jesus Christ. He exercised divine dominion, or actualized the new covenant. He thus revealed his divine nature, and he expressly based this nature upon the conception of the unity of the Father with the Son and the Spirit. He opened up to the disciples a great task, while at the same time he held out the prospect of his presence and co-operation for its accomplishment through the coming of the Spirit, 4. In accordance with the prophecy of Christ, the Spirit pro- duced a great awakening. Wonderful words and wonderful deeds were given to those who believed on Jesus. A sphere of the miraculous (see Acts) surrounds the church. But the Spirit did not exert his power as a revolutionary principle. On the contrary, he manifested himself as the Spirit of Christ, establishing the authority of Christ as Lord in the church. But in connection with this element of stimulation there were other and stable elements which preserved the work of the Spirit from subjective exaltation and onesidedness. These were the Old Testament ; the authority of the words of Jesus and of the apostles as his historical witnesses (Acts i. 22 ; 3. 15 ; 4. 33 ; 5. 32 ; 8. 12 ; of. also Matt. 16. 19); the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's Supper, established by Jesus ; and, finally, a complex of traditions (^7:apad6x.a) denotes the immoral condition of the sinner ; whereas to be ''in the flesh" (iv fTap-A) belongs to human nature (2 Cor. 10. 3). Thus arises a '* walking in the lusts of the flesh" (Eph. 2. 3), with a mind ((/•fitryrj/ia) of the flesh (Rom. 8. 7) and a ''minding earthly things" (Phil. 3. 19 ; 2.4, 21), the ** worldly lusts " (Tit. 3. 3 ; 2. 12), the " desires of the flesh " (Eph. 2. 3), and the "works of the flesh" (Gal. 5. 19 f. ). It is not the idea of Paul, that the natural constitu- tion of man produces sin in him ; for sin came into the world by a particular act (Rom. 5. 12. i Cor. 15. 22). He means, on the contrary, that the historical power of sin {^diiapria') gives a free rein to lust in man and thereby the flesh becomes the deter- mining factor in his life. Sin, thus regarded, is for Paul a degradation of human nature, a^gerversity. From this con- dition, contrary to nature and uriwbrthy~of it, Christ as the Spirit sets free. His energy (^hipyeio) works with power (iv duvdfj.sc) within us (Col. i. 29). We become in him a "new creature" (2 Cor. 5. 17. Gal. 6. 15). He lives in us (Phil. I. 21. Rom. 8. 10. 2 Cor. 4. 10 f. Gal. 2. 20). Wisdom, righteousness, and sanctification proceed from him (i Cor. i. 30; 6. 11). He who puts on Christ ceases to obey the will (^Tzpovota) of the flesh. But as through Christ a new life is begun in us, so will he also make us alive through the resurrection. It is only when we have received eternal life that the redemption of Christ is completed (Rom. 13. 11 ; 8. 23 f. ). We have merely more precise and concrete delineations of this thought, 42 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. when Paul describes in many aspects the creative activity of the divine Spirit in the soul of man (the Spirit reveals, teaches, witnesses, confirms, inspires, impels, vivifies, renews, strengthens, sanctifies, infuses love, fills us, sets us free, etc.). ''As many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God " (Rom. 8. 14). Christians live and walk '' in the Spirit " and '' accord- ing to the Spirit." They serve God in him and they lead a new life through him (Gal. 5. 16, 22. Rom. 7. 6. Phil. 3. 3. Eph. 6. 18). They are spiritual (TrvsofiarcxoQj whereas other men are only natural (^'u/tzo;') (Gal. 6. i. i Cor. 2. 14? 18). They expect at the resurrection, instead of the merely natural body, a spiritual body /xa nveofiaTcxov (i Cor. 15. 44). But the organ for the reception of the spiritual influences of Christ, or of the Spirit, is faith (Eph. 3. 17 f ). Faith is also, according to Paul, a taking and receiving. It is further charac- terized as a purely spiritual activity ; as a knowledge of the will of God (Col. I. 9, 6. Eph. i. 17. Phil. 3. 8. i Tim. 2. 4. 2 Tim. 2. 25); as an obedience of faith, or to the faith (uraxoiy -tVrew?, Rom. I. 5 ; 16. 26); as " the obedience (u-axoij) of your confession unto the Gospel of Christ " (2 Cor. 9. 13. Rom. 6. 17 ; 10. 3 f , 16 f 2 Thes. 1.8. 2 Cor. 10. 4 f); as a personal conviction (Rom. 14. 23); as love for the truth (2 Thes. 2. 10); as also a full persuasion, boldness, confidence (^7zX7jpo^<>ptaj 7rapprjtTta^7:£7:(>ii^7]fTi<$) (Rom. 4. 20, 21. Eph. 3. 12). But as faith thus in manifold ways apprehends the spiritual gifts and influences of God, it is, since God is ef^cient Will, essen- tially to be defined as subjection to God in obedience, or trust. Even faith itself must according to Paul be received as an effect of the Spirit ; for it is a gift of God (Phil. i. 29. 2 Cor. 4. 13) and comes from the Gospel (Rom. 10. 17. i Cor. 15. 14. Gal. 3. 2, 5), in which the effectual working of the Spirit is exercised. Thus there is awakened in man by the Spirit through faith a new life : faith working by love (Gal. 5. 6). Inasmuch as fhe Spirit makes the will of God effectual in man, man becomes free from the authority of the law (2 Cor. 3. 17. Rom. 8. 2), Christian morality culminates in liberty (Gal. 5. 1-13). The letter kills, but the Spirit makes alive. Sin remains even in the believer. Hence sanctification still proceeds in his life (i Thes. 4. 3. Rom. 6. 19, 22), as also conversion (^iierdvota — 2 Cor. 7. 9 f ; 12. 21. 2 Tim. 2. 25); grace is increased (2 Cor. 9. 8. Eph. 3. 16), and the moral life is a constant striving (Phil. 3. 13 ff-)- A process is begun in man through the Christ- Spirit, which finds its consummation in eternal glory (Rom. 8. 18, 30. 2 Cor. 3-8)- PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN PROCLAMATION. 43 7. We pass now to the second combination of ideas found in the writings of Paul. Sin {aiiapria), as we have seen, manifests itself in man as a carnal being. But it displays itself also as dis- obedience (^-apa/jiYj), and hence, as incurring personal guilt. This guilt is incurred by both Jews and Gentiles (Rom. i. 3). The law cannot free from guilt. It only awakens a sense of sin. It kills, as Paul knew by experience (i Cor. 15. 56. Rom. 7. 7 f. ; 3. 19; 2. 13, 25: 5- 13). Nevertheless it comes from God, but has been imposed upon men only for pedagogical reasons and for a definite time (Gal. 3. 19, 21, 24. Rom. 5. 20). For the present time the Gospel {eoayyihov') holds sway, it being identical with the ancient gospels (^eofiyyeXia) which preceded the law (Gal. 3. 17 f. Rom. I. 2. Eph. 3. 6. Acts 13. 22. Tit. i. 2 f.). But since the entire race rests under guilt, and hence under penalty of death, and the law can only serve to make us sensible of our guilt, we need the forgiveness of sins upon the part of God. But deliverance from the guilt of sin occurs through the forensic justifying act (^<^r/.fU(>ov ; cf. Xoyi^efTi^at ei'? dt.y.at6(7uyr,'^~) of God (Rom. 2. 13, 26 ; 3. 4 ; 4- 4 f. Gal. 3. 6). Judaism also pos- sessed the forensic conception of righteousness (ni3j and Dipyn): but whereas, according to Jewish ideas, the law is a living power and stimulates man to the good, which God then accepts as a basis for justification, according to Paul the law is incapable of making man good, and only faith justifies, and it does so simply because it accepts Christ. God pronounces righteous the un- godly man dfreSr^q (Rom. 4. 5), Avho has no righteousness of his own (Rom. 10. 3. Phil. 3. 9). The meaning of justification by faith and not by works is therefore, not that God recognizes faith as an ethical beginning, but that it is faith alone by virtue of which man apprehends the righteousness achieved by Christ (Gal, 2. 20; 3. 13. Rom. 5. 9 ; 4-25; 3. 22 ff.). This is the sense in which we are to understand the '* righteousness which is of God by (t-i) faith" (Phil. 3. 9). It is the righteousness of God, or his faithfulness (Rom. i. 17; cf. 3. 3, 4, 26; 5. 21; 4. 16 ; 10. 3), which graciously accomplishes the non-attributing of guilt, or the pronouncing righteous (Rom. 4. 5 ff. 2 Cor. 5. 19. Col. I. 14. Eph. I. 7). The formula : Faith is accounted for righteousness (Rom. 4. 3 ff.; cf.. Gen. 15. 6), in itself mis- leading — it is constructed in opposition to the Pharisaic idea : Works are accounted for righteousness — is therefore meant to in- dicate merely that the righteousness bestowed by God avails for man only upon condition of faith, because only faith can make it an inward possession of the man. '^ Of faith " (^z tt^Vtsw?) is therefore (Rom, 4. 16) the same as ** according to grace" 44 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. (xara x^P^^^- Hence the thought of Paul is clear : The righteous- ness of God ('9r(*M) bestows upon man the righteousness which is of (tx) God ; but man possesses this as the righteousness of faith (^x 7:i(TTeui'<;), But if faith itself is now a gift of God, there re- sults a double connection with the line of thought developed under item 6 : God works faith in us through the Spirit, and he gives to faith righteousness as a conscious possession ; cf. also Eph. 2. 8 ff. Tit. 3. 5-7. Phil. 3. 9 ff. The justified man has peace with God (Rom. 5. i f); son- ship and right of inheritance (Rom. 8. 23, 15 f Gal. 4. 5, 6 ; 3. 26 f., 29. Eph. I. 5); freedom from the law (Gal. 2. 4; 4. 26 ff.; 5. i), etc. We are now, for Christ's sake, declared righteous. But is it for the sake of his work of redemption ? On the one hand, Paul defines the object of Christ, who, in obedience to God, gave him- self to death on account of our sins, but was raised by God from the dead, to have been deliverance from the world (Gal. 1.4), sanctification and purification (Eph. 5. 25. Tit. 2. 14), a life dedicated to Christ (i Thes. 5. 10); on the other hand, he represents the death of Christ as the means through which we receive forgiveness and are placed in a new relation to God. The two conceptions stand side by side in 2 Cor. 5. 14 ff.: In Christ we are a * ' new creature ' ' and through him we have recon- ciliation {/MTaA'Aayyj^y because God has dealt with Christ as per- sonified sin. Thus in the one direction Christ's death and resur- rection serve for the establishment of his redemptive dominion (Rom. 14. 9) and for the awakening of zeal for good works (Tit. 2. 14), since the life of Christ in the flesh displays the divine con- demnation of sin, and he, by his death, severed forever his rela- tion to sin (Rom. 8. 3 ; 6. 10 ), and in death most fully attested his obedience (Phil. 2. 8). Christ therefore died and rose again, by his obedience condemning and abolishing sin. As he who has done this, he acts in believers, enabling them to lead a new life opposed to sin. Thus viewed, even Christ's sufferings serve for the religious and moral regeneration of the race, of which we have spoken under item 6. This presupposes that Christ brings into a new relation with God, or achieves for us the forgiveness of sins. But this has come to pass, because God has made Christ in his blood a propitiator (^Ua(TT7Jpto<$)j in order that those who believe on him may be for his sake declared righteous (Rom. 3. 24 f). His death, acknowledged by God through the resurrection, brings to us for- giveness and justification (Rom. 4. 25), and Christ continually represents us as our advocate before the" Father (Rom. 8. 26 f., 34 f ). By virtue of the death of Christ we are thus translated PKI.MITIVE CHRISTIAN PROCLAMATION. 45 into the State of reconciliation (2 Cor. 5. iSL), with the forgive- ness of sins and justification. We are thus again brought near to God (Eph. 2. 13, 18; 3. 12). But if this has occurred, then at the same time we were made free from the law and its curse, under which Christ fell, in accordance with the declaration in Deut. 21. 23, since he bore the fate of the transgressor (Gal. 3. 13 f, 17; cf.-^lso Col. 2. 14 f.). What Paul thus means to assert is this :l^ince Christ attested to the utmost his obe- dience in the con3ition which sin had brought about for the race, he, in accordance with the appointment of God, covered the sins of men from the sight of God, or atoned for them, so that God now enters upon a new relation to the race, looking upon them for Christ's sake as righteous, and no longer permits theji^quirements of the law to determine his bearing toward man- kind! The one righteous man who preserved his righteousness to the utmost is the basis upon which God, for his sake — for he rules through his Spirit in the race — permits the race to enter into a new relation to himself. These conceptions are not con- structed upon the line of the sacrificial idea, but in accordance with the idea of the reconciling effect and the vicarious signifi- cance of the sufferings of the righteous one. Even here Paul's teachings are not arranged as a ** system." They are controlled by concrete aims, and the History of Doctrines proves how many interpretations may be placed upon them. Nevertheless they do not appear to lack a certain unity. Ssince Christ as the Reconciler, by his obedience even unto death, ap- peared and continually appears for man as his advocate, he has brought the race into the new relation to God. The law is ab- rogated, sin is forgiven, man is pronounced righteousT^ But since this new relation has been established, the inner spiritual domin- ion of God in the race has also been made possible. Thus the two lines of thought which we have traced here unite. But at the same time it is clear that, for Paul also, the new covenant is actualized through Christ. The reconciliatior. (xaraAAayTj) is the new covenant. 8. The idealism of Paul's faith beheld in the few Christian congregations of his time the beginning of a new epoch of history, and his practical sense saw in these congregations the means for actualizing this epoch. In this, Paul adopted the conception of the church (ixx?.7jfT{a) held by Christ. This, as viewed from the position of the History of Doctrines, is an idea of immense significance. Christianity, accordingly, does not present the spectacle of a number of individuals accidentally associatec(2but it is the Christ present in the worldj The ancient idea of Menenius Agrippa, of a body of humanity organically 4^ HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. associated, was revived in many forms in that day. Paul gives it a new aspect. Christ is the Head of this body, from whom it derives its origin, its course, its life, its growth, and its goal (Col. I. i8 f., 24. Eph. 2. 20 ff.; 5. 23 ff.; 1. 22 f. ). In this community Christ works through the Spirit. All the gifts of the Spirit are present in it. But, above all, is the power of the Spirit actively exerted in the preaching of the Gospel. Among other functions of the church are to be mentioned baptism and the Lord's Supper. Paul in 2 Tim. 2. 20 testifies that there are among the saints (^ay.ot') in the church not only such as lead a real Christian life, struggling and crucifying the flesh, but also perverse members. The Pauline eschatology cannot be here presented, further than to note the suggestion in the sphere of the philosophy of history, that the prophecies concerning Israel are yet to find their fulfillment in the ingathering of the heathen into the church in the present era and in the salvation of ** all Israel " at the end of the world (Rom. 11. 25, 26). 9. Having now noted the peculiar doctrinal points emphasized by Paul, let us cast a brief glance upon the general views preva- lent in the apostolic age. These laid the foundations upon which the post -apostolic age carried forward the work of con- struction. The Old Testament, inspired by God (2 Tim. 3. 16. 2 Pet. I. 20 f.), is the Holy Scripture of Christendom. It serves for edification (Rom. 15. 4. 2 Tim. 3.16). From its utterances doctrines are developed (see esp. Hebrews). Its prophecies serve as the source of apostolic evidences (see esp. the Gospel of St. Matthew). To the Old Testament are added the historical sayings of Jesus (i Thes. 4. 5. i Cor. 7. 12, 25 ; 9. 14. Acts 20. 35), but also the Spirit (^nvsufia) and the spirits (TT^/s^/Aara). But the spirits are to be tried (Matt. 7. 16 ff. I Thes. 5. 19-22. I Cor. 14. 34 f. i Jn. 4. i). The historical apostolate and the traditions {Tzapadotrst'^) set a limit to the working of the spirits (see above). The vivid conception of God which we have found in Paul is manifest also in other literature of the period. The loving-will of God desires our salvation (2 Pet. 3. 9) and begets us into a new life (Jas. i. 18). The all-working God is also holy and just (Rev. 15. 3 f.; 16. 5, 7 ; 19. i f. 2 Pet. i. i, 3. i Pet. 2 . 23 ) . Christ is the Lawgiver and Judge (Jas. 4. 12). He is always thought of as now existing in the state of exaltation. Rev. i. 12-17 (*^f- n- iS J i7- 14 J 19- 16; 22. I ) presents the popular conception. Having passed through death, he has entered into glory (i Pet. i. 21). He is the Lord of glory (Jas. 2. i), our only Master and PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN PROCLAMATION. 47 Lord (^defTTzoTTj^ y.ac xoptoq^ Jude 4.), who is enthroned at the right hand of God (Heb. 8. i j lo. 12 ; 12. 2), and to whom the angels are subject (2 Pet. 3. 18 ; i. 14, 16). Interest centres, above all, in the power (dOvafu^') and coming (^Ttapoufxta) of Christ (2 Pet. i. 16). The latter is near at hand, but will occur unexpectedly (2 Pet. 3. 4, 10. Rev. 3. 11). Thus there will be a revelation (dnoxdXo^'c^) of his glory (i Pet. 4. 13 ; I. 7). The present glory of Christ is in harmony with his pre-existent state (i Pet. i. 20, 11 ; 3. 19 f.). That Christ died on account of our sin was the apostolic tra- dition (i Cor. 15. 3) and the general belief (i Pet. 3. 18). SThe death of Christ was universally regarded as the means by which we are transported into a new moral state of life, and this because Christ died the just for the unjust, in order that he, having died and risen again, might lead them to God and bring them into a new relation with GodT The Epistle to the Hebrews follows a peculiar course. Its Christology recognizes Christ as prc-existent (Heb. i. 2 f. , 4 ff . ) and locates his nature in the ** power of an endless life " (7. 16, 8u-^afii<^ ^ujtj^ dy.araXnTou) jinhis ** eternal Spirit " (9. 14., Tzvsu/ia aiatvcav'). As such, he assumed flesh and blood (2. 14 ; 7. 14), in his earthly life experienced human emotions, and died in obedience (4. 15 ; 5. 7, 8). He is now at the right hand of God (i. 3 ; 8. i ; 10. 12 ; 12. 2). In the same way as in the writings of Paul, a discrimination is made also in this Christology between the human existence of Christ and a spiritual, eternal, divine element. The author has presented the exaltation of Christ in the light of his high- priesthood. The apologetic character of the work, which required this method of presentation, led him, first of all, to conceive of the death of Christ as a sacrifice. And this sacrifice is once for all and forever sufficient (5. i ff., 7 f.; 9. 12-14; 7. 27), as Christ also forever stands as our advocate before God (7. 25 ; 9. 24). The death of Christ, t, e.^ his blood, inaugu- rates the ''new covenant" and purifies the heavenly sanctuary (9. 15 ff. , 18 ff. ). To this is added, as the object of his death, the purifying from sin {xay%apiap.oq afxaprnuv^ i- 3 j 9- I4» 26), as also the expiatory covering over (^IXddxefTiiaL^ of sin and the despoiling of the power of the devil (2. 14 f.). If we leave out of account the emphasis laid upon the forms of the sacri- ficial ceremonies, the conceptions of the author do not carry us beyond the two-fold representation which we have already found in Paul, /. t') as leaders of the church (Heb. 13. 7, 17, 24, 19). Office- bearers begin to exercise the ministry of the word (i Tim. 3. I ff.; 5. 17. 2 Tim. 2. 2. Tit. i. 7, 5). But these features of the period do not indicate any increasing worldiness. Es- chatology, on the contrary, is a powerful factor of the religious life. Two characteristics meet and combine in mutual support in the Christianity of the apostolic age : upon the one hand, the powerful impulse to establish the dominion of Christ by serving him and in his power pressing out to the ends of the earth ; and, upon the other hand, the conviction that only Christ himself can achieve this, and that he will soon do so. These two ten- dencies did not at first conflict, but aided one another. We may recall the vivid hope of Paul and his great labors in the service of this hope. In the Apocalypse is given in great pic- tures, with veiled imagery and many references to the great world-empires, a portrayal of the conflicts and the great victory of the last time, which was so varied in its forms that every period of history has been able to employ it as a mirror of its own age. The city of God, already prepared in heaven, will come down to the earth. It remains only for us to pray : ' ' Come, Lord Jesus" (Rev. 22. 17, 20). Christ will soon be Lord alone (Rev. 11. 15, 17; 12. 9, 10; 14. 3 f.; 19. 2, 6, 16). This is the one controlling thought. But just because it is, the moral counsels and exhortations to conflict and devoted service gain the support of powerful motives. Of this, the letters to the churches, recorded in the Apocalypse, furnish an illustration. 10. At the end of the apostolic age we witness the active 50 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. ministry of John, which is of the greatest signiiicance for the History of Doctrines. Standing between two eras, he impressed the message of the days of revelation deeply upon his genera- tion. We may define his significance in three observations : (i) The Christ, of whose historical revelation he has been a witness, is the Lord of the world . The apocalyptic hopes of his youth, of which hitherto but few have been realized in their ex- ternal form, yet remain. He sees in great visions the final vic- tory of Christ. The apocalyptic traditions of his nation furnish for him the forms of these visions. (2) A separation begins to appear between the historical Jesus and the heavenly Logos- principle (Cerinthus). In response to this, the Gospel proves that the heavenly Lord was none other than the man Jesus. John expresses this as paradoxically and bluntly as possible : **The Word became flesh." From this resulted the pecu- liarity of his Gospel. The religious knowledge which he had gained in the course of a long life in communion with the ex- alted Christ enables him to interpret the life of Jesus, which he depicts in a thoroughly human way, with many minute human traits. He carries backward the knowledge gained at a later day. He seeks out the words which establish it and apprehends the words of Jesus in this hi gher se nse. Profound contemplation characterizes this treatment of the life of Jesus. It saved to the church the history of Christ, since it made it possible to un- derstand it religiously, as the Lord himself, when present, had been known to his disciples. (3) Vision and contemplation were in this remarkable man united with a practical, simple tem- per, averse to all foolish vaporings and pretense. To the watch- words of the age, such as ''spirit" and '* righteousness," he opposed this simple knowledge of the truth. Christianity is summarized in the ''old commandment" (i Jn. 2. 7) or the teaching (dcda/yj') of Christ (2 Jn. 9 f. ). This is the primitive Christian catechism, to which reference has been made above (item 4). Its contents are faith in God and love toward one another (i Jn. 3. 23; 4. 15). John does not mean, however, that faith and love are only an outward keeping of the commandments. On the contrary, they are given to man by the Spirit in the new birth, or regeneration. The Spirit does not, as once thought, produce separate states of excitement. John goes even beyond Paul, for whom the "power" of the word was, in the last analysis, the Spirit. The Spirit effects in man a permanent condition of fellowship (^xotvtouta) with God (i Thes. 4. 13). This communion with God is manifested in faith and love. But he who believes, be- lieves in harmony with the commandment (iiroAiy), and he who PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN PROCLAMATION. 5X loves, loves that which the commandment enjoins. Faith and love are awakened in the heart of man by the Spirit, and not by the commandment. But faith and love, if they be genuine and right, can never contain anything else than the commandment given by God. Ut is evident that John himself is far removed from the ancient Catholic conception of Christianity as a '^new law," to that he yet helped to prepare the way for that con- ceptionj But true faith is that which confesses that Jesus is really Christ. The Logos, or God only-begotten (Jn. i. 14), the '^true God and eternal life" (i Jn. 5. 20), became the man Jesus. Unless all indications are at fault, John borrowed his conception of the Logos from Cerinthus, but he interpreted it in his own sense. The Logos is the revealing God — God, because he manifests himself not only in many words, uttered '*in divers portions and in divers manners, ' ' as those of the prophets, but in an all-inclusive, complete revelation (cf. Rev. 19. 13 f. Heb. I. 2. Ignat ad Magnes, 8. 2 ; 9. 2 ; ad Rom. 8. 2). This God became the man Jesus. He who denies this — /. e.y two principles, the divine and human, separate from one another (Cerinthus) — is the Antichrist (i Jn. 2. 22 ; 4. 3, 15 ; 5. i, 5. 2 Jn. 7 ; cf. Iren. i. 26. i ; iii. 11. i). And true love is the practical, active brotherly-love, which walks according to the commandments of God ( 2 Jn. 6 . i Thes. 2. 3 f. ). He who doeth righteousness is righteous. From this active righteousness may be known whether anyone has really been born of God (i Jn. 2. 29; 4. 7; 5. 1,4). The regen- erated, as such, does not sin (i Jn. 3. 9, 6; 1.6; 2. 6). Never- theless, John assumes sin in his readers, as well as a regularly observed confession of sin (i Jn. 2. i. f. ; i. 7f. )• This ap- parent contradiction may, if I am correct in my judgment, be solved by discriminating between a ''sin unto death " and a *^sin not unto death" (i Jn. 5. 16, 17), /. ^., between the sinful state of ungodliness which forever prevents communion with God and the separate sinful acts which leave room for a restoration through repentance (i Jn. 5. 16; i. 7 f. ). This conception also (cf. Heb. 6. 4, 8; 10. 26 f.; 12. 17) reminds us of ideas in the primitive Catholic period. II. John subjected the traditional Christian conceptions to a noticeable redaction. In addition to him, only the Pauline type can be presented in distinct outlines. Between the two lie the conceptions of James, Peter, Jude, and Hebrews. These types of doctrine differ from one another in many particulars, but the elements common to all certainly outweigh the differences. And it was not really the peculiar features {e. g.^ Paul's doctrine of justification, and the theories.of the Epistle to the Hebrews), 52 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. but those which were common to all, which influenced the future. The Apostolic Fathers, e. g., presuppose a general proclamation which embraced the common basis of the New Testament doctrine. These common ideas may be summarized as follows rY^^e acknowledgment of the Old Testament ; the words of Christ, together with the apostolic tradition and teaching, as of binding authority; faith in the living God, who, in omnipo- tence and grace, directs the life of individuals as well as the course of history ; faith in Christ as the celestial and omnipresent Lord, who became man, and, through the resur- rection, entered again into glory ; the conviction that God and Christ, through the Spirit, renew and quicken man re- ligiously and morally, granting him also the charismata^ which he needs for the upbuilding of the church. The work of Christ embraces the efficacious atonement for sin as well as the transfor- mation of man through the power of the Spirit. Forgiveness and sonship with God, the filling with the Spirit, and eternal bless- edness constitute the blessings of salvation, which are appro- priated in faith and love. Love as an active disposition of soul finds exercise in the congregational life, in which Christ and the Spirit work through the word, baptism, and the Lord's Supper, and through the charismata^ and the miracles wrought through the latter. The final goal of the church is the glory of the divine kingdom, to be ushered in by the coming of Christ, which is near at hand. If we compare this with the teaching of Christ himself, it is clear that it presupposes the resurrection of Christ and the mani- festation of the risen Lord in his glory ; and, further, that the revelation made by Christ during his earthly life gives shape to the whole structure. Christ exercises divine dominion, in that he brings to man the forgiveness of sins and a new life, and ac- tualizes the new covenant wherever these blessings are received. Through the dominion of Christ, humanity is organized as the church, or kingdom of God, and thus conducted to its appro- priate goal. He accomplishes the salvation of men^ forgiving the evil and bestowing the good, and he brings the race to its divinely appointed goal. In faith man bows to this beatifying dominion and in love brings into active exercise his new attitude in the kingdom of God. These ideas embrace the whole reve- lation of the New Testament. The redemptive dominion of God and faith, the kingdom of God and love — this is the briefest possible expression of the Essence of Christianity in the sense of the New Testament.^ 1 Cf. Seeberg, Die Grundwahrheiten der christl. Religion, ed. 3, 1903 ; lectures iii.-vi. BOOK I. DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE IN THE ANCIENT CHURCH. PART I. CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY IN THE POST-APOSTOLIC AND ANCIENT CATHOLIC AGES. CHAPTER I. THE CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY IN THE POST-APOSTOLIC AGE. § 7. The Apostolic Fathers. Sources : l. From Clemens Romanus we possess a manuscript of the Roman congregation, addressed to the church at Corinth. It was written probably early in A. D. 97. Wrede, Untersuchungen zura I. Klemens- brief, 1891. 2. In Rome appeared also the Pastor of Hermas, a call to repentance divided into 5 visions, 12 mandates, and 10 similitudes. Its composition is, with great probability, located in A. D. 97-100, while others, upon the testimony of the so-called Canon of Muratori, place it so late as A. D. 140- 145. Cf. Zahn, Der Hirte des H., 1868. Huckstadt, Der Lehrbegriff des Hirten, 1889. 3. The documents which follow carry us to Asia Minor, First, the 7 gen- uine Epistles of Ignatius of Antioch (to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smymans, and Polycarp), written about A. D. no. Cf. Zahn, Ign, v. Ant., 1874; Von der Goltz, Ign. v. Ant. als Christ u. Theologe, in Texte u. Unters., xii. 3 (1894). 4. In the same time appeared the Epistle of Polycarp op Smyrna, 5. Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, wrote, about A. D. 125, 5 books: 7.oy'i.Liv KVf>iaK(Jv k^7jyr]i)Yevi(7Tep6<5) than any creature ; insomuch that he was in counsel with his Father at the creation of all things (Sim. 9. 12. 2, 3). He could very well have protected his people through an angel (Sim. 5. 6. 2 ; cf. 2. 2) ; but he did more, since he purified them by his own toil (Sim. 5. 6. 3). The angels are his to command (Sim. 5. 5. 13 ; of. 2. 2), and he upholds the whole world (Sim. 9. 14. 5 ; cf. Heb. i. 2). It cannot therefore be doubted that Christ is for Hermas a pre- existent Being, exalted above the angels. It has been contended that, according to Hermas, Christ is not a separate divine person, but that the Holy Spirit dwelt in his flesh (Baur, v. Engelhardt, p. 425 f. Harnack, p. 185. HOCKSTADT, p. 26 ff.). But Sim. 5 distinctly discriminates be- tween the lord of the farm, /*. e., the Father, the servant, /'. e., the Son, and the son, /. e., the Holy Ghost. The lord commits to the servant the cultivation of the farm, and after this has been done, he rejoices over it with the son, ?'. e., the Holy Ghost (5. 2.6; 5. 2). If it is said immediately after this (6. 5) that God caused the Holy Ghost to dwell in the flesh of Christ, and that the latter served the Spirit without defiling it, the meaning is not that the Holy Spirit constitutes the divine nature of Christ, but that the pre-existent Christ is holy spirit {to 7:veo[j.a to aytov TO Tzpoov^ TO y.Ti.(Twj TTdfTav TTjv xTtfTv^') , and that thls flesh, since it did not defile the spirit, has been by God taken with the spirit to himself (6 ff. ). The other passage adduced in support of the theory in question, Sim. 9. i. i : *' For that spirit is the Son of God ' ' means only to say that the holy spiritual being that spoke with Hermas was the Son of God. The pre-existent Christ was not *' the Holy Spirit," but a pre-existent holy spiritual being. It was not uncommon to speak in this way in the second cen- tury. Christ is called Spirit of God (^izveofxa i^eou') in 2 Clem. 9. 5. Iren. adv. haer., v. i. 2 ; cf. Arist. Apol., 2. 6. Celsus in Orig. c. Cels., vi. 75. Theophil. ad AutoL, ii. 10. Tertul. Apol., 21 ; adv. Prax. 8. 26; de orat. i. See already i Cor. 3. 17. The view of Hermas is, therefore, not essentially differ- ent from that of the New Testament. It would have been in- comprehensible that he should, in view of the baptismal formula, have fallen into such confusion. Vid. also Dorner, Christol., i., ed. 2, p. 200 ff., 194. (3) Christ, the Son of God, placed men (evidently meaning believers of Old Testament times) under the protection of 6o HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. angels ; then himself became man in order to purify men : '* And he himself labored very much and suffered much that he might blot out their offenses . . . wherefore having himself blotted out the sins of the people, he showed to them the paths of life, giving them the law which he had received from the Father ' ' (Sim. 5. 6. 2, 3). Thus Christ brought forgiveness for the sins of the past, and for the future gave to men his commandments. Cf. Link, Christi Person u. Werk im Hirten des Hermas (Mar- burg, 1886). ((t) As to the personal state of the believer, we are taught : In the hearts of men, which are in themselves weak and full of sin {^e.g., Mand. 4. 3. 4. Sim. 9. 23. 4), which turn away from God, do not know him, and Avill not obey him (Vis. 3. 7. 2. Sim. 4. 4. 4, etc.), God causes his Spirit to take up its abode, or the powers of the Son of God are imparted to them. Only such as have obtained these are able to enter into the kingdom of God (Mand. 3. i ; 12. 4. 3 ; 6. 2, i ff. Sim. 9. 32.4 ; 13. 2; cf. 25. 4). But this good Spirit cannot live in man together with the evil spirits (Mand. 5. i. 3 ; 2. 5 ff. Sim. 10. 3. 2). Sim. 8 explains how this gift is imparted. Branches from a willow-tree are given to believers. Some bring them back fresh and blooming : others, withering and withered (both classes in various degrees). The willow-tree is the law of God. ^* But this law is the Son of God, preached throughout the whole earth " (3. 2). It is therefore the preaching of Christ as anew code of moral life which accomplishes the above results in be- lievers. We are futher told that life is given us through the water of baptism, and this is so necessary that it must in some way be applied even to Old Testament believers (Vis. 3. 3. 5. Sim. 9. 16. 2, 3, 5). Through baptism all the sins which aman has committed are forgiven (cf. below under d). The fundamental subjective condition of the moral life in man is faith (Sim. 6. 12). This comes from above, and equips man with power ; whereas its opposite, double -mindedn ess, is of the earth and has no power (Mand. 9. 11). Since the latter, which leads to doubt, must be overcome, as well as care and trouble (Xo7:7j)j man turns in faith with his whole heart to God, praying and sure that his prayer is heard (Mand. 9. i, 2, 5 ; cf. Vis. 4. 2. 4-6. Mand. 10). He who fears God becomes free from the fear of the devil (Mand. 7. 4). Although faith may be apparently presented as one among the Christian virtues (Mand. 8. 9; 12. 3, I. Sim. 9. 15. 2), it is evident from the above that it is not so regarded. The elect are saved through faith. The other virtues are daughters of faith (Vis. 3. 8. 3, 4 ; cf. Mand. 5. 2. 3). The essential content of faith is presented in THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 6 1 the passage quoted as Scripture by Irenseus, Origen and Athana- sius, Mand. i. i : ** First of all, believe that there is one God, who created and framed all things, and made them from being nothing to be all things (cf. 2 Mace. 7. 28), and who compre- hends all things, and who is alone incomprehensible (d/wprjro';) . ' ' God created the world for the sake of men and the church (Mand. 12. 4. Vis. 2. 4. 2 ; i. 4). That faith in Christ is not unknown to Hermas is of course to be taken for granted (vid. Sim. 8. 3. 2 extr. ). Faith is therefore not only a knowledge and acknowledgment of God as the Creator, but also an undivided turning of the heart to God, which makes man strong and is the root of all moral activity. It is '* as truly fundamental duty as fundamental power" (Zahn, p. 175. Cf. Huckstadt, p. 59 f.). But the relationship of faith and good works is not always ob- served by Hermas. ** Take heed, therefore, ye that serve the Lord, and have him in your hearts : work the works of God, being mindful of his commandments and of the promises which he has given, and believe that he will perform these if his com- mandments are kept " (Sim. I. 7). The moral activity com- mended is the fulfillment of the separate divine requirements. To such an observance of the commandments is attached the promise of life (Sim. 8. 11. 3 ; 6. i. i ; 7. 6 ; 10. i. 2 ; 2. 4 ; 4. I. Mand. 4. 2. 4 ; 7. 5). Although this cannot be interpreted as equivalent to the later moralism, it yet dis- tinctly prepares the way for it. Cf. also the designation of the preaching concerning Christ as law, vofin^ (Sim. 8. 3. 2, 3). The view of Hermas as to the possibility of fulfilling the divine commandments is not fairly represented in the assertion : ** The power thereto is innate in man " (Schmid-Hauck, DG., p. 11). On the contrary, it is '' the man having the Lord in his heart" (Mand. 12. 4. 3 ; cf. Sim. 10. 3. i) who has this ability. A certain narrowing of the moral horizon is manifest in Sim. 5. 3, 3 : '* If thou shalt do some good thing not embraced in the commandment of God, thou shalt purchase to thyself the greater dignity, and thou shalt be more honored before God than thou shouldst otherwise have been" (cf. Mand. 4. 4. 2). (d) Finally, for a proper understanding of the general view of Hermas, it is very important to note his conception of repent- ance, which is the dominating note in his discussions. His fun- damental idea here is : '^ that there is no other repentance than this, that we go down into the water and receive the forgiveness of our past sins " (Mand. 4. 3. i ; cf. 4. i. 8 ). It is a special favor of God, that now through the preaching of Hermas, in an exceptional way, a second repentance is granted the congrega- 62 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. tion of believers (Vis. 2. 2, 4, 5. Mand. 4. 4. 4. Sim. 8. 11. I, etc.). He who from this time forward keeps the command- ments shall find the forgiveness of his sins (Mand. 4. 4. 4) and be saved. This idea of one repentance is based, indeed, upon representations in the New Testament (i Jn. 5. 16 ff. Heb. 6. 4. ff. ). As Christianity was regarded as the consummation upon which very shortly should follow the end of the world, there seemed to be no further room for apostasy and repentance (cf. Apoc. Baruch, 85. 12). Although Hermas in other connections by no means regards sin as consisting merely in outward works, but includes in it inward desire (i-td-oiiiaj Vis. i. i. 8; 3. 8. 4. Mand. 12. i. i ; 2. 2 ; 4. 2. Sim. 5. i. 5), yet of re- pentance he can say : ** For he that hath sinned is conscious that he hath done evil in the sight of the Lord, and his deed that he has done comes into his heart, and he repents and no more does evil, but does good most abundantly, and humbles his soul and afflicts it, because he has sinned " (Mand. 4. 2. 2 ; cf. Sim. 7. 4). But it is not held that he whose sins have been forgiven can thereafter live without sin. The *' Shepherd" himself since his conversion remains liable to many moral faults, and the righteous as well as the wicked must, after every transgression, take refuge to the Lord (Sim. 9. 31. 2 ; cf. Zahn, p. 355)- Hermas does not venture to condemn to death the man who, after hearing the call to repentance, shall sin under pressure of temp- tation (^oizo y_tipa^ Mand. 4. 3. 6). He has in mind such sins as effect a surrender of the moral power of the Gospel, a com- plete corruption : he is thinking of apostasy, which is to be followed by a new conversion (Sim. 9. 14. i ff. ; cf. Mand. 4. I. 8. Sim. 9. 26. 6). Accordingly, repentance is like conver- sion : '' If ye turn to the Lord with your whole heart, and work righteousness the remaining days of your life, and serve him strictly according to his will, he will heal your former sins" (Mand. 12. 6. 2; cf. Sim. 8. 11. 3). This is the starting-point of the Catholic discrimination between venial and mortal sins. The error lies not really in the general idea of repentance, but in an underestimate of minor sins. But the chief defection from the biblical standard lies in the failure to understand grace as the forgiveness of sins extending continuously throughout the whole life. Hence the moralism of Hermas. (^) In connection with the preaching of repentance, Hermas gives great prominence to the conception of the church. The church rests upon Christ, the ancient rock with the new door (Sim. 9. 2. 2; cf. 12. 2. 3), ;'. £-., the pre-existent Son of God, who became manifest only in the last time. It is built upon the waters of baptism (Vis. 3. 3. 5. Sim. 9, 16. 2), and THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 63 is extended through the preaching of Christ (Sim. 8. 3. 2). The church is tne city of God with its own laws (Sim. i. i, 3, 9). But not all who receive branches from the great willow-tree, or the word concerning Christ (cf. above, under c), preserve them ; and not all who have been admitted to the tower of the church stand the test when tried by Christ (Sim. 9. 6). Thus the essence and the appearance of the church are often not in harmony. The task of the preaching of Hermas is the purifica- tion of the church (Sim. 9. 18. 3). There is a pause in the building of the church in order that sinners maybe purified and again admitted to the structure of the church ( Tzarpd^;, (Rom. inscr.), and the Lord, 6 JcnptiK^ (Polyc. i. 2). Ignatius uses the formula "in Son and Father and in Spirit" (Magn. 13. i ; in § 2 roTzvevfia 64 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. is doubtful; cf. Lightf. ). He was with the Father before time began (Magn, 6. i). At the end of the days he became man — and this as a revelation of the One God, the Father, *' who has manifested himself through his Son Jesus Christ, who is his word, /o^'os", proceeding from silence " (Magn. 8. 2 ; cf. 9. 2 : ** our only teacher," and Rom. 8. 2 : '' the genuine mouth in whom the Father truly spake ").^ Ignatius recognizes the reality of the earthly activity of Christ and confirms his presentation of its separate features by an emphatic ''truly," aXrjHuxs (Smyrn. i and 2 . Tral. 9. It is not allowable to say that he only seemed to suffer : Tral. 10. Smyrn. 2. Polyc. 3. 2; cf. Smyrn. 12. 2. Ephes. 7). But since Christ has completed his work on earth, he is now again with the Father (^v izarpX wy), but in consequence of this he may be but the better known (^/idXXov (patverat, Rom. 3. 3) on earth. Even after his resurrection, which he himself effected (truly raised himself, d'^if7Trj(T£v ^aorov^ Smyrn. 2, in contrast with which, however, vid. 8. i : *'The Father raised; " cf. Trail. 9. 2), although spiritually united (^nveo/iartxa)? rjvwfiivo^') with the Father, he is yet *' in the flesh " (Smyrn. 3, i, 3). Ignatius was fond of combining these two classes of utterances. Christ is at once God and man : '*The one Healer is both fleshly and spiritual, born and unborn. God became incarnate, true life in death, both from Mary and from God, first passible and then impassible, Jesus Christ our Lord" (Eph. 7. 2 ; cf. 18. 2. Smyrn. i. i). Upon the one hand he is, therefore, unborn, a^'^wj^ros', but according to the flesh he is sprung from David's tribe, born of the Virgin according to the will of God (Eph. 19. i), " conceived in the womb of Mary, according to the dispensation of God — on the one hand of the seed of David, on the other of the Holy Spirit " (Eph. 18. 2). He is, therefore., perfect (r^xeioy) man (Smyrn. 4. 2) and just as truly God (cf. supra). It is impossible, in view of the above, to hold that Ignatius regarded Jesus as by nature a pre-existent spiritual being who, after completing his work on earth, returned again to heaven (the so-called "pneumatic" Christology, Harnack i. 183 ff. ). How could he describe such a being as his God and the God of Christendom ? We should observe further that the title. Son of God, in Ignatius designates Christ, not only as be- gotten in eternity, but also as the One sprung, according to the ^ Thus the Johannine term, Logos, was authentically interpreted. Christ is the Word, or the Mouth of God, i. e. , the revelation of God. Remarkable, further, is the combination of faith and love with the triadic formula [e, g.^ Magn. 13. I. Ep. 9. i ; cf. I Clem. 58. 2 ; 46. 6). Were both formula:; — they possess something of the character of formulas already in the New Testament — handed down together in the instruction preceding baptism ? THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 65 dispensation of God, at once **from Mary and God," ''from David's tribe and the Holy Spirit," and entering upon a histori- cal existence : ** being truly of the tribe of David according to the flesh, the Son of God truly born of a virgin according to the will and power of God " (Smyrna i- i ; cf. Zahn, Ignat. , p. 469 f. ). By virtue of the double origin of his historical exist- ence, he is ' * Son of man ' ' and ' ' Son of God. ' ' And, being this, he is **the new man" (u xatvo'; aW^wTro?, Eph. 20, a term fur- ther explained in 19. 3 : God appearing in the form of man unto newness, ei? xatvoryjra^ of eternal life). (d) Christ became man in order that he might, as the Aoyo'? of God, reveal God to men (supra, and Eph. 3. 2 : the knowl- edge, yvwjrq, of the Father; Eph. 17. 2: the secret wisdom yvchfTiq^ of God ; Philad. 9. i). His appearance itself is for us a revelation of God, inasmuch as he is God. This revelation is not nullified by the death of Christ, but is attested by it anew for the contemplation of faith (Magn. 9. 2). He who was him- self impassible is for our sakes passible (Polyc. 3. 2). To the prince of this world, the virginity and motherhood of Mary and the death of Christ were alike incomprehensible (three mysteries). But faith knows that this all aims at the abolition of death (Eph. 19). Especially does our life now have its origin in the death of Christ (Magn. 9. i); through this mystery we have obtained faith (ib. 2). Faith in his death enables us to escape death (Tral. 2. i). Thus his suffering has in view and effects our salvation and peace (Smyrn. 2 ; 7. i, cf. Tral. inscr. Philad. inscr. Smyrn. 6. i). Christ is our life, not only in that he will one day bestow immor- tality upon us, but in that he personally dwells in believers, work- ing eternal life in them. This is the leading thought of Ignatius. Christ is our inseparable life (ro ddiaxpirnv -^ficov ^^y, Eph. 3. 2, cf. Magn. 15), our life forever (Magn. i. 2), our true life (Smyrn. 4. i. Eph. 11. t, cf. Tral. 9. 2). Christ now dwells in the hearts of believers, as does also the Father (^«/?o9); and Christians are God-bearers, temple-bearers, Christ -bearers, bearers of the Holy One {vao(p6pot^ /f)t{TTnd(7Tao(c ; 102 : na^^oTuKat nat fiep/Kai Kpiueiq. Cf. the Exposition of Cyril of Jerus, ; " It is called catholic on account of being through the whole ^orldfrom one end to the other "(Cat. 18. 23). Similarly Martyr. Polyc. 8. i, THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 67 as its centre and the apostles as its presbytery (Philad. 5. i). But the episcopacy bears no relation to it. The idea of Ignatius is, on the contrary, that as the universal church has its centre in Christ, so the separate congregation should find its centre in its bishop. What the apostles are to the church at large, that is the presbytery to the individual congregation. Accordingly, the bishop is a type of God or of Christ, the presbyters types of the apostles (Tral. 2. i ; 3. i. Magn. 2 ; 6. i. Smyrn. S. i. Eph. 6). Christ, the unseen Bishop, is contrasted with the bishop who is seen (Magn. 3. 2, cf. Rom. 9. i. Pol. inscr. j. The individual congregation subject to the bishop and presbytery is a copy of the church universal, which is led by Christ and the preaching of the apostles. Christ and the preaching of the apostles, therefore, not the episcopacy, condition the unity of the church universal. Ignatius, it is true, attaches great importance to the episco- pate, but in doing so he has in mind only the relation of the in- dividual bishop to his congregation. He has, evidently, two motives for thus emphasizing the authority of the bishops. First, he wished to maintain the moral principle of authority and sub- jection in human society (he demands the same subjection and reverence for the presbyters and deacons). Referring to the three offices, he says : '^ Without these it is not called a church " (Tral. 3. I, cf. Eph. 2. 2 ; 20. 2. Polyc. 6. i. Philad. inscr. 4. 7. Tral. 2. 2 ; 13. 2. Magn. 13. i and 2 : "Be sub- ject to the bishop and to one another " ). Secondly, there was a special reason for supporting the bishops at that time, as they presented a fixed authority in opposition to the gnostic tenden- cies then spreading in Asia Minor (Tral. 7. Philad. 2. 3. 4. Smyrn. 9. i). Theunity and harmonyof the membersof a congre- gation in prayer and in temper, in love and faith, in subjection to one leader, the bishop, constitutes for him the ideal cf congrega- tional life (e. g.f Philad. 7. 2 ; 8. i. Polyc. i. 2. Magn. i. 2 ; 3. 2 ; 6. 2 ; 7. Eph. 4. 13). It is to be attained by attach- ment to the bishop and obedience to him. Cf. Seeberg, Der Begriff d. Kirche, i., 1885, p. 11 ff.^ The principle applies not only in matters of doctrine and life, where the '* catholic church" is the churches throughout the world {Kara T//11 o'iKovfiivTjv hiiOii]ULaL)\ but ibid. 16. 2 speaks o[ "the catholic church in Smyrna." Cf. 19. 2. ^ It is historically incorrect to find here — the case is somewhat different with Clement — the beginning of the Catholic hierarchy or *' divine church law," as does SoHM ( Kirchenrecht i., 1893), a position to which he is led by his erroneous principle, that every form of ecclesiastical law is in conflict with the essential nature of the church and a source of all manner of evil. Cf. m^ critique of the work of Sohm in Theol. Lit. bl., 1893, Nos. 25-27. 68 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. but particularly in baptism and the celebration of the eucharist, in the Agapse and in the celebration of marriage : '* It is not allowed without the bishop to baptize or hold the Agape, but whatsoever he shall approve, that is also well-pleasing to God, in order that whatsoever is done may be safe and secure " (Smyrn. S. 2. Cf. Pol. 5. 2). Referring to baptism, Ignatius says that Christ in his own baptism designed to purify the water by his passion (Eph. 18. 2), and that baptism is for those who receive it, like faith, love, and patience, a part of the Christian panoply (Pol. 6. 2). It belongs to the defensive armor {onXa) of the Christian life, and has, therefore, a practical daily signifi- cance. Of the Lord's Supper it is said : '' The eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour, Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, which the Father in his goodness raised from the dead." Of those who deny this, it is said : "It were profitable for them to coxmnnxio^ {^ayaTzav^dyd-Tiv 7:0 (.Itv, Smyrn. 8. 2. Apparently in the same sense we find dyd-nri a(pi^apTopa&cbv) of our righteousness is Christ, who lifted up our sins in his body on the tree (8. i. Cf. i Pet. 2. 24). Christians should follow Christ and suffer with him (8. 2 ; 9. 2, cf. 2. 2). (c) These exhortations reach their culmination in the thought that God will raise from the dead all those who, following Christ, keep his commandments, and will permit them to share in the dominion of Christ. He that raised him up from the dead will raise us up also, if we do his will and walk in his command- ments, and love what he loved, abstaining from all iniquity (2. 2, cf. 5. I, 2). The leading thoughts of Polycarp are thus seen to be thoroughly evangelical : The Christian, who has apprehended Christ in faith, will in love fulfill the law of Christ, following him with patience, in hope of being, like Christ, raised up by God to everlasting life and of enjoying eternal fellowship with Christ. The influence of Johannine ideas (especially from the Epistles) is in this 7° HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. disciple of St. John just as apparent as is the different spirit which animates him, 5. Papias. Among the fragments of Papias, only that preserved by Ire- n^eus (v. 33. 3 sq. ) is of special importance in the History of Doctrines. It paints in glowing colors the wonderful fertility of the earth during the millennial reign : " The kingdom of Christ being established bodily upon this very earth " (Euseb. h. e. iii. 39. 12). The description is drawn from the Jewish apocalyptic books (Enoch 10. 19. Apoc. Bar. 29), which accounts for the vivid eschatological expectations and the conformity to Jewish theology (Cf. Just. Dial. 80). 6. Barnabas. Despite the repulsive extravagances of Alexandrian exegesis found in this author, he preserves the fundamental ideas of the apostolic period in a relatively pure form. ((7) The pre-existence of Christ is affirmed, and with it his divine creative activity (5. 5, 6). Hewillone day return again as Judge in divine omnipotence (15. 5). He is not Son of man, but Son of God (12. 10; 7. 9). He appeared in the flesh, since men cannot look even upon the created and perishable sun (5. ID, II). (J>) The Son of God, who thus assumed human flesh, suffered also upon the cross, according to the will of God. His suffer- ings are understood also as a sacrifice (5. i ; 7. 3 : and since he would make the tabernacle of his Spirit [/. e., his body] a sac- rifice for our sins, § 5 ; c. 8). The object and result of the bodily sufferings are, first, the abolition of death and the demon- stration of this in the resurrection (5. 6); but chiefly the forgive- ness of sins and sanctifying of the heart, since we are thus made new creatures (5.1: * ' For to this end the Lord endured, that he might give his flesh to death, in order that we might be sanctified by the remission of sins, that is, by his blood of sprinkling;" 6. 1 1 ; ^' Since, therefore, he has renewed us by the remission of sins, he gave us another character, so that we might have the spirit of children, as he had moulded us anew "). Accordingly, the heralds of the gospel proclaim '^the remission of sins and the sanctification of the heart " (8. 3). Through his suffering for us Christ has bestowed upon us the covenant which Israel (see below) forfeited, and has made us heirs of the inheritance ( 14. 4). Although Barnabas has not made clear the necessity, nature, and object of Christ's sacrifice, there is no ground for attributing to him the idea that the Saviour's death has relation THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 7^ only to sins of the past (BehiM, Ztschr. f. k. Wiss., 1886, p. 299 f. ). His sufferings are represented as making death power- less and establishing in us the principle of a permanent renewal. Barnabas, it is true, has, like the other Church Fathers, failed to realize and teach distinctly that the forgiveness of sins remains a vital element of the Christian's entire life. (r) The believer enters upon the possession of the blessings of redemption through baptism: "This he says in order that we may go down into the water bewailing our sins and unclean- ness, and come up from it having fruit in our hearts, having reverence and hope in Jesus in our spirits" (11. i, cf. § S). Through baptism, therefore, we become free from sin. Our heart is thenceforth a dwelling of God (8. 15). As to the na- ture of this new state and the means (preaching) by which it is produced, we are taught in 16. 7-9: '* Before we believed in God, the abode of our hearts was perishable and weak . . so that it was full of idolatry and the home of devils because we did the things which were against God. But it is to be builded up in the name of the Lord. . . How ? Learn : Receiving the remission of sins and hoping in his name, we are become new creatures, created again from the beginning. Wherefore God truly dwells within us in the abode of our hearts. How ? His word of faith, his proclamation of the Gospel, the wisdom of (his) pardons, the commandments of (his) doctrine, he himself speak- ing in us and dwelling in us, slaves to death as we are, opening to us the gate of the temple, which is his mouth [for the procla- mation of the word] , giving to us repentance, leads us into the imperishable temple." It will be observed that here also faith is presented as a fundamental act in the reception of grace (Cf. 2. 2 ; 4. 8 ; 6. 17 ; 9. 4 ; II. 11). But faith is in Barnabas most intimately associated with hope. Faith and hope are but different aspects of the same inner possession (i. 4, 6 ; 4. 8 : *' In the hope of his faith ; " 6. ^ ; 11. 11, /. ^., of baptism: '' having in our spirits reverence and hope in Christ ;" 8. 5; 11. 8; 12.2, 3, 7; 16. 8; 19. 7. Cf. Heb. 11. i). The expectation that Barnabas will place a corresponding valuation upon justification (dcxacixTu'^T] and Scxacnu>') is not gratified. With the above presentation of faith he combines a portrayal of moral integrity _(i. 4; 4. 12 ; 5. 4; 20. 2 ; 4. 10 ; 15. 7. The passage 13. 7 is not decisive, nor is i. 6, where the text is also fragmentary). (^) He who has thus received Avith faith in Christ through baptism the forgiveness of his sins and the renewing indwelling of God will also seek to fulfill the '*new law of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2. 6). Barnabas describes such an one as *' being with- out the yoke of necessity " (ib., cf. Jas. i. 5. Gal. 5. 1). This 72 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. assertion must not be overlooked amid the very strong emphasiz- ing of the divine commandments (2.1; 4, 11. Cf. 21. 1,5, 8). Bat that Barnabas was not free from moralistic overvaluation of good works in the Christian life is clearly evident from the lan- guage (not, indeed, original with him, but adopted with ap- proval) of 19. 10 : '*0r work with thy hands for the ransom (r:9 hjTpov) of thy sins. ' ' Christians should not bring outward but inward sacrifices (2. 9, 10); the insight which they have gained restrains them, as strangers, from observing the Jewish law (3. 6, cf. 4. 6). We note, finally, as bearing upon the development of the moral life, the admonition : '* Do not take it upon yourselves to live alone, as already justified ; but, assembling in one place, strive together for the common good " (4. 10, cf. 2). (/^''') force his way and gain i)Ower (4. 9, 13). To avoid this, Christians must keep the commandments and cling to {-fxxjiy^zvj) the fellowship of the church (2. i; 4. 10, 11; 21. 8j. Barnabas undertakes also to map out the future. As there were six days of creation, so will God in six thousand years bring the present dispensation of the world to an end, since one day is with him as a thousand years. Then follows a seventh millennium, corresponding to the Sabbath of creation, in which Christ renews the world and the righteous {J^v/.anndivTZ^ y.ai a~<>Xa66vTe^^ tyjV iTzayy-zXiav^ a^£a/7>'/cyrc?) hallow this last day of the world's week. Then dawns the eighth day, the beginning of the other world {akhio xoaiLoo apyji). The type of this is seen in the joyous celebration of Sunday, upon which day also Christ arose from the dead and ascended (!) to heaven (15. 5-9). To summarize : Through his passion and death Christ brought us forgiveness of sins and deliverance from death. Through baptism the forgiveness of sins is imparted to us, God dwells in us, and a new life begins. In this new life we — with free will — fulfill the commandments of Christ. The author is writing for those who are in danger of accepting the Jewish ordinances (3. 6 ; 4. 6. Cf. his own description of the contents of his epistle, 17. i), but he is free from any subjection to the Old Testament law. The nearness of the end of all things and the severity of the account to be rendered should impel us to zeal. 7. The Didache. This document can be employed in tracing the History of Doctrines only with the most extreme caution, since we know that it was not designed to present a statement of Christian teach- ing — not even of any particular doctrines. (iz) The designations of Christ as the Son of God (16. 4), as the God (oris ^[09 the proper reading?) of David (10. 6), and as the Servant of God (9. 3 ; 10. 2, 3) are to be interpreted in the same sense as in the documents already examined. We have also 74 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. already met the representation of God as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (7. I, 3), preserved in the baptismal formula. (/^) Of the blessings of salvation bestowed upon us by God through Christ are here mentioned life, the deeper knowledge (^'ywrr;^), faith, and immortality (10. 2 ; 9-3, cf. 16. i ; 4. 8), and also the indwelling of the name of God in our hearts (10. 2). Christians are those who hope in God (J7t\ tov »^£ov, cf. Barnabas). The Spirit of God prepares us for our Christian calling (4. 10). (/) As means by which salvation is applied to the individual may be mentioned baptism (7); the eucharist (9. 10), which is spiritual food and drink (10. 3 : *' upon us he has graciously be- stowed spiritual food and drink and eternal life through his Son ' ' ) and is received with consciousness of the personal presence of the Lord (10. 6. Whether we read xn XilO as in Rev. xxii. 10, " Come, Lord Jesus, " or XHN po, ''The Lord is here," does not affect the question before us) , through which presence there are given to men the blessings which we have above (^) enumerated. (It is, therefore, the Johannine conception of the Lord's Supper which is presented here as well as in Ignatius); the proclamation ofsalvation('' for the imparting of righteousness and knowledge " (11. 2) by traveling apostles (11. i, 2), by prophets (speaking in the Spirit. Cf. the description of prophets in Hermas, Mand. 11, and the labors of Hermas himself. Also Ignat. Eph. 20. i. Rom. 7. 2. Philad. 7. Vid. Bonwetsch, Die Prophetie im apostol. u. nachap. Zeitalter in Ztschr. f. k. Wiss. , 1884, p. 460 if.), by special teachers inspired by the Spirit (13.2), but also by bishops and deacons (*'for these also ministei (IztroDpyoTjfri^ for you the ministry of the prophets and teachers," 15. i), and, as well, by brotherly admonition (4. 2). (//) In this free exercise of spiritual functions there can be no thought of hierarchical tendencies. Official positions stand upon the same footing as the free agencies of the Spirit, and it is es- pecially noted that the latter may fittingly render such service, and are, therefore, to be accorded like honor (15). The church (or the saints, 4. 2) is the body of believers scattered through- out the world, who are to be gathered into the (eschatological) kingdom of God (9. 4, cf. 10. 5). This eschatological concep- tion of the kingdom of God is a peculiarity of the apostolic fathers (the view of Barnabas is different, 8. 6). Here, too, we find a vivid expectation of the approaching end of the world. Cf. in the communion-prayer • '* Let grace come and this world pass away" (11. 6).^ The last chapter of the Didache treats of the ^ It is possible, indeed, that these words have reference to the blessings be- stowed in lie Eucharist, in which case the petitioner expresses his desire that THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 75 Christian duty of watchfulness, of false prophets which shall come, of Antichrist (then shall appear the yjn7ij.ii~'Aoy<>pel may be traced directly to the fact that the Gentile Chris- tians did not understand the Old Testament ideas presupposed in the apostolic proclamation of the gospel. But moralism always serves the interest? of legalism. Making much of man's O'A'n works, the age accepted (^. g., from the Book of Tobit) the legalistic works of the later Jewish piety. § 8. Rules of Faith. Already in the period of the Apostolic Fathers, the Holy Scriptures and the baptismal formula began to be regarded as presenting the norm of Christian faith. We can here consider only the earliest tracer of the recogni- tion granted to these two sources of authority. The problems associated with them in the course of historical development will demand our attention at a later period. ( I ) Jesus himself describes and employs the Old Testament as an infallible authority {^e.g., Matt. 5. 17. Lk. 24. 44), and the apostles also use it as such {e. g., Rom. i, 2. Gal. 3. 8, 22 ; 4. 30, etc.). But the Lord says of his own words also, that they shall outlast heaven and earth, and asserts the same of the prin- ciples to be proclaimed by his apostles (Matt. 10. 40 ; 16. 19). In harmony with this, the apostles appeal to Christ's words as of binding authority (i Thes. 4. 15. Gal. 6. 2. i Cor. 7. 10; 9. 14. Acts 20. 35), but claim also like authority for their own utterances (e. g., 2 Thes. 2. 15. 2 Cor. 2. 9; 7. 15). There is, indeed, a manifest desire to have authoritative words of Jesus himself (r Cor. 7. 10, 12, 25). The epistles of Paul and the books of the Old Testament are Xotnai ypaipai (2 Pet. 3. 15. 16). The Apostolic Fathers still view the matter in the same light. With them, too, the Old Testament is regarded, as primarily the absolute authority and norm of truth, howevercoristantly.it is interpreted in a New. Testament^en^e. Quotations from it are introduced with the traditional formulas, *'the Scripture" {-q ypfj-ipf)^ and ''it is written" (jiypaTzrai^ . If this formula, which, in accordance with New Testament usage, was associated peculiarly with the Old Testament, was very seldom applied to the sayings of Christ (Barn. 4. 14. 2 Clem. 2. 4. Cf. Polyc. 12. i), yet the authority of the latter is just as fully recognized. The words of Christ are appealed to in controversy as decisive. '* Of some who say : Unless I find it in the originals (toTs* afr/stiHi^) in the gospel, I do not believe, and when I said to them, 'It is written,' they answered me, 'That settles it ' " (Ign. Philad. 8. 2. Cf. Smyrn. 7. 2). The same is true of the writings of the apostles, which are regarded as final au- RULES OF FAITH. 83 thorities for the church of all places and all ages (Ign. Tral. 2. 2 ; 3. I, 3 ; 7. I. Magn. 6. i. Phil. 5. i. Smyrn. 8. i. Rom. 4. 3. The Didache announces itself as the '* Teaching of the Apostles " ) . The gospel is the flesh of Christ ; the ap ostles are the presbytery of the church (Ign. Philad. 5. i). That such was the esteem in which the writings of the apostles were held is confirmed by the facts, that the documents which we have just examined abound throughout in references to nearly all of the New Testament books, and that the latter as well as the Gos- pels themselves were read in the assemblies for worship (cf. I Thes. 5. 27. Col. 4. 16. Jas. i. i. i Pet. i. i. Rev. i. 3. I Clem. 47/ I. Cf. 2 Clem. 19. i. Homily of Aristides, vid. ed. Seeberg, 1894. Just. Apol. i. 67. Iren. adv. haer. ii. 27. 2; iii. 21. 4. Can. Mur. 1. 77 {.). The Antignostic Fathers at the end of the second century regard this recognition of the authority of the New Testament as having been always prevalent in the church. Cf. below • Marcion's Canon and Montanism. The canon of Scripture was in this period by no means a clearly defined whole, nor even a distinct dogmatic postulate. As, on the one hand, not all of the New Testament books were everywhere in use ; so, on the other hand, various other writings soon came to be regarded with equal veneration, /. e., Hermas, Barnabas, the Didache, i and 2 Clement, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Praedicatio of Peter. These were read in public as the other books (Jrr ia'jTo-^ i^iov ehai av/]Yo(>eu(7z-/). Although he is son of God, he is not God ; since God is an unbegotten entity, he, a begot- ten (Hom. 16. 15, 16). Man has free will :„ ''It has been en- joined what things it is proper to think and to do : choose there- fore what lies in your power " (Hom. 11. 11 ; 10. 4 ff. , cf. 2. 36 fin.; 3. 22, 23, cf. 8. 48). It is our duty no^v to fulfill the commandments of God. The Homilies do not mention cir- cumcision (but see Diaraart. Jak. i)j the Recognitiones (5. 34) distinctly discredit it. AVe have, however, frequent washings (Hom. 9. 23 ; 10. 26. Recog. 4. 3 ; 5. -^6), vegetable diet (Hom. 12. 6 ; 15. 7 ; 8. 15 ; 14. i), prohibition of marriage (Hom. 3. 6S. Ep. ad. Jac. 7). A characteristic mode of deal- ing with the Old Testament led to the rejection of bloody sacri- fices (Hom. 2. 52 f.; 3. 42). The documents before us constitute a special foreshadowing of Elkesaism. Although their preparation appears to have been undertaken with a view of winning the West, and especially Rome, we have no evidence that such a result was in any measure attained. This form of Judaism exercised a historical influence only upon the genesis of Mohammedanism. (Cf. Wellhausen, Skizzen u. Vorarbeiten H. iii. 197 ff. ) Out of the combination of the two great monotheistic religions of the Semitic race arose the third. § 10. Gentile- Christian Gnosis. Sources. Of the abundant Gnostic literature there have been preserved for us in complete form only the Epistle of Ptolemaus to Flora in Epiph. h. t,t,. 3 ff . — the PiSTis-SoPHiA (Copt.), ed. Schwartze-Petermann, 1S53, from the latterhalf of the third century (cf. Harnack, Texte u. Unters. 7. 2), and two other Gnostic works in the Coptic language, edited by Schmidt, Texte u. Unters. viii. i. 2. Besides these we have only fragments. See the account 92 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. given by BoNWETSCH in Thomasius DG. i. 153 f . ; a comprehensive collection in Grabe, Spicilegium ii.; Hilgenfeld, Ketzergesch. des Urchristent. , 1884. Also, Stieren, Irenceus i. gooff. (Ptol. Valent. Heracleon ; fragments of the last named were collected by Brooke in Texts and Studies, i. 4. The most ancient of the works directed against the heretics have been lost, e. g.^ Agrippa Castor (Eus. h. c. iv. 7. 5 ff. ). Justin's Syntagma wider alle Haeresien (cf. Apol. i. 26) and his writing against Marcioa (Iren. adv. haer. iv. 6. 2), etc. These have been preserved in Latin, and many Greek fragments are found in Epiph., Eus., etc. In Irenseus we have ^^^k^yx^^ Kai avarpoTvy ttjq -ifjevdojv'u^ov yvcjaeiog 11. 5 (edd. Massuet ; Stieren ; Harvey), written about A. D. 180 ; in Tertullian, de praescriptione haerticorum, adv. Valentinianos, de carne Christi, de resurrectione carnis, de anima. From HiPPOLYTUS we 'possess Kara izaia of the Greeks, from their speculative teachings and at- tempted mysteries and warning astrologers. ■^ We may recall the opinion of Celsus : '* Certain dancing syrens andsoph- istriennes, sealing up the ears (a Gnostic rite) and turning the heads of their victims, etc. Orig. contra Cels. v. 64. 96 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. [the supreme God and the devil] , occupying properly a place be- tween them"), or even an angel, (4) In the world of matter there exists a remnant from the spirit-world, and the deliverance of this remnant is the aim of the soteriological process. According to the proportion of spirit in the matter in their composition, men are spiritual (Trveu/iarufn'), psychical (0tj/ix*u'), and carnal ((Tw/xanxo:) (^. g,^ Iren. i. 7. 5. Tert. adv. Val. 29). This classification maybe used to character- ize Christianity, Judaism, and Heathenism. (5) Sensuousness constitutes (in true heathen fashion) the evil in men. The spirit is imprisoned in the body : ''It explains the conflict in the body, that its structure (^TzXdtr/j.a') is composed of warring elements (Hippol. Ref v. 8, p. 154. Cf. the hymn of the Naasenes, ib. c. 10, p. 176 : " From thy breath it wanders away — it seeks to flee from the black chaos — and does not know how to pass through, ' ' etc. ) . Demons of many kinds have their abode in the soul of man, and injure and defile it as travelers an inn (Valent. in Clem. Al. Str. ii. 20. 114). From this results the universality of sin, and the fact that it is so natural to man (Basilid. in Clem, Al. Str. iv. 12. 83, in Hilgenfeld, p. 208. Iren. iv. 27. 2). (6) Redemption originates in the world of spirit. The Re- deemer is Jesus Christ. There are many and greatly variant de- lineations of his person. He is a celestial aeon, which inhabits a body, practices self-restraint, and thus comes to be of the same nature as the latter : '* For we say of that which is seen, and of that which is unseen, that they are one nature" (Valent. in Clem. AL Str. iii. 7. 59, and in Photius Bibl. cod. 230. Vid. Hilgenf. 297, 302), Or he is an aeon which assumed a body formed of a psychic substance : being impassible, he did not suffer, but only his psychic body, — thus the school of Valentine (Iren. i. 6. i ; 7. 2. Otherwise, Tertul. adv. Val. 39. i). Or the man Jesus, bearing the image of God, and by a special dis- pensation born through Mary, is chosen by God ; with him at his baptism the aeon Christ, also called ''Man" or " Son of man," unites himself, — thus Marcion in Iren. i. 15. 3. Cf. Cerin- thus in Iren. i. 26. i. Carpocrates, Iren. i. 25. i, 2. Ps. Tert. adv. omn. h. 15. — Satornil ("He held that the un- begotten Saviour was both incorporeal and invisible, but he thought that he appeared a man," Iren. i. 24. 2) and Basilides ( ' ' That Christ came in phantasm, was without substance of flesh, did not suffer at the hands of the Jews, but instead of him Simon was crucified ; whence we are not to believe in him who was crucified," Ps.-Tert. 4. Cf. Iren, i. 24. 4. Philaster 32, etc.) agree in discriminating sharply between the historical Jesus and GENTILE-CHRISTIAN GNOSIS. 97 the celestial Christ, either considering the celestial aeon as dwelling in an apparent body, or regarding the man Jesus as led and prompted by the aeon. (7) In regard to the object of Christ's coming, it is to be said: **For the Father of all wished to dispel ignorance and destroy death. But the recognition of himself became the dis- pelling of ignorance " (Iren. i. 15. 2, Marcion). In the hymn of the Naasenes, Christ says to the Father : ** Having the seals I shall affirm : I travel through all ages. I shall unfold all mys- teries — I shall show the forms of the gods — the hidden things of the holy way — I shall summon wisdom (jvwfn^') and teach "^ (Hipp. Ref. V. 10. a. also Fist. -Soph., p. i f. 182, 232: * * Verily I say unto you, that ye shall know how the world, x6(7iio<;, was formed," vid. the enumeration, p. 206 ff. ). The gospel is the knowledge of supermundane things (^ rihv onepyjxrixlujv yvanTtg, Hipp. Ref. vii. 27, p. 376). At the beginning of the Jeft-books, p. 142, it is said: **This is the book of the knowledges of the invisible God by means of the hidden mys- teries which lead to the elect generation." *' This is the doc- trine in which the entire sum of knowledge dwells. ' ' Christ thus brings knowledge to the world, and thereby the spiritual elements are strengthened to release themselves from matter. The self-consciousness of the human spirit begins, and it now recognizes the means of grace and sacred formulas which aid it to rise from this world into that above. (8) Redemption has to do chiefly with the pneumatic. '* They teach that these are not only by practice, but by nature pneu- matic, and will everywhere and absolutely be saved" (Iren. i. 6.2. Cf. CI. Al. Str. v. I. 3). The ''only good Father" himself looks upon the heart of man in Christ, and it is illuminated and blessed in the vision of God. The man now lives bound to the Saviour in mutual fellowship, and has become in himself immor- tal (Val. in CI. Al. Str. ii. 20. 114; v. 6. 52 ; iv. 13. 91 in Hiigenfeld, pp. 296, 301, 298). The knowledge (sTriyvwrt-;?) of the great Unutterable is redemption, but it has to do only with the spirit, and not with the soul or body (Iren. i. 21. 4; 7. 5). Thus the spirit by knowledge becomes free from the oppression of the sensuous and mounts to God. The psychic, /. e., ordi- ^ This hymn pictures the distress and anxiety of a soul which has fallqn under the '* dense darkness," and seeks like a trembling hart to escape from it, and yet does not know how to go in or out. Then comes Christ, the Saviour. He brings knowledge and shows the way of escape, ;'. c, the ascent of the soul to God through the realm of the planetary spirits — which are the gods. The hymn furnishes a fine example of the practical religious temper of the Gnostic circles. 9^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. nary Christians in the church, may be saved through faith and works, but the hylic will all be lost (Iren. i. 6. 2). In practical life the Gnostics regarded all their actual adherents as pneumatic (cf. Iren. i. 6. i fin.; iii. 15. 2. Hipp. Ref. v. 9, p. 174). (9) The moral philosophy accompanying these views of re- demption was dominated by the false estimate of sensuousness, and assumed a double form (Iren. iii. 15. 2), either a strict ascetic abstinence (Iren. i. 24. 2. Hipp. Ref. v. 9, p. 170. Pist.-Soph., pp. 250, 254 f.), oralax carnality, confident that nothing could harm these favored ones, with scornful criticism of the strict morality of the church, as, for example, on the sub- ject of martyrdom (Iren. i. 6. 2,3; 25. 3 ; 28. 2 ; 31. 2. CI. Al. Str. iv. 9. 73. Agrippa Cast., in Eus. h. e. iv. 7. 7. Isadore, in CI. AL Str. iii. i. i, assails the *^ theatric ascetics." Cf. also Plot. ii. 9. 15). (10) In keeping with the whole trend of the system of Gnos- ticism, there is found in it no recognition of the resurrection of the dead, nor of the early Christian eschatology as a whole. ^ The return of the spirit freed from matter to the pleroma marks the end (cf. Iren. i. 7. i, 5. Tert. c. Val. 32). 5. The attempt was made in various special associations to popularize this general cosmical theory by symbolic rites, mystic ceremonies, and the teaching of magic formularies, etc. Members of the orthodox church were particularly cultivated (Iren. iii. 15. 2. Tert. praescr. 42). The Gnostics either formed con- gregations outside the church or secret organizations within her pale (Iren. iii. 4. 3 ; 15. 2; i. 13. 7). At the reception of persons into these associations, and in their worship, strange forms and formulas played an important part. It was taught to have been the design of Christ to grant to his followers such ''mysteries" as a means of protection and as powers to be effectually employed against sin, death, and the cosmic forces opposing in the state of death : ''Jesus said . . coming into the world I have brought nothing but this fire and this water, and this wine and this blood " (Pist.-Soph., pp. 372, 219. Cf. Jeu i. pp. 142,198). We note the principal rites observed : — (i) The redemption (aTroXnrpioTt^), or leading into a bridal chamber, among the Marcosians (spiritual marriage) (Iren. i. 21. 2, 3). (2) Touching of the glove as a sign of recognition (Epiph. h. 26. 4). (3) Branding of the right ear (Iren. i. 25. 6. CI. Al. Excerpt, ex proph., ^ 25. Celsus in Orig. c. Cels. V. 64). (4) Three-fold baptism with water, fire, and spirit (e.jf., Jeij, pp. 195, 198, 200 ff. Pist.-Soph., 375 ff.). (5) ' What a difference is thus revealed between this system and the church ! GENTILE-CHRISTIAN GNOSIS. 99 Anointing with oil (Iren. i. 21. 3. Hippol. v. 7. Orig. c. Cels. vi. 27. Acta Thorn, ed. Bonnet, pp. 20, 6S, 73, 82). (6) The '* mystery of the forgiveness of sins" (e. ^^., Jefi, p. 206 f. ): ''Therefore must every man who would believe on the Son of Light receive the mystery of the forgiveness of sins, in order that he may become entirely perfect and complete in all mysteries therefore now I also declare that, if ye have re- ceived the mystery of the forgiveness of sins, all the sins which ye have consciously or unconsciously committed, which ye have committed from the time of your childhood until the present day, and until the severing of the bond of the flesh of fate, are altogether blotted out, because ye have received the mystery of the forgiveness of sins." (Vid. Pist.-Soph., pp. 300, 375 f.) (7) The obscene rite (menstrual blood and male semen, Pist. Soph., p. 386. Epiph. h. 26. 4. 2 Book Jeu, p. 194. Vid. Cyril. Catech. 6. ^^ ; also August, de haeres. 46, de morib. Manich. 18. 66.) (8) Pictures (Iren. i. 25. 6). (9) Magic charms and sentences (Plot.Ennead. ii. 9. 14. Orig. c. Celsus vi. 31, Cels. ib. 39, 40. Cf. the various formulas preserved in the Coptic Gnostic works). (10) Hymns (Acta Joh. ed. Zahn, p. 220 f. Acta Thorn, vid. Lips. Apokr. Apostelgesch. i. 292 ff. Hippol. V. 6. 10; vi. 37. Tertul. de earn. Chr. 17, 20, cf. Can. Mur. i. 81 ff. Pist. -Soph. S3 ^-y 53-^8o). (11) Magic (Iren. ii. 32. 3). (12) Prophecy (Iren. i. 13. 3. Eus. h. e. iv. 7. 7).^ (^3) Miracles, such as the changing of wine into blood (Iren. i. 13. 2. Hipp. vi. 39, p. 296. Clem. Exc. ex Theodot. 82. Cf. the changing of wine into water, 2 Bk. JeCi, p. 200^. (14) Anointing of the dying with oil (Iren. i. 21. 5. Cf. Orig. c. Cels. vi. 27. Epiph. h. ^6. 2). The practical importance attached to all this ceremo- nial is evident from the original Gnostic works preserved in the Coptic language. It rested above all upon the belief that this was a means of gaining security in the world to come. It is at the same time very plain that this entire foolish trifling with symbols and formulas has an exact parallel in the heathen mys- teries of the age. It is, really, only in view of this fact that we can estimate the true essential character of Gnosticism. It is an attempt to transform the gospel into a religious philosophy and \ In the unarticulated and senseless formulas of prayer and magic whicli are often met in the Pist. -Soph, and the Jeu books, we may be tempted to see an echo, z. e., an imitation, of the speaking with tongues among the primitive Christians (cf. Harnack, T. u. U. vii. 2. 86 ff. ). We are not compelled to so regard them, however, since similar formulas are very frequently found in the magic sentences of Jews and heathen nations. See e.^:, Dieterich, Abraxas, 1891, pp. 138, 139, etc. Also the Mitiirasliturgie published by Dieterich, 1903. loo HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. into mystic wisdom — to make heathenism the Christianity of the enlightened. 6. Yet Gnosticism claimed to be Christian in character. The only way to establish this claim was that prevalent in the church, i. e. , by proving that the views held were based upon the Scrip- tures and the traditions of primitive Christianity. Appeal was made for this purpose wherever possible to the words of Jesus (Ep. Ptol. ad. Flor. fin.: ** worthy of the apostolic tradition, which we also have in turn adopted, together with the establish- ing of all our words by the teaching of the Saviour " ). To this end they employed freely the method of allegorical exegesis, then equally prevalent among heathen and Christian writers (^. ^., loc. cit. and Iren. i. 3. 8. Cf. Tert. de praescr. 38. 17. resur. cam. 63). Appeal was taken also to the professed secret tradi- tion handed down from apostolic times (Iren. iii. 2. i ; i. 25. 5. CI. Al. Str. vii. 17. Hipp. Ref. 7. 20; v. 7. Tert. de praescr. 25 f. Cf. in Pist.-Soph. and Jeu books). Upon this basis then arose a literature of sacred books (** an unutterable mass of apocryphal and spurious writings" (Iren. 20. i: 25. 5. Gospels, see Zahn, Gesch. d. n. tl. Kan. i. 770 ff., 744 ff. See also the Sources of Hipp. Ref. whatever may be the opinion in regard to them). By thus treating the accepted writings of the church, it was not difficult to impose upon many of her mem- bers (to the amazement of the unthinking and those who do not understand the Scriptures of truth, Iren. i. 20. i), and repre- sent the Gnostic teachings as genuine Christianity. Gnosticism is a coarse, anti-judaistic (cf. the condemnation of the demiurge) development upon the territory of Gentile Chris- tianity. It is not merely Gentile Christian in character, but essentially heathenish. The fundamental problem to which it addresses itself originates in the religious thought of the heathen world, as well as the peculiar means employed for the solution of this problem. Its character is not altered by the fact that it applies the instruments of Christian and Jewish tradition to the problem in hand. Its claim to recognition as Christian is sup- ported primarily by the high estimate which it places upon the person of Christ. His person marks the decisive turning-point in human history, and his teaching is the absolute truth. We may compare the attitude of Philo toward Judaism "(there Moses, and here Christ), and the pecuhar zeal of the age for oriental religious forms. It is misleading to designate Gnosis as ''the acute Hellenizing of Christianity" (Harnack), or, with the same author, to call its leaders ** the first Christian theolo- gians. ' ' Gnosticism is Hellenizing in so far as the problems of Greek GENTILE-CHRISTIAN GNOSIS. lOI and Roman culture influence its course, but the means by which it seeks to solve these problems are of essentially oriental origin. There were, indeed, systems — such as that of Valentine — in which the Hellenistic philosophical tendency was the controlling element ; but, judged as a historical phenomenon, Gnosticism was the attempt to establish the universal religion, in which the religious problems of the educated world in that age should be answered by means of the ancient oriental mythology and magic, with the addition of the gospel of the church. We may, accordingly, instead of a Hellenizing, speak rather of an Ethni- cizing of Christianity. The historical significance of Gnosticism is very great. Chris- tianity is here first conceived as *' doctrine " and as a ^'mys- tery." Thus the church was compelled to determine positively what is Christian doctrine. And since the Gnostics used for their own purposes the standards of the church, the Scriptures, and tradition (which they were by no means the first to use in this way), the necessity of a clearer definition of the latter was early recognized. On the other hand, the positive influence of the Gnostics must not be overestimated.^ It is customary to count Marcion of Sinope also among the Gnostics; but it is better to treat separately of him. There were two ^ We might here enter into many details, e. g.: the universality of sin. Of the Father of All it is said among the later Valentinians : It pleased him at one time that the most beautiful and perfect thing which he had in him should be born and proceed from him ; for he was not a lover of solitude. For love, they say, was all ; but love is not love unless there be something loved. Hence the begetting of the intelligence (i-oit) and truth (d/^/t^f/a) (Hipp. Ref. vi. 29, p. 272). Basilides used the formula : *'That in consequence of the supermundane election, the cosmic faith of all nature has arisen (CI. Al. Str. ii. 3, p. 434 ) . But this election signifies only an advantage of nature " ( ib. cf. Str. V. I, p. 645). Cf. also the interesting formulas of Origen's Gnostic opponents : "To live virtuously is not our work, but entirely divine grace," or, *' salvation (ro o(.Kiu-^ai') is not from anything in us, but from the planning or choice of him who has mercy when he will." Cf. Rom. 9. 16 (Orig. de princ. iii. 1. 8 ff., 15, 18, ed. Redepenning, pp. 28,33). Cut no one will think Aut. salufaris, Tert. i. 19). He is the manifestation of God himself. As to his relation to God, there are no plain deliverances. He is com- monly spoken of as the good God himself (Tert. i. 11. 14 ; ii. 27 ; iii. 9 ; iv. 7). He did not defile himself with the body of the demiurge, but — merely in order to make himself intelligible — assumed an apparent body (Tert. iii. 8. 11). Thus his work was a conflict with the ancient God. Because he revealed the good God, and abrogated the? law and all the works of the de- miurge (Iren. i. 27. 2. Tert. iv. 25-27; i. 8. 19. Epiph. h. 42. 4), the latter secured his execution on the cross. Christ thereupon went into the nether world and there liberated the Gentiles, even the Sodomites and Egyptians, but not the pious of the Old Testament (Iren. i. 27. 3). Paul has faithfully pre- served the truth. It is to be received in faith (cf Apelles in Eus. h. e. v. 13. 5, 7. Adam. ii. 6: ''he changed them through faith, that, believing in him, they might become good " ) . Thus one attains the forgiveness of sins and becomes a child of God (Adam. ii. 2. 19). An earnest spirit prevailed among the adherents of Marcion, and the strictest asceticism was advocated, particularly celibacy (Tert. i. 29. CI. Al. Str. iii. 3, p. 515). But the majority of men will finally be lost (Tert. i. 24), /. ^., they will be consigned to the fire of the demiurge (Tert. i. 28). The good God does not punish ; but he does not desire to have the wicked. This is his judgment (Tert. i. 27, cf. Adam. ii. 4 f.). The bodily resurrection is denied (Iren i. 27. 3. Tert. i. 29). Such was the teaching of Marcion. The contrasts of law and gospel, Judaism and Christianity, nature and grace, the just and the good God, dominate all his utterances. He has presented I04 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. this distinctly in his *'Antithesen" (Tert. i. 19 ; iv. 6. 9). His understanding of the Epistle to the Galatians led him to theidea that the apostolic writings in use in the church were partly inter- polated and partly spurious. Inasmuch as he held firmly to the literal interpretation of Scripture, the only remedy lay in criti- cism of the texts of the accepted books. This led to the publi- cation of Marcion's New Testament, which, besides a revised Gospel of Luke, contained ten similarly emended Pauline Epistles (Iren. i. 27. 2. Tert, iv. 2, 3, 5 ; v.). This under- taking is an evidence of the high place which the New Testa- ment writings held at that time in the regard of the church. Marcion was a practical genius. After leaving the church, he began to work. He proposed to reform the church and restore the pure gospel. ** For they say that Marcion did not so much change the rule [of faith] by the separation of the law and the gospel, as restore it again to an unadulterated form ' ' (Tert. i. 20). He established congregations (Tert. iv. 5, etc.), and as early as A. D. 150 his doctrine was spread *' through the whole race of men" (Just. Apol. i. 26). In the sixth century, Marcionite congregations still existed in the East, their doctrinal views hav- ing been modified by either Gnostic or Catholic influences (/xi'a fi-PX'rii Apelles in Rhodon, Eus. h. e. v. 13. Between ajah(w and zaxov as Tpirri dp'^ri^=^8ix.au>v, Prepon. Hipp. Ref. vii. 31. The sufferings of Christ redeem men from the power of the demiurge. The Hyle as third principle, Adam. i. 27. Esnik, cf. Adam. i. 3. CI. Al. Str. iii. 3, p. 515). The Marcionite controversy led the church to the clearer apprehension of two thoughts : that the Creator and the Redeemer are the same God, and that in God justice and mercy are combined. § 12. The Montanist Reformation. Literature. The Montanistic oracles have been collected by Bonwetsch, Gesch. d. Montan., p. 197 ff. and Hilgenfeld, Ketzergesch. , p. 591 ff. As to other documents, see Bonwetsch, 1. c. p. 16, note. Tertullian, de corona, de fuga, de exhort, castitatis, de virg. veland., de monogamia, de jejunio adv. psych., de pudicitia. The 7 books, DE ECSTASI (cf. Jerome, de vir. ill. 24, 40, 53), are lost. The most ancient replies have also been lost, ) 6Xnv)^ body, ^ Cf. e. g-.y the word as used by Celsus and by Origan in Orig. c. Celsus v. 2 ; viii. 24, 28, 33, 45, 58, etc. On the other hand, v. 5 ; vii. 67, 68 f.; viii. 13. 25, etc. J- 1 2 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. intellect, and soul. For whatever things the philosophers and lawgivers excellently uttered or invented w^ere wrought out by them through the co-operation of the Logos in discovery or con- templation" (Just. Ap. ii. lo). Only germs ('T7r^/>/zar a) of the Logos dwelt in the prophets, whereas he revealed himself com- pletely in Christ. Hence much is found in heathen authors that is erroneous. Plato's teachings are thus related to the doc- trines of Christ : ''not alien {^aXXoTpta) to Christ, but that they are not everywhere the same " (Just. Ap, ii. 13). Again, it is said, "Those living according to the Logos are Christians," such as Socrates, Heraclitus, Abraham, Elijah," etc. (Just. Ap. i. 46; cf. Minuc. 20 init.). The entire truth is contained in the primitive writings of the Old Testament prophets, for they were inspired ; the Logos himself spoke in them ; they cor- rectly prophesied of future things (Just. Ap. i. 30 f. , t,6. Ath. 9: *'Who, in the ecstasy of the thoughts within them, the divine Spirit moving them, gave utterance to the things they were impelled to utter, the Spirit using them as a flute-player plays his flute. Cf. Just. Dial. 115). Their utterances are, therefore, to be acknowledged even by the heathen as absolute proof of the truth. Christianity, is, therefore, not a new reli- gion, as Celsus charged (cf. Just. i. 53. Ath. 7, 9. Theoph. ii. 9, cf. 36, the Sybils. As to this evidence from prophecy, cf. also Celsus in Orig. c. Cels. iii. 26; viii. 12; vi. 2). The prophets taught One God, true morality, and future rewards and punishments (Theoph. ii. 34 fin.; iii. 9). Their writings con- tain the Christian truth (Just. Dial. 29). With their real spiritual contents, however, was combined, on account of the hardness of heart of the Jewish people, the ceremonial law (Just. Dial. 19-22, 42, 44, 46, 67), which contains also veiled references to Christ (''I say that a certain law was ordained for the cultivation of piety and right living, and a certain law and ceremony was also announced as a mystery of Christ, or on ac- count of the hardness of your hearts," Dial. 44). The Jews have, by their doctrines (^diddyfxara) supplanted those of God (Just. Dial, 78). They are, consequently, no more the people of God.^ In accordance with the prophecies, Christians from the heathen world are now the people of God and the true Israel (Just. Dial. 25, 26, 123, 135 fin.). What are then the true Christian '' doctrines? " 4. There is One God, the Creator, Adorner, and Preserver of the world (Just. i. 6. Ath. 8. Theop. iii. 9). The invisible God is an unbegotten, nameless, eternal, incomprehensible, un- 1 The judgment of Aristides is less severe. Cf. Seeberg, 1. c, I, page 295 f. THE APOLOGISTS. II3 changeable Being, without any needs and free from all passions (Arist. I. Just. i. lo, 13, 25,49, 53 ; ii. 6. Dial. 127. Tat. 4. Ath. 10, 13, 16, 44, 21. Theoph. i. 4. 3; ii. 10, 3, 22 j. He made everything for man's sake, and is therefore to beloved (Arist. 2. Just. i. 10; ii. 4. Tat. 4. Theoph. i. 4 fin.; ii. 16). He created the world out of nothingness and gave form to matter (Theoph. ii. 4, 13, 10 : *'That in some way matter was begotten, created by God, from which God made and formed the world"). Yet, with all this, the true nature of the living God does not find expression. There is no advance beyond the mereabstract conception that the Divine Being isabsoluteattributeless Existence. In both operations, God employed the Son as mediator. This is not to be understood in a mythological sense (Ath. 10). He is the Logos of God. This was a favorite term of the cultured classes. Whenever it was mentioned, the interest of all was at once secured. But that precisely this term was chosen proves how entirely the thoughts of the church were centered in the exalted Christ. If they had thought chiefly of the man Jesus, they might have easily characterized him as a second Socrates. But they thought of him as God, in God, and with God, and hence selected a term such as '* Logos/' in order to make the matter plain to the heathen. Originally God was alone, but by virtue of the reasoning faculty (Xtfytxij duva/itg) belonging to him he had in himself the Logos. By a simple exercise of his will, the Logos sprang forth (Tzpo-KTjda). He is the first-born work of the Father (Tat. 5; cf. Just. Ap. ii. 6. Dial. 100. Ath. 10: *'The first begotten thing . . . not as coming into being, for from the beginning God, being eternal intelligence, V0D9, had in himself the Logos, being eternally Logos-natured, ?.oytx6<^'). Of the manner in which the Logos originated, it is said : '^ This power was begotten from the power of the Father and his counsel ; but not by a separation, as though the nature of the Father were distributed," /. e., somewhat as a fire does not diminish another by which it is enkindled, ''and that which is taken away from it appears to be also the same and does not diminish that from which it was taken " (Just. Dial. 128, 61, 100. Tat. 5). He is not an angel, but divine ; divine ('^eo?), but not God himself (J i^eo?) (Dial. 60 ; vid. per contra, Ap. i. 6). In respect to the Father, he is something else (irepov n) and another (aXhn; rig) J and is such in number but not in mind, y^ia9, occurs first in Theoph. ii. 15. Although the Apologists find little occasion to speak of this mystery^ the apprehension of it constitutes for them the profoundest problem and the supreme desire of their hearts : " carried away with this desire only, to see God and the Logos with him. What is the unity of the Son with the Father ? what the fellow- ship of the Father with the Son? what the Spirit? what the ^ We here note the influence of the Logos-conception in the sense of John and Ignatius. THE APOLOGISTS. II5 union and the difference of those who are thus united — the Spirit, the Son, and the Father?" (Ath. 12). 5. The Work of Christ. The Logos of God, who, before the incarnation, was only a holy spirit {-vti)i±a ayur/), became man, born of the Virgin Mary (Arist. 2. 6. Just. Ap. i. 22, 31, 32 f. Dial. 43, 45, 48, 6;^, 66, 76, 78, 84 f., 100). The full reality of his bodily human nature is firmly held (Just. Ap. i. 21 ; ii. 10. Dial. 85, 99 : " He became a man, truly subject to suffer- ing, made incarnate," -Tc^to/iarn-oiry^/Za;, Dial. 70),^ yet he was not by any means on that account only a man in the ordinary sense (Just. Dial. 54), but God and man (ib. 59); his divinity was concealed in his flesh (rr^v aoroh xzy.ii>J!J.iihrj\> h <7i'«) , more strictly speaking, the resurrection, bringing with it rewards and punishments (.?. g.^ Just. Ap. i. 13-19). Aristides thus reports to the Emperor what is contained in the Christian Scriptures : ** But you may learn from their writings, O King, to know their words and their commandments, and the glorious character of their service, and the expectation of compensating reward according to the deeds done by each of them, which they expect in the other world " (c. 16. 3. Cf. Just. Apol. i. 65init.). Man has the ability to keep these commandments, since God created him free (Just. Dial. ^^, 102, 141. Apol. i. 28. Tat. 7). Although man, by disobeying the commandments of God, fell and became subject to death (Theoph. ii. 25. Tat. fin.), he is, nevertheless, still free to decide for God through faith and repent- ance (Just. Ap. i. 28, 43, 61 ; ii. 14; Dial. 141. Theoph. ii. ^Justin, according to a quotation attributed to Jeremiah, taught a preach- ing of Christ in the Lower World (cf. Marcion) : '* And he went to them to preach his salvation to them ' ' ( Dial . 72 fin. ; also Iren. v . 3 1 . 1 . Cf. iv. 27. 2, 21. I ; iii. 20. 4. Cf. also Herm. Sim. ix. 16. 5. Barn. 5. 7. Ignat. Philad. ix. I ; Tral. ix. l). Il6 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. 27}: ' ' For just as the man who refuses to hear brings death upon himself, so he who willingly submits to the will of God is able to secure for himself eternal life. For God has given us the law and the holy commandments, everyone who keeps which can be saved (^du-^arac (Tuji^Jjvat) and, experiencing the resurrection, in- herit immortality." Freedom here appears, it will be observed, as an inamissible element of man's endowment. However deeply the fall and corruption of man is conceived, his freedom yet remains unquestioned. From this it may be understood also that Justin includes grace, in the sense of the effectual power of God, in his conception of Christian doctrine. Grace is no more than the revelation of doctrine and of the law. Although it does not appear from such presentations of the subject why the sufferings and death of Christ were necessary (except as in falfillment of Old Testament prophecy), yet the Apologists very positively testify that the belief in the signi- ficance of these experiences of the Lord formed an essen- tial part of the common Christian faith. The sufferings of Christ deliver men because he thereby took upon himself the curse which rested upon them; they bring forgiveness of sins and se:; free from death and the devil (Just. Ap. i. 6^, 50, 32 ; ii. 13. Dial. 40, 41, 45, 95, 54, 80, 8S, 11 1, 134^ Melito, Corp. ap. ix. 418). He who now believes in the Crucified is purified from his past sins, the Spirit of God stands by his side to help in all assaults of the devil, and Christ will deliver him from all trouble and receive him to his kingdom if he will but keep his commandments (Dial. 116). The wood of the cross, the water of baptism, faith, and repentance are the means by which to escape from condemnation on the day of judgment (Dial. 138).^ There was no attempt to enlarge upon these ideas in the controversial writings of the period ; but there can be no doubt that they held the same place in moulding the life of the church at large as in the post -apostolic age. ' 6. The Christian Church is the people of God, the truelsrael, the high-priestly generation of God (Just. Dial. 116, 123, 135). The churches are islands of safety in the stormy sea of the world, where the truth is taught (there are, it is true, also desert islands inhabited by ravenous wild beasts, /. e.j heresies, Theoph. ii. 14). In the Christian world prevail strict morality, holy love, and readiness to suffer with rejoicing. Its members belong to an- other world. They are a ' * new generation, " ' * the generation of the pious," winged to fly like birds above the things of this ^ It appears exceedingly doubtful to me whether Justin already employed the conception of the a\'aKf(pa7^a'(Dair. The citation from him in Iren, adv. haer. iv. 6. 2 would u'"o\e more than is intendtd. THE APOLOGISTS. H? world ; but it is for their sake that the world is preserved (cf. Arist. 15 ff. Theoph. ii. 17. Just. Ap. ii. 7. Melito in Eus. h. e. iv. 26. 5, etc.). 7. Esoteric elements, which the Apology mentions only for the sake of completeness in its survey (vid. Just. Ap. i. 61 init. ), are the means employed in public worship by which one be- comes and remains a Christian. They consist of the reading of the prophets and the gospels, preaching and exhortation, united prayers (ib. 67), baptism, and the Lord's Supper. The candi- date for baptism is washed in the name of the triune God, after having prayed for the forgiveness of his sins. Baptism brings repentance and the pardon (atfetri^) of sins, it trans- plants into a new existence, and without it there is no salvation (Just. Ap. i. 61 : being made new, xar^oTzotrj^^iurE^ -^ 66: the washing for the pardon of sins and unto regeneration, to vizzp a(pi<7iuj<; diJ.apTLU)v xai eiY avayiwTjfTVj Xaorpdv cf. Dial. 19, 29, 44. Theoph. ii. 16 j 61 : enlightenment, (pojTi<7p.6)"^''^Vj de Chr. et Antichr, 4. c. Noet. 4, 17, 12. 15 : *' the Logos incarnated and made man, made flesh, the incarnate Logos, " (TecX7j -iVrtc) to Gnosis. But this occurs according to the canon of the 142 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. church (xara xdvova h.xXy]fT(arTTtx6v^ Str. vii. 7. 855 ; vi. 15. 803). Following Philo, Clement effects a compromise with the letter of the Old and New Testaments by allegorical interpretation (cf. Str. vi. 15. 806 f. ). Faith in revelation is necessary to salvation. Such faith is sufficient, but points beyond itself to Gliosis (Str. ii. 2. 432 ; v. i. 643 ; vii. 10. 864 f.; ''to believe is the foundation of gnosis "). Hence, " to know is more than to believe " (Str. vi. 14. 794). Faith is the outward accept- ance of God and of the doctrine of Christ in the literal sense, from fear and respect for authority {^e. ^.^ Str. ii. 12 ; v. i. 643 \ vii. 12. 873 f.). The Gnostic, on the other hand, lives in initiated vision (^^TTOTZTr/.Tj i')-£ujpia), apprehending salvation inwardly and comprehending it (Str. vi. 10; i. 2. 327). He does not do that which is good for the sake of expected reward, but for its own sake, in love to God (Str. iv. 18. 614 ; iv. 22. 625). He avoids not only actual sin, but also every motion of sinful desire (Str. ii. 11. 455; vi. 12. 789 f.). He regards himself, not as a servant, but as a child of God (Str. vii, 2. 831). He prays always, for prayer is companionship with God (Str. vii. 7. 851 ff., 854 ; vii. 12. 875). If he who simply believes (^aTzXm^ TTSTTtrTTsuxcL)^') Tcqulres the purifications (^y.ad-dp(na) , or minor mysteries (^luxpa fjjjfrryjpta') of the church, the Gnostic needs the great (jxeydla) mysteries, the i-oTzreia (Protr, § i, p. 9; § 12. Str. v. II. 689). This is the royal way. '* By as much as anyone loves God, by so much the more does he make his way into God (Quis div. salv. 27 fin.). Thus there result two forms of Christianity. In contrast with the barely believ- ing, uncultivated beginner, inclined to externahties, stands the Christian who beholds the mysteries of God, and who, with heart and understanding, receives God to abiding fellowship. The Stoic discrimination between the wise and the advancing (izptr/.o-Ttr^r^^) is here transferred to Christianity. There are now Christians of a first and of a second class. Thus the evacuation of the conception of faith by means of the bare orthodoxy which is satisfied with outward belief (Str. i. 9. 342 f. ) is noted, but also granted honorable recognition, while at the same time a way of escape, although a dangerous one, from that error is discovered. The * * Gnostic ' ' of Clement really stands higher than his * ' believer. ' ' The separate doctrines in Clement — as the objects of faith and knowledge — may be readily passed in review. The One God, who is Being beyond nature (i-ixzVMi tt/^ oo/ria'i), and without attributes (e. g., Str. v. 12. 695 f.; v. 11. 689), is the Creator of the world. The formula and the conception of the Trinity constantly recur (Str. v. 14. 710; cf. Exc.exTheod. 80. Protr. 12 init. Paed. i. 6. 123; also iii. 12. 311. Quis div. salv. 42 THE ALEXANDRINE FATHERS. I43 fin. Adumbr., p. 88, Zahn). Christisthe Logos of God (dis- tinct from the paternal Logos, Tzarpiyjj^ Aoytt^, Hypot. in Photius Bibl. cod. 109). In him God is known. He has been from the beginning present and active in the world, giving it existence and offering the truth in prophets and philosophers. He has now become man. *' Christ was, indeed, in ancient times this Logos and [the cause] of our being . . . and of our well- being ; but now this same Logos has appeared to men, the only- One both God and man, the cause of all things good to us, by whom, ha-\^ng been thoroughly instructed in right living, we are conducted to eternal life " (Protr. i, p. 6). He was a man \\-ith a human body and soul (cf. , * * impassible as to his soul, ' ' Paed. i . 2, p. 99). Clement seeks, although without success, to avoid Docetism : '* But in the case of the Saviour [to suppose] that the body, as a body, demanded the aids necessary for duration would be ridiculous. For he ate, not for the sake of the body sustained by holy power, but in order that those with him might not be induced to think otherwise concerning him, just as, indeed, afterward some thought that he was manifested in seeming (^doxrjtrsi). But he was entirely impassible, upon whom no emotional impulse, whether of joy or grief, could manage to exert its power" (Str. vi. 9. 775; cf. iii. 7. 538. Adumbr., p. 87, Zahn). Christ surren- dered his life to death for us, became a ransom (Xorfxr^) for us, and overcame the devil (Quis div., p. 37. Paed. iii. 12, p. 310; i. 5. Ill; i. II fin. Protr. ii init.). Not much im- portance is, however, attached to the conception of Christ as the propitiation (^UatT/id^j vid. e. g., Paed. iii. 6, p. 310). He grows eloquent, on the other hand, in extolling the Logos as a teacher beyond compare, as leader and lawgiver, and as the way to immortality (Protr. 11, p. 86 : *^ For if the Teacher who has filled all things with his holy powers, creation, salvation, good- ness, legislation, prophecy, instruction, now as Teacher instructs us in all things, Athens and Greece also already knew every- thing in the Logos," ib. p. ^^ f. , § 12, p. 91. Paed. i- 3, p. 102 f . ; i. 6. 113. Protr. i. p. 8 : *' The Logos . . . having become man, just in order that thou also mightest learn from a man how at any time a man might become divine; " cf. Paed. i. 12. 156. Str. iv. 23. 632 ; vii. 10. 865). Christ, as God, forgives sins, and his humanity serves the purposes of moral instructi^on : ** As God, forgiving sins ; but as man, leading to avoid continuance in sin" (Paed. i. 3 init.). Man, upon his part, is to render obedience to the teaching of Christ, and, with a view to reward, exercise love toward others, in accordance with the commandments fProtr. 11, p. 89 f. Paed. i. 3. 102). Clement knows full well that man lies bound 144 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. in the fetters of sin (Protr. ii. init. Paed. iii. 12. 307 : '* For to sin continually is natural and common to all " ) , but this does not prevent him from most strongly emphasizing his free- will (^adre^oufnov) or the * ^ in our power" (ty' ^/^i^, Str. vi. 12. 788). *'But he desires that we may be saved from our- selves" (ib.). Thus man is free to do good and to exercise faith (Str. iv. 24. 633; ii. 15. 462 ; iii. 9. 540). God offers salvation, and man has power to grasp it : *' Just as the physi- cian furnishes health to those who labor with him for health, so also does God furnish eternal salvation to those working with him for knowledge and prosperity" (Str. vii. 7. 860). The first right inclination (^ tt/joIttj rrpu? trojTTjpiav v£u(7t<^') is faith. Then follow fear, hope, repentance (^ixerdvota). The goal is reached in love (dydTZfj') and knowledge (jvcbfrt^) (Str. ii. 6. 445). Faith is an *' assent" (^(ruyy.a-dff-efnq) and a *' perception of the mind {^7zp6Xrj(l'cg dcavaca?) concerning the things Spoken " (Str. ii. 12. 458; 2. 437, 432). Inasmuch as faith is a necessary pre- liminary to salvation, our salvation may be ascribed to it (Str. ii. 12. 457 f.: ''Faith is strength for salvation and power for eter- nal life ; " Paed. i. 6. 116: ** The one universal salvation of the human race is faith"). But this faith points beyond itself to knowledge and love (vid. supra ; cf. Str. ii. 11. 454 : *' reason- able," do^ao supra, under i). Many gradations may be traced in this process (in Matt, xii. 15). Knowledge is the goal. But the unfolding of faith is inconceivable without a corresponding moral conduct upon the part of the individual. The Logos acts not only as teacher, but also as physician (cf. supra). Threats of punishment and promise of reward are spurs to piety. Thus faith is also the way to virtue (c. Gels. iii. 69). A faith without works is im- possible {e. g., in Joh. xix. 6). If with such a conception of faith (lacking the decisive element of an inward, obedient, and trustful acceptance), Paul's doctrine of justification does not receive an unqualified acknowledgment, this must be regarded as merely an evidence of religious tact and of real Ghristian tem- per. Origen, in his commentary upon Romans, reproduced the Pauline doctrine of justification, but was not able to maintain himself at the altitude of that conception. Faith is sufficient, indeed, for righteousness, but it finds its consummation in works, and suffices only because it has ever works in view. ''Right- eousness cannot be imputed to an unrighteous man. Ghrist justifies only those who have received new life from the example of his resurrection." Accordingly, the forgiveness of sins and the salvation and eternal happiness of men depend, not only upon faith, but more upon their repentance and good works (cf. e. g., in Lev. hom. xii. 3 ; ii. 4; c. Gels. iii. 71,57; viii. 10). '*The salvation of believers is accomplished in two ways, through the acknowledgment {^agnitionem') of faith and through the perfection of works" (in cant., p. 84; cf. i?istitutionibus ac disciplinisy de pr. i. 6. 3). Repentance consists primarily in the confession of one's sins to God, since he is the true physician of souls (in Ps. 36 ; hom. I. 5); but also to one's fellowmen (ib. ). In the lat- ter case it is necessary, however, to find a man, whether clerical or lay, who has the Spirit, who is devoted to the service of God, and who is like the merciful high-priest Ghrist, as were the THE ALEXANDRINE FATHERS. 1 59 apostles (de or. 28. 8; in Ps. 37 ; horn. 6). Repentance has here, it will be observed, an inward character, not a legal, as in the West. Origen's moral ideal embraces, first of all, the Gnos- tic contemplation of God, and also a strongly ascetic element (emphasis upon virginity and a corresponding depreciation of marriage; c. Gels. vii. 48; i. 26 fin.; viii. 55; commendation of those who, separate from the world, abstain from the cares of this life, in Lev. xi. i ; in different vein, Clem., supra, p. 145, n.). (<:) The church is the congregation of believers, the assembly of the righteous, the **city of God " (c. Gels. iii. 30 ; cf. vii. 31 ). Outside the church there is no salvation (in Jos. hom. iii. 5). Individual Christians are, indeed, also priests (in Lev. hom. iv. 6; vi. 5; ix. i, 8; xiii. 5); but to the priests in the special sense of the term belong special prerogatives. It is theirs to an- nounce the forgiveness of sins ; but this may be done only by a pious priest (in Lev. hom. v. 3; cf. Bigg, p. 215 ff.). Fur- ther, Origen discriminates between the empirical church and the church properly so called (^xupiw^, e. g., de or. 20; in Num. hom. xxvi. 7 ; in Jos. hom. xxi. i. Cf. Seeberg, Begriff d. chr. Kirche, i. 27 ff. ). 7. The process of purification and instruction begun on earth is continued after death. The good, clothed in a refined spiritual body, enter ''paradise," or ''a certain place of education, an auditorium or school of souls." Now are solved for the spirit all the problems which have been presented here in nature, his- tory, and faith (de pr. ii. 11, 4, 5). The wicked, on the other hand, experience the fire of judgment. This is a ''flame of one's own fire " {proprii igms^, whose material is the individ- ual's own sinfulness tortured by the conscience (de pr. ii. 10. 4), In this we are to see, not a permanent punishment, as imagined by the simple, but a process of purification : " The fire of God's vengeance avails for the purgation of souls " (ib. § 6"). " It befits the good God to destroy wickedness by the fire of pun- ishments " (c. Gels. vi. 72 ; cf. v. 15 ; vi. 26). It is a purifying fire (~op y.a^^dp(7uiVj c. Gels. v. 17).^ While the wicked are thus purified, the good mount up from sphere to sphere to meet Christ (de pr. ii. ri. 5). But the former as well as the latter, although it be only after infinite ages, also attain the goal (de pr. iii. 6. 6). Then, with the day of the second coming of Christ, will come the end. Now occurs the resurrection of the 1 This idea, which found recognition also in the West (Cypr. ep. 55. 20), reminds us of the ancient conception of the purifying power of the fire of Hades, c. g.y Virgil Aen. vi. 742 : Wickedness unconsummated is purged or consumed by fire ; cf. Dieterich, Nekyia, 1893, P- ^99^-; ^Iso, Rohde, Psyche, ii. ed. 2, 128 f. l6o HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. bodies of men — glorified, pneumatic bodies (de pr. iii. 6. 4-9 ; but cf. ii. 3. 7 ; iii. 6. i, in Jerome's translation in Redepenning's edition, p. 318 f., and also H. Schultz, 1. c, p. 220 f.). God is now all in all, and all created things live in full vision of the Godhead (iii. 6. 3). Here we shall understand the *' everlast- ing gospel, ' * which is related to the temporal gospel as is the latter to the law (ib. iii. 6. 8 ; iv. 25). But, since there is even yet the possibility of a change in the attitude of will of a free agent, it always remains possible that this consummation of earth's drama may prove to be but temporary, and that freedom of will may call other worlds into existence (cf. de pr. iii. 6. 3, in Jerome's translation ; also c. Cels. iv. 69 ; per contra, de pr, iii. 6. 6: *' in which state they always and immutably remain "). 8. Tested by the original teachings of Christianity, the Alex- andrine theology, as compared with the doctrinal development of the second century, indicates in all points a progression, but in very few particulars an actual advance. The Alexandrine Fathers gave to Christian literature, in form as well as in scien- tific method, a position of equal rank with other literature of the age, and prescribed for the future the method of theological statement. They are the first dogmaticians. But they knew no other way of accomplishing their task than by recasting the per- manent elements of the church's doctrine in harmony with a re- ligious philosophy of Grecian character (cf. the judgment of Porphyry in Eus. h. e. vi. 19. 7 f. ). What the Apologists were compelled to do, these men willingly sought to accomplish. In their philosophy the elements of the Christian tradition are com- mingled in an amazing way with ideas and problems of the heathen world. It is easy to show the wavering character of the movement and the illogical nature of the presentation. The tra- ditional elements are retained en masse (by Origen in detail). But in regard to these, nothing more was required than a simple assent, which is the proper attitude toward dogmas and a law. Beyond this lay knowledge and understanding, /. ^., of the philo- sophically-framed doctrine. The curious fabric thus constructed was glorified as the wisdom of the wise ; not, indeed, without some perception of the real nature of Christianity, such as was in danger of vanishing from the consciousness of the unitiated The significance of this theology for later times lay in the fact that it preserved the traditional doctrines of the church in a form which impressed its own generation (Trinity, divinity and humanity of Christ, soteriological formulas, baptism and its effect, elements in the appropriation of Christianity, resurrec- tion). In Christology, inferences were drawn from the orthodox THE ALEXANDRINE FATHERS. t6i view which were genuine logical deductions (cf. Origen). On the other hand, no little foreign material was given currency as Christian, and the foreign elements of the preceding age were carried to the most extreme conclusions (definition of God, con- ception of faith, moralism and asceticism in Christian life, limi- tation of the work of redemption to doctrine and example, defi- nitions of sin and free-will) . But it was just in this way that this theology succeeded in delivering the death-blow to Gnosticism. Whatever was influential in the latter, it also possessed, and pos- sessed in connection with the faith of the church. A general view of the historical development thus far traced leads to the conviction that the Christianity of the Apostolic Fathers was that which had characterized the church of the second century. Everywhere we note a consciousness of the sinner's lost condition, and the conviction that he can be saved only through grace, through Christ, through the sacred ordinances of the church ; but everywhere also the heathen moralism — everywhere the zealous effort to hold fast to the ideas of primitive Christianity and surrender to the enemy not an iota of the sacred tradition. The more objective an asserted fact, and the more distinctly it pointed upward, the greater was the certainty attaching to it ; the profounder its appeal downward to the heart of the believer, the more waveringly was it received. The for- mer became an object of contemplation ; the latter was more and more misunderstood. To the former, assent was given only in connection with suspicious heterogeneous material, and with a portentous employment of heathen ideas (Logos, faith); but the truths of the '*Rule of Faith," however perverted may have been the relation of the individual to them, were, at least in general outline, preserved intact against the assaults of heathenism and a heathenized Christianity. This, together with the initial attempts at a scholarly interpretation of these truths, constitutes the significance of the theology developing during the present period.^ ' What has been said applies also, with some modifications, to the faith of the common people. Cf. the discussion of Celsus, written probably not long after the middle of the second century, and occasional remarks of Origen , e. g.^ the sharp contrasting of the " Great Church" with the Gnostic parties (Cels. in Orig. c. Cels. v. 6^,)', the faith in One God; the rude conception of his Person (de pr. iv. 8 fin. ; Cels. t. Cels. iv. 71 ; vi. 61 ff. ; the unique position assigned to the adorable Person of Christ (" your God," "they reverently worship," Cels. in Orig. c. Cels. viii. 41, 39, 12, 14 ; cf. iii. 41 ; vi. 10 ; vii. 36 : Orig, deor. i6init. ); the hymns recognizing the divinity of Christ (Eus. h. c. V. 28. 5 ; vii. 30, 10; the hymn at the close of Clement's Paedag.; Tert. \^. Jud. 7 ; Mart. Polyc. 17. 2 ; Lucian's de morte Peregrin, ii. 13 ; the Roman mock crucifix, etc.; the emphasis upon bare faith (Cels. 1. c. i. o, 12); the epitomizing of Christianity in the declaration, "the world is crucified to me," II 1 62 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. CHAPTER IV. SEPARATE DOCTRINES AND GENERAL CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY IN THE THIRD CENTURY. The period under review had a decisive influence upon the con- struction of dogmatics. It was then that conditions and views asserted themselves in connection with the popular faith with which dogmatic theology was compelled to deal, which it could neither deny nor ignore. A method was inaugurated by which it was sought to harmonize these and explain their significance. There was now an ecclesiastical doctrine and a doctrinal church. Heresy had come to be definitely noted. Every new develop- ment of doctrine was so regarded. The great extension of the church produced new perils and new practical problems. A new outlook had been won, and new requirements must be met. The secularization of the church, which had been already deplored in the second century,^ was greatly accelerated in the third, and with it there became manifest also a secularization of the relig- ious sentiment. This explains both the general type of doctrine prevalent and the modifications in the views concerning repent- ance and the church, as also the strenuous opposition to all doc- trinal differences, particularly to the attempts, reaching back into the second century, to reconcile the divinity of Christ with the principle of Monotheism. We begin with the latter. § 1 6. Monarchianism. Dynamistic Monarchians : Hippol. Refut. vii. 35. Ps.-Tert. adv. omn. haer. 23 (8). The small Labyrinth, Eus. h. e. v. 28. Epiph. h. 54. Paul of Samosata : Eus. h. e. vii. 27-30. Epiph, h. 65. Fragments in RouTH, Reliq. sacr. iii. ed. 2, 300 ff. Mai, Vet. scr. nova coU. vii. 68 f. Patripasstans : Tert. adv. Prax. Hippol. c, Noet. Refut. ix. 6 12. Epiph. h. 62. Eus. h. c. vi. 33. Compare Harnack, PRE. x. 178 ff. HiLGENFELD, Ketzergesch., p. 609 ff. Thomastus, DG. i. 168 ff. The divinity of Christ is, in the second century, a recognized fact (cf. supra, pp. 63 f., 70, 75, 78, 113 f., 124 ff., 143, 149 f., etc. (Gal. 6. 4. Cels. 1. c. v. 64); grace (Cels. \. c. iii. 71, 78); the vivid, sensuously-colored hopes of the future life \e. g.^ Orig. de pr. ii. II. 2 ; cf. in Method, de resur. 20. Cels. 1. c, viii. 49; iv. ii; v. 14; vii. 28); the strong faith in the power of the devil and demons, vi'ho are to be overcome by Christian faith through the use of scriptural citations, etc. (Orig. c. Cels. i. 24, 25, 46, 67 ; ii. 8; iii. 24; v. 45 ; vii. 69; viii._37, 58, 59, 61). ^ Cf. the strictures of Irenceus upon those Christians who, for personal rea- sons and on account of false bretiiren, sever themselves from the church (i"^- ZZ' 7 ; 3°* 3 ; iii* '^- 9 J '^- 26. 2 ; cf. Eus. h. c. v. 15, with 20. i). MONARCHIANISM. 1 63 161, n.). The learned attempts to define the relation of Christ to the Father (Logos, second God J were, indeed, far from satisfac- tory. Christ was regarded as *' a God," and his human nature was asserted. The Logos-christology was, in the main, framed in such a way, as to guard the unity of God. But when the Logos, proceeding from the Father, assumes an independent existence, he is then regarded as ** the second God," and thus Monotheism is endangered. Monarchianism made an effort to reconcile Mono- theism, the most precious treasure of Christianity as contrasted with the heathen world, with the divinity of Christ without resort to the expedient of the * * second God. ' ' In this consists its histor- ical significance. It reminded the church that there is only One personal God. To this task it addressed itself, under the guid- ance of the two-fold principle : (i) making the man Jesus the bearer of the divine Spirit, (2) recognizing in Christ the person of the Father himself: ** Since they reflected that God is one, they thought it was not possible for them to maintain this opinion unless they should hold the belief, either that Christ was such a man, or that he was truly God the Father " (Novatian, de trin. 30; cf. Tert. adv. Prax. 3 : '* Therefore they charge that two or three Gods are preached by us, but imagine that they are worshipers of the one God they say, ' We hold a mon- archy. ' " Hippol. Refut. ix. 11 : Ditheists, did-eoi, Epiph. h. 62. 2 ; Hilar, de Trin. i. 16). I. Dynamistic Monarchianism. The ** Alogi " are generally treated under this heading, but improperly so. Epiphanius, in- deed, was disposed thus to classify them (h. 54. i), but, follow- ing the authority before him, recognizes their orthodoxy (h. 51. 4; cf. Iren. and supra, p. 108, n.). {a) Theodotus, the Fuller, brought this doctrine to Rome about A. D. 190: " Maintaining in part the doctrines commonly held among those of the true church concerning the beginning of all things, confessing that all things were made by God, he yet holds . that Christ came into existence in some such way as this : that Jesus is, indeed, a man born of a virgin ac- cording to the counsel of the Father — living in common with all men, and most pious by birth ; and that afterward at his bap- tism in the Jordan, the Christ from above, having descended in the form of a dove, entered into him ; wherefore miraculous powers were not exerted by him before the Spirit, which he says is Christ, having descended, was manifested in him. Some think that he did not become God until the descent of the Spirit \ others, until after his resurrection from the dead " (Hipp. Ref. vii. 35 ; cf. Ps.-Tert. 8). Pope Victor excommunicated him (small Lab. in Eus. v. 28. 6) . (J?) In the time of Zephyrinus this view again 1^4 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. appeared under the leadership of Asclepiodotus and Theodotus, the Money-changer (Eus. v. 28. 7; see also 17). Here again it was held: "He asserts that this man Christ (springs) only from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary " (Ps.-Tert. 8). He was inferior to Melchizedek (see Epiph. h. 55. 8).. But this ' ' bare man ' ' was at his baptism endowed with the Spirit of God (Hipp. vii. ^6). The attempt was made to prove this doctrine exegetically, calling in the aid of textual criticism and subde logical distinctions (Eus. v. 28. 13-18 ; cf., for examples, Epiph. h. 54). Nevertheless, these men claimed to teach the ancient confessional doctrine. ** For they say that all the former teach- ers, and the apostles themselves, both received and taught these things which they now proclaim, and that the truth of the gospel message was preserved until the times of Victor but that the truth was perverted by his successor, Zephyrinus " (small Lab. in Eus. v. 28. 3 ; cf. the charge brought against them by their orthodox opponent : ** They have impiously slighted the divine Scriptures and repudiated the canon of the ancient faith, and have not known Christ," ib. § 13). It is beyond question that the claim of conformity to the teachings of the church was, speaking generally, without foundation. The Monarchian doc- trine is not an attempt to reproduce the original Christian view, as is evident from a comparison of its tenets with the apostolic portrayal of Christ as the Lord of heaven and earth (per contra, Harnack, DG.j ed. 3, 673 f. ). The origin of this form of Monarchianism maybe very easily traced to the Logos-idea — the Logos, or Spirit, being conceived not as a personal being, but as a divine energy. The attempt to establish a congregation of ad- herents to this view, although made at personal sacrifice, was not successful (small Lab. in Eus. v. 28. 8-12). (r) After the middle of the third century we find this view still advocated by Artemas (or Artemon) at Rome, and he appears to have gath- ered about him a congregation of his own (Eus. h. e. vii. 30. 17). (d) But its most important representative is Paul of Samosata. This imperious and worldly-minded Bishop of Antioch (from about A. D. 260 ; cf. encycl. letter of Synod of Antioch, in Eus. h. e. vii. 30. 7-15) taught *' Jesus Christ from below" (xaroj»^/£i^, in contrast with avw^ei', ib. vii. 30. 11). In the man Jesus, born of the virgin, dwelt the divine Wisdom. This is not a separate hypostasis, but exists in God as human^' reason exists in man : ' ' That in God is always his Logos and his Spirit, as in the heart of man his own reason {logos'); and that the Son of God is not in a hypostasis, but is in God himself . . But that the Logos came and dwelt in Jesus, who was a man ; and thus, they say, God is one . . . one God the Father, and his Son MONARCHIANISM. 1 65 in him, as the reason (logos) in a man " (Epiph. h. 65. i). A parallel to this is seen in the indwelling of Wisdom in the proph- ets, except that this indwelling occurred in a unique way in Christ as the temple of God : "In order that neither might the anointed of David be a stranger to Wisdom, nor Wisdom dwell so largely in any other. For it was in the prophets, much more in Moses ; and in many leaders, but much more in Christ as in a temple." But also : '*He who appeared was not Wisdom, for he was not susceptible of being found in an outward form , . for he is greater than the things that are seen " (fragm. disput. c. Malchionem in Routh, Rel. sacr. iii. 301 ; in Leontius, ib. p. 311). As to the mode of this union, Paul teaches that the man Jesus was from his birth anointed with the Holy Ghost. Be- cause he remained immovably steadfast in this relationship and kept himself pure, the power of working miracles became his, and, having been ' ' born pure and righteous, ' ' he overcame the sin of Adam. It is amoral union (in the way of learning and fel- lowship, Routh iii. 312) in the will and in love, which here meets us, not a merely natural one : " Thou shculdst not wonder that the Saviour has one will with God. For just as nature shows us a substance becoming out of many one and the same, so the nature of love makes one and the same will out of many through one and the same manifested preference." (Also: " the thingsob- tained by the natural reason have no praise, but the things obtained by the nature of love are exceedingly praiseworthy," frag, in Mai, Vet. scr. nov. coll. vii. 68 f. ; cf. Athanas. c. Arian, or. iii. 10.) Thus Jesus in his moral development united him- self intimately with God by the influence of the Spirit and unity of will, thus securing the power to perform miracles and fitness to become the Redeemer, and in addition attaining a permanent oneness with God. ** The Saviour, born holy and righteous, having by his struggle and sufferings overcome the sin of our pro- genitor, succeeding in these things, was united in character (rrj 'iperf;) to God, having preser\ed one and the same aim and effort as he for the promotion of things that are good ; and he, having preserved this inviolate, his name is called that above every name, the prize of love having been freely bestowed upon him " (Mai, 1. c). Three synods were held at Antioch to consider the matter (264-269 ; Eus. h. e. vii. 30. 4, 5). Paul at first re- sorted to evasions and no conclusion was reached- Finally, the presbyter Malchion vanquished him at the third synod. ' * He did not formerly say this, that he would not grant that in the whole Saviour was existent the only-begotten Son, begotten before the foundation of the world" (frg. disp. adv. Paul, a Malch. hab. in Routh iii. 302 ; also Pitra, Analecta sacra iii. 600 f. ; iv. 424. Eus. 1 66 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. h. e. vii. 28, 29). Thedecreeof the synod proclaimed the heresy of Artemas and his exclusion from the fellowship of the church (Eus. h. e. vii. 30. 16, 17).^ But Paul retained a following and his office until, in A. D. 272, the degree of Aurelian gave the church property to the control of the one who should be upon terms of epistolary correspondence with the bishops of Italy and Rome (Eus. vii. 30. 19). This was the first time that imperial politics carried into effect a condemnatory decree of the church.^ 2. Patripassian Monarchianism is the more influential and more widely prevalent form of Monarchianism. It is this form chiefly which gives to the system the historical significance noted on p. 163. It is not accidental that Rome and Egypt were the breeding places of Sabellianism and the pillars of the homousia. The history of the separate representatives of this party is, to some extent, obscure, and it is, therefore, difficult to keep the peculiar tenets of each distinct in our minds. Here and there we may trace a connection with the primitive form of the doctrine. The prevalent term, '' Patripassians," may be traced to TertuUian (adv. Prax.). Their fundamental idea is ; *' For thus it is proper to state Monarchianism, saying that he who is called Father and Son is one and the same, not one from the other, but he from himself, called by name Father and Son ac- cording to the figure of the times, but that this one appearing and born of a virgin remains one . . . confessing to those who behold him that he is a Son . and not concealing from those ^ The synod rejected also the Origenistic term, ofioovotoq^ according to the opinion of Athanasius, because Paul understood it as teaching an equaUty with the divine nature (ovain) and not with the Father, so that there would be three natures [ovffiat) to be acknowledged (de synodis 45 ff. ), or because Paul himself expressed the relation of the impersonal Logos to the Father by this term (thus Plilar. de synod. 81, 86). ^ In Pseudo-Cyprian, De montibus Sina et Sion^ the fourth chapter (0pp. Cypr. ed. Hartel iii. 108) is by no means (as Harnack, DG., i. 676 holds) to be understood as presenting a Monarchian Christology. For when it is there said : '* the Lord's flesh from God the Father is called Jesus ; the Holy Spirit who descended from heaven is called Christ," this is but phraseology such as we find, c. g., in Hermas, Sim. ix. i. i ; Arist. Apol. 2. 6; Cyprian, quod idola dii non sint II ("the Holy Spirit assumes flesh ; God is mingled with man"); Lactant. Instit. iv. 6. I ; 12. I ; Tertul. adv. Prax, 8, 26; Hippol. c. Noet. 4, 16; Celsus in Orig. c. Cels. vi. 69, 72, 73, 78, 79 ; Apollinar. in Greg. Nyss. Antirrh. 12. See my remarks upon Arist. 2. 6. The case is dif- ferent with the Christology of the Ac ^a dispiiiatiQnis Archelai et Manetis (ab. A. D. 300, in Ro^ith, Reliq. sacr. v. ed. 2, 38-205). Here, u. 50, the Monar- chian Christology really appears : *' For he who was born the son of Mary, who resolved to undertake the whole conflict because it is great, is Jesus. This is the Christ of God who descended upon him who is sprung from Mary." But the author has at once brought this idea into connection with the teaching of the church : " For God alone is his Father by nature^ who has deigned to manifest all things to us speedily by his Word^^ (c. 33). MON ARCHIANISM. 1 6 7 who approach him that he is the Father" (Hipp. Ref. ix. 10). (a) Praxeas, a martyr of Asia Minor, came with Victor to Rome, and gained an influence over this foe of Dynamistic Monarchianism by means of his Christology as well as by his anti- montanistic tendencies. His doctrine found acceptance also in Africa (Tert. c. Prax. i). He taught: ^' After that time the Father was born and the Father suffered. Jesus Christ is proclaimed as the Father born, the Father suffering, God himself, the omnipotent Lord" (Tert. adv. Prax. 2 init. ). Father and Son are therefore the same person(ib. 5 init.). In support of this the Scriptures were appealed to, particularly Isa. 45. 5; Jn. X. 30; xiv. 9, 10 (ib. 18, 20). It reveals a lean- ing toward the orthodox view, employing the term. Son of God, in the Biblical sense — but at the same time an inclination toward Dynamistic Monarchianism — when distinction is, after all, made between the Father and the Son : '* And in like man- ner in the one person they distinguish the two. Father and Son, saying that the Son is the flesh, i. e., the man ; /. e. , Jesus j but that the Father is the Spirit, /'. e.^ God, i. e.^ Christ" (ib. 27). In this way they avoided the assertion that the Father suffered ('^ Thus the Son indeed suffers {patitur), but the Father suffers with him" (^compatttur) ; ib. 29; cf. Hipp. Ref. ix. 12). {l)) NoETUS of Smyrna and the adherents of his theory, Epigonus and Cleomenes, found again at Rome in the beginning of the third century an influential centre for the dissemination of their views (Hipp. Ref. i. 7), which were the same as those of Praxeas : '* That when the Father had not yet been born, he was rightly called the Father ; but when it had pleased him to sub- mit to birth, having been born, he became the Son, he of him- self and not of another" (Hipp. Ref. ix. 10). ** He said that Christ is himself the Father, and that the Father himself was born and suffered and died" (Hipp. c. Noet. i). Thus the Father also called himself to life again (ib. 3). The Scriptures require us to believe this. Thus the Son is glorified (ib. i) and thus salvation made possible : '* For Christ was God and suffered for us, being the Father himself, in order that he might be able also to save us " (ib. 2). It was a religiously-inspired interest in the full divinity of Christ which led these men to insist upon their theory, and this accounts for their wide influence. They wished to maintain that Christ was God, and yet not waver in the asser- tion of the unity of God as confessed in the church's creed : ** For some simple persons (not to say inconsiderate and ignor- ant, as is always the majority of believers) since the rule of faith itself leads us from the many gods of the world to the one and i68 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. true God (cf. p. 85, n.), not understanding that he is to be be- lieved as being one but with his own economy {uix(tvo/j.ia)j are terrified at this economy. They think that the number and order of the Trinity implies a division of the unity*' (Tert. adv. Prax. 3 init. ). (aii£t^')^ and in the last analysis " three gods " (as Marcion). He opposes the designa- tion of the Son as a created being (-oi'T^/ir/), as also the ascrip- tion to him of a temporal beginning. On the contrary, Ave must, according to the Scriptures, connect the Son and the Spirit very closely with the Father : ''I say now that it is fully necessary that the divine Trinity be brought together and summed up in one, as in a sort of consummation, the one God, the almighty Ruler of all things." Therefore the divine Unit (/kwa'?) dare not be split up into three gods, but we must believe : *' in God the Father Al- mighty, and in Christ Jesus his Son, and in the Holy Ghost •" but the declaration must be unified (^rjvcu(7i^ac) in the God of all things. For thus the divine Trinity and the holy message of the Monarchy would be preserved (de deer. syn. Nic. 26). Regarded theo- logically, this discussion is non-committal (e, ^., the r^vcofn'^ac); but it proves that the Roman bishop was in a position to approve and sanction the Origenistic formulas of the accusers of his Alex- andrine colleague,^ and that he was, on the other hand, accus- tomed to expound the baptismal formula in such a way as to give due prominence to the unity of God (cf. Tertullian, Novatian, and even Sabellius). The course of Dionysius is typical of the attitude of the Romish church in the Christological controver- ' That the Alexandrian bishop did not, as Athanasius suggests in his de- fense ((?. ^., de deer. syn. Nic. 25 ; sent. Dion. 21), think of the '* economy (o'lKovofica) of the Saviour according to the flesh," is sufficiently evident from the situation. Cf. also Basil, ep. 9. 2. 2 He appears (according to sent. Dion. 18, de decret. syn. Nic. 25) even to have laid emphasis upon the ofioovGLot;, ANTE-NICENE CHRISTOLOGY. I 73 sies : ( i ) The creed is regarded as a fixed quantity, and as ex- pressing everything necessary upon all points, and hence upon the details of Christological statement. (2) TertuUian's apparatus of formulas is considered as helpful. (3) The subject itself is discussed as little as possible, as the final conclusion is supposed to have been reached. It is particularly worthy of note how quickly Dionysius of Alexandria found his way back to the doctrine of Origen. The charges of his opponents appeared to him in reality as a mon- strous misunderstanding. Influenced, indeed, by the opposition encountered, he had hitherto revealed only the half of his Ori- genistic soul. He does not deny that there was a certain one- sidedness in his earlier expositions, and that his figures of speech were inappropriate. There are not wanting attempts to help himself by strained interpretations of his former statements. But, beyond this, he expresses entire accord with his opponents : '* For there was no time when God was not the P'ather. Since Christ was the Logos and Wisdom and Power he always existed — being always the reflection of the eternal light, he himself also is eternal. The Son always being with the Father" (sent. Dion. 15). It is false that he denies the uiJ-oti'xno^, although, in- deed, the expression is not biblical (ib. 18, 26). *' For as I do not think that the Logos is a creation, I also do not say that God is his Creator, but his Father " (21). * ' We expand the Monity undivided into the Trinity, and again combine the Trinity undi- minished into the Monity " (ib. 17). Almost more instructive than the controversy itself is the readiness with which the opposing parties come to agreement. The Roman bishop agrees with the Alexandrine plaintiffs, and the bishop of Alexandria at once finds his way back to the stand- point of his opponents. A certain uniformity is beginning to appear in the views entertained of the person of Christ and its relation to the Father. 3. A glance must yet be given to the Christology of Methodius OF Olympus (f A. D. 311. 0pp. ed. Jahn, 1S65, in Migne Gr. 18; BoNWETSCH, Meth. v. 01. vol. i. Writings, 1S91). Christ is the Son of God '^ through whom all things became '^ (urchin, 7. 3), since he is the executive hand of the Father ((le creatis 9, in Bonw., p. 343 f. ), who stands beside the Father and the Spirit (who embraces in himself the knowledge of the Father and the Son), and of whom believers lay hold (conv. dec. virg. viii. 11, 9, 10 ; v. 2 ; iii. 8 ; cf de resur. iii. 23. 8, 12 ] leprosy, 11, 4 ; distinction of meats, etc., 12. 3 f. ). He is the '^ pre-temporal Word" (leprosy, it. 4; de resur. ii. 24. 5 ; cf. conv. vii. 4 ; viii. 9 ; pre-existing already before 174 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. the worlds), the first sprout (^SXaarr^iia^ conv. iii. 4), the *^only- born Son " (de resur. iii. 23. 6J, who is, however, -' the begin- ning after his own unbegun beginning" (de creatis 11), the first of the archangels (the oldest of the aeons and the first of the archangels, conv. iii. 4 ; cf. urchin, 7. 3), the shepherd and leader of the angels (conv. iii. 6), who spoke to the prophets under the old covenant (ib. vii. 6), greater than all except the Father (conv. vii. i). Prayers are addressed to him (de resur. iii. 23. 11; conv. 11. 2). According to the will of the Father he '' truly " assumed the ^^ unsuffering " yet '*much suf- fering body" (cf. '* he imitated the poor/' vom Leben undvern. Handl. 6. 2), and truly died (de resur. ii. 18. 8 ; iii. 23. 4). *^ For this is Christ — a man filled with unadulterated and com- plete divinity, and God contained in man " (conv. iii. 4). But the Logos dwelt in Adam as well as in Jesus (ib.: but this same became Christ and this one [Adam]; cf. 8). The Lord had also the same '* actual " body, consisting of the same substance, in his glorification (resur. iii. 7. 12; i2.3ff. ). ThisChristology, imperfect as it is, represents the average faith of the age : the pre-temporal Son of God, conceived of in a Subordinationistic way, became a. real man. These are illy-defined ideas, falling considerably short of the position of Athanasius, and also of Origen. But it required only a concrete occasion — as shown by the controversy of the two Dionysius's — to produce a more definite and fixed formula- tion.* § 18. Ordinance of Repentance and Advance in Conception of the Church. I. The church is the general body of men who believe the truth. The further development of the doctrine concerning the church by Irenasus and TertuUian started with this idea. The 1 We may here notice briefly the Syrian, Aphraates (A. D. 337-345), who was in time post-Nicene, but in principles ante-Nicene (Wright, the homilies of Aphr., Lond., 1869, translated into German by Bert in Texte u. Unters. iii. 3, 4 ; we cite from the latter). Of Christ, it is said, *' that he is Son of God, and that he is God, who came from God" (xvii. 2, p. 280), " and that through him we know his Father" ( § 6, p. 285). To the Jews it is pointed out that they have no occasion to regard this as anything *' unusual " (§5), since the Old Testament also calls men gods and sons of God {\ 3). But the meaning here is not that Jesus was only a sort of prophet, etc. He " came from God," i. <:., the Father separated him from his own nature [ovuia) and sent him to men (xxiii. p. 402 ; also vi. 9, p. 102). It was a special act that he assumed a human body (ib. p. 378 f. ), being born '*of the Virgin Mary " and "of the Holy Spirit" (p. 388). Gabriel foo/e the Word from on high and came., and the Word became flesh and dzvelt af7iofig us. He is, there- fore, God by nature, ** the first-born of all creatures" (xvii. 8 fin., p. 289), REPENTANCE AND THE CHURCH. 175 bishops are the bearers of the truth. The Catholic church is the church of pure doctrines, guaranteed and represented by the bishops. But the church is also the holy people of God. The recognition of this truth led to consequences of historical importance. There were three possible interpretations of the holiness of the church, each of which found its advocates : (i) Every separate individual is holy (Novatian). (2) The bishops are holy (Cyprian). (3) The sacraments and ordinances of the church are holy (Rome). 2. Hermas had, in his day, in accordance with a special reve- lation (p. 61 f. ), proclaimed the possibility of a ** second repent- ance. ' ' The church didnot lose sight of this idea, and it is almost certain that it was through the authority of this publication that the idea of the * ^second repentance " secured such general ac- ceptance (cf. Tertul. de pud. 10, 20). The resulting praxis was at about the close of the second century the following : A dis- crimination was made between *' sins of daily occurrence " (as anger, smiting, cursing, swearing, lies) and "sins more serious and destructive," "mortal" (i Jn. v. 16), "capital" and " irremediable " (homicide, idolatry, fraud, denial or false testi- mony, blasphemy, adultery, fornication, " and if there be any other violation of the temple of God," Tert. de pud. 19 ; c. Marc. iv. 9). Sins of the firtt class might find at once forgive- ness through the mediation of Christ, through prayer, good works and intercession, since the sinner by these means offered to the offended God sufficient satisfaction (see p. 133); but sins of the second group require an exclusion from the congregation of the "saints" (see Tert. de pud. 19). There was, however, a difference in the praxis of the church in regard to transgressors of the second class. To the greater number of these it granted the "second repentance," but only (Tert de poenit. 7, 12) upon condition that they felt bitter regret, manifesting this by their out- ward deportment, requested intercession in their behalf, and made the required confession {exomologesis') in the presence of the as- sembled congregation . The church granted this privilege through her presbyters and confessors (Tert. de poenit. 9, 12, 22 ; Apol. 39). Thus is suitable satisfaction made to God ( " let him repent from the heart, " if.r (^?z/w(9 . . . " confession of sins," t'£?/7/^jj"/^y^- lictorum . . . "confessionis the method of satisfaction," j-a/?*j/(7f- tionis consilium, poen. 8 fin.). These are the elements of the Romish sacrament of penance. The worship of idols, murder, for- "light of light" (ib. 2, the only Nicene turn in Aphraates). Trinitarian for- mulas are found, ^.^■., xxiii., pp. 411, 412 ; cf. i. 15. These are ideas that fit easily into the line of thought traced in the present section. For the somewhat earlier ** Acta Archelai," see p. 166. I7f> HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. nication, and adultery were absolutely excluded from this second repentance (Tert. pud. 5, 12, 22 ; cf. Orig. de orat. 28 fin.). Practically, the discussion centered about two offenses : in times of peace, especially fornication ; in times of persecution, denial of the faith and apostasy. The conflicts of the future naturally raged about these two centres. The opinions entertained concerning this '^second repentance" were still for a time, indeed, quite fluctuating. Not to speak of the Montanists, Tertullian, even before joining their ranks, had only reluctantly accepted the theory (**Iam afraid of the second, I should rather say, last hope," poen. 7). But others found fault with the strictness of the treatment (poen. 5, 10), and even thought that open sinners might be tolerated in the church, as the ark, which typifies the church, held unclean animals (Tert. de idololatr. 24 fin. ; cf. remarks of Dionysius of Corinth in Eus. h. e. iv. 23. 6). 3. Such was about the situation when CALLiSTUSof Rome (217- 222), by the publication of a new penitential order, introduced a change of momentous import in the praxis of repentance, and thus also in the conception of the church. Literature. Hipp. Ref. ix. 12, p. 458 f. Terl. de pudic; cf. Harnack, Ztschr. f. Theol. u. K., 1891, p. 114 ff. Preuschen, Tert. Schriften de paenit; et de pud. Giess. Diss. 1890. Rolffs, Das Indulgenzedikt des rom. Bischof Callist, in Text. u. Unters. xi. 3.^ Callistus was the first to allow the second repentance in the case of fornication: '*He first contrived to connive with men in matters pertaining to their lusts, saying that sins were forgiven to all men by him " (Hipp. ),/. ^., he declared : *' I remitby peni- tence to those who have committed them also sins of adultery and fornication" (Tert. i). But this applied, as TertuUian's polemics prove, only to sins of the flesh, and made provision for but one second repentance. In justification of this innovation, Callistus (or his adherents) presented a number of biblical argu- ments, e. g.: '* God is merciful, and does not desire the death of the sinner," etc. (Ez. xxxiii. 11. Tert. ii. init.); it is not for us to judge our brethren (Rom. xiv. 4, ib. ); the parables of the prodigal son and the lost sheep (7 f. ); Christ's treatment of the woman taken in adultery (11); Paul's manner of dealing with such (2 Cor. ii. 5 ff. c. 13), etc. The aim of repentance is forgiveness (3); i^Hio^'^r^ {^communicatio') maybe withdrawn 1 The following analysis proceeds upon the supposition that the bishop whom Tertullian attacks in his De pudicitia was Callistus, and that we may, accordingly, from the work of Tertullian, fill out the portraiture given in Hippol. Ref. ix. 12. This was first done by Rossi, Bulletino archeol. christ., 1866, p. 26. Extracts from the Edict of Callistus reveal the hand of Tertullian. RoLFFS attempted a reconstruction. REPENTANCE AND THE CHURCH. 177 from the sinning, but only for the present {^ad pre sens). If he repent, let it be granted him again according to the mercy of God (i8). If the blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin (i Jn. i, 7, c. 19), then it is also perfectly scriptural for Callistus to grant pardon to fornicators. The church has the authority to do this (*' but the church has, I say, the power of pardoning sins," c. 21); particularly the bishops. ''And, therefore, the church will indeed pardon sins, but the church as a spirit {^ecclesia spirifus) through a spiritual man, not the church as a number of bishops" (c. 21). Callistus hereappeals to Matt. xvi. i8 (ib.), and appears to have attributed to himself, as the successor of Peter, peculiar authority (cf. the form of address, apostolicCy c. 21, and the \\\\^'a, pontifex viaximus, episcopus episcoporum, c. i). A similar authority is also ascribed to the confessors (22). The forgiveness of sins is thus practically given into the hand of the bishop, who exercises it as a divine right. His own moral character is not taken into consideration. He is not subject to removal : *' If a bishop should commit some sin, even a mortal one, it is not permitted to remove him" (Hipp. ix. 12). If the bishop tolerates sinners in the church, no objection can be made. He must allow the tares to stand among the wheat, and the ark contained many kinds of animals (Hipp. ix. 12, p. 460 ; Tert. de idol. 24). The innovation of Callistus was certainly in harmony with the spirit of the age. Many of his deliverances have an evangelical sound. But that such is not really their character is evident from subsequent developments — from the fact that he did not advance a single new idea looking to the awakening of penitence, but only changed the praxis in regard to fornication upon practical grounds, and, above all, from his conception of the church, which gave direction to all his thought. Callistus was evangelical — and even liberal — because he was the first conscious hierarch.^ Henceforth the church is no longer the holy people of God, holding in common the faith of the apostles, i. e., the faith of the bishops ; but it is an association of men, subject to the control of the bishop, whom he tolerates in the church, and this by virtue of the divine authority which has been given him to pardon or re- tain sins. He whom the bishop recognizes belongs to the church. The bishop is lord over the faith and life of the Christian world by virtue of an absolute supremacy divinely bestowed upon him. ' Hipp. ix. 12 fin.: "Callistus. . . whose school remains, guarding morais and the tradition." Perhaps these were watchwords among the Callistians. They sought to evangelize morals upon the basis of the misinterpreted tradition. 12 lyS HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Callistus was the author of the Roman Catholic conception of the church. 4. The penitential praxis introduced by Callistus had become universal by about A. D. 250 (e.g., Cypr. ep. 55. 20; 4. 4), although there were still lingering recollections of opposition to it (Cypr. ep. 55. 21). The circumstances of the congregations during the Decian persecution produced a further and logically consistent (cf. Tert. de pud. 22) step in advance. Even to such as had denied the Christian faith must now be extended the op- portunity of return to the church. It was chiefly Cyprian (f A. D. 258) who justified this step, and, in doing so, developed more fully the Catholic conception of the church. Vid. collection of Cyprian's letters, his De /apsis and De catholicae ecchsiae unitate (Cypr. Opp. oran. ed. Hartel, 1868), and the letter of Cornelius of Rome to Fabius of Antioch, in Eus. h. c. vi. 43. Dionysius of Alexandria to Novatian, ib. vi. 45. Ambrose, de poen. 11. 2. Compare Rettberg, Cypri- anus, 1831. Peters, Der heil. Cypr. v. Karthago, 1877. Fechtrup, Der heil. Cypr. vol. i., 1878. O. Ritschl, Cypr. v. K, u. die Verfassung der Kirche, 1885. Goetz, Die Busslehre Cyprians, 1895. K. Miller, Ztschr. f. KG., 1896, I ff., 187 ff. Harnack, pre. viii. 417 ff.; x. 652 ff. During the Decian persecution it became evident that it would be impossible, in view of the number of backsliders {lapsi), to maintain the ancient praxis, i. e., to exclude all such from the communion of the church (the eucharist, Cypr. ep. 57. 2), and to refuse to allow them to receive the benediction {pax) with the congregation. Those who had fallen applied to their ** confes- sors " for letters of recommendation (Hbeliz), which were freely granted (Cypr. ep. 20. 2; cf. 22. 2; 27. i). Although these were primarily intended only as letters of recommendation (ep. 15. I ; 16. 3 ; 18. I ; 19. 2 ; 22.2 fin.; cf. 1,6. 2), this recom- mendation (cf the more ancient praxis, Tert. de pud. 22, and Dionys. of Alex, in Eus. h. e. vi. 42. 5 f. ; 'ep. eccl. Lugd. in Eus. h. e. v. T. 45, 46 ; 2. 6, 7) soon came to have the force of a command (see the letter of the confessor Lucian to Cyprian, ep. 23; cf. 21. 3). Cyprian did not dispute the right of the confessors, but he thought that an assembly of the bishops should first consider the matter and lay down the principles to govern such cases before any action was taken — particularly in the midst of the distractions caused by the persecution (ep. 19. 2 ; 20. 3 ; 20, cf. 31. 6). This was also the position of the church at Rome (ep. 30. 3, 5, 6 ; 21. 3 ; 36. 3). Meanwhile some pres- byters at Carthage, during the absence of their bishop, Cyprian, admitted certain of the lapsed to the communion upon the basis of their libelli, without previous public confession (ep. 15. i ; 16. 2, 3; 17. 2; 20. 2), and in some cities the mass of the REPENTANCE AND THE CHURCH. I 79 people {multitudo), relying upon the testimonials of the martyrs and confessors, compelled the bishops to pronounce the benedic- tion upon them (ep. 27. 3). In contrast with those who, with the testimonial of the confessors in their hands, believed them- selves authorized to demand the benediction, stood others, who declared their purpose to repent and to await the bishop's declaration (ep. 33. i, 2; 35, cf. 36. i). Cyprian instructed that the presbyters who would not submit to the episcopal deci- sion should be excluded from fellowship {^communication ep. 34. 3; cf. 42). Thus the episcopal authority on the one hand, and on the other the pastoral office of the presbyters and the prerogative of the confessors, stand arrayed in opposition (cf. 16. i). It is not in reality a discord in the praxis of repentance which here conies to view, but a discord between the bishop and the presbyters. As a result, an opposition party was formed under the leadership of five presbyters and a certain Felicissimus (ep. 41. 2).) If the latter was the '^standard-bearer of sedition," the presbyter, NovATUs, was the soul of the insurrection, " a torch and fire for kindling the flames of sedition " (52. 2 ) . Fortunatus became the bishop of this party (59. 9). Their motto was, *'to restore and recall the lapsed" (43. 5), and they were opposed to an episcopal decision in the matter and to a more prolonged probation for penitence (43. 2). In accordance with the ancient privi- lege of confessors, they admitted at once to fellowship those who were recommended by the latter. About the same time a schism arose also in Rome, occasioned by an election for bishop (ep. 44. i. Euseb. h. e. vi. 43), in which Cornelius and Novatian (about A. D. 251) were the candidates. Novatian, otherwise an orthodox man, established a party in opposition to Cornelius by retaining the ancient praxis in relation to the lapsed. He sought to build up a congregation of the pure {-/.afhxpot^ Eus. h. e. vi. 43. i), since the idolatrous worship of some contaminates the remaining members of the church : ** They say that one is corrupted by the sin of another, and in their zeal contend that the idolatry of an offender passes over to the non-offending" (Cypr. ep. 55. 27). He proposes to have a congregation of actually holy men. Hence he has those who come to him from the church at large re-baptized (Cypr. ep. 73. 2; Dionys. of Alex, in Eus. h. e. vii. 8; Ambros. de poenit. i, 7. 30). His adherents were compelled at the reception of the Lord's Supper to bind themselves by oath to adhere to his church (Cornel, in Eus, h. e. vi. 43, 18). There should thus be established a congregation of saints, such as Montanism had endeavored to form. But to what an extent church politics and personal motives were involved on both sides 1^° HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. is manifest from the league formed by Novatian — after his *' con- fessors " had forsaken him (Cornel, to Cypr. ep. 49. i, 3; cf, 53, 54) — with Novatus (see ep. 47. 50). Novatian appointed opposition-bishops also in other places (ep. 55. 24 ; 68. i), and Novatianism ere long struck root also in the Orient (Eus. h. e. vi. 46. 3; vii. 5). A Novatian counter-church, which after- ward extended its rigor toward the lapsed to all guilty of mortal sins (see^. g., Athanas. ad Serap. ep. iv. 13 ; Socrat. h. e. i. 10), had soon spread, variously combined with Montanism, over the whole church (see Harnack PRE. x. p. 667 ff.). But it never gained a more than superficial influence. It was an essentially powerless reaction in the interest of an archaistic idea, which never was nor could be applied with real seriousness in practical hfe. In Carthage, after Cyprian's return, the proposed assembly of bishops was held (A. D. 252). Its decrees present the actual results of the agitation. In expectation of a new persecution, it is here held to be proper ** that to those who have not departed from the church of the Lord, and from the first day of their lapse have not ceased to exercise repentance and lament and pray to the Lord, the /^x should be given." Although this had hitherto been granted only to those in immediate peril of death (cf. Cypr. ep. 55. 13 ; 57. i ; de laps. 16), yet it is now, upon the suggestion of the Holy Spirit and plain visions, extended to all the lapsed (see Cypr. ep. 57 ; cf. 55. 6). To this Rome also agreed (ep. 55. 6). This principle was not, indeed, at once acted upon in all places (see ep. 55. 22 ; 59. 15), but as a prin- ciple it had carried the day. It is not in this fact, however, that the real significance of the decision lay. In the question concerning repentance, Cyprian accepted fully the position of his opponents; but it was bishops who passed the final decree, bishops were to decide in the case of individuals who had lapsed, and from their authority the latter could not appeal. In these controversies, therefore, Cyprian's conception of the church was perfected. The whole heart of the great bishop was bound up with this idea. In it concentred all the elements of his re- ligious thought and feeling. He had the juristic, logical bent of a Roman. TertuUian was his instructor. He had a warm heart. He was fanatically devoted to the hierarchy, and he loved Christ. 5. Cyprian's conception of the church embraces the follow- ing: (a) The successors of the apostles are the bishops, who, like the former, are chosen by the Lord himself and inducted into their office fCvpr. ep. 3. 3; cf. Firmil. 75. 16) as leaders (prae- REPENTANCE AND THE CHURCH. lOl positi^ or pastors (^pastores) (ep. 8. i ; 19- 2 j 20. 3; 27. 3; 33. I ; 13. I ; 59. 14). This is to be understood not merely in the sense of an ** ordinance of succession," but every individual bishop is inducted into his office by a*' divine decree, for his own sake " (59. 5). He isabishop, however, and his sacrifices and prayers are effectual, only so long as he remains faithful and leads a holy life.^ He who criticises the bishops presumes thereby to pass judgment upon the judgment of God and Christ : '^This is not to believe in God; this is to be a rebel against Christ and his gospel, as, when he says : * Are not two sparrows, ' etc. (Matt. 10. 29) . . . thou wouldst think that priests of God are ordained in the church without his knowledge . For to believe that those who are ordained are unworthy or corrupt, what else is this but to contend that his priests are not appointed in the church by God nor through him?" (66.1).*^ In harmony with this, the bishops are said to be guided in their decisions by divine sug- gestions and visions (^. ^., ep. 11.3,4; 57. 5; 68.5; (>t. 10; ^^3- ij 73- 26, cf. 40; 8t ; see also de aleat. 3. 2).^ The bishop, according to Cyprian, is, upon the one hand, a successor of the historical apostolate and hence the legitimate teacher of the apostolical tradition. But he is also an inspired prophet, endowed with the charismata — a claim not found in the teachings of Irenseus. Thus the bishop discharges the office of the ancient Spirit-endowed men, for he receives revelations from the Spirit. The place of the former Tzveufiarr/Mt is filled by the bishop, as after- ward by the monastic system. But if the bishops have the ^ Ep. 65.4: "to separate the brothers from the folly and remove them from the contagion of these, since neither can a sacrifice be consecrated where there is not a holy spirit, nor does the Lord favor anyone on account of the addresses and prayers of one who has himself offended the Lord." And in 6p' 67. 3 (circular letter of 37 bishops) it is announced as a fundamental prin- ciple : " AH are completely bound to sin who have been contaminated [ac- cording to Hos. 9. 4] by the sacrifice of a profane and wicked priest,'* and *' a people obedient to the Lord's commands and fearing God ought to sepa- rate themselves from a sinful leader, praepositus^ and not participate in the sac- rifice of a sacrilegious priest" (Numb. xvi. 26). These are statements to which the Donatists could afterward appeal. Cf. Reuter, Augustin. Studien, p. 254 ff. ^ The divine decision at elections does not exclude " the vote of the people, the consensus of associated bishops" (ep. 59- 5 ; 55- ^J 67. 4, 5 ; 49. 2). It is even said of the populace [plebs): "Since it most fully possesses the power of electing worthy or rejecting unworthy priests" (ep. 67. 3). ^ This is an archaistic feature. Visions are mentioned by Cyprian also in other connections (ep. 16. 4; 39. I ; de immortal. 19 ; ad Donat. 5 i cf. Dionys. Alex, in Eus. h. c. vii. 7. 2, 3 ; Firmilian's letter, ep. 75. 10, and the criticism noted in ep. 66.10: "ridiculous dreams and absurd visions appear to some "). Cyprian has in mind, not a permanent official endowment, but illuminations granted from time to time. This patriarch was not far re- moved from superstitious fanaticism. l82 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Spirit, it may be easily understood that all criticism must be forestalled by their deliverances, as formerly by those of the prophets (vid. Didache ; also supra, p. i8i). {b) According to Matt. xvi. i8 f., the church is founded upon the bishop and its direction devolves upon him : *' Hence through the changes of times and dynasties the ordination of bishops and the order of the church moves on, so that the church is constituted of bishops, and every act of the church is con- trolled by these leaders " (33. i). ** One in the church is for the time priest and for the time judge, in the stead of Christ " (ep. 59. 5.). How seriously these principles were accepted is evident from the controversy above noted. The bishop decides who belongs to the church and who shall be restored to her fel- lowship (16. I ; 41. 2 ; de laps. 18, 22, 29). He conducts the worship as the priest of God, who offers the sacrifice upon the altar (67. i ; Cyprian is the first to assert an actual priesthood of the clergy, based upon the sacrifice offered by them, vid. sub, p. 196), and cares for the poor. He defends the pure tradition against errorists (ep. 6t,, 17, 19; 74. 10). Cf. O. RiTSCHL, 1. c, 216 ff. He is the leader { praepo situs') y whose office it is to rule the laity (Jaici^ or pie bs) by virtue of divine authority. (r) The bishops constitute a college (^collegium'), the episco- pate {episcopatus). The councils developed this conception. In them the bishops practically represented the unity of the church, as Cyprian now theoretically formulated it. Upon their unity rests the unity of the church. ''The episcopate is one, a part of which taken separately is regarded as the whole : the church is one, w^hich is ever more widely extended into a multitude by the increase of reproductive energy " (de unit. eccl. 5 ) . * ' The church, which is one and catholic, is in a manner connected and joined together by the glue of the mutually cohering priests " (ep. 66. 8). In this connection it is said: ''These are the church united (adunata) to the priest and the flock adhering to the pastor. Whence thou shouldst know that the bishop is in the church and the church in the bishop, and he who is not with the bishop is not in the church, and they flatter themselves in vain who, not having peace with the priests of God, deceive themselves and think that they may secretly hold fellowship with any persons whatsoever " (ib.). This unity of the episcopate rests upon the divine election and endowment which the bishops have in com- mon as successors of the apostles, and finds expression in the same sense {e. g.^ 75. 3) in their united conferences and mutual recognition (cf. ep. 19. 2; 20. 3 ; 55. i, 6, 7, 24, 30; cf. 75. 4, 45, etc.). The unity is manifest in the fact that the Lord in REPENTANCE AND THE CHURCH. 1 83 the first instance bestowed apostolic authority upon Peter : *' Here the other apostles were also, to a certain extent, what Peter was, endowed with an equal share of both honor and power ; but the beginning proceeds from unity, in order that the church of Christ may be shown to be one" (de un. eccl. 4). Accordingly, the Roman church is the ** mother and root of the catholic church " (ep. 48. 3; cf. 59. 14, etc. ). The Roman bishop made practical application of these ideas (ep. 67. 5 ; esp. 6d>. i- 3; cf. also ep. 8; 71. 3; 75. 17; de aleatoribus i, as well as the ideas of Callistus, supra, p. 177). As understood by Cyprian, no higher significance was attached to them than by Irenseus (supra, p. 137). In reality all the bishops — regarded dogmatically — stand upon the same level, and hence he main- tained, in opposition to Stephanus of Rome, his right of inde- pendent opinion and action, and flatly repelled the latter's ap- peal to his primacy (ep. 71. 3 ; 74 ; cf. Firmilian's keen criti- cism, ep. 75. 2, 3, 17, 24 f; see also 59. 2, 14; 67. 5). The bond which holds the church to unity is thus the epis- copate. (^) Rebellion against the bishop is, therefore, rebellion against God. The schismatic is also a heretic (59. 5 ; 66. 5 ; 52. i ; 69. i; deunit. eccl. 10). He who does not submit to the rightful bishop forfeits thereby his fellowship with the church and his salvation. ** Whosoever he is, and whatever his character, he is not a Christian who is not in the church of Christ" (55. 24, referring to Novatian ! cf 43. 5; de unit. 17, 19). The possession of the same faith, to which such persons are wont to appeal, benefits them as little as it did the family of Korah (ep. 69. 8). It is always chaff which is blown from the threshing- floor (de un. eccl. 9 ; ep. 66. 8), even though the individuals concerned were martyrs for the faith (ep. 73. 21): ** because there is no salvation outside the church." The true members of the church will, therefore, above all, recognize the bishop and obey him. Thus they remain in the one church, outside of which there is no salvation : '* It is not possible that he should have God for his father who has not the church for his mother " (de un. 6). The members of the church are related to the bishop as children to their father (ep. 41. i); members of the fraterniias to one another as brothers, in that they give full sway to peace and love, and avoid all discord and divisions, praying Avith one another in brotherly accord, and even sharing with one another their earthly goods (de un. 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 24 f; de orat. dom. 8, 30 ; de op. et eleem. 25 fin.; de pat. 15 ; de zel. et liv. 6). ((?) A logical result of this conception of the church is seen 1S4 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. in Cyprian's denial of the validity of heretic baptism. Tradition was here divided. The bishops, assembled three times (A. D. 255-256) at Carthage under Cyprian, supported their opposition by appeal to their predecessors (ep. 70. i ; 71. 4; 73- 3; cf. Tert. de bapt. 15), and, as Firmilian reports (ep. 75. 19), the synod at Iconium had taken the same view. The Roman usage was, however, different, and Stephanus followed it (*'let there be no innovations, let nothing be done except what has been handed down," 74. i; cf. Ps. -Cypr. de rebaptismate i ; also Alexandrines, Eus. vii. 7. 4), andappealed to theprimacy of Peter (71. 3; cf. sent, episcoporum, proem.). When confronted by tradition,^ Cyprian always appealed to the *' decision (^consilium) of a sane mind" {(i%. 2 and 71. 3; 73. 13; 74. 2, 3, 9; cf. 75. 19. Compare Tert., supra, 135, n.), /. ^., to the logi- cal consequences of his conception of the church, according to which, it was evident, no one who was himself outside of the church could receive anyone into it. The baptism of heretics is a ''sordid and profane bath" {tinctio, 70. i ; 72. i ; 73. 6, 2 1 , etc. ) . On the other hand : ' ' the water is purified and sanc- tified through the priest of Christ " (70. i). Only the leaders, who receive the Spirit, have the power to impart the forgiveness of sins, and it is only in the church that the Spirit of God is re- ceived (73. 7 ; 74- 5 ; cf. 75. 9); therefore, in receiving those baptized by heretics, the term employed should be not re-baptism, but baptism (73. i). Stephanus severed fellowship with the churches of Africa (75. 25 ; cf. Fechtrup i., p. 236 ff. ) and threatened to pursue the same course with the Orientals (Dionys. in Eus. h. e. vii. 5. 4). Thus Cyprian's conception of the church was used as a weapon against himself. Cyprian held in this controversy apparently the more logical position. But the instinct of Rome was keener. Individuals are changeable and open to assault. A principle is firmly established only when it has become rooted in institutions, and when these bring individ- uals into subjection. Accordingly, the seemingly more liberal praxis of Rome prevailed. 6. We have thus witnessed a momentous transformation in the general conception of the Church. By the term is no longer understood the holy people of God believing on Jesus Christ, but a group of men belonging to the episcopacy. They obey it, not because it advocates the truth proclaimed by the apostles, but because the bishops have been endowed and appointed by God to be the leaders of the congregations, ruling them in God's ^ Hippolytus (Ref. ix. 12) says of Callistus : e'kX tovtov 7rp6T0)C reTdXft^rac ih'urepov avrotg ^dirTio/ia. GENERAL CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY. 1 85 name and by virtue of divine authority. This subjection under the episcopacy is the essential feature in the church, for it con- stitutes her unity. Only he who obeys the bishop belongs to the church and has relationship with God and salvation. The ideas of Irenseus must now receive a new interpretation and be brought into harmony with this new conception, and the holiness of the church is more and more distinctly associated with her sacra- ments. The evangelical definition of the church was superseded by the catholic. The church is no longer essentially the assem- bly of believers and saints, nor an object of faith, but a visible body, controlled by divinely authorized '' ecclesiastical law." Much is yet in a crude state, but the foundation has been laid. § 19. General Conceptio7i of Christianity. I. If the definition of the church is the church's own descrip- tion of herself, defects in the definition must all find their coun- terpart in perverted views of Christian character, and the means by which it may be secured and maintained. We will find con- firmation of this principle when we come to deal with the litera- ture of the West, but we must first examine the writings of the Eastern theologians. 2. Among these we mention ; DiONYSius OF Alexandria (f ca. A. D. 265. PVagments in RouTH, Reliq. sacr. iii.,iv. Theognostus (ca. A. D. 280; cf. Phot. cod. 106). PiERiUS (age of Diocletian, vid. Phot. Bibl. 118). Gregory Thaumaturgus (vid. Caspari, Quellen, etc., 1886, p. i ff. Migne gr. 10. Lagarde, Analecta syr., 1858. Ryssel, Greg. Thaum. Leben u. Schriften. Pitra, Analecta sacr. iii., iv.). HiERACAS (Epiph. h. 67). Above all, Methodius of Olympus (Opp. edited by Bonwetsch, vid. supra, p. 173, and cf. Pankau, Meth. Bisch. V. Olymp.; in '* Der Katholik," i887,ii.,p. Ii3ff., 225 ff.; Bonwetsch, Theologie des Meth., 1903. With the latter, his con- temporary, Peter (| A. D. 311 ; fragments in Routh, Reliq. sacr. iv. Pitra, Analecta sacra, iv, 187 ff., 425 ff. Cf. Harnack, Gesch. d. altchr. Litt. i., p. 443 ff-)- The thought of Eastern theologians was largely moulded by Origen, as may be clearly seen even in his most energetic oppo- nents. His dogmatic formulas and problems (creation, homousia of the Son, spirit and body, freedom, resurrection, interpreta- tion of Scripture, etc. ) continue to exert a positive influence. Compare, e.g., the writings of Dionysius of Alexandria (his Christology, supra, p. 130; his work, r.epi ')-eo£txeXoVj res. i. 35. 2). This freedom of choice has descended from the first man to his posterity. *' From whom the subsequent members of the race also had allotted to them the like freedom " (lib. arb. 16. 2). This moral equipment of man involves that he was and is in position to fulfill the law of God : *' For it belongs to him to be able to accept the commandment or not " (lib. arb. 16. 7). ''For it hes with us to believe or not to believe . . . , with us to live aright or to sin, with us to do good or to do evil " (res. 57.6; of conv. viii. 17). Since man was created for eternity, God sees to it that this becomes his portion (res. i. 35. 2-4). This is the genuine Greek anthropology. (3) The devil's envy of man led to the fall (lib. arb. 17. 5 ; 18. 4 ff.), /. e.^ man em- ployed his freedom in disobedience of God's command. '* But wickedness is disobedience" (ib. 18. 8). The spirit of the world then gained control within him : ** For thus first came about our condition ; we were filled with strifes and vain loo HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. reasoning ; on the one hand, emptied of the indwelling of God ; on the other, filled with worldly lust, which the plotting serpent infused into us" (res. ii. 6. 2). Thus man ''chose evil from free choice" (res. i. 45. 2). Thus it is not the flesh, but the soul, that is responsible for sin (res. i. 29. 8 ; 59. 3), but '* every sin and every way of life attains its end through the flesh '* (res. ii. 4. 3). Henceforth evil lusts crowd in upon us, which we, in- deed, ought to conquer : *' For it does not lie wholly with us to desire or not to desire things improper, but to carry out or not carry out the desire" (res. ii. 3. i). But in order that the evil in man might not become immortal, God graciously appointed death (res. i. 39. 5 ; 38. i ; 45. 5 ; ii. 6. 3), which is a penalty intended, as are all penalties, to lead to amendment (res. i. 31. 4). As an artist breaks to pieces a statue which has been maliciously defaced, in order to recast it, so God deals with man in appointing him to death (res. i. 43. 2 ff. ). We may here again clearly trace the influence of Origen, despite all the polem- ical assaults upon him. (4) Wherein now consists the salvation which Christ has brought to the race ? The answer assumes many forms. The souls of men are cleansed by the blood of Christ. He is our ''Helper" in the conflict (distinction of meats, 15; 11. 4; 2. i). He is "helper, advocate, and physician," the "great Giver and great Helper" (res. iii. 23. 11). Christ announced through the prophets of the old covenant that he would bring forgiveness of sins and the resurrection of the flesh (conv. vii. 6). Thus the "Word" "directed us to the truth and brought us to immortality" (res. iii. 23. 4,6). He brings to men the redemption of the body (res. ii. 18. 8; 24. 4). But the controlling idea of Methodius is different from these, /. e., Christ is born in those who are received by baptism into the church : " For since those illuminated (baptized) with the image of the Logos, impressed in figure upon them and be- gotten within them according to perfect knowledge and faith, receive also the marks and image and manhood of Christ, so, we may understand, is Christ born in everyone. ' * Since they through the Holy Spirit enter into living fellowship with Christ, they themselves become, as it were, Christs : "As if having become Christs, being baptized according to their possession of the Spirit into Christ " (conv. viii. 8; cf, Ephes. 3. 14-17). " For to proclaim the incarnation of the Son of God by the holy virgin, but not at the same time to confess that he also comes into his church as into his flesh, is not perfect. For everyone of us must confess, not alone his parousia in that holy flesh which came from the pure virgin, but also a similar parousia in the spirit GENERAL CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY. 1 89 of everyone of us" (urchin, 8. 2, 3). ''Be moulded by Christ, who is within you " (ib. 1.6; cf. distinction of meats, 4. i). Christ becomes known to us, because he dwells in us (cf. conv. viii. 9). But this fellowship in the Holy Ghost produces in us a new life and energy, which lead to im- mortality (urchin, 4. 4, 6 ; 8, 3-5. Conv, iii. 8 : *' It is im- possible for anyone to be a partaker of the Holy Spirit and be accounted a member of Christ, unless the Logos, having first come to him, has fallen asleep and risen, in order that, hav-ing arisen from sleep with him who for his sake fell asleep, he also having been formed anew may be enabled to share in the re- newal and restoration of the Spirit." Conv. viii. 10: *' He chooses the thought of the restored " ) . Thus Christ has come to take up his abode in men. When this is done through the Holy Spirit, men are renewed, incited to choose the good and thus to attain immortality. As the Logos once dwelt in Adam (supra, p. 174), so now he dwells again in believers. (5) Man is in- troduced into this new life through the church, which is pri- marily *' the whole assembly (^af}poi(rrj.a) and mass (^frrttpo^) of those who have believed " (conv. iii. 8 ; vii. 3); but the more perfect and morally mature properly constitute the church of Christ, which has the power to prosecute his work (ib.). Fur- ther, in this ''robe of the Lord," the church, are discriminated the spiritual and the laity : " He calls the more powerful rank of the church, /'. e.j the bishops and teachers, the warp ; but the subjects and laity of the pasture, the woof " (leprosy, 15. 4). This is not yet understood in a hierarchical sense (see complaint against bishops, ib. 17. 2). The church in which Christ dwells now bears children to him. This occurs through teaching (dtdafTxaXca^ conv. iii. 8) and through baptism (ib. viii. 6 ; cf dist. of meats, 1 1 . 6 : "as the mysteries have been ordained for the illuminating and vivifying of that which has been learned "). Baptism introduces into the fellowship of the Spirit and bestows immortality ("the illuminated [/'. e., baptized] have been duly born again to immortality," conv. iii. 8). Thus the church in- creases and grows because it stands in living fellowship with the Logos: "growing daily into loftiness and beauty and magni- tude through the union and fellowship of the Logos" (ib.). Thuii she bears children to Christ — yea, even begets the Word itselfin the heart (ib. viii. 11 init.). (6) Evident as it is that man has the ability to accept by the power of his will the salvation proffered, it is just as certain that sin yet exerts its alluring and stimulating power within him. " But now, even after believing and going to the water of cleansing, we are often found yet in sins. ' ' Faith only smothers sin, and does not root it out ; it cuts igo HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. off the suckers, but not the root itself (res. i. 41. 2-4). More than this man cannot accomplish (ib. i. 44, 4 ; only death can complete the workj: but this much he must strive to do. He does so in the power of the Spirit working within him (^. ^,, conv. viii. 10). Thus he represses the lusts that burn within him (res. ii. ,3-5) and obeys not the world but God (**the law of God is self-control," res. i. 60. 3). In this conflict, Christ is helper and advocate (res. iii. 23. 11). God is called upon to grant *' improvement of the heart," and '*non-imputation and for- giveness of sins" (ib. iii. 23. 7-9). Thus, contending and re- penting (ib. iii. 21. 9), man struggles upward. Repentance has to do primarily with the lusts of the heart. These must be con- fessed to God. But if one is yet unable to overcome them, or if they issue in sinful acts, then one should entrust himself to the bishop and be by him subjected to the discipline of the church. This imposes upon the offender separation from church- fellowship and public confession. It is the duty of the bishop to note whether there be real penitence and a forsaking of sin, and, only in such case, to restore the offender to fellowship (leprosy, 5 ff.; cf. Bonwetsch, Theol. des Method., p. 103 ff.). It is important to observe how the point of view here as elsewhere differs from that of the West. The bishop is not a judge, and the aim in repentance is not to render satisfaction to God. The bishop is regarded as a spiritual adviser and official of the church, and the object of repentance is inward healing and amendment. The Christian's aim is : " that we may become strong and sound through faith to keep thy commandments " (ib. iii. 23.11). All depends upon '' the faith and the conduct," upon '* orthodoxy,"^ and *' good works," and ^' an active and rational life " (leprosy, 15. 2 ; urchin, 8. 4 ; dist. of meats, 8. 2). At the same time there is running through the writings of Methodius a strong leaning toward asceticism and thoughts of the life to come. Suffering purifies (dist. of meats, 1-5). He esteems lightly * ' things present " ( " a using, but no possession " ) , but he loves *' things to come," which are eternal (life and rat. conduct, 5. I ; 6. 3). Of ^ Musts" the church will know nothing, for " they say that it is called * church ' from having turned away from (ixxexXcxivat) pleasures" (de creat. 8). But Methodius never tires of glorifying celibacy:^ Virginity is nearness to God ^ Cf. the value attached to orthodoxy, f . jf. , res. i. 30. 2 : " For thou seest that the doctrines are not of small account to us, but in what way it is necessary to have believed ; for I think that nothing is so evil for a man as that of the nec- essary things he should believe anything false." ^ The right to marry is not thereby curtailed, e. g.^ conv. ii. 1.2; iii, II ff.; lib. arb. 15. I f. GENERAL CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY. I9I (^Ttapd-ela yap i) ■Kapi^)-^via, conv. viii. i). Christ IS the chief Virgin (ib. 1.5). Virgins are the best portion of the church. " For, although many are evidently daughters of the church, there is one rank alone chosen and most precious in her eyes above all others, the rank of the virgins (conv. vii. 3). (7) The goal of the Christian life is immortality attained through the resurrection. The latter term applies not to the soul, but to the body, v^^hose substance continues to exist, since it was not the purpose of God to transform men into angels (res. i. 50. I ] iii. I ff. ). Immortality is, therefore, to be attained after the final conflagration, which will result in a reconstruction (a^azT-irT'^r^i^a;) of the original creation (xrcVts") (ib. i. 48. 3). All of this is in direct and designed opposition to Origen. 4. Such are the principles which constituted the ''Christi- anity" of a cultivated Greek of about A. D. 300. It is a unique mixture of ideas garnered from the popular philoso- phy of the Greeks, from the popular Christianity of the age, from a glowing zeal for the ideals of asceticism, and from a real interest in the problems which Origen had so forcibly stated. Methodius has lost all conception of a righteousness to be attained through faith. Faith is the acceptance of that which is to be believed, and is accompanied by the moral application to the life by means of self-control {(Tuxppdfrir^ri) and in obedience, through good works and an ascetic life — with which is combined also the hope of immortality. But throughout all these assertions is felt the force of a great primitive Christian experience, '' the Christ in us," who is our strength, who renews us in our hearts, and draws our hearts upward from this earth toward himself. " Up to the heights of the regenerated who have been borne to the throne of God . . are lifted the hearts of the renewed, taught there to see and be seen, in order that they may not be betrayed into the depths of the mighty dragon" (conv. viii. 10). But this Sursu??i Corda I rests upon the thought that he is the Vine and we the branches — he in us and we in him. It is the legacy of John and Ignatius which furnishes spiritual sustenance to this theologian of Asia Minor. It is, perhaps, erroneous to charac- terize his theology as '* the theology of the future " (Harnack); but it reveals to us one of the factors which explain the bitter conflicts of the future as to the person of Christ. We see here the religious capital which was to bear the expenses of the long campaign. 5. The Western Theologians now claim our attention. Sources. The writings of Cyprian with the Pseudo-Cyprian works, De montibus Sina et Sion, and the sermon, De aleatoribus (probably delivered at Rome in the second half of the second century), ed. Hartel, vid. p. 178; 192 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. the best edition ofDe aleat. by Miodonski, 1889. Compare GoTZ, Das Chris- tentum Cyprians, 1896. Commodianus, Instructionum 11. 2, and Carmen apologeticum (ed. Dombart, 1887). Arnobius, adv. nationes, 11. 7 (ed, Reifferscheid, 1875). Lactantius, divinarum institutionum, 11. 7. Epitome, de ira dei (ed. Brandt and Laubmann, 1 890). ** Christ . , . since he knew that the nature of mortals is blind and not able to comprehend the reahty of any things except those placed before our eyes, . . . has commanded us to leave and neglect all those things, and not to devote fruitless medita- tions to those things which are removed far from our knowledge, but as far as possible to draw near with our whole mind and soul to the Lord of all things . . . What is it to you, he says, to investigate and search out who made man, what is the origin of souls, who planned the schemes of the wicked, whether the sun is larger than the earth . . . whether the moon shines with rays from another luminary or with her own ? Neither is it an ad- vantage to know these things, nor any detriment to be ignorant of them. Commit these things to God, and allow him to know what, why, and whence they are, whether they ought to be, or ought not to be, whether anything is without origin, or has its primordial beginnings , . . it is not permitted to your faculties to implicate you in such things and to be uselessly concerned about things so remote. Your own interests are endangered, I say the safety of your souls, and unless you apply yourselves to the thought of the Lord God, evil death awaits you when freed from the bonds of the flesh " (Arnobius, ii. 60, 61). These remarkable words of a Western theologian direct the interest of the Christian upon the salvation of souls, and deny to him the consideration of physical and metaphysical problems. There is here revealed a peculiar and growing tendency of Wes- tern Christianity, very clearly seen by a comparison of Tertullian with Origen, or Cyprian with Methodius. Even the theological interest of Cyprian did not extend further than the salvation of souls {^salus animarujn) and immortality (^ perpetuitas ^ Arnob. ii. (>s). We note the same limitation in Commodian and Lac- tantius, in the naive heterodoxy of Arnobius and the correct orthodoxy of Novatian. The practical Christianity of these men — notably that of Cyprian, who so largely moulded the thought of the succeeding ages — moves within the lines marked out by Tertullian^ (supra, p. 132 f. ). {^a) By the Western theologians as well as by the Orientals ^ Even the emphasis laid upon the salus animaj'Jim as the content of Chris- tianity is an echo of Tertullian : ** Of these blessings there is one superscrip- tion, the salvation of man " (paen. 2 ; cf., e.g,^ ib. 10, 12 ; pud. 9 ; jej. 3 ; bapt. 5 ; praescr. 14; c. Marc. ii. 27 ; res. 8, et supra). GENERAL CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY. 1 93 the first and most important place is assigned to the doctrine of the one almighty God, Creator of heaven and earth (e.g.. Corn- mod, carm. ap. 90 ff.). Man is under obligation to obey him. The relationship is viewed as a legal one (vid. sub : lex, satisfac- tio, meritum). (/5) The sinner is one who has refused obedi- ence. Sin and death passed from Adam upon his descendants (Cypr, ep. 64. 5 ; Comm. carm. ap. 324 : ** on account of whose %rs\{^cujus de peccato) we die." Cf. instr. i. 35. 3)/ (^c') God now endeavors to deliver man from sin and death. This is first attempted through the law, but finally through Christ, who as teacher of the truth gives a '^ new law ' ' and makes it impressive by his example ; ''by the grace of God we are incited to believe the law" (Comm. carm. ap. 766 ; cf. instr. i. 35. 18; ii. i. 6 ; 7- 5- Cypr. deop. et eleem. i, 7, 23, 24 ; de laps. 21 ; unit, eccl. 2, etc.). Lactantius scarcely gets beyond these ideas. Both the incarnation and the death upon the cross find their pur- pose completely attained in instruction and example (vid. instr. iv. 10. I ; II. 14 : *' When God had determined to send the teacher of virtue to men, he then ordained that he should be re- born in the flesh and become like to man himself, whose leader and companion and teacher he was to be ; " iv. 13. i \ 14. 15 ; 16. 4; 26. 30 ; 24. I, 5, 10, 7 : "God himself surely would not be able to teach virtue, because outside of the body he can- not do the things which he shall teach, and on this account his teaching will not be perfect ; " also epit. 38. 8 f ; 39. 7 ; 45 ; 46. 2 f. ), if we except the peculiar power attributed to the cross in the taking of an oath (epit. 46. 6-8. Inst. iv. 27 j see also iv. 20. 3). Cyprian and Commodian strike a deeper note. Christ not only taught us the new law, but he suffered for our sins (Cypr. laps. 17), and thereby made us children of God (ep. 58. 6). He has become our attorney and advocate, our media- tor (ep. II. 5 ; quod idola, 11), so that we find forgiveness of our sins through him. His blood nullifies death (ep. 55. 22; op. et al. i). Thus Christ grants cleansing from sin (baptism), forgiveness of sins (repentance), the new law and immortality. He is the Saviour, because he establishes and imparts the grace of the sacraments and of the church order. (^) This salvation is imparted to man in baptism ; is pre- served by faith, fear, and obedience ; and attested by repentance andgoodworks. Divine grace begins with baptism, *' sincethence * **What he did of good or of evil, the leader of our nativity conferred upon [contulisset) us; we die likewise through him;" cf. Instr. ii. 5. 8 : geni- talia. Cypr. ad Donat. 3 : genuinum^ op. et eleem. i : *' He healed the wounds which Adam had conveyed and cured the ancient poisons of the er- pent," etc. 194 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. begins the whole origin (^origo') of faith and the saving entrance {^ingressio) upon the hope of eternal life and the divine regard {dignatio) for the purifying and vivifying of the servants of God ' ' (Cypr. ep. 73. 12)/ In baptism man experiencesthesecond birth {secunda nativitas^ Cypr. ad Donat. 4; orat. dom. 23). The recipient receives the Holy Ghost (ep. 63. 8; 73. 9), becomes free from the devil (ep. 69. 15), from death and hell (ep. 55. 22; op. et al. 2). The second birth secures for man health (^sanitas, Cypr. hab. virg. 2 J; inborn sins are forgiven (Comm. instr. ii. 5. 8 : ^' in baptism ^d';z/Va& are forgiven thee." Cypr. op. et al. i); the subject really becomes another man (Cypr. ad Don. 3. 4). The new law now applies to him, by obeying which he is to preserve the purity attained : *' he gives the law of innocence after he has conferred health . . . that pardon may no more be lacking after thou hast begun to know God ' ' (Cypr. hab. virg. 2 ; cf. Commod. instr. ii. 5. 11 : '* The conclu- sion for thee : Always avoid serious sins"). Christ, therefore, imparts a two-fold blessing to man. By baptism he makes him whole, and he grants to him as thus restored the law, by obey- ing which he may and should preserve himself in health. If he fails to do this, repentance is offered to him as a means of salva- tion. It is now a question of forgiving grace and the preserva- tion of the good will which desires amendment. Man fulfills his duty toward God by faith and the fear of God : *' the whole basis of religion and faith begins in obedience and fear " (Cypr. hab. virg. 2 init.; cf. op. et al. 8); by prayer (or. dom. 12); and by the reception through faith of the gifts of grace now richly granted (ad Don. 5 : "it flows continually ; it overflows abundantly ; it satisfies our utmost desire and yet flows on. As much of receptive faith as we bring thither, so much of the over- flowing grace do we imbibe"). Although these words of Cyprian, which were written soon after his conversion, seem to reveal a vivid sense of the supreme significance of faith, yet the context leads us to a different conclusion. Faith is for him essen- tially the recognition of the divine law and belief in the veracity of the promises {e.g., de mortalit. 6. 22 fin., 24 ; ad Demetr. 20 ; de patient, i ; cf. Commod. carm. ap. 311 ff., 615 ; Lac- tant. epit. 61. 3 fl". ; inst. vi. 17. 23 ff.; also epit. 61. i : ** faith ^ As to the outward form of baptism, we note : It is administered in the name of the triune God, not merely in' the name of Christ (ep. 73. 18 ; cf. 69. 7); the baptismal confession (ep. 70. 2 ; 69. 7 ; cf. 75. 10 f.); sprinkling or pouring, with the customary bath [lavacrum^ ep. 69. 12); children to be baptized, not on the eighth day, but as soon as possible (ep. 64. 2 ; cf. laps. 10); they also receive the Holy Ghost (ep. 64. 3); anointing with the con- secrated oil [ckrisma^ ep. ']Q. 2); cf. const, ap. vii. 40 ff. GENERAL CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY. J 95 is, therefore, a great part of righteousness. "(!) Hence we may thus summarize : Baptism brings forgiveness of sins and blots out sin in a man ; he is now equipped with the Spirit and fulfills the law of God, because he believes that God will reward this struggle to live virtuously and will bestow upon him eternal life. By good works man really wins for himself a merit (^merituni) before God (op. et al. 26: **to our merits and works contributing promised rewards "). He pays back what Christ has done for him (op. et al. 17. 23 ; cf. hab. virg. 2). He who performs the works of the law is righteous before God. It is the first concern of the Christian to be mindful of the law : '^ Nor let anything be considered in your hearts and minds except the divine pre- cepts and the heavenly commandments " (ep. 6. 2). ((?) But thebaptized also still commit sin. For this, too, grace offers away of escape : ** He has given to the restored one a law and commanded that he should now sin no more ... we would have been constrained and brought into a strait by the law, nor could the infirmity and imbecility of our human frailty have accomplished anything, had not the divine goodness, again intervening, opened out a certain way of preserving salvation by performing works of righteousness and mercy, so that we may dy alms wash away whatever stains we have afterward con- tracted " (Cypr. op. et al. i). This is the idea entertained of repentance. True, sincere penitence (in case of the lapsed, see p. 180) and confession before the church are prescribed, but, at least in the case of trifling daily sins, good works, and particularly alms, remain the principal thing. By the giv- ing of alms, the Christian repeats what was granted to him at his baptism : '*just as in the bath of saving water the fire of hell is extinguished, so by alms and righteous works the flame of sin is quenched. And because in baptism the forgiveness of sins is once bestowed, diligent and continual working, imitating the pattern of baptism, bestows again the favor of God " (op. et al. ■2 ; orat.' dom. 32). By alms, the sinner renders to God suitable satisfaction (satisfaction op. et al. 4, 5 ; cf. ep. 35 ; 43. 3 ; 55. 11; 59. 13; 64. i; de laps. 17, 22, 34 ff.); reconciles God {propitiando deo) and merits {mereri') the mercy of God (op. et el. 5, cf. 13 fin.; 15, cf. Comm. instr. ii. 14. 14; de aleator. II. 2). If man thus by prayer and good works merits for himself the mercy of God in his battle with sin {precibus et operibiis suis satisfacere, Cypr. 16.2), we find the Eucharist represented as a means of strengthening for the conflict. It is a safeguard {tutela^ in the conflict (ep. 57. 2.) It elevates and inflames the spirit (''there is something lacking in the spirit which the recep- IC)6 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. tion of the eucharist does not uplift and inflame," ib. 4). It unites the church with Christ, and the sorrowing heart is by it filled with joy (ep. 63, 13, 11 : *'Let there be a forgetting of the former worldly life, and let the sad and sorrowful heart, which was before oppressed by its increasing sins, be set free in the joy of the divine forgiveness " ), These are genuinely Chris- tian sentiments, which we are not at liberty to discredit because they give no direct answer to questions raised at a later period. But the eucharist is also viewed in another light. It is the ^^ sacrifice " offered by the priest, and this can be done only in the church. Fellowship {communication with the church really consists in the partaking of the eucharist. This sacrifice is offered (^offerre) also for penitent sinners, and in their name (^e.g.^ ep. 16. 2 ; 17. 2). It is a repetition of the sacrifice of Christ ; '*This priest acts in the stead of Christ, imitating that which Christ did, and offering then a true and full sacrifice in the church to God the Father " (ep. 63. 14). '* For the passion of the Lord is the sacrifice which we offer" (ib. 17). In earlier times, the virtues and prayers of believers had been called gifts (^dmpa, I Clem. 44. 4; 40. 2 ff.; 36. i), particularly the eucha- ristic prayer (Did. 14. i, 2 ; Just. Dial. 40, 70, 117). Thusalso the presentation of the elements of the Lord's Supper before God (Iren. iv. 17. 5 ; 18. i, 4), as well as the contributions brought at such times as on the anniversaries of the death of rela- tives, were looked upon as a sacrifice, and before long a peculiar significance began to be attached to them as such (e. g., Tert. ad ux. ii. 8; de monog. 10; ex. cast. 1 1 ; de coron. 3 f; de orat. 28; cf. Cypr. i. 2). The Lord's Supper was called the ^^ sacrificium.^'*^ Cyprian — since the clergy were, in his view, actual priests — adopted this idea with great earnestness. Through the priest the sinner is received into the church, and through the act of the priest the merit of Christ is applied to him. In this, a distinctive idea of Catholicism again comes to view. The history of the Lord's Supper is marked by two great modifications. The first transformed the fraternal Agape into the ecclesiastical sacrament ; the second designated as the chief thing in the transaction the bringing of the sacrifice before God as a repetition of the death of Christ, and not the gracious presence of God in our behalf The second was effected by *Tert. de cultu fem. ii. 11 : ** Either the sacrifice is offered, or the word of God administered ; " cf. de orat. 19 ; ad uxor. 11. 8. See the association of Word and Eucharist also in Ps.-Clem. de virg. ep. i. 5 ; cf. Abercius-title, lines6, 9, 12 ff. (word, baptism, eucharist), and Method., supra, p. 189. For the sacrificial idea in ancient times, see H5FLING, Die Lehre d. altesten Kirche von Opfer, Erl. 1851. GENERAL CONCEPTION OF CHRISTIANITY. I97 Origen, and in it we have another ilhistration of the complete externahzing of religion. Instead of the act and agency of God appears the work of man, the ordinance of a holy legal system. It was thus in the eucharist, and most distinctly thus in the doctrine and praxis of repentance. The Romish sacrament of penance was constructed by Tertullian and Cyprian. In the attempt to make repentance difficult, it is made easy. For that which is the hardest thing in religion — repentance and faith — is substituted good works : * ^ the salutary guardian of our security — a thing placed within our power to do — a thing both grand and easy " (op. et al. 26).^ (/j The inevitable consequence of the conception of the Christian life as an obedience rendered to the '^ new law " is a double morality. The highest self-surrender to God cannot be demanded oi all, but only advised. The first precept commands to increase and multiply, and the second counsels continence (hab. virg. 23). Virginity is the blossom of the ecclesiastical seed (ib. 3). However beautifully Cyprian may depict the ideal of the Christian life (see esp. orat. dom. 15 ; zel. et liv. 16 ; cf. Comm. instr. ii. 17. 17 ff.), yet the best Christians are those alone who have chosen the heavenly Bridegroom (hab. virg. 20. 22) — and the language here is not meant, as in Origen, to indi- cate a really higher plane of Christian character. {g) But, while thus accommodating the Christian life to the world, the desire was strongly felt to escape from the world, and there was much thought of the approaching end (Cypr. un. eccl. 16 ; de mortal. 25 f. j ad Demetr. 3 f. ). The resurrection was the chief object of faith, for from it was expected the reward for good works {e, g., hab. virg. 21, also supra). Great delight was found in drawing portraitures of the last times and the con- flicts under the reign of the Antichrist (Nero), with the consola- tion of the millennial kingdom (see esp. Comm. carm. ap. 791 ff.; instr. ii. 2-4 ; 39 ; i. 27, 2S, 41, etc. Lactant. ep. 66, 67). The gulf between the church, as it was then conceived, and the kingdom of God lying wholly in the future, became but the wider : '^He declares that they shall be permitted to see the kingdom who have performed works in his church " (op. et el. 9, cf. de zel. et liv. 18). ^ Cyprian, like Origen, believed in a purifying fire after death : ** It is one thing, tortured with prolonged misery for sins, to be cleansed and purged for a long time by fire, and another thing to have all sins purged in the passion " {i, «'fTi;'/0 ^^ ^^^ person (^bnofTTafn^') (Heb. i. 3). These were regarded as the *' apostolic dogmas of the church " (vid. Alex. ep. ad Alex. inTheodoret. h. e. i. 3). Opposite conceptions must now inevitably lead to con- flict, as had become evident in the Monarchian and Dionysian controversies. After the unity of the church had become a theory of practical importance, and the conception of ** heresy " had, in consequence of the fixation of the church's doctrine, become more definite, the ancient indefinite formulas became unsatisfactory, especially as they left room for such interpreta- tions as that of Arius. But we shall utterly fail to understand the conflicts of the period before us if we shall interpret them as merely a result of the metaphysical tendency of Grecian thought. On the contrary, beneath these controversies lay most thoroughly practical and religious motives. Christ was the centre of Greek piety ; the new immortal life, the periphery ; the idea of salvation, the radius. The centre must be so located that all the radii may actually meet in it. Christ must be conceived of as in nature and character capable of bestowing the new divine life upon men. LuciAN of Antioch was an adherent of Paul of Samosata, and hence out of harmony with the church (ib. in Theod. i. 3, p. 739)- (201) 202 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Arius was his pupil, as was also Eusebius of Nicomedia (ep. Arii ad Eus. in Theod. h. e. i. 4 fin. and Alex. ib. 4). Traces of relationship with Paul may be found in Arius Tsee Athanas. c. Arian. or. iii. 10, 51); but the views of Paul were developed by him in harmony with the later age. The impersonal energy {(J6'^aiutj(Tt(ry)^ nor as alike uncreated (^(Tovnyh^riru^^. For if the Father were compound, divided, or mutable (rrnvffzTo^^ oiaipzT<><^^ TffETZTO's'), we should have to think of him as corporeal, and be compelled to accept two uncreated beings (fJuo dyd'^-^rjToc), The Son would then be a brother of the Father (ep. ad Al. and ep. ad Eus.; Athanas. c. Arian. or. i. 14; iii. 2, 62, 67 ; de * Also, dufiaTa re vavrtKO, nal ETrf^vTua Kal ofhiTVopiKd ypdxl>at . . fJf,' fiEAo)6lac tKTFivaij Philostorgius h. c. ii. 2, 2 Appeal was made, among others, to Hermas, Mand. i. (Athanas. in Theod. h. e. i. 7). THE HOiMOUSIA OF THE SON. 203 deer. syn. Nic. lo). (/') God alone is unoriginated, or unbe- gotten, without beginning. The Son had a beginning, and was from a non-existent state created by the Father before the begin- ning of the world : " The Son is not unbegotten, nor a part of the unbegotten One . . . nor from somethingpreviously existing, but he existed with will and design before times and ages, the com- plete, only-begotten, unchangeable God ; and before he began to be, or was either created or founded, he was not. The Son has a beginning, but God is without beginning He is, out of things not being (ep. ad Eus.). God was not always Father, but there was [a time] when God was alpne, and was not yet Father, and afterward he became Father. The Son was not always. For, all things coming into being from not being, and all things created and made having begun to be, this Logos of God also came into being from things not existing ; and there was [a time] when he was not, and he was not before he was be- gotten, but he also had a beginning of being created " (Thai, in Athan. or. i. 5). (c) The Son is the Logos and the Wisdom of the Father, but he is to be distinguished from the Logos im- manent in God. The latter is a divine energy ( ('inva/j.c^') ^ the Son a created divine being, having participation in the immanent Logos (cf. the Dynamistic Monarchianism). He says thus that there are two sophias ; the one peculiar to God and co-eternal with him, and the Son was born in Xh^sophia, and, sharing in it, he is called simply sophia and Logos . . . and he says thus also that there is another Logos besides the Son in God, and that the Son, sharing in this, is again by grace called Logos and the Son himself" (Athan. 1. c. i. 5). (^) The Logos is, therefore, a crea- ture of the Father, created by him as the medium in the creation of the world (ib. and ii. 24; ep. encycl. Alex, in Socr. h. e. i. 6). Accordingly, he is not God in the full sense of the word, but through his enjoyment of the divine favor he receives the names, God and Son of God, as do also others ( ^* and although he is called God, he is yet not the true God, but by sharing in grace, just as all others also, he is called by name simply God, ' ' Thai. ib. I. 6 ; cf. ep. Al. ad Al. in Theod. i. 3. p. 732). It is, therefore, clear that *' the Logos is different from and unlike the substance (o'u^£'a)andpeculiar nature (j'^twrijrfjs^) of the Father in all respects" (Thai. ib. ) . (-?) In view of the significance of this unoriginated character (^aj^vv-qaia) for the divine nature of the Son, a further consequence is unavoidable. The Logos is by nature mutable. But since God foresaw that he would remain good, he bestowed upon him in advance the glory which he afterward as man merited by his virtue (Thai, in Ath. i. 5; cf. i. 35 init. j ep. Al. ad Al. in Theod. i. 3, p. 732 ; cf. ep. encycl. Alex, in Socr. i. 6 : muta- 204 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. ble, Tf)£7ZTo^, and variable, dXXotmrogj by nature).^ The Arians held, with Paul of Samosata, that Christ is through unity of will one with the Father (Athan. c. Arian. or. iii. lo). (/) By the use of profane logic (Athan. c. Ar. or. ii. 68) and by the citation of passages of Scripture treating of the humility of Christ (Alex, in Theod. i. 3, p. 740), the Arians sought to estab- lish their own view and disprove that which was becoming the accepted doctrine of the church. It was the easier to carry out this purpose, since Arianism did not attribute a human soul to Christ (see Greg. Naz. ep. ad Cledon. i. 7. Epiphan. ancor. 33)' If we contemplate this theory as a whole, we at once observe its relationship with Paul of Samosata and Dynamistic Monar- chianism. But the earlier views referred to, in the process of ac- commodation, became much worse. What Paul taught concern- ing the man Jesus, Arius — and apparently Lucian before him — transferred to a median being, the Logos. It is not the man Jesus who is endowed with divine energy (^dwa/ic^) and preserves it in a moral life, but the Logos — the man Jesus does not even pos- sess a human soul. The Logos is, therefore, a ** creature of God " and yet *^ complete God." The unity of God is preserved, but only at the price of teaching '*that there are three persons (u7:o^Tdiil, Mi. 46. 796. Aug. de symbol., I. 2. 2oS HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Father " (ii. 70). Finally, this median being (/isfjirTj^') between God and the world is an utterly useless and senseless invention. Neither is God too proud to come himself as Creator into direct touch with a creature, nor in that case would the matter be made any better by the supposed Logos, since at his creation also some median creature would have been Jiecessary, and so on ad infi- nitum (ii. 25, 26; de deer. 8).^Hence, if Christ is not the true God and one substance with the Father, then it is all over with the Trinity and the baptismal-symbol ; then polytheism an(i the worship of creatures are again introduced into the church-; then the salvation of Christian believers comes to naugh tjV and yet, after all, no logically tenable position has been reached. Thus the theory of Arius is just as impious as it is unscientific. {b') What then is the doctrine of Athanasius himself touching the divinity of the Son? (a) **And since Christ is God of God and the Logos, Wisdom, Son, and Power of God, there- fore, One God is proclaimed in the Holy Scriptures. For the Logos, being the Son of the one God, is referred back to him from whom he is, so that Father and Son are two, yet the monad of divinity is unseparated (a(5fa£/?£ro?)and undivided (^aa'/^nym^'^ . Thus it might be said also that there is one original source of divinity and not two original sources, and hence, also correctly, that there is a monarchy . . the nature (^uufria) and the person (u7:orTTa(7i<^) are one" (c. Ar. or. iv. i). These theses voice the conviction that the divinity of the Son must be under- stood with a distinct and conscious effort to guard the divine monad. No basis is left for the '' second God. " Athanasius was led to recognize the importance of this position by the conclusions which Arius had drawn from his *' second God." He may, per- haps, have been influenced also by the significant part played by Sabellianism in Egypt (vid. supra, p. 168). In this case we have another illustration of the historical recognition of the element of truth lurking in a false theory. But the circumstance should not be overlooked that Athanasius labored in the West, where the consciousness of the unity of God was always more vivid than in the East, which was so unquestionably controlled by the formulas of the Logos idea. (/?) But Athanasius will not rec- ognize a Son-Father (ocoTzdrwp) with the Sabellians, nor a sole- natured (/itr^oon^cn?') Qod, for the existence of the Son would thus be excluded. On the contrary, the independent and eter- nally personal existence of the Son is a fixed premise, always bear- ing in mind that we are not to think of *' three hypostases sep- arated from one another," which would lead to Polytheism. The relationship between the Father and the Son is rather like that between a fountain and the stream that gushes from it : '* Just THE HOMOUSIA OF THE SON. 209 as a river springing from a fountain is not separated from it, although there are two forms and two names, so neither is the J'ather the Son, nor the Son the Father " (expos, fid. 2 ; c. Ar. or. iii, 4). (;') This distinction, as well as the unity, finds ex- pression in the term " oneness of essence " (^pottj? ri^g odtrta^). The Logos is a production, or generation (^tv^Tj/za), from the na- ture ((>rj(7ca) of the Father (de deer. 3, 22, 23 ; c. Ar. i. 29). As to his relation to created beings, it follows that *' the Son is different in origin and different in nature from created beings, and, on the other hand, is the same and of the same nature (0^0^0159) as the nature of the Father " (ib. i. 58 ; de deer. 23, 12 ; de syn. 53). As he is thus other-natured (^irepoitntrtn'^) than created beings, so he is same-natured (^6/ioouffco^y with the Father, z. e., he shares with him the one divine substance (the Son is ofiDoofTco^ and of the ou(T{a of the Father, ad Serap. ep. ii. 5 ; de syn. 40). But if this is the case, then the Logos is im- mutable and eternal (de deer. 23. 12). ((5) The Son comes forth from the Father by a begetting, or birth. In view of the unique character of the divine nature, we cannot here thinh of any outflow from the Father, nor any dividing of his substance. *' The begetting of men and that of the Son from the Father are different. For the things begotten of men are in some way parts of those who beget them . . . men in begetting pour forth from themselves. But God, being without parts, is with- out division and without passion the Father of the Son. For neither does there take place any outflowing of the incor- poreal One, nor any inflowing upon him, as with men ; but, being simple in his nature, he is the Father of the one and only Son . . . This is the Logos of the Father, in whom it is possi- ble to behold that which is of the Father without passion or divi- sion " (de deer. 11). Nor is it as though '^the Son was be- gotten from the Father by purpose and will" (c. Ar. iii. 59), for thus the Son would be again degraded to the position of a creature created in time, one which the Father first determined to make and then made (iii. 60-63). All things w^ere created by the will of God, but of the Son it is to be said : '' He is outside of the things created by the purpose [of God] , and, on the other hand, he is himself the living purpose of the Father, in which all these things come into being" (64). '' But the Son of God is himself the Logos and wisdom, himself the counsel and the living purpose, and in him is the will of the Father; he him- self is the truth and the light and the power of the Father" ^ Athanasius himself never attached a particular significance to this word (see, d-. ^., de syn. 41). 14 2 10 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. (65). As the very image (z<> Idtov) of the Father's person (''-(^rt-ra/r;^-)/ he did not originate in an arbitrary act of the Father's will (ib.). But this does not imply that the Son was not desired by the Father. " For it is one thing to say ; he was be- gotten by desire (/3otjAiy'f7£d), and another thing to say that the Father loves his Son, who is the same in nature as himself, and desires him " (66). The Son is thus related to the Father as radiance to the light : ** the living Counsel and truly by nature a production, as the radiance is a production of the light" (67). Father and Son are, therefore, two persons (the Logos is not impersonal, avoTro^rraro?, as the word of man, de syn. ^i fin.), the Begetting and the Begotten ; but they are again, by virtue of this same relationship, one — a divine Being : ** The Father is Father and not himself Son, and the Son is Son and not himself Father, but the nature (j^eoTox(t^). (j3) The object of this whole method of regarding the subject is to establish a firm foundation for the salvation (fTWTTjpia) of men. Inasmuch as Christ was really God, he could deify the flesh which he assumed ; and inasmuch as this was really human flesh (c. Epict. 7), human nature has thereby been deified. ** Man could not have been deified, unless he who became flesh had been by nature of the Father and his true and peculiar Logos. Therefore such a conjunction was effected, in order thatto that which was according to the nature of the divinity he might join that which was by nature man, and the salvation and deification of the latter might be secure" (c. Ar. ii. 70). *' For as the Lord, having assumed the body, became man, so THE HOMOUSIA OF THE SON. 2I3 we men are by the Logos deified, having been taken into part- nership through his flesh, and, furthermore, we inherit eternal life " (ib. iii. 34). Accordingly, since Christ assumed flesh, he assumed human nature, and thereby deified and immortalized it : ** From the holy and God-bearing Virgin he raised up the new form and creation of Adam, making it his own by union (za?9' £vaj(nv), and thus appeared the man Christ, God from eternity, and we are members of Christ." i Cor. vi. 15 (c. Apol. i. 13, cf. c. Ar. i. 43; ii. 61; iii. 33; iv. 36). He is thus the second Adam (c. Ar. i. 44; ii. 65). The life of the Lord is to be interpreted in the light of this purpose. He was, according to the flesh, without knowledge, in order that to his flesh, and thus to humanity, might be given power to know the Father (c. Ar. or. iii. 38; ad Scrap, ii. 9). He feared death, in order that we might become free from the fear of death and partakers of immortality (ib. iii. 54 ff. ; cf. ii, 70). He was baptized, anointed with the Spirit of God, received grace, and ascended to heaven, in order that we through his flesh might secure the Spirit, grace, and immortality (ib. i. 43-48). To all assertions of this kind must be added, to insure a proper understanding, the words : '^ And all such things in the flesh wholly for our sakes " (ib. iii. 34, 38 ff. ; cf. iv. 6 : '* for on this account he became incarnate, that the things thus given to him might pass over to us " ) . But this all happens to the flesh of Christ, and thus to the human race, because that flesh is joined with true divinity (ib. ii. 70, 67 ; iv. 36). Thus sin is de- stroyed {w^yjkw-ai^ and humanity becomes free from sin and im- mortal (ib. iii. 32 ; 2. 56).^ Thus, too, we become a temple and sons of God (i. 43 ; ii. 59), the Spirit of Christ dwells in us and we are thereby made one with the Father (ii. 25). We must in all these discussions avoid the erroneous idea that in this deification of man Athanasius sees a magical process by which the seeds of immortality are physically implanted in man. The deification embraces, on the contrary, all the spiritual and mys- tical processes in which Christ operates by his word and his ex- ample upon the hearts of men (ib. iii. 19 ff. ). What Athanasius means to assert is that Christ dwells in us, and, by the power of his Spirit, gives us a new, eternal life. But now, since God was in Christ, and from him a divine life flowed out upon men, the man Jesus has become in all things the representative of the ^ To this end it was necessary that the Logos should himself dwell in the race, for although "many were indeed holy and pure from all sin " (,?. g., Jeremiah and John the Baptist), yet death reigned from Adam to Moses also over those who had not sinned, after the similitude of Adam's transgression. Similarly, c. Ar. iii. 33. 2 14 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. race, or the second Adam. His death is, therefore, the death of all, or he has given his body to death for all, and thereby ful- filled the divine sentence against sin (ii. 69). This guiltless self-surrender to death is designated as a " ransom of the sin of men and an abohtion of death" (i. 45). Represented this ran- som, or sacrifice, to God the Father, and by his blood cleansed us all from sin (ii. 7). Athanasius here adopts traditional ideas. His own thought remains clear. Since we have become one body with Christ, his death is our death, and his victory over death is ours : '* All men being ruined in accordance with the transgression of Adam, the flesh of this one was first of all saved and set free, as being the body of the Logos itself, and thereupon we, as being of one body (^it'J(t<7w/j.oi') with him, are saved. . Having endured death for us and abolished it, he was the first man to arise, having raised up his own body for us. Furthermore, he having arisen, we also in our order arise from the dead on account of and through him" (ib. ii. 61). As in all these positions we can trace the influence of the general point of view above noted, so too in the passages in which Christ is represented as the only mediator of the knowledge of the Father (i. 12, 16; ii. 81), as the pattern of unvarying righteousness (i. 51), as the dispenser of the forgiveness of sins (ii. 67), and as the bestower of the Holy Spirit (iii. 23-25, 33 ; de deer. 14). But it still remains the matter of chief importance that, through the incarnation of the Logos, God himself has entered into the human race for abiding fellowship, and the latter have thereby secured grace and righteousness, the Holy Spirit, a new life, and with it immortality: ''Therefore the perfect Logos of God assumes the immortal body . . in order that, having paid the debt for us (aviV rj/iajv rry^ 6Vj ib.). And, as in the case of the Son, this is manifest also from the nature of his work as attested by our experience. He sanctifies us, and enables us to participate in the divine nature (Ji-eia(f'j(7t'^, i. 23). ** When now we are called partakers of Christ and partakers of God, the anointing within us bears witness and the seal, which is not of the nature of things made, but of the nature of the Son through the Spirit who in him unites us to the Father (cf. i Jn. 4. 13) . . . But if in the fellowship of the Spirit we become partakers of the divine nature, he would be mad who should say that the Spirit is of created nature and not of the nature of God. There- fore, indeed, they into whom he enters are deified ; and if he deifies, it is not doubtful that his nature is that of God " (i. 24). Such is the doctrine of Athanasius. It, in his judgment, faithfully reproduces the teachings of the Scriptures, as well as of the Fathers {e.g., Ignat. Ephes. 7, cited in de syn. 47), the "great councils," the baptismal command, and the baptismal con- fession (ad Serap. ep. i. 28, 30, 33 ; ii. 8 ; iii. 6 ; c. Apol. i. 2 ; ad Epict. i. 3). Its profound religious basis, as well as its sim- plicity and consistency, must be evident to all. 5. We turn back in our study to present the historical course of the controversy and the conclusions of the Council of Nice, A. D. 325. Sources. The Decrees of the Council in Mansi, Acta concil. ii. 665 ff. Ep. CoNSTANTiNE ad Alex. et Ar. in Eus. Vita Const, ii. 64-72 and account there given (ib. iii. 6-22). Euseeius ep. ad Caesareens. in Theodoret. h. e. i. II. Athanasius, de decretis syn. Nic. and epistle to Afros. Eustha- THius, in Theod. h. e. i. 7. Further, the accounts of the later church histor- ians : Socrat. h. c. i. 7-10. Sozomen. h. e. i. 16-25. Theodoret. h. e. i. 6-13. Philostorgius h. e. i. 7 ff-*» ii- 'S- Also Gelasius (ca. A. D. 476); l.ii'Tfi}fj.a Tiov Kara T^v kv NcKaig dytav avvo(hv 7Tpa;];-d-€VTG)v, 1. ii. (in Mansi, Acta concil. ii. 759 ff. Cf. the collection of decrees in Mansi, 1. c. Neander, greater sacrifice — the historical Christ " (DG. ii. 221). But the peculiarity of Athanasius which made his teaching normative for the future lay precisely in the fact that he strictly guarded the unity of God, and yet without wavering maintained the divinity of Christ — and of the historical Christ at that. 2l6 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. KG. ii. 79off. ). Moller-Schuben, KG. i., ed. 2,424 ff. Hefele, Concilien- gesch. i., ed, 2, 282 ff. Braun, de synode Nic. (Kirchengeschichtl. Studien by Knopfler, iv. 3). Seeck, in Ztschr. f. KG. xvii. 105 ff. 319 ff. Already in A. D. 320 or 321, Alexander of Alexandria had directed two ecclesiastical assemblies in Egypt against Arianism, and it was condemned by them (Hefele, 1. c. i. 268 ff. ). Arius was compelled to leave Alexandria. But the agitation was thus only increased, as a synod in Bithynia enhsted in his cause (Soz. i. 15). The Emperor Constantine now found occasion to take part in the affair. He at first endeavored to treat it as an unim- portant strife of words, and exhorted to mutual reconcihation, as, in any event, no " one of the chief commandments of our law" was in question (Eus. vit. Const, ii. 70). The emperor, indeed, changed his opinion upon this point (ib. ii. 69, 71 and iii. 12); but he remained faithful to the political interest in the preservation of the unity of the church's faith, which had from the first been his controlling motive (cf. vita Const, ii. 65 init., with iii. 17, 21). As the agitation continued to grow and threatened to spread through the entire East (ib. ii. 73. Socr. i. 8), he summoned a general council of the church to meet at Nicaea. About 300 bishops (asto the number, see Hefele i. 291), chiefly Orientals, but also Thracians, Macedonians, Achaeans, and the Spaniard, Hosiusof Cordova (Rome being represented by tw presbyters) responded to the call (vit. Const, iii. 7). The order of business and the course of the debate are alike obscure for us. There were in the council many elements lacking in independence (Socr. I. 8). We can note with some measure of certainty three groups. An Arian section led by Eusebius of Nicomedia (see his view in Theod. h. e. i. 5), small in numbers (Theod. i. 6. Soz. i. 20), first presented its confession of faith. This was re- jected with indignation, and even the partisans of Arius, with the exception of two, did .not dare to adhere to it (Eustath. in Theod. i. 7). A compromising party now entered the field. Eusebius of Caesarea presented an indefinite Origenistic confes- sion : * * We believe ... in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Logos of God, God of God, light of light , life of life ^ the only-begotte^t Son, the first-born of all creation, begotten of the leather before all the ages ; through whom also all things were made ; who for the sake of our salvation was made flesh and dwelt among men, and suffered and rose on the third day and returned to the Father, and shall come again in glory to judge the quick and the dead," etc. (Eus. in Theod. i. 11). This confession, as the italicized words indicate, has all the advantages and defects incident to a compromise formula. The Homousians could find their views expressed in it as well as the Arians (see Ath. ad Afros). Taken THE HOMOUSIA OF THE SON". 21 7 as it Stood, it undoubtedly presented the view of the majority. The emperor approved it, but wished an acknowledgment of the o/j.(iou(Tio^ (it). ). It is very probable that he was under the influ- ence of Hosius (cf. Socr. iii. 7. Philostorg. i. 17), who, in turn, was in sympathy with Alexander, and for whom, as a Western man, the term presented no difficulty (vid. Tert. , Novat., Dionys. of Rome, supra, pp. 124 f., 169 f., 172). A basis was thus fur- nished and a program mapped out for the third group, that of Alexander and Athanasius : ** Under the pretext of the addition of the 6fntoufTu>y, they composed the writing," writes Eusebius, (ib.). With the professed purpose of cutting away the founda- tion beneath the Arians, the confession of Eusebius was changed, and finally read : ** We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only begot- teUj i. e., of the natitre of the Father. God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made, both things in heaven and things on earth ; who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh and assumed man's nature, suffered and rose the third day, ascended to heaven, [and] shall come again to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. But the holy and apostolic church anathe77iatizes those who say that there was \a time, T.ure\ when he was not, and that he was made from things not existing, or fi'om another perso7i (^uTrofTrdtTew'^^ or being (otto-t'a?), saying that the Son of God is mutable, or changeable'''' (ib.). The words which we have italicized indicate in what spirit this modi- fication was undertaken. This formula was accepted, also for the sake of peace, though not without some delay, by the median I)arty (Eus. 1. c). It became the confession of the council. Besides Arius, only five persons. refused to sign it (even Eusebius of Nicomedia, who, however, was unwilling to approve the con- demnatory portion). These were banished by the emperor. Thus the Homousia of the Son became a dogma. When, in- deed, we consider the immediate circumstances under which this dogma was adopted, it was but natural that the real struggle should only then begin. Nevertheless, the assembled representa- tives of the church had accepted the Homousia, and the emperor deemed it his duty to give legal force to the decrees^ of the coun- ^ In addition to the decision as to the Houmosia, decrees were adopted upon the question of the Passover ^Eus. vit. Const, iii. 18-20), upon the Meletian (Socr. h. e. i. 9 ; cf. Canon 6) and Novatian (Can. 8) schism and upon a number of questions of church order and discipline (cf. Hefele, CG. i. p. 320-431 )• 2l8 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. cil, demanding obedience to them and punishing those who opposed them. The state church comes into power. The emperor summons the councils ; the state guarantees traveling expenses and entertainment ; the emperor, or an imperial com- missioner, opens the councils and regulates the proceedings ; and an imperial edict gives legal force to the decrees. It is for Church History to point out the significance of all this. A historical parallel to Constantine is seen in Augustus' work of restoration. Both served God and politics, and both crowned their work by the introduction of imperialism. § 21. Ftirther Development Until the Council of Consta7itinopley A. D. 381. 1. The strife and contentions of this period belong in their details to the sphere of Church History and Patristics. We must, therefore, be content with a brief general view of them. The Nicene Creed was really, after all, but the confession of a minority. The letter of Eusebius to his congregation at Caesarea (in Theod. h. e. i. 11) indicates what skill was required to make it appear acceptable. According to this explanation, the v!J.noo<7io^ means no more than that ''the Son is of the Father," and that *' the Son of God bears nc likeness to begotten crea- tures, but is to be likened in every way alone to the Father who begat him, and that he is not from any other b7zo(TTdmoufn<><^ is avoided. Athanasius is not indeed directly assailed, but in the person of the like-minded Marcellus of Ancyra (see the three formulas of the former of these councils and the /onnu/a niacros- tichos of the latter). 3. In the West, on the contrary, the doctrine of Athanasius, as also that of Marcellus, was unconditionally endorsed at the councils at Rome, A. D. 341 (see the letter of Pope Julius in Ath. Apol. c. Ar. 20-35), and 5i?repyzia) with God, for all things were made by him . . ; and, in the third place : ' the Word is God,' he tells us not to divide the divine Beings since the Word is in him and he in the Word ; for the Father, says he, is in me and I in the Father " (p. 37 A.). The terms dOvaiif; and bApyeca are here used to designate the Logos as power reposing in God and power in action, the Ivipyeta dpatrrufj (p. 41 D. ) (see Zahn, p. 123 ff.). The Logos is, therefore, on the one hand, a personal power immanent in God, and, on the other hand, in the interest of his historical work, he proceeds (i|£>i'?tt>^, i-ATzopzuzzai^ p. 167 f) from the Father, but without thereby changing in any way the first relationship. We dare not start with three hypostases and then combine them into a divine unity: "For it is impossible that three, being hypostases, be united in a monad, unless the triad has first originated from a monad " (p. 167 D). How is it to be accounted for, upon the Arian theory of two separated persons {izp6(7Lo-a) ^ that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and yet is bestowed by the Son? (ib. ). We have not to do with three different beings, but the inexpressible relationship is to be regarded somewhat as an extension of the one God : " Not distinctly and evidently then, but in a mystic sense, the ;;z£??z^^ appears extended to a triads but, continuing to exist, is in no way divided " (ib. cf. Dionys. of Rome in Ath. sent. Dion. 17 and Tert. Apol. 21). These are BEFORE THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. 22 1 Nicene ideas: the one God leads a three-fold life; only that Marcellus, with greater exegetical prudence, refrains from apply- ing directly to the prehistoric life of the divine nature the knowledge of God which we have historically gained. This is evident also from the following statements : When God proposed to establish the church and set apart the human race for sonship (p. 12 D), the Logos proceeded from the Father as actively en- gaged in the creation, preservation, and redemption of the world. Less than 400 years ago he became the ** Son of God," Christ and King (p. 50 D). At the end of the days, since his kingdom shall become the kingdom of God, he will return into God (p. 41 C ; 42 A ; 52 Cj, ruling with the Father. What will then become of his body, Marcelius confesses that he does not know (p. 53 A). The significance of this theology lies in the fact that it gave the Eusebians the opportunity of continually bringing the charge of Sabellianism against their opponents ; but, on the other hand, the fact that it was recognized by the Homousians as orthodox (in Athan. Apol. 32, 47) indicates how sincere they were in their de- votion to the strictly monotheistic conception of God, and that their controlling interestcentered in the three-fold historical self -revela- tion of God. But this theory itself made no impression historically. It was too original and archaistic to secure wide acceptance (cf. Iren., p. 124 f.). Athanasius (or. c. Ar. iv.) also attacked the views of Marcelius without naming him, and, after review- ing them, had only ridicule for the oddities of the *'old man " (Epiph. h. 72. 4). It was further disastrous for them that they were interpreted even by contemporaries in the sense of Photi- Nus of Sirmium (Epiph. h. 71), according to whom Christ was only a supernaturally (per contra, Marius Mercator, opp. ed. Baluz., p. 164) begotten man, in whom the Logos dwelt. This was really the doctrine of Paul of Samosata. The Eusebians as well as the Nicene theologians rejected it. 4. Photinus fell under condemnation (Council at Milan, A. D. 345 (?) and 347). In other points the Western theologians, with Athanasius, adhered to their views. Constantius, held in check by the Persians, was driven to the determination to recall Athanasius (A. D. 346), and two prominent Eusebians, Ursacius and Valens, deemed it prudent to make peace with Rome and Athanasius (see Athan. Apol. 51-58). On the other hand, the (first) Sirmian Council in A. D. 347 (?) condemned Photinus, indicating Marcelius as the source of his heresy (Hilar, frg. 2. 21- 23). The death of Constans (A. D. 350), who had inclined to the Nicene orthodoxy, changed the situation. Constantine at once applied himself with energy to the suppression of the Nicene faith. 22 2 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. The Orientals had alrea'dy, at the (second) Council at Sirmium (A. D. 351), again made themselves felt. The Sirmian formula here adopted is in the positive portion identical with the Fourth Antiochian formula (p. 219), but a large number of Athanasian- isms (see Ath. de syn. 27; Socr. h. e. ii. 30; Hilar, de syn. 38. ; cf. Hefele CG., i. 642 ff. ) are appended. The latter are in the line followed hitherto by the Eusebians. The favorite phrases of the Arians were rejected (n. i. 24), and also the views of Photinus and Marcellus. Subordinationism appears in n. 18 ; '^ For we do not co-ordinate the Son with the Father, but he is subordinate (^■•-nT^zayiJ.i'^o^^) to the Father." At Aries, A. D. 353, at Milan, 355 (at Biterrae, 356), the Western men were compelled to recognize the condemnation of the *^ sacri- legious Athanasius " (Mansi, iii. p. 236). It was politically pru- dent to demand no more than this. Those who resisted this (Eusebius of Vercelli, Dionysius of Milan, Lucifer of Calaris, the deacon Hilarius of Poitiers, Hosius of Cordova, Liberius of Rome) were banished. Athanasius, deposed, fled into the wilderness, A. D. 356. In response to protests, the emperor as- serted : ** But what I desire, that is canon " (Athan. hist. Arian. ad mon. 33 fin. ). The orthodox now regarded him as the Anti- christ and a monstrous wild beast {^e,g., Ath. 1. c. 67, 64 ; Lucif. Bibl. max. iv. p. 247, 244, 246). But victory is a most dangerous thing for a bad cause ; and this victory led to the downfall of Arianism. Who then were these victors and what would they do ? Now that their common opponent no longer compelled them to harmony of action, it at once became evident how uncertain and how various were their positive ideas. One party spoke of the pretemporal and eternal birth of the Son, and asserted that he is like the Father in all things. This was ' ' the royal path ' ' between Arius and Sabel- lius (thus Cyrillof Jer. Catech. iv; 7; xi. 4, 7, 10, 14, 17). They, therefore, strenuously advocated the Antioch formulas, ex- cept that they could not reconcile themselves to the o/jjuiuain^. They thought to substitute for ito/jMututrtot^ (Sozom. h. e. iii. 18). In other words : they were -willing to agree with Athanasius in the result attained by him, but they reached it by a different path. Instead of starting as he did from the one divine nature, they, dreading Sabellianism,^ followed Origen in beginning with two divine persons. But the result itself might thus be brought into question, as these formulas could be approved also by ele- ments more in sympathy with the left wing, /. e., Origenisticand 1 This is plainly seen in the question of the Anomasan in Apollinarisdial. de trin. ( Draeseke, p. 264 ) : " What does ofioovatov mean ? I understand this to teach that the Son and Father are not the same." BEFORE THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. 223 Ariaiiizing tendencies. These formed the party of the Semi- arians or Homoiusians. But the consistent Arians now came out in opposition to this party, as well as to the Homousians, under the leadership of Aetius of Antioch (vid. discussion by(' him, '^concerning the unbegotten and the begotten God," in Epiph. h. 76. 1 1 J, and Eunomius of Cyzicus (a confession of faith and an apolegetic discourse in Fabricius, Bibl. graec. viii., and in Thilo, Bibl. patr. gr. ii. pp. 580-629 ; cf. Philostorg. h. e. iii. 15 ff.; iv. 12 ; v. 2 ; ix. 6 ; x. 6; v. i, etc.). Of Eunomius, Theodoret says: *' He presented theology as tech- nology " (haer. fab. iv. 3); and this is a just comment. Al- though it was, indeed, deemed proper to appeal to the authority of the Scriptures and the ancients (Eunom. Ap. 4, 12, 15 ; see the citations in Greg. Naz. or. 29, 18 and the discussion, or. 30), yet the thmking of these men was dominated by the profane logic which Athanasius had rebuked in Arius (cf. Greg. Naz. or. 27. 2). God is the unbegotten (^ayivvriTir/) . If this is his nature, then the view that we may fully know God (Socr. h. e. iv. 7 ; Theod. haer. fab. iv. 3 ; Basil, ep. 235) is quite intelligible. If now it be proper to designate the Son as begotten (ye-^-^fjzoy^ Eunom. Ap. 11, 12), then it necessarily follows that he is not God as is the Father, not derived from the substance of the Father, but as his creature, from his will (ib. 12, 15, 28). But if the Son is the first creature of the Father, then it follows : '^that he is neither oV^oofWco? nor otjjiwunui^^ since the one indi- - cates a beginning and a division of the nature, and the other "an identity " (Eunom. 1. c. 26 ; cf. Aet. 1. c. 4). Even a similarity (^o/jjnoy) is, in regard to the nature, impossible between the Begot- ten and the Unbegotten (Eunom. 11. 26), although we may speak of an imitative moral similarity (Eunom. ib. 24 and conf. fid. 3 : '' This only one like, oijjno^, to the Begetter is not an unbegotten like to the Unbegotten, for the Creator of all things is alone unbegotten . . . but as Son to the Father, as the image and seal [/. e., impression made by seal] of the whole energy and power of the Creator of all things, he is the seal of the Father's works and words and councils;" cf. Philostorg. vi. i and iv. 12). This is all merely consistent Arianism, and when Euzoius of Antioch (A. D. 361) proposes the formula : ** In all things the Son is unlike the Father," he is also but consistent (see similar utterances at the Council of Seleucia, in Hilar, c. Const, imp. 12). Thus had Arius himself taught. Yet the Nicene Creed still remained the doctrinal basis, and it was necessary to secure its abrogation. This was accomplished by the Third Council of Sirmium, under Ursacius and Valens, who had long before again become Arians, in the Second Sirmian 2 24 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. formula (A. D. 357 J: ** But as to that which some or many thought concerning the substance, which is called iisia in Greek, i. e.y that it be understood very expressly as homousion^ or what is called homoeusion^ it is proper that no mention at all be made and that no one teach it, for this reason . . . that it is not con- tained in the divine Scriptures, and that it is beyond the knowl- edge of man (Isa. 53. 8)'\ Furthermore, according to Jn. 14. 28, "There is no doubt that the Father is greater" (Hilar, de Syn. 11). Western men, among them Hosius, now almost a hundred years old, accepted this formula, and it was approved by a council at Antioch, A. D. 358 (Sozom. iv. 12). Thus the Nicene Creed, and the terms 6{ioob(no<; and 6/j.ocou(T[o? as well, appeared to be banished from the world. 5. But the development of ideas cannot be forced backward by decrees. At the council of Ancyra, under the leadership of Basil of Ancyra (A. D. 358, see the decree of the council in Epiph. h. 73. 2-11), it became evident that Arianism was not the faith of the Eastern church. As a son, the Son is not a creation of the Father (creator and creature are one thing, father and son another, c. 3). On the contrary, he is in his nature — in another way than other children of God — like the Father, in his tifj(Tia and not only in his hipysta ("certainly, as Only-one from Only-one, like in nature, from the Father," c. 5; "of likeness to the Father according to nature," c. 8 ; "He had the attributes of divinity, being according to nature incorporeal (^dfT'M/iarog), and like (^o/ioco^) to the Father according to the divinity and incorporeity and energy," c. 9. " And if anyone, professing to believe upon the Father and the Son, say that the Father is not his Father of like nature but of like energy . . . thus taking away his being truly a son, let him be anathema," c. II. But also : " If anyone, saying that the Father is in author- ity and nature the Father of the Son, should say also that the Son is of like or of the same nature (^6[j.oo6(nov de r^ rauToootTtov') as the Father, let him be anathema/' 11 fin.^ These formulas won the ear of the emperor (Soz. iv. 13 f. ). The fourth council of Sirmium now made an attempt, by means of the third Sirmian formula (A. D. 358), to establish peace by the revival of the fourth Antioch formula. It was hoped to confirm this peace at the double council at Ariminium and Seleucia (A. D. 359) by the presentation of a formula previously prepared at the Court at Sirmium (the fourth Sirmian), which was a compromise * In the dual arrangement of these anathemas, placing the Arian extreme side by side with the Sabellian, there is very clearly revealed the basis of the mistrust of the term, ofioovacog. They were afraid of being led into Sabellian- ism. Cf. Ath. de syn. 12 ; Socr. h. e. ii. 39. BEFORE THE COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE. 225 between the second formula of Sirmium and that of Ancyra : *^The term, o?jiJ.iitj(7ta, or n-otrza^i^); the three-fold personal life within which, being a self-evident presupposition, he does not at all attempt to prove. The Capi^adocians begin with the three divine hypostases (cf. Basil of Anc. ) and attempt to bring these under the conception of the one divine t/si'a. The terms, hypostasis and tisia are now carefully discriminated, the former being understood as in- dicating the individual separate existence, and the latter the sub- stance common to all (^. ^., Basil, ep. 38. 1-3 ; 9. 2 ; 125. i \ 236. 6. Greg. Nyss. inOehler. Bibl. ii. 218^,236, 234. Cat. magn. i in. Cf. ApoUin. dialogi, p. 266 f., 271). (^) There should be recognized three divine u7zo(7rdVj Bas. ep. 52. 2). It is the same nature ((pufTc^) and dignity of divinity (rict'a Ti^s" {^z.or-qro'^') , an equality of nature in honor, which be- longs to the three hypostases (Greg. Naz. or. 31. 9, 10, 28; 29. 2). The homoiisia, therefore, indicates the same divine substance or nature, but in consequence of this also the same dignity or glory, in the three hypostases. (c/) Thus arises the idea of the Triune God — three persons in ^ The homousios originally sounded strangely to Basil, as is evident from a letter to Apollinaris (Draeseke, p. 102): ** To such an idea, it seems to me that the meaning of the exactly equivalent hovioios is even better fitted than that of the homousios. For light having no difference at all from light in being more or less, cannot, I think, be rightly said to be the sajiie, because, in its own circuit of existence, it is different, but it may be accurately and exactly said to be like in nature^''' Startlni^ with this understanding, Basil interpreted the homousios in this sense, as appears above. 230 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. one Godhead. *'The three one in divinity, and the one three in individuahties " (t'^jwrry/riv) (Greg. Naz. or. 31. 9; 28. 31; 39. II, 12). The point of view which forms the basis of this conclusion is : *' In order that the unmingledness (rt) aamyDTh(7w.^ the same? But how can it be otherwise? Let it then be confessed also that things subsisting differently are admitted to be of the same nature " (Greg. Naz. or. 31. 11, 14, 15, 32. Bas. ep. 210. 4). The three are one God, but : " It is plain that not the per- son (jzfu'xTiDTZDv^ but the nature (^<>tj; horn. 15. 3.^ Greg. Naz. or. 34). His relation to the Father is described, in contradistinction from that of the Son (otherwise there would be two Sons) , not as a generation, but as a sending forth {ey.7:£[nl'tv/) with the Father (i. 6). Accordingly, the three hyposta- ses, although always to be thought of as realities, are yet not related to one another as are three men (i. 8, p. 138). They are one, but different in their mode of existence {rpo-o^ b-Kdp^ew^): *' They are one in all respects . except those of non -genera- tion, generation, and procession. The distinction is in thought ; for we know one God, in the exclusive peculiarities of paternity and sonship and procession " (i. 8, p. 139). This relationship may be further defined as a mutual interpenetration of the three hypostases without comminghng (according to Jn. 14. 11): '* The hypostases are in one another. They are in not so DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. 237 as to be commingled with one another, but so as to be contained in one another ; and they move about within one another without any coalescing and without juncture" (i. 8, pp. 140, 138). *' For the deity is, to speak concisely, undivided in the divided (^dfiipc(TTo<^ iv ixeixeptdiiivotq), just as also, in three suns contained in one another and unseparated, there is one blending and mu- tual connection of light " (ib.). Despite his radical rejection of Subordinationism, John of Damascus describes the Father as the Source of the Godhead (i. 7. 8j, and accordingly represents the Spirit as proceeding from the Father, although, indeed, ** through the Logos " (i. 12 ; per contra, vid. i. 8 fin.). This way of viewing the subject, which is simply a relic of the Greek Subordinationism, prepared the way for the controversy, long continued and never fully concluded,^ between the Roman and the Greek churches, upon the procession of the Holy Spirit (^filioque^. See Langen, Die trin. Lehrdifferenz, 1876. Gass, Symbolik der griech. Kirche, p. 152 if. Kattenbusch, Confes- sionskunde i., p. 323 ff. 3. The Western conception of the Trinity reached its final statement in the extensive and magnificent w^ork of Augustine, De trinitate^ which clearly re-states the Latin view of the Trini- ity — in its divergence from the Grecian, and which, by virtue of its method and the problems discussed, exerted a commanding influence upon the dogmatics of the Western church.^ The Oc- cident, as we have seen, stood unwaveringly upon the side of the Nicene theologians (Athanasius and Marcellus). The formulas of Tertullian were the means of preserving the recognition of the strict unity of God as not prejudicing in any degree the per- sonal distinctions in his nature. The prevalent theory was not Sabellian, nor was there thought to be any reason for suspecting the Alexandrine theology of a Sabellianizing tendency. The Neo- Nicene orthodoxy was therefore, though tardily, acknowledged. In this respect, Augustine is thoroughly Western in his point of view. It is not the Greek theology, nor even, in reality, the Council of Nice, which is decisive for him, but the ''catholic faith," e, g., ep. 120. 17 ; in Joh. tr. 74. i ; 98. 7 ; 18. 2 ; 37. 6; de doctr. chr. iii. i (cf. Reuter, Aug. Studien, p. 185 ff. ). As to Augustine's doctrine of the Trinity : Baur., Lehre v. d. Dreieinigkeit, 1841, p. 828 ff. NiTZSCH DC, i. 305 ff. Thomasius, DG. i., ed. 2, 281 ff. A. DoRNER, Aug., 1873, p. 5ff. BiNDEMANN, Der heil. Aug. iii. 709 ff. Gangauf, Aug. spekulat. Lehre von Gott, 1865. ^ Cf. the Russian Catechism (Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, ii. 481 f., 461) and the negotiations between Old Catholics and Greeks at Bonn, A. D. 1874, reported in Reusch, p. 26 ff. 2 See the brief outline of the contents in Book xv. 3, \ 5. 23^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. The basis of Augustine's theology is the unity of God. The Trinity is the one and simple God, '* not therefore not simple, because a Trinity " (de civ. dei xi. lo ; de trin. v. 7. 9 ; viii. i ; de fid. et symb. 8. 20). ** The Trinity itself is, indeed, the one God, and one God in the same sense as one Creator " (c. serm. Arian. 3). Accordingly, there belongs to the one triune God one substance, one nature, one energy, and one will : *^The works of the Trinity are inseparable" (ib. 4; de trin. ii. 5. 9; Enchirid. 12. 38 ; de symb. 2 ; c. Maxim, ii. 10. 2 ; in Joh. tr. 18. 6 ; 20. 3, 7; 95. i; 21. 11). These ideas are carried out to the fullest extent. Even the theophanies of the Old Testament are not re- ferred exclusively to the Son (trin. ii. 15 ff.). The Son (and the Spirit) even takes an active part in his own inissio into the world, since this was not accomplished otherwise than through *'the Word of the Father:" **The incarnation . . . was effected by one and the same operation of the Father and the Son inseparably, the Spirit, indeed, not being separated from it ; " cf. Matt. I. 18. '* Since the Father sent him by his Word, it was brought about by the Father and his Word that he was sent. Therefore by the Father and the Son was sent the same Son, because the Son himself is the Word of the Father" (trin. ii. 5. 9). But the fact that it is just the Son (and Spirit), and not the Father, who is sent, is not because they are inferior to the Father, but because they proceed from him (ib. iv. 20. 27 ; c. serm. Ar. 4, cf. de symb. 9 and opp. viii. 1636). Father, Son, and Spirit are, therefore, not three persons different from one another in the sense in which three human persons differ al- though belonging to one genus (in Joh. tr. 39. 2 f. ; 91. 4). On the contrary, each divine person is, in respect to the substance, identical with the others, or with the entire divine substance : ' ' For Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit together are not a greater essence (^essentia) than the Father alone or the Son alone, but these three substances, or persons, if they be so called, are to- gether equal to each one alone " (de trin. vii. 6. 11 ; viii. i ; vi. 7. 9; 10. 12 : ** Neither are two something more than one." In this sense, of the identity of substance, the term vijaioIxtkk; is used in Joh. tr, 97. 4). It is plain that Augustine's entire con- ception of the unity of God leads inevitably to the recognition of his personal unity. Augustine felt this, but for him — and long afterward — a distinct enunciation of this truth was prevented by the triadic application of the term person (cf. de trin. vii. 4. 7 ; 6. II). The One (personal) God is thus for Augustine an established fact. No less certain is it, however, that there are three persons in the one God. Here lay for him, as for Athanasius, the DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY. 239 greatest difficulty — the real problem. These are related to God, not as species to genus, nor as properties to a substance. Every quantitative or qualitative distinction is excluded {e. g., trin. v. 5-6; vii. 3-6; V. II ; viii. i). On the contrary, this termi- nology is designed to indicate the mutual inward relationship be- tween the three : *' They are so called, not with respect lo sub- stance, because they are thus called, not each one of them as related to himself, but as related mutually and the one to the other; nor with respect to property, because what is called Father and what is called Son is eternal and immutable in them. Wherefore, although to be Father and to be Son are two differ- ent things, yet there is not a different substance; for they are called thus, not with respect to substance, but with respect to that which is relative, which relativity is yet not a property, because it it is not mutable " (trin. v. 5,6; 8-9 ; viii. i init.; cf. '^Another, not other {alius non aliud),^' civ dei. xi. 10. i). The one God is never either Father only nor Son only, but the three forms of existence of the one God, each requiring the others, are Father, Son, and Spirit. They are hence substantially identical — the re- lation of dependence between them is a mutual one. The Father, who commands the Son, is no less dependent upon him than is the latter upon the Father (c. serm. Ar. 3). Father, Son, and Spirit behold in themselves the entire undivided Deity, only that it belongs to each of them under a different point of view, as generating, generated, or existing through spiration. '* Father and Son, therefore, know one another mutually, but the one in begetting, the other in being begotten" (trin. xv. 14- 23). Between the three hypostases exists the relation of a mutual interpenetration and interd welling (trin. vi. 7. 9). For the designation of this relationship, the t^rm. pe?'sona (or substantia) does not altogether satisfy Augustine. ** Nevertheless, when it is asked, What are the three? human speech at once toils with great insufficiency. Yet we say, three persons, not in order to express it, but in order not to be silent" (trin. v. 9, 10).^ That, with this conception of the Trinity, the Holy Ghost is regarded as proceeding not only from the Father ''but from both at once," follows as a matter of course (xv. 17. 29 ; in Joh. tr. 99. 6). According to Augustine, then, the one personal God, from an inward necessity, leads a three-fold, mutually-related personal ^ The whole passage is important in elucidating the terminology of Augus- tine. He translates luav bvolav^ rpeiq vTroGraoeig : unani essentiam^ tres substantias; but decides for the formula : Unam essentiam vel stibstaniiam, tres autem personas. Cf. vii. 5. lo, where, appealing to Ex. 3. 24, he prefers essentia to substantia. 240 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. life. The attempt is made to explain this view in a number of analogies, and thus prove the possibility of the three-fold life in the one God. These analogies are drawn from the human soul, because it was made in the image of God. Thus there is a trinity in sight (*' thing seen, vision, intention of the will uniting the two" (trin. xi. 2. 2 ; cf. xv. 3. 5); in thought (*' thus there is this trinity in memory, and inner vision, and the will which unites the two," ib. xi. 3. 6); in the human spirit (ix. and x.; xv. 3. 5 : ''mind, and knowledge by which it knows itself, and love by which it esteems itself and its knowledge — memory, intelligence, will "); inlove (ix. 22 : '* that which loves, that which is loved, and love itself ' ) . These analogies not only give expression to the idea that three are equivalent to one, which the ancient teachers sought to illustrate from nature (cf. in Aug. de fid. et symb. 9. 17), but they present the idea of a harmonious spiritual entity, impelled and controlled from a three-fold centre. In this there was a distinct advance upon the representations of the older theologians, which constantly wavered between the unity and the trinity. Augustine made it impossible for later ages to overlook the fact, that there can be no Christian doctrine of the Trinity which is not at the same time an unequivocal confession of the one personal God. *' Thrice have I said God, but I have not said three Gods ; for God thrice is greater than three Gods, because Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God " (in Joh. tr. 6. 2; cf. serm. 2. 15. 8; trina unitas^ . Augustine did not con- ceal his deep realization of the inadequacy of all these attempted explanations. He closes his work with the words : ** Lord, our God, we believe in Thee, the Father and the Son and the Spirit. For Truth would not have said. Go, baptize, etc. (Matt. 28. 20), unless Thou wast a Trinity, ... I would remember Thee ; I would know Thee ; I would love Thee . . , Lord, Thou one God, divine Trinity, whatsoever I have written in these books by suggestion of Thee, the One, mayest Thou the Three accept, if anything of myself, mayest both Thou the One and Thou the Three overlook it " (xv. 21. 51).^ Such is Augustine's doctrine of the Trinity. In it is collected a wealth of psychological observations and profound speculations. Theorists have hence always returned to it anew. It is but the more noticeable on this account that it really exerted but a slight influence upon practical piety. This is accounted for by the fact that the Augustinian theory was concerned only with the imma- 1 Ambrose represented the Trinity in a way more in harmony with the Cap- padocian ideas : three persons who are one by virtue of their *' one substance, divinity, will, law." See de fide ad Grat. i. 2. 17-19; ill. c. 12, 26; ii. 8. 73 ; 10. 86 ; iii. 14. 108 ; iv. 6. 68 ; 8. 83, etc. DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY, 24I nent Trinity, without deducing this from the view-point of the economic Trinity \ whereas a practically religious conception of the Trinity can be secured only from a contemplation of the re- vealed Trinitarian activity of God. It was because Augustine did not start at this point, that he was compelled to confess that men in theory acknowledged allegiance to the absolutely One, Triune God, whereas their practical ideas were always tinctured with Tritheism. But, despite this, what a wealth of ideas and views has this doctrine of Augustine bequeathed to the church ! 4. This Augustinian conception of the Trinity was — in its fundamental features — embodied for the Western church in the so-called Athanasian Creed, or Symbo/nm Qutcungue p- ''That we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. For there ^ The mention of this symbol, which was not produced until a later period, at this point is justified by the fact that it contains the theology of Augustine. Of the recent literature we cite : Kollner, Symbolik i., 1837. Ffoulkes, The Athan. Creed, London, ed. 3. Lumby, History of the Creeds, ed. 3, 1887. SWAINSON, The Nicene and Apostles' Creeds, etc., 1875, p. 195 ff. Ommanney, The Athan. Creed, 1875, and Early History of the Athan. Creed, 1880. G. Morin in La science catholique, 1 891, 673 ff. , and in the Revue benedictine xii., 1895, p. 385 ff. Burn, The Athan. Creed and Its Early Commentaries (Texts and Studies, ed. Robinson, iv. i, 1896). Har- NACK DG., ii. 298 ff. LooFS PRE. ii. ed. 3, 178 ff. The origin of the symbol, despite the most diligent efforts of scholars in re- cent years to discover it, is still unknown. It is evident that it has no relation to Athanasius. The following relatively certain data throw some light upon the question : (l) The manuscript copies of the text carry us to the eighth century. (2) The ancient expositions would lead us still further back, if the Expositio fidei Foriunati (Burn, p. 28 ff. ) can be attributed to Fortunatus (f ca. A. D. 600), whom one manuscript represents as the author, while another manuscript names Euphronius the presbyter, who was bishop of Treves A. D. 555"572. But the crediting of this Expositio, which would otherwise come to us anonymously, to two men who were personal acquaint- ances is very remarkable, and the apparently probable solution, that Euphro- nius as presbyter (hence about A. D. 550) composed it, must still remain un- certain. (3) Parallels to the formula of the Creed appear in great numbers in Southern Gaul. Especially important is the Pseudo-Augustinian Sermo 244, which has from ancient times been attributed to Csesarius (f A. D. 542). But an Expositio discovered by Caspar! in two Paris manuscripts ( Anecdota i. 283 ff. ) shows close relationship to Sermo 244, but does not contain the parallel to the Quicunque. On this account the originality of Sermo 244 is assailed. Caspar?, Zahn, and Kattenbusch, however, zealously defend it. But if Sermo 244, in the form in which it appears in Pseudo-Augustine, was really composed by Caesarius, we then must here recognize, not only anticipa- tions of the Quicunque, but an acquaintance at this early day with a completed formula. Such a formula must then have existed as early as about A. D. 500. (4) Vincent of Lerins, when he wrote his Commonitorium in A. D. 434, had no knowledge of the Creed (Loofs). (5) A council at Autun, at which Bishop Laodegar (A. D. 659 to ca. 683) presided, expressly mentions the *' creed (yft/i?OT) of Saint Athanasius, the president." Thus at this time 16 242 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. is one person of the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Spirit ; but the Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as is the Father, such is the Son, and such the Holy Spirit. . . And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal; just as there are not three uncreated nor three unbounded, but one uncreated and one unbounded . . . not three omnipotents, but already the Creed bore at Autun the name of Athanasius. (6) The codex Paris, 3836, dating from the eighth century, cites among canonical material a Christological rule of faith which is intimately related to ^§ 28-40 of the Qui- cunque, but which varies considerably in the wording. But the writer of the Pans codex had before him a Treves manuscript. From the fact that the Christological part of the symbol stands by itself in this document, it has been inferred that this second part was added later to the above-cited trinitarian portion (Swainson, Lumby, Harnack). But Loofs (p. 186) has correctly sur- mised that the part of the Treves manuscript cited by the writer beginning : " Domini nostri, Jesu Christi fideliter credat," is merely a fragment torn from § 27 of the Quicunque. From this he infers that there was a page wanting in the Treves manuscript in the hands of the Paris writer, and that he (about A. D. 750) had no knowledge of the Quicunque, or he would not have copied this. This is supposed to disprove the so-called two-source theory. Yet this entire ar- gumentation does not appear to be at all decisive. The very circumstance that the creed designated as Athanasian atAutun aboutA. D. 670 should have been unknown to this writer of A. D. 750 is sufficient to shake our confidence in the conclusion. Nevertheless, the suggestion with which Loofs starts is correct be- yond question ; but the inference drawn by him is false. The proper inference can only be : Since a librarian living about the middle of the eighth century would be familiar with the Athanasian Creed, and it was such a man who transcribed the Christological part, he must have been yet in ignorance of this portion of the document. This might be said already of the writer of the Treves Codex. Thus the two-source theory concerning the codex of Paris, 3836, receives, in my opinion, an important support. It commends itself also from the fact that the transition from the first to the second part (§ 27) plainly betrays the attempt to artfully unite two documents in hand. Compare also § 40. It is evident, for example, that, according to the first part, i}s\^ fides catholica em- braces nothing more than faith in the Trinity (|§ i-3)' To this \ 27 adds that it is necessary to eternal salvation that one believe also in the incarnation ; while in \ 28 the confession of the divinity and humanity of Christ is presented as the content oi fides recta. This is evidently something new, which was not in view when \ 3 was composed. The history of the Quicunque must accordingly be somewhat as follows : The first part was composed from formulas of Augustinian theology for the eluc- idation of the Apostles' Creed. It may have attained a fixed form by about A. D. 500, and in South Gaul. But, in addition to this formula, there was also a second and Christological one, which was not much later in its appearance. It was probably bound up with the first named as early as the seventh century. Yet toward the middle of the eighth century there were scholarly people who knew nothing of the Christological formula. But, with this exception, the combination of the two formulas must be regarded as a fixed fact. Since the time of the Carlovingians, we find the Quicunque making its way into liturgies and then co-ordinated with the other two symbols as the Creed of Athanasius (Anselm, ep. ii. 41. Alex, of Hales, Summa iv. quest. 37, \ 9, etc.). Thus the Reformers were also led to accept the symbol. THE TWO NATURES OF CHRIST. 243 one omnipotent. . . The Son is the only (son) of the Father ; not made, not created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and the Son, not made nor created nor begotten, but pro- ceeding. . . In this Trinity there is nothing before or after, nothing greater or less ; but the whole three persons are co- eternal together and coequal, so that in all things, as has been said above, both the unity in trinity and the trinity in unity is to be worshiped. Whoever, therefore, wishes to be saved, let him think thus concerning the Trinity " (§§ 3-26). CHAPTER II. THE DOCTRINE OF ONE PERSON AND TWO NATURES IN CHRIST. § 23. Origin of the Controversies Upon the Two Natures of Christ. 1. Two things had been transmitted by tradition as fixed : the reality of the humanity of Christ, with his human activity and sufferings (recognized in conflict Avith Docetism in the second century), and the reality and Homousia of his divinity. Divinity and humanity are now combined in one person ; there is a syn- thesis (^(jovd-srov^ Origen), but as to the question how this union was conceivable, especially how two personal natures can consti- tute one person, there was no further investigation, despite the propositions put forth by the Dynamistic Monarchians. Only the West possessed, in Tertullian's view of one person in two substances, a formula which appeared to adequately meet the situation, and which had been confirmed by the fuller develop- ment of the doctrine of the Trinity. Western theologians, with this theory in hand, felt themselves relieved from the necessity of further investigation, and in the conflicts of the succeeding era they presented it as an adequate solution of all the questions raised in the Orient. 2. This was the situation when Apollinaris of Laodicea (born about A. D. 310) carefully stated the Christological prob- lem and, at the same time, presented a clear and challenging at- tempt at its solution. The learned bishop was prominent as a humorist as well as noted for his acquaintance with the Scriptures and his intellectual acuteness. 244 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Of his writings, the following are here of interest : The treatise attributed to Gregory Thaum., Kara fiepog irtar/.g \ de divina incarnatione, frg. ; die pseudo-Athanasian, nefji r/'/g aapKucecog tov ^eov a6}ov, and a number of frag- ments, vid. Draseke, in Texte u. Unters. vii. 34. Caspari, Alte und Neue Quellen, etc., p. 65 ff. Further, in opposition : Athan. c. Apol. (genuineness questioned); cf. in Epiphan. h. 77 ; Greg. Naz, ep. ad Nectarium, epistolae ad Cledonium ; Greg. Nyss. Antirreheticus c. Apol.; Theodoret Eranistes dial. 5 ; haeret. fab. iv. 8. Theodore of Mopsuestia, frg. from his c. Apol. et de Apollinari. Compare Dormer, Entwicklungsgesch. d. Lehre v. d. Pars. Christi, i. pp. 975-1036. LooFS PRE. ii. ed. 3, 177 ff. Burn, the Athan. Creed, Texts and Studies iv. i. G. Krueger, PRE. i., ed. 3, 671 ff.' (^) The Christology of this enthusiastic champion of the 6/if>(inrTt(i<; took its form in opposition, both to the Arian doctrine of the mutability of the Logos and that of the external juxtapo- sition of the two natures of Christ, as taught by the Antiochian *' Paulinizing " (Paul of Samosata) theologians, who ''say that the man that is from heaven is one, confessing him to be God, and the man from earth is another, saying that the one is uncre- ated, the other created" (ad Dionys. ep. p. 348 ; cf. ep. ad Jov. p. 342 ; cf. p. 381). The idea of the God, Christ, held his thought in positive thralldom. On the one hand, it was his aim to so construct Christology that no shadow of mutability might fall upon Christ. But this appeared to be possible only if this man was really God — if there was in him no free human will (de incarn. pp. 383, 387, 388). Otherwise, he would be sub- ject to sin (fid. conf. p. 393 and Athan. c. Apol. i. 2 ; ii. 6, 8 ; Greg; Nyss. Antirrh. 40. 51 ; Greg. Naz. ad Cled. i. 10) and the redeeming death of Christ would be only the death of a man (de inc. p. 391 ; in inc. adversar. p. 395). On the other hand, the outward juxtaposition of the two natures does not help to overcome the difficulties. It is impossible to make the divinity and the humanity combine in their entirety into one person (de inc. pp. 384, 388, 389, 400). Two persons (-/>or7a>;ra) would be the necessary result (ib. 387, 392). ''That two complete things should become one is not possible " (Athan. c. Apol. i. 2). We would thus be led to a fabulous being like the Minotaurs or Tragelaphs, or we would be compelled to introduce a quater- nity instead of the trinity (Greg. Nyss. antirrh. 42). Only be- cause the flesh (trdp^) of Christ is one person (^TzpofTWTzo'y) with his divinity is it possible to worship Jesus without, at the same time, worshiping a man (pp. 389, 349, 350). Only thus is re- demption a work of God. (^) From this it follows that the im- mutable divinity of Christ and the unity of the Redeemer's per- son can be preserved only by yielding the integrity of his hu- man nature. Arius and his followers had, with a purpose dia- metrically opposite to that of ApoUinaris, maintained the same THE TWO NATURES OF CHRIST. 245 position (in order to make all evidences of mutability or infirmity in Jesus applicable to the Logos), /. e.^ that Christ was not made man, but only became incarnate, and therefore assumed only a human body and not also a human soul (see Confes. of Eudoxius in Caspar:, 1. c. iv. p. i8o ; Athan. c. Apol. ii. 4 ; Greg. Naz. ad Cled. ep. ii. 7 ; Epiph. ancor. 33 ; cf. supra, p. 203). This same inference Apollinaris now drew with a different purpose and in a different sense. He regarded the trichotomy of man's na- ture as established by i Thes. 5. 23 (deinc. pp. 382, 388, 390). The Logos assumed the body and soul of a man, but the divine Logos itself took the place of the spirit (^vwj^) or intellectual soul {4"-'X'0 i^"^/>«). *' Christ, having, besides soul and body, a divine spirit, i. e., mind, is with reason called the man from heaven" (de inc. pp. 382, 401). Hence it may be said: *' Thus the one living being consists of a moved and a mover, and is not two, nor composed of two, complete and self-moving beings" (deinc. p. 384); and thus Christ is one person with one personal life in mind and will and energy, z. e., the purely divine (pp. 349, 399, 400, 401). *' For, saying that 'theLogos became flesh,' he does not add, ^ and soul; ' for it is impossible that two souls, a thinking and a willing, should dwell together in the same person, and the one not contend against the other by reason of its own will and energy. Therefore the Logos as- sumed not a human soul, but only the seed of Abraham " (de unione, frg. p. 401; cf. 396). The difficulties are thus over- come : ^* For God, having become incarnate, has in the human flesh simply his own energy, his mind being unsubject to sensual and carnal passions, and divinely and sinlessly guiding the flesh and controlling the fleshly emotions, and not alone unconquerable by death, but also destroying death. And he is true God, the unfleshly appearing in the flesh, the perfect one in genuine and divine perfection, not two persons (-^'Vw-a), nor two natures (^y^sf?). There is one Son ; both before the incarnation and after the incarnation the same, man and God, each as one. And the divine Logos is not one person and the man Jesus another ' ' {y.aTo. p.zp. -:rt-r. pp. 377, 378). (r) But since Apollinaris in this way found in Christ one person, one harmonious being, he could also speak of his one nature (^(phai^') and one substance (ourrca) (^. ^., 341, 348, 349, 352, 363), the Logos being unsep- arated and undivided (^fj.y(i)fnf>T ^^so Theodoret, see excerpts in Mar. Merc), (a) A settled point is here the Homousia of the Logos. The Logos, by his birth from Mary, assumed a complete man as to nature, consisting of "soul and mind and flesh" {}8{>xia). The man Jesus desires what God desires. Through him the Deity becomes efficient. There is one willing (^^^i\rj^). In view of these statements, we can understand the vigorous opposition of Apollinaris. The unity of the person is endangered. The divine cannot be said to have really become man, as there remains only the moral rel- ative union (iVoio-i? rr^ercxrj') between two persons. The religious significance of this union is that Christ, in prototype and example, represented the union of man with God — in obedient will. As did the man Jesus, so may we also attain sonship to God *' by grace, not naturally." His purpose was ^' to lead all to imitation of himself" (Theod. de inc. xii. 7, p. 306; xiv. 2, p. 308; cat. 8, p. ss^).^ (f?) The church is indebted to this school of theologians for the preservation of a precious treasure — the reality of the human and personal career of Jesus. To what extreme the ideas of ^ Cf. the saying attributed to Ibas : " I do not envy Christ," he says, "that he was made God ; for what he has been made I have been made, because he is of my nature " (Gallandi viii. 705). 250 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. ApoUinaris lead may be seen in the later Monophysites. But it cannot be maintained that the *' historical Jesus" would ever have received justice at the hands of those who were content with this theory. The abstract conception of God which lay at its basis prevented any real and historical understanding of the na- ture of the God-man. Two difficulties were felt : (i) The unity of the personal life of Jesus remained problematical, although this problem was perhaps soluble. (2) The tendency of Greek Soteriology toward a mystical deification of the humanity through the medium of the God-man did not appear to harmo- nize with the theory as proposed by the Antiochians. The only significance remaining to the work of redemption appeared to be instruction and imitation. This explains the often unjustifiable opposition to this Christology. The theology of the Antiochians at least prevented the acceptance of Apollinarianism as a solu- tion of the problem of ApoUinaris. 4. The other Greek theologians attempted to solve the prob- lem in a different way, following upon the track of Athanasius : the God-man is a concrete unit, in whom, however, we discrim- inate in the abstract two natures (supra, p. 211). The Cappa- docians maintained essentially the same position. But, in facing the problem of ApoUinaris, they, like the Antiochians, could not get beyond mere allegations. They spoke of two natures {^(poast^) , but did not infer from this that there were ** two Sons," although the two natures were to be conceived as each complete (Greg. Naz. ep. ad Cled. i. 7, 8). It was thought that the two natures coalesced in one. There is a miraculous commingling, the one deifying and the other being deified : *' For both the taking and the taken are God, the two natures concurring in one ; not two Sons" (Greg. Naz. or. 37. 2); and " being that which deified and that which was deified. O, the new mixture Qxi^i^) ; O, the strange compound" {xpa(n^)\ (or. 38. 13). It is, says Gregory of Nyssa, a relation like that between a drop of vinegar mingled with the sea and the sea itself. This simile indicates how utterly unlim- ited was the range of thought which these men allowed them- selves. Since the Logos becomes flesh, the human is transformed into the divine ('* changed, a mixing up, dvdxpatTL^^ with the divine, a transformation, iisrafTrinyemfnq, of the man into the Christ "). Thus the infirmity, mutability, and mortality of the human nature are consumed by the deity : *' He mixed his life- giving power with the mortal and perishable nature. . . The Immutable appears in the mutable, in order that, having changed and transformed from the worse into the better the evil commingled with the mutable subject, he might, having expended the evil in himself, cause it to disappear from the nature. For our God is a THE TWO NATURES OF CHRIST. 25I consuming fire, in which all wood of evil is thoroughly burnt up ' ' (Greg. Nyss. c. Eunom. v., Mi. 45, pp. 700, 693, 697, 705, 708, also Antirrh. 42). It is also held, indeed, that "■ the be- holding of the attributes of the flesh and of the deity remains unconfused, so long as each of these is regarded by itself" (ib. p. 706). Thus the humanity weeps at the grave of Lazarus, but the deity calls him to life. But viewed concretely, the deity, by virtue of the union, affects the human just as well as the humanity the divine : *' thus through the connection and union the (prop- erties) of both become common to each, the Lord taking upon himself the stripes of the servant, and the servant being glori- fied with the honor belonging to the Lord" (ib. 705, 697). The relation of the two natures is thus a different one from that existing between the persons of the Trinity : ** God and man are, it is true, two natures . . . but there are not two Sons nor two Gods. . . . And if it is necessary to speak concisely : other and other (a'AAo xat alh>^ are the entities of which {ra i^ wv') the Saviour . . not another and another, aXht^ xa\ aXhi^. God forbid. For both are one in the compound, God being human- ized and man being deified . . . but I say * other and other ' in a contrary sense from that in which it may be said of the Trinity; for there it is 'another and another,' in order that we may not commingle the hypostases, and not ' other and other,' for the three are one and the same in their divinity " (Greg. Naz. ep. ad Cled. i. 4). Unfinished as is all this, we may yet clearly see the aim of these writers. The historical character of Christ compels them to maintain the two complete natures as well as the intimate union of these two natures. But their conception of redemption leads them to think of this union as a commingling of the na- tures, as a transformation of the human into the divine. They maintained in their relation to the Antiochians a religious posi- tion, and in opposition to Apollinaris a historical standpoint. In view of this tendency — though by no means in the import- ance or clearness of their ideas — they are superior to both (cf. p. 246, n. 4). 5. Thisview received its final formulation at the hands of Cyril OF Alexandria (bishop from A. D. 412, ■\ A. D. 444). Opp. ed. Aubert, 1638. Mi. gr. 68-77. Especially : Quod unus sit Christ. Dial, de incarn. unigeniti. De incarn. verbi. De incarn. domini. Adv. Nestorii blasphemias, 11. 5. Quod s. virgo deiparasit. L. adv. nolentes con- fiteri a. virgo esse deiparam. Explicatio duodecim capitum. Apologetic, pro duodecim capitibus. Apologet. c. Theodoret. De recta fide ad reginas, 11. 2. Frgg. ex libris c. Theodor. et Diodor. Ep. iff.; ep. 17 ad Nestor.; epp. 45, 46 ; ad Succensum, in Mi. t. 75-77. Cf. LoOFS, Leontius v. Byz. in Texte u. Untersuch. iii. i, p. 40 ff. 252 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. (a) Cyril starts with the person of the Logos. This person assumed complete human nature for our salvation. His formula is: "one nature of the divine Logos, made flesh." He does not speak of the one nature of the incarnated Logos, or Christ, but habitually of the one incarnated nature of the Logos. The Logos, as the subject contemplated, has thus the one incarnated nature. It may, however, also be said of the Logos that he was made man and incarnated (e. ^., c. Nest. v. 4, 7 ; ii. 10 j ad regin. ii. 4, 33). In detail, Cyril teaches : Two natures are to be acknowledged, the divine and the human, both of them com- plete, so that the latter includes the reasoning soul (^4'^X'^ ^^"T^^-'^j) (adreg. i. 13, Mi. 76. 1221 ; ii. 55 ; inc. unig., Mi. 75. 1208 f., 1220). Thus Christ is " of like nature (^6/j.ooijffco';) with his mother as with his Father" (dial. c. Nest., Mi. 76. 252; ep. 40, Mi. 77. 192). In consequence of his becoming man, there is a concurrence (^awdpo/j.ij') and union (iVw^c^) of these two na- tures. How is this to be understood? Not as a conversion or change, since " the nature of the Logos is immutable and abso- lutely unchangeable" (ad reg. ii. 2, 22; inc. unig.. Mi. 75. ii92ff., 1200, 1253). *' Neither as a mixture nor compound " (^(popfiofs^ (Toyxpafyfiy xpa.fn'i^] quod unus, Mi. 75. 1292 ; c. Nest. ii, 11; ep. 4, Mi. 77. 45); yet not as a mere connection {^fTuvaiptio) or indwelling (^hoixr)<7(.^^ (^. g,, c. Nest. ii. proem. quod b. virgo 8). On the contrary, both natures retain their own characteristics unmingled. The deity throughout all the changes of its earthly lot remains in its full glory what it was be- fore (c. Nest. ii. i ; ad reg. i. 4; ii. 9, 16, 27, 33, 37 ; inc. unig.. Mi. 75. 1216, 1220, 1221, 1229), and the humanity re- tains its complete Homousia with us (ep. 40, Mi. 77. 192 ; inc. unig.. Mi. 75. 1 216 : Christ's body mortal). Cyril can, there- fore, speak of two natures (vid. esp. quod unus. Mi. 75. 1292), and he can compare the relation of the two to that between an emperor in his proper character, and as appearing in the garb of a consul (quod b. virg. 14); or to that of body and soul in man, which yet together compose one man (c. Nest. ii. 12 ; inc. unig., Mi. 75. 1224; ep. 17, Mi. 77. 116; ep. 45, p. 233, quod unus, Mi. 75. 1292). This illustration affords us a key to the inter- pretation of the above-cited formula of Cyril. The two natures are, indeed, after their union the same as they were before, but they are combined in indissoluble unity by means of the unity of the person — the Logos, as also by means of the consequent mu- tual communication of their respective attributes. Thus the two natures are kept distinct in abstract thought, although the con- crete object of contemplation is the ''one incarnate nature," which has the Logos as its controlling factor. The unity in this THE TWO NATURES OF CHRIST. 253 sense is, therefore, one of hypostases (Jvoj(n^) or hypostasis of the Logos, i. e., the Logos itself, is truly united (cStui^'cf?) with the humannature " (Apol. c. Theodoret, Mi. 76. 400). Inasmuchas the Logos-person of the God-man is for Cyril the self-evident postulate, he was not called upon to face the problem of ApoUi- naris, and hence, of course, furnished no solution of it. {b) But Cyril's ideas lead us also upon a different path. We are to acknowledge **one Son, one Lord, one Christ," and him as '* of two perfects: " *' the two natures proceed together in unbroken union, unconfusedly and unchangeably ... we do not at all detract from the concurrent unity when we say that it is (derived) from two natures. From two and different natures is the one and only Christ" (ep. 45, p. 232 f.). For, just as the Logos was God before his sojourn on earth, so also, having be- come man . . . he is again one. Therefore he has called him- self a mediator between God and man (i Tim. 2. 5), as being one from both natures" (quod b. virgo 12; cf. c. Nest. ii. 12 ; ep. 17, Mi. 77, 116 ; inc. unig.. Mi. 75. 1220, 1221, 1233, 1253, 1208 : " We are accustomed to guard absolutely the un- broken unity, believing him to be the Only-begotten and the First-born ; the Only-begotten, as the Logos of God the Father . . , the First-born moreover in that he becameman "). He is, therefore, one and the same before and after the incarnation : '* for the Son according to nature from the Father, having taken to himself a physical and rational body, was carnally born and, not turning into flesh, but rather taking it to himself, and ever mindful of his being God " (ad reg. ii. 2). '' Being man, viewed outwardly ; but inwardly true God" (quod b. virgo 4). Cyril denies the charge that in his conception Christ is two-per- soned (^dt7zp6fTW7:o^fj.d£ vorjro^. The eternal Word is conceived pri- marily in his relation to the world, and not in a purely religious way, in his relation to salvation and to human history. As, e.g. , all things are but copies of eternal ideas, and these ideas are in God (de Oct. quaestionibus, q. 46. 2), so all things exist only in so far as God gives to them a '' continuing and unchangeable form " (de lib. arb. ii. 17. 45). But the eternal ideas (rationes) of all temporal things are present in the Logos (de genes, ad litt. iv. 24. 41), and the Logos is the '^ form of all real things," '^ the unfashioned form" {forma infabricata)^ ''without time . . . and without local dimensions." Of him it is said : ** For he is a certain form, an unfashioned {non formata) form, but the form of all fashioned forms, an unchangeable {incommutabilis^ form . . . controlling {sicperans^ all things, existing in all things and a kind of foundation in which they exist, and a roof under which they exist. . . . Therefore all things are in him, and yet, be- cause he is God, all things are under him" (serm. 117. 2, 3). These are clearly conceptions derived from Greek philosophy, regarding the Logos as the cosmic principle of idea and form. But, if we would rightly understand Augustine, we must also bear in mind that he always thinks of this Logos as the second person in the Trinity, as the Son of God immutably present with the Father, who in time became man. All ideas of Subordination- ism are utterly remote from his thought, however strongly the 17 258 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Greek conception of the Logos might impel in that direction, as we have seen in the Apologists and in Origen. At this point, the church's doctrine of the divinity of the Son marked out for him an absolutely fixed path from which he never deviated. Nor did Augustine fail to draw from the divinity of Christ practical inferences in the sphere of Soteriology (vid. sub). But the starting-point of his doctrine, and hence its relation to other views, was always different from that of Athanasius.^ Whilst the latter began really with the redeeming work of Christ, and upon this, as a basis, erected his homousian theory, Augustine started with an accepted ecclesiastical doctrine, which he inter- preted for himself through speculative reflections, and from this drew his conclusions as to the redeeming work of Christ. Hence his Christology does not present the strikingly religious one- sidedness which marks the conception of Athanasius. Regarded as doctrine, its originality dare not at all events be too highly rated. Augustine maintained unconditionally the divinity of Christ, and he esteemed highly his humanity, as a fact of which he had gained knowledge in his personal experience. But in re- gard to the combination of the two natures, he did not advance beyond the views traditional in the "West. The sources do not sustain the opinion of A. Dorner (Augustinus, p. 92) and Har- NACK (DG. iii., ed. 3, 120), i. e., that it was because of the sus- ceptibility of the human soul of Jesus that the Logos appeared in it, nor justify the latter in declaring that *' Augustine constructs the God-man from the standpoint of the human person (soul)," or that the chief interest of Augustine centres in the human soul of Jesus. We may, perhaps, characterize his fundamental ten- dency as in harmony with the positions taken in his De civ. dei, X. 23, 24. The oracular deliverance cited from Porphyry, ** fountains can purify ' ' ( principia posse piirgare), is correct, ex- cept that we can here speak of but One fountain. This foun- tain, the Logos, in entering humanity, purifies it : ** Christ the Lord is the fountain, by whose incarnation we are purified. For neither the flesh nor the human soul (/. ^'). ''The only- begotten Son of God out of grace so united himself with his human nature, that he became man. The only-begotten Son of God, not by grace by nature, by nature uniting himself in such unity of per- son, that he, the same, was also man. This same '' Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, /. e., the unique One, our Lord, wasbornoftheHoly Spirit and the Virgin Mary " (ib. ii. 36, 37}. But in all of this the Logos remains unchangeable (de agon. chr. i. I ; X. II. 23, 25). But Augustine can also speak of the com- 26o HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. bination of the natures as a '' mixture : " '^ the man is joined to, and in some way mingled (^cominixtus') with, the Word into a unity of person " (trin. iv. 20. 30). It is such a mixture as is found in every human person : ** In that person there is a mix- ture of soul and body ; in this person is a mixture of God and man" (ep. 137. 3, 11; serm. 174. 2). But at the same time the immutability of the divine nature is still carefully guarded, and we accordingly read also : '' the same who is man is God, and the same who is God is man, not in confusion of nature, but in unity of person " (sermo 186. i). The idea of a change of the divine nature, or a denuding it of power in the interest of redemption, is entirely foreign to Augustine. The divine na- ture remains as it was, except that the flesh is added to it, and becomes with it the same person. *' The Word does not come into the flesh in order to perish, but the flesh comes to the Word in order that it may not perish " (sermo 186. i ; 121. 5 ; 264. 4 ; ep- 137- 7. 10; trin. i. 8. 15).^ But the religious interest of Augustine does not centre entirely in the divinity of Christ, rather in this no less than in his humanity. In Christ the divine nature reveals itself. Its wis- dom is thus offered to us as milk to babes (sermo 117. 10. 16 ; 126. 4. 5 ; conf. vii. 18). The love of God manifest in him awakens us to a responsive love. His humility overcomes our pride (de catechiz. rudibus 4. 7, 8; conf. vii. 18). His whole * Augustine has also the following modification (afterward, employed by Abelard): '* the Word of God having the man" [habens hoitiinetHy in Joh. tr. 19. 15), but also: "he assumed the man" (de agon. chr. Ii. 12; 18. 20 ; 19. 21 ; 20. 22 ; cf. Hilar, de trin. x. 22). He also teaches a predestina- tion of the man Jesus (de praedest. 15. 30, 31 ; cf ScHEEL, 1. c, p. 215 f.). These terms of expression are, indeed, of value in aiding to a proper under- standing of Augustine, since they show to what an extent he was able to grasp independently the idea of the humanity of Christ (cf. also such expressions as : "The Son of God assumed man, and in that man {in illo homine) suffered," de agon. chr. ii. 12 ; ib. : "in which \i. t., that man] the Son of God offered himself to us as an example ; " ib. 23. 25 : "Thus we say that the Son of God suffered and died in the man whom he carried, without any change or destruc- tion of his divinity " ). But when Scheel (p. 216) infers from the predesti- nation of Jesus a fundamental departure from the doctrine of the two natures, since only a person and not a substance can be predestinated (Harnack simi- larly speaks of a "profound relationship with the Christology of Paul of Samo- sata, and Photinus," p. 121), he is in so far correct, that the ideas and for- mulas cited testify that Augustine could conceive of the human life of Jesus as relatively independent and like our own (vid. with reference to the childhood of Jesus, Scheel, p. 230). Yet in this Augustine by no means abandons his controlling scheme of thought, for the predestinating of the man Jesus means exactly that that the Logos should absorb him "in order through him as the mediator to bring grace to the predestinated." At all events, there are here points of view at variance with Greek conceptions, which became significant in the theology of the West. NESTORIUS AND CYRIL. 261 life and conduct, in both its human and its divine aspects, serves as an example for believers (enchir. 14.53; ^5- 108). Asman, he is the mediator between us and God (conf. x. 43 : '' For in so far as he is man, in so far is he a mediator"); but only in so far as he is also God. As man he is the mediator (as Augustine always states with emphasis), for thereby he stands near to men ; but the nearness is the nearness of God. The man becomes the mediator, because he has God within him (enchir. 25. 108 ; conf. X. 42). Compare also in Joh. tr. 42. 8 : *'His divinity whither we journey, his humanity where we journey," similarly tr. 13. 5 ; civ. dei xi. 2. The West had, therefore — in independence of the East — its own Christological theory. It was more nearly in accord with the Christology of Alexandria than with that of Antioch, although not without points of agreement with the latter. § 24. Nestorius and Cyril. The Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus. Upon Nestorius, see Socr. h. e. vii. 29 ff., the letters of Coelestine ; his ora- tions in Marius Mercator in Gallandi, bibl. viii. 629 ff., in Mi. lat. 48, cf. Hefele CG. ii. 149 ff. Loops, PRE. xiii. ed. 3, 736 ff. I. The great controversy arose from the discussion of a litur- gical formula. Nestorius, who was called in A. D. 428 from Antioch to Constantinople, desired to controvert the heretics. He vigorously assailed the Arians, the Novatians, and the Mace- donians, but joined hands with the western Pelagians. The designation of Mary as the mother of God, which was becoming current, aroused his polemics. He held the genuine Antiochian view : The Logos, being as divine absolutely immutable, was not born. This can be said only of his garment, or temple, i. e.^ his human nature (or. 1.2; 3. 2). Hence Mary was not to be called really the mother of (>od {^s.(p6(>o^) manVib. i. 2 ; ii. 10, cf. inc. unig., Mi. 75, 1232); when we are baptized into Christ and by him, we would be bap- tized into a man (ad reg. ii. 52 ; c. Nestor, iii. 2 ; inc. unig.. Mi. 75, 1240); we would in the Lord's Supper partake of the flesh and blood of a man (c. Nestor, iv. 5 ; inc. unig., Mi. 75, 1241 j. Compare Thomasius, DG. 341 ff. Thus the Christian world would be robbed by Nestorius of all the treasures which it possesses in the historical Christ. All these things have now only a human valuation ; and we no longer have in Christ God himself. The whole religious energy of Cyril's views is here ^ Lechler has prepared the way for a juster estimate of Nestorius, proving that the latter taught the true divinity and humanity of Jesus, as well as the union of the two in one person, but did not draw the inference of the cotiwiu- nicatio idiomatum. Further, he maintains that it was chiefly love of conflict and of debate which produced the controversy. Erl. Ed. 25, ed. i, 304 fi". NESTORIUS AND CYRIL. 263 revealed. The real point of controversy is, whether it was the man Jesus controlled by the Logos, or whether it was God him- self, who was born, lived, taught, labored, and died among us. The positive teachings of Cyril have been already outlined. These writings of Cyril, viewed from the standpoint of church politics, are the works of a master hand. Theologically and morally, they make a different impression, giving evidence of a lack of capacity to understand and appreciate a theological opponent. Rome was very soon drawn into the controversy. Nestorius wrote to Pope Coelestine as his colleague, and Cyril sought direc- tion and instruction from the same source. Nestorius expressed his view in the charge which he brings against his opponents ; *' They confound, in the mutability of modification, both natures which, through the supreme and unconfused union, are adored in the one person of the only-begotten " (ep. 2 ad Coel. c. 2) — /. e.j he expressed himself — in word — in harmony with Western ideas. ^ Nevertheless Rome, after some delay, decided against him at a synod, according to her traditional policy making com- mon cause with Alexandria (A. D. 430). Coelestine could find nothing to say to Nestorius except that he was a ravening wolf and a hireling, and that he must within ten days subscribe to the teaching of the Romish and Alexandrine church, or, failing to do .so, be excluded from the church (see Coelestine, ep. 11-14). 3. Cyril now drew the lines of opposition most sharply at the Council of Alexandria, A. D. 430. He addressed a communi- cation to Nestorius, containing an exposition of his teaching, and closing with twelve anathemas (ep. 17, in Hahn, Bibl. d. Sym- bole, ed. 3, p. 312 ff.): Mary is the mother of God (i). The one Christ dare not be divided in accordance with the hypostases, and the latter are not bound together only by their conjunction in accordance with their dignity, i.e., their sphere of dominion or power, but through a physical union {'ivwfn^ P- 215): *' We, therefore, acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, complete God and complete man, of a rational soul and a body ; begotten of the Father before the ages according to (his) divinity, but in the last days ... of Mary the Virgin according to (his) humanity ; that he is of the same nature with the Father according to (his) divinity, and of the same nature with us according to (his) humanity. For a union of the two natures has taken place ; wherefore, we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. In accordance with this con- ception of theunconfounded union, we acknowledge the holy Vir- gin to be the mother of God, because the divine Logos was made flesh and became man, and from her conception united with him- self the temple received from her. We recognize the evangelical and apostolic utterances concerning the Lord, making the charac- ters of the divine Logos and the man common as being in one per- son, but distinguishing them as in two natures, and teaching that the godlike traits are according to the divinity of Christ, and the humble traits according to his humanity. ' ' The Antiochians had in this the rejection of Apollinarianism and the recognition of the two natures; Cyril, the one person,* the union of the two natures, and the i^eoroxa^. Each party could read its own Christology into the symbol, and Cyril did this in a liberal way.^ But inasmuch as the formula, which ex- cluded both extremes, had been accepted, the submerging of the matter in the drawing of inferences was prevented. There was not lacking opposition upon both sides, but it was in part quelled by force. The Nestorians were persecuted, and were able to maintain themselves only in the Persian Empire (see Hefele ii. 270 ff.). 1 Whether the one person is that of the Logos or the divine-human person is not clear in the symbol. ^ See the letters of Cyril in M. v., and, on the other hand, the attitude of Theodoret, who remained essentially in harmony with the Antiochian Chris- tology. Yet he emphasized the unity of the person more strongly than his pred- ecessors : see Eranistes u. haer. fab. v. Compare Bertram, Theodoreti doc- trina christologica, 1883. His view is, in brief : * * he showed in the one person the distinction of the two natures," /. e., Paul in Rom. 5- 9 (haer. fab. v. 14, opp. iv. 1 . 433 ) , Even after the incarnation there remain two natures : ' ' that each nature remained also unmixed after the union" (Eranist. ii. opp. iv. I, p. loi, also p. 99), and **we do not separate the flesh of the divine Logos, nor make the union a commingling ' ' (ib. p. 102). The divine nature did not, indeed, depart from the human nature, either on the cross or at the grave, but "being immortal and immutable, it endured neither death nor suf- fering" (haer. fab. v. 15, p. 435 ; cf. ep. 113. 2). EUTYCHIAN CONTROVERSY. 267 § 25. Eutychian Controversy and Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon} I. Cyril may be designated either as a Dyophysite or as a Monophysite. This explains his historical position. The ortho- dox were trained under his influence, and he became the teacher of the Monophysites. The Greek theory of redemption more and more repressed interest in "the man Jesus. Christ, in order to 'Meify " us, must be God, and practical Christianity con- stantly tended to find its entire expression in the doctrine and mysteries of the church. That these really were divine and pos- sessed the power of deifying man appeared to be certain only if the man Jesus was deified — if he was absolutely God. The practical conception of Christ's personality demanded this view, and the administration of the mysteries in the ritual of the church gratified it. The tendency to sensualize the spiritual, which marked the age, was here also manifest. In this way arose a piety of Monophysite type. But in theology there still sur- vived a part of the Antiochian Christology. We can understand it, therefore, that the energetic and shrewd successor of Cyril, DioscuRUS (from A. D. 444 bishop of Alexandria), thought to best promote his own advancement by favoring the Monophysite conception. In February, A. D. 448, the emperor had renewed the anti-Nestorian edicts. The Alexandrine bishop zealously maintained intercourse with all Alexandrine territory, and thus, with a celebrated monk in Constantinople, Eutyches. Opportunity for a decided stroke now appeared to be afforded him by the agitation aroused by this archimandrite. The latter, after A. D. 433, was in the habit of accusing the Unionists of Nes- torianism (see Leo ep. 20). He was in consequence denounced by Eusebius of Dorylgeum at a council at Constantinople, A. D. 448 (s. HEFELEii. 320 ff. ). After various refusals, he finally appeared before the council and declared : ''I confess that our Lord was of two natures before the union, but after the rmion I confess one nature," and ** until to-day I said that the body of our Lord and God was of the same nature with us" (M. vi. 744, 742).^ He opposed the union symbol of A. D. 433, but did not by any means accurately reproduce the doctrine of Cyril. Eutyches can scarcely be said to have possessed a theory of his own upon the subject. He was deposed and excommunicated as a reviler of Christ, with the proper accompaniment of tears (M. vi. 748). But Eutyches did not rest quietly under condemna- 1 LooFS, PRE. V. ed. 3, 635 f. 2 Exceedingly characteristic is his earlier utterance: "Which Father has declared that the God Logos has two natures? " (M. vi. 725). 2 68 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. tion. By the use of placards, he aroused the interest of the pop- ulace, and also of the emperor, in his cause and appealed to Pope Leo of Rome (Leo ep. 21). But bishop Flavian of Constanti- nople also laid his ^* burden of grief and multitude of tears " at the feet of Leo (Leo ep. 22J, declaring that Eutyches had revived the teachings of Valentine and Apollinaris, and demand- ing that the pope inform his bishops of the heresies of Eutyches. The pope had meanwhile, of his own accord, requested an accu- rate account of the affair, in order that he might pass judgment upon it (ep. 23, 14). Flavian complied with the request, and implored the pope's approval of the "faith of the God-fearing and Christ-loving emperor" (ep. 26). The pope now sent to Flavian his *' doctrinal letter" (ep. 28). He had thus defi- nitely fixed the attitude of Rome, which is historically a fact of the greatest importance, for it established a positive and power- ful opposition to the Alexandrine doctrine. But, meanwhile, Dioscurus of Alexandria had entered the lists and secured the summoning of a general council at Ephesus. Theodoret was ex- cluded from participation in the proceedings, and Dioscurus presided. Everything seemed to assure a Monophysite victory. 2. This resulted in the Robber Synod of Ephesus. The pope was here represented by three legates (ep. 31. 4), who were informed that the Catholic doctrine was contained in the 'Moctrinal letter" (ep. 29).^ But Dioscurus dominated the council by brutal terrorism and nearly all yielded to intimida- tion. Discussion was not desired, but the faith of the Fathers (/. e.y of the councils of Nice and Ephesus) was to be acknowl- edged (M. vi. 625). Eutyches defended himself, and 114 of the 135 participants were of opinion that he was orthodox. " Anathema to everyone who speaks of two natures still after the incarnation" (M. vi. 737, 832 ff.). Leo's letter was not even read. Eutyches was restored. Flavian, Eusebius of Dorylseum, together with Theodoret, Domnus of Antioch, and others, were deposed (M. vi. 908 ff. Theodoret ep. 113, 147).. 3. The victory was thus with Dioscurus. Measured by the standard of his age, and compared with the people who followed his leadership, we can scarcely pass a severe judgment upon him. He had the courage to discard the traditional policy of the Alex- andrine church in its compact with Rome. He had vanquished the New Rome without the aid of the Old Rome — had even most seriously disabled the latter. For one moment the Bishop of Alexandria was lord of the church. An Alexandrine priest * As to the person of Eutyches, Leo expressed himself with remarkable for- bearance, ep. 29 ; 31. 4 ; 32 ; ■7,^. 2 ; 38. EUTYCHIAN CONTROVERSY. 269 under his control became bishop of Rome (Leo ep. 53), and Leo was excommunicated by Dioscurus (M. vi. 1009 j. But Leo was shrewd enough to be true to Flavian, himself, and his ''dogmatic epistle" (ep. 50, 51, 67, 68. 1, cf. 69. i), since the latter was in harmony with Cyril and the first council of Ephesus. He became the refuge of the ** humble and small," z. e., the opposite party, who sought ^' help at the apostolic throne" (Theodoret ep. 113). His constant desire was to secure the annulling of the decrees of the Robber Synod and the summon- ing of a new council to be held in Italy under his leadership (ep. 44, 54. 70, cf. 55-58). Thus, and only thus, could he recover from the defeat experienced at the hands of the *' Alexandrine bishop who usuries all things to himself" (ep. 45. 2). But Theo- dosius held fast to the confession of the second council of Ephesus as the '*faith of the Fathers" (Leo ep. 62-64). Yet the pope's waiting was not in vain. Theodosius died (A. D. 450). He was succeeded by Pulcheria, who was married to Marcian. It was decided that the desired council should be held — although in the Orient (ep. 73, 76, 77). It appeared to be a necessity, for it is scarcely correct to say 'Hhat the council of A. D. 449 had really pacified the church in the East " (Harnack ii. 365). If we consider the brevity of the period during which the second confession of Ephesus was in force, it will be evident that Har- nack' s conclusion is merely a dogmatic one. It follows from his assertion of the Monophysite-Apollinarian character of Greek Christianity. But there were other tendencies opposed to this ! The Antiochian theology was not dead. The Union symbol had had many adherents. Individuals and whole groups of theolo- gians in the Orient accepted the second confession of Ephesus. Neither the calling of the council of Chalcedon, nor its transac- tions, can be explained under Harnack' s theory (vid. Liberatus Breviarium 12 b, Gallandi xii. 140. Theodoret ep. 113, cf. also the opinion of Loofs, PRE. v. ed. 3, 647 f. ). Leo, indeed, no longer needed the council, and declared it now inopportune, especially as it was to be held, not in Rome, but at Nicgea. And, on the other hand, his epistula dogmatica. y^'zs,, without the aid of a council, finding ever wider acceptance in the East (ep. 82. 2 ; ^■^. 2 ; 89; 90; 94). But the emperor clung to his purpose, and the Council of Chalcedon (having been first summoned to meet in Nicaea), was accordingly held A. D. 451 (cf. M. vi. vii. Hefele CG. ii. 410-544. Also, Kruger, Monophys. Streitig- keiten in Zusammenhang, m. d. Reichspolitik, Jena, 1884). The pope claimed the right to preside — in the person of legates — and considered his letter sufficient to decide the matters in controversy (ep. 93. i. 2). 270 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. 4. The contents of this letter (ep. 28) may be thus summarized : Christ is God and man, born of Mary, her virginity being preserved (c. I, cf. c. 4). The two substances remain what they were, but combine in one person : '*The peculiarity of each nature and sub- stance being therefore preserved and entering into the one per- son, humility is received by majesty," etc. This is necessary in the interest of redemption : ''One and the same mediator of God and men, the man Jesus Christ, should from the one be able to die, and from the other be unable to die." But, inasmuch as each nature retains its own peculiarity, the *' emptying (^exiiiani- tio, cf. p. 256) by which the invisible makes itself visible . . is not a loss of power " (3). There is, therefore, after the in- carnation only one person, but the natures of this one person act in alternating fellowship: ''For each form performs what is peculiar to it in fellowship with the other, /'. e., the Word doing that which is peculiar to the Word, and the flesh accomplishing that which is peculiar to the flesh. The one of these shines forth in miracles, the other succumbs to injuries. ' ' The one nature be- wails the death of Lazarus ; the other wakes him from the dead (4). In consequence of the unity of person (" on account of this unity of person in each nature "), it may be said that the Son of man came down from heaven (Jn. 3. 13), and that the Son of God was crucified and buried (i Cor. 2. 8), etc. (5). The confession of Eutyches, " before the incarnation two natures, after it one nature," is in both its parts equally profane. He who regards the death of Christ as a real death cannot deny " that the man whom he sees to have been passible was of our body " (6). This much-lauded document is nothing more than a reproduction of the Western Christology (Tertullian, Am- brose; cf. Augustine). It does not enter at all upon the con- sideration of the problem which perplexed the Greeks, and the dogmatic simplicity of the pope is most strikingly revealed in his opinion, that the twelve propositions of the Apostles in the Creed sufficed for the refutation of this and other heresies (vid. ep. 31. 4 ; 45. 2 ; 28. i). As to the Christology of Leo, see also ep. 2,S- 2 ; 59- 3-5 ; S8. 1; 114. I ; 119. i. 5. The council itself (2 1 sessions in 14 days, Hefele ii., 411 f. j, attended by about 600 bishops — all Greeks — makes an exceed- ingly unfavorable impression. Not only was it as boisterous^ as the Robber Synod ; but worse than this was the cowardly and senseless abandonment of Dioscurus and of the position taken two years before ("we have all been wrong; we all beg for ^ At the very first session, as Theodoret appeared : *' Cast out the Jew, the adversary of God, and do not call him bishop ; " to which the opposing party responded: "Cast out the murderer Dioscurus. Who does not know the EUTYCHIAN CONTROVERSY. 27 I pardon," vid. M. vi. 637 ff., 674 ff., 690, 827 ff., cf. 973 f., 1005). Dioscuruswas self-consistent. With Athanasius, Gregory, and Cyril he professed to agree in the '' one incarnated nature of the Logos." He did not question the '^ of two" (iz d'')<>), but 'nhe two (ru duo)^ I do not receive" (M. vi. 684, 689). He was deserted by all, as his deposition had been a settled matter already at the first session. At the later sessions he did not ap- pear — not even when summoned at the third session. A number of accusers of this *' heretic and Origenist " now cried out that Dioscurus was a reviler of the Trinity, a desecrator of relics, a thief, an incendiary, a murderer, a licentious fellow, a traitor (M. vi. 1005 ff., 1012 ff., 102 1 if., 1029 ff. ). But he was at length deposed for contempt of the ^Mivine canons" and for ** disobedience toward the council " (M. vi. 1093 J. As to the matters in dispute, the doctrine of the papal letter was approved : ''This is the faith of the Fathers, this the faith of the Apostles. Thus we all believe. Anathema to him who does not so believe ! Through Leo, Peter has spoken . . exactly thus taught Cyril ! Why was this not read at Ephesus ? Dioscurus kept it hidden" (M. vi. 971). It was thought that the harmony of Leo's teaching with the confessions of Nice, Constantinople (supra, p. 235, n.), and the First Council of Ephesus could be clearly established. Only the 13 Egyptian bishops refused to subscribe to it, and they were in earnest in their refusal : *' We will be killed, we will be killed if we do it. We would rather be slain here by you than there (in Egypt). Have mercy on us ; we would rather die at your hands and the emperor's than at home " (M. vii. 53 ff., cf. the 30th canon of the council). Despite the opposition of the Roman legates, the letter of Leo was not given dogmatic autho- rity, but the council at its fifth session adopted a new formula (M. vii. 112 ff. ). The synodical letters of Cyril against Nes- torius were adopted in refutation of Nestorianism, the letter of Leo to Flavian in refutation of Eutychianism. Those are con- demned who teach a * ' dyad of sons, ' ' as well as those who dream of " two natures before the union, but one after the union." On the contrary : *' We confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ . the same perfect in divinity and the same per- fect in humanity . . . of a rational soul and a body, of the same nature with the Father according to (his) divinity, and of the same nature with us according to (his) humanity, and we recog- nize the same one Christ, Son, Lord, and Only-begotten, in two natures (not, as the Greek text reads : of, ix, two natures, cf. crimes of Dioscurus? " M. vi. 589, cf. also the cry : '* We shout for piety and orthodoxy." 272 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Hefele ii. 470 f,^), unmingled, immutable, indivisible, insep- arable ; the difference of the natures being by no means obliter- ated by the union, but, on the contrary, the peculiarity of each nature being preserved and entering into one person and one hypostasis, not divided nor separated into two persons. ' ' It will be observed that these definitions do not go beyond the statements of Leo's letter. The Western Christology was forced upon the Greeks, for the decree of the council marks a breach, not only with Dioscurus and Eutyches, but also with the much-lauded Cyril. The formula preserving the peculiarity (tV^torij?) of the two natures was contrary to Cyril's view, as also the terms, *' un- mingled, immutable." The Christological contradictions of the Orient found no solution, to say nothing of a solution of the gen- eral Christological problem. But in the course of the develop- ment an element was fortunately — we cannot regard it otherwise — introduced, which, in the form now assumed by the contest and the terminology of the day, fixed a barrier against extreme views in either direction. It must be remembered, too, that it is not the office of symbols to establish dogmatic theories. They merely give expression to the religious convictions of their age. Such convictions found expression in the Chalcedon creed — essentially, in consequence of the peculiar circumstances of the period, in a negative form. As the formula of the one person and the two natures was adopted as a fixed dogma, the historical Christ was gained, although only in faintest outline, as the norm and corrective for the ideas of the dogmaticians. This may be seen most clearly in Luther.^ § 26. Movements Growing Out of the Christological Conflict (^Monophysite and Monothelete Controversies') and the Result of the Agitation. I. The emperor condemned Eutyches and Dioscurus to exile. Strict measures were employed against their followers and the Apollinarians (M. vii. 476, 498 f, 502 f.). ^ Originally the overwhelming majority, despite the letter of Leo, demanded the formula : '* e/c 6vo (}>vaijv.^' The reason for this is evident, as this formula left open the possibility of speaking of on/y one nature even after the incarna- tion. Only after severe pressure had been brought to bear from above was the victory gained for the kv 6vo (j)ba€(n — thus saving the historic Christ. 2 Leo endured the chagrin of having the council refuse to adopt his letter as a dogma, increase the power of the bishop of Constantinople, and place the bishop of New Rome, in view of the equal importance of the city as an imperial city (nothing being said of Peter), by the side of the bishop of Rome as second in dignity. Canon 28; cf. Leo ep. 104-107, 114, 119, 127, 135 f. At the opening of the council, the clerical delegates had requested MONOPHYSITE AND MONOTHELETE CONTROVERSIES. 273 But peace was by no means restored. On the contrary, the history of the ensuing years is marked through its whole course by the records of wild excitement and horrible deeds of religi- ous fanaticism. Within the limits of a general History of Doc- trines the MoNOPHYSiTE CONTROVERSIES can be treated but briefly. Literature. Vid. the KG. of Zacharias Rhetor, syr. in Land, Anec- dota syr. iii. (German by Ahrens and Kriiger, Leipzig, 1899). Evagrius h. e. 1. ii.-v. Johannes v. Ephesus h. e., translated from the Syrian by SchOnfelder, 1862. M. vii,-ix. Cf. Walch, hist. d. Ketzereien vi.-viii. SCHROCKH KG. xviii. Gieseler, Comment, qua Monophysitarum opin. illustr. i.-ii., Gott. 1835, 1838. Hefele CG. ii. S64ff. Kruger, PRE. xiii., ed. 3, 372 ff. Kruger, Monophys. Streitigkeiten, etc., p. 68 fF., Jena, 1884. LooFS, Leontius of Byzantium, 1888, p. 53 ff. A Strong party arose for the defense of Monophysitism, or the doctrine of Cyril — first in Palestine (Theodosius) and in Egypt (Timotheus Aelurus, Petrus Mongus), then in Antioch (Petrus Fullo), here in alliance with the ApoUinarians. All the efforts of the emperor could gain but superficial control of the move- ment and secure but temporary recognition for the confession of Chalcedon. This was the situation under Leo I. (A. D. 457- 474). The usurper, Basiliscus, by his Encyclion (A. D. 476) rejected the Chalcedon Creed, and about 500 bishops agreed with him (Evagr. h. e. iii. 4; Zachar. v. 2). The emperor, Zeno, endeavored by his /r(??z^//r£7«, A. D. 482, to effect a union (Evagr. iii. 14; Zachar. v. 8). The definitions of the coun- cils of Nicaea, Constantinople, and Ephesus, as well as the twelve anathemas of Cyril, were here recognized, and Nestorius and Eutyches condemned. Christ the true God and the true man is confessed to be of the same nature with the Father according to his divinity, and of the same nature with us according to his humanity, but *' to be one and not two. For we say that the miracles and whatever sufferings he endured in the flesh are (those) of one." Whoever adopts another teaching (^dZ/T^^-a) than this, whether taught now or heretofore, at Chalcedon or elsewhere, is anathematized. Nothing is plain except the authority of Cyril and the rejection of Nestorianism and Euty- chianism. Beyond this, the disputed formulas are carefully avoided ; the rejection of the Chalcedon confession is implied but not distinctly expressed. The agitation was not allayed by this formula. Neither the strict Monophysites nor the orthodox were satisfied. The former missed in the Henoticon the ex- the exclusion of Dioscurus, because he had presumed to open an ecumenical council without the presence of Rome. For the further history of the question, see Hefele ii. 562 f., 568 f. The foundation was thus laid for the schism between the East and the West. 18 2 74 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. press condemnation of the Chalcedon Creed and of the letter of Pope Leo (Zachar. v. 7, 9 ; vi. i). The latter, as in the days of Chalcedon, took refuge in Rome. Pope Felix III. turned to the emperor in defense of the endangered Chalcedon creed and excommunicated Acacius, the bishop of Constantinople, A. D. 484 (ep. 1-4, 6). The latter, in turn, struck the name of Felix from the Dij)tychs. The breach with Rome had become com- plete. It was a necessity, as an agreement was not possible be- tween the ancient Latin Christology and the Greek doctrine, which inclined more and more toward Monophysitism. But even in the East there were still elements which withstood the ad- vance of the Monophysite views. The emperor, Anastasius (from A. D. 491), permitted the ^*Henoticon" to stand, but favored the Monophysite interpretation of it. Nevertheless, there were bitter controversies during the entire reign of Anastasius. In Antioch, Severus, one of the Monophysite leaders, became bishop, but the emperor yet labored to secure peace with the ad- herents of Chalcedon and the authorities of Rome. But it was now evident that the situation had only become the more com- plicated, and that the Roman bishops were contending, not in the interest of pure doctrine, but to secure the dominion of the en- tire church. Hence the transactions with Pope Hormisdas were without result (cf. Kriiger, PRE. xiii., 387 f. ). 2. Anastasius was succeeded by Justin I. (A. D. 518-527). He was under the control of his nephew, Justinian, who suc- ceeded him upon the imperial throne (A. D. 527-565). The political plans of this great prince (cf. Kriiger, PRE. ix. , ed. 3, 650 ff.) required the pacification of the church. The ancient universal empire was to be revived, and restraint put upon the aggressions of the Germans. To this end there must be har- mony in the government, the laws, and the church. He sought for the formula of the universal empire and made everything serviceable for his own purpose. *' He still lives in the Codex and the Hagia Sophia ' ' (see delineation of his character in Ranke, Weltgesch. iv. 2, p. 125 f. ). No one before him had attempted to carry out in so comprehensive and reckless a way the idea of the state church. The ecclesiastical doctrines and ordinances became state laws, and heresy and heathenism were forbidden by the civil government. The power of the church was thus vastly increased, but it at the same time lost every ves- tige of independence and distinct character as contrasted with the state. The emperor was unwearied in his efforts to strengthen the power of the clergy, but he at the same time ruled in the church with despotic power. Great as was his power, however, he was confronted by immense difficulties in MONOPHYSITE AND MONOTHELETE CONTROVERSIES. 275 the prosecution of his final plans. The old unity of the Greek and Roman churches had been dissolved. Rome and Constan- tinople were now independent centres, and it was sought to combine them in one. The church of the East was to be har- monized and again united with the church of the West. The restoration of the orthodoxy of Chalcedon was hence, from the start, the watchword. It was a difficult undertaking, as the power of the Monophysites was yet unbroken in the East, and they enjoyed the sympathies of the empress, Theodora, not to mention the favor of hosts of pious believers. The creed of Chalcedon must remain in force — that was now clearly seen — and an interpretation of it found which would be tolerable for the Monophysites. The ecclesiastical primacy of Rome must be recognized in principle (vid. Novella 131. 2 : *^ that the pope of Old Rome is the first of all priests, but that the most blessed archbishop of Constantinople, the New Rome, has the second seat after the holy apostolic seat of Old Rome"), but the power of the popes practically overcome. Such was the task, as complicated as the circumstances and the purpose which gave it birth. The first attempted policy, that of the forcible suppression the Monophysites (Zachar. h. e. viii. 5 f. ), was soon abandoned by Justinian as fruitless. 3. The theology of Justinian' sage accommodated itself to the tendencies of the emperor. This was particularly true in the case of the ^'Scythian" monk, a relative of Vitalian, Leontius of Byzantium (about A. D. 485-543. See especially his publica- tion in three ** books" against the Nestorians and Eutychiansin Mi. gr. 86. 1267 ff.; cf. Loofs, L. v. B., 1888. Rugamer, L. v. B., 1894). The formulas of Chalcedon are here recast in ac- cordance with Aristotelian categories (otifft'a, ^ivo<$j sMo?, repre- sented by the eidoTtoto} dta(pofjaij or TTOcoTTjTei^ ob(jtwdsLe fide orthodoxa : ' ' One hypostasis in two natures " ) . From the latter it necessarily follows that Christ also possessed two natural wills and energies (iii. 13-15). We can no more accept the idea of one will (iii. 14) than we can speak of one composite nature (iii. 2). In the Cyrillian formula: ** One nature of the divine Logos, made flesh " (/-tc'« ^t,')\ the large catechism of Gregory of Nyssa ; the De fide orthodoxa of John of Damascus ; the works of Maximus the Confessor (ed. by Combesis, 1675), and of Anastasius Sinaita (Mi. gr. 89), etc.; and finally the writings of PseudodionysiusAreo- PAGITA (de coelesti hierarchia, de ecclesiasticahierarch., de divinis nominibus, de mystica theologica, epistulae lo, ed. Corderius, 1634, also 1644 and 1755 '" Mi. gr. 4, translated and scrutinized by Engelhardt, 1823 ; cf. HiPLER, Dionys. der Ar., 1861 ; Stiglmayr, Das Aufkommen der ps. -Dionys. Schriften, etc., 1895 ; H. Koch, Das Auikommen der pseudodionysian. Schriften, in Theol. Quartelschr. , 1895, 353 ff. ; Bonwetsch, PRE. iv., ed 3, 687 ff. Bardenhewer, Patrologie, 1894, p. 284 ff.^ Cf. further Kunze, Marcus Eremita, 1895 : Holl, Enthusiasmus u. Bussgewalt beim griech. Monchtum, 1898. Harnack DG. ii., ed. 3, 441 flf". ). 1 There is yet no general agreement as to the time when these writings ap- peared. They are first mentioned at a synod at Tyre, which was held not later than A. D. 513 (Zachar. rhet. h. e. vii.; 12 in Land, Anecdota Syr. iii. 228), and by Severus( bishop of Antioch, A. D. 512-518, vid. Mai, Vet scriptor. nov coll. vi. I, p. 71); then at the religious colloquy at Constantinople, A. D. 533 (M. viii. 817 ff.; vid. also Liberat. breviar. 10; and Bonwetsch, 1. c. 689). It appears safe to place its appearance at the close of Cent. v. in Syria. As the writings now stand (have they been revised ?) they appear (despite the arguments of Hipler to the contrary) to be a designed forgery (cf. Stigl- mayr and Koch). Suspicion is aroused by the relationship of the eighth letter GREEK CHRISTIANITY. 289 I . ' ' Orthodoxy ' ' and ' ' good works, ' ' according to Methodius, constitute Christianity (supra, p. 190, and Clem. AL, p. 146). Cyril of Jerusalem names *' the teaching, [ifb^Huim, of the dog- mas " and ''good works" (cat. 4. 2 ; cf. Const, ap. iii. 12). But among the Greeks the emphasis was laid more and more upon the ''orthodox" doctrine. The doctrine of the church as such, in its technical and detailed form, was regarded as an object of faith. This explains the acrimony in the conduct of controversies, and the bad habit of denying life and salvation to the adherents of another doctrinal formula. The '' tradition of the Catholic church," i.e., the dogmas of the Trinity and the two natures in Christ, is to be accepted and believed to be true {e.g., Cyril, cat. 16. 24 fin.; 5. 12 ; 11. 20 init. Greg. Nyss. cat. m. 1-3; 3.9. Joh. Dam. iv. 10). It is only necessary to observe the style employed in the documents named in order to realize that the bread is here already beginning to turn into stone. The dogmas are state laws whose acknowledgment the state re- quires of its citizens. It therefore persecutes with its own weapons opposition to the doctrines of the church. But these same doctrines are also an expression of the most ancient con- victions of Christian truth. It is only by their acceptance that a saving view of the truth can be obtained. But such a view is made dependent upon a merely intellectual apprehension of the truth. Here, then, appears the office of the mysteries. He who participates in these is lifted above the world in the experience of salvation. Here becomes manifest thelife-giving fountain of reli- gion. The doctrines are the theory of life : the mysteries bestow this life. But only he who accepts the theory can experience that which it contains. It is easy to understand that the conception of the inwardnature of Christianity shouldthusbegraduallylost. The Pauline doctrine of justification was never comprehended by the Greek church. The internal element which it contains did not become a motive for the regulation of piety. To believe means '* simply to obey," z. e., the traditional doctrine, and how this can bring salvation to a man, cannot be made plain to the inner consciousness (see, e.g., Cyril, cat. 5. 5 ; the homilies of Chrys. upon Romans i. 17 ; 4. 7 ; 3. 21 ; Gal. z. 8, 16 f.; Heb. 11). Faith is nothing more than the acceptance of a doctrine, with its mysteries and with the injunctions to the performance of pious works. But when faith has been robbed of its true char- acter, the church must find for herself a substitute. The church (cf. eccl. hier. iii. 3. 7) to that which Dionysius of Alexandria wrote against Novatian (Eus. h. e. vii. 8 f. ); and also by the relation of a passage of the letter (^ 5) to the ep. ad Conone?n of Dionys. Al., ^ 3 (in Pitra, jur. eccl. Graecorum hist, et Monum. i, 547 ; cf. 549 f. ). 19 290 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. of the West chose * ' good works ; ' ' that of the East, worship and its mysteries, mystic consecrations, relics and saints, amulets and images. Thus there is poured into the church the M^hole current of religious materialism, which seeks to realize the spiritual and eternal in sensuous, tangible and audible forms. Christianity is participating in worship, subjection to ecclesiasti- cal ordinances. The sacred symbols are commended to the mul- titude, and the spirit of reverence for them cultivated — as in the " dreadful hour " when the ** terrible mystery " of the eucha- rist is presented (cf. Chrysost. de sacerdot. iii. 4 ; ep. ad Olym- piad. 2. 2 init.; the 9th homily upon repentance). This is rep- resented as Christian piety. The same may be said of all parts of the "second order of Christianity," and even of the mys- tery of the dogmatic formulary itself. The interest of the popu- lace in the dogmatic controversies was, after all, only that of veneration for a formula. There is nothing left to awaken de- vout longings and hold reverence in the ** beholder " (Dionys. Ar.) but the venerated symbol. Thus visible sacred symbols were relied upon to lead the soul to the vision of the spiritual : " Since it is not possible for the spirit in our state to pass through to that immaterial imitation and contemplation of the heavenly hierarchies unless it makes use of the material guidance to it, we regard the visible beautiful things as reflections of the invisible loveliness, and the sensible odors as typifications of the spiritual largess, and the material lights as images of the immaterial glory, and the sacred doctrines as channels for the satisfying of the mind contemplatively. . . In which way he would lead us through things sensible to things spiritual " (Dionys. coel. hier. 1.3; eccl. hier. i. 2, 4, 5 ; 3. 2 : " the multitude catching. a glimpse only of the divine symbols;" 3. 3. 12; 4. 3. i). It is the flourishing period of the arcana discipUna. 2. This reveals the fundamental thought of the work of DiONYSius Areopagita, which became so influential in the East. («) Christianity is the representation of the ladder of sacred symbols, mysteries, consecrations, which come down from God to men through the medium of divinely-enlightened hierarchs — and the persuading of men to climb upward upon the ladder of these mysteries to God. Grace reveals itself in a complex of purifying and consecrating mysteries. In this connection, the ** hierarchy " — in a way peculiar to the Orient — finds its place. (/^) God is the unpredicated, supersubstantial Existence. This "primeval source" (div. nom. i. 3, 5), this "darkness above light" (theol. myst. i. i), this "unapproachable Light," and this "divine darkness" (ep. 5) is not approachable to man. But God allows himself to be known by man by means of the GREEK CHRISTIANITY. 29I hierarchical ladder, (if) The hierarchy is hence a sacred order and agency through which God, extending his energies from person to person, purifies, illuminates , and perfects — or actually deifies — those whom these energies reach (coel. hier. 3. i, 2 ; 7. 2, 3; 9. 2 ; 10. 2; 12. 2 ; eccl. hier. i. i, 3 ; 5. i. 4, 7 ; 6. 3. 6, 1,3: " For as one, in speaking of all taken together, calls the order of the priests a hierarchy, so evidently, when speaking of the chief priest (hierarch), he means the inspired and divine man who presides over all sacred knowledge. . . . The source of this hierarchy is the fountain of life . the one cause of existing things, the Triad, from whom come both existence and prosperity to existing things through his goodness. . . And this is the common aim of the entire hierarchy, an intimate affection for God and divine things . the gnosis of existing things, in which all things exist . . . the vision and understand- ing of sacred truth, the inspired impartation of the unique per- fection of this One as far as possible, the feast of contemplation spiritually nourishing and deifying him who attains to it"). (^) This hierarchy is primarily the heavenly hierarchy of angels, which in its three orders bears a graduated relation to the Deity (coel. hier. 4-9). Through it God revealed himself under the old covenant (ib. 4. 3). Then follows the earthly hierarchy, whose source, essence, and power is Jesus, the supremely-deified and supersubstantial mind (u d-sapyuayrazo^; vod? y-oi OTzepohaut's'). Through him, or the Holy Trinity, according to the declarations of the sacred Scriptures, the hierarch is filled with divine knowledge and inducted into the '^sacred and spiritual vision" (ib. i. 2, 3; 3. 2. I fin.; 3. 3. 14). But there is here also a three-fold gradation (hierarch, priest, deacon), which is regarded as ab- sorbing God, not in a local way, but according to capacity (ep. 8. 2), in which process purity becomes the portion of the dea- cons, illumination that of the priests, and perfection that of the hierarchs (cf. ib. 5. i. 5, 6 ; 6. 3. 5). Furthermore, the in- cumbents of the higher orders possess also the endowments of the lower (ib. 5. 3. 7). (^) By means of the sacred mysteries, the hierarchs perform their official duties toward the people, purify- ing, enlightening, and perfecting them. These symbols are baptism (ib. 2), the eucharist (ib. 3), the holy oil (ib. 4), the consecration of the priesthood (ib. 5), monastic consecration (ib. 6 : ** possessors of the most perfect philosophy"), conse- crations and prayers for the dead (ib. 7). The aim of all these symbolical acts is union with God through the luxurious contem- plation of his Being (coel. hier. 3. 2; eccl. hier. i. 3): ''Trinity more than nature, more than God, and more than good \ Thou guardian of the wisdom of Christians, lead us to -92 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. the more than unknown and more than lofty and unapplauded summit of the mystic doctrines, where the simple and absolute and unchangeable mysteries of theology are veiled in the more- than-light darkness of the crypto-mystic science, shining with superlative brilliancy in the superlatively dark, and more than filling unfettered souls in the absolutely intangible and invisible (realm) of super-lovely glories" (theol. myst. i init.),^ Rightly did a philosopher term our author a ''patricide" (ep. 7. 2). The Neo-Platonic premises of this opponent of heathen- ism are everywhere very apparent. ^' All transitory things are but a parable — the insufficient here is that which occurs." Such is the Neo-Platonism of the Areopagite. It is a distinct expression of the Greek Christianity of a later period. The Christianity of dogmatic formulas has been paralyzed by the de- votional symbols, although the veneration of formulas finds in this very devotional tendency its strongest support. The great majority were satisfied with the formula, and the latter might easily become a mere formula of enchantment. 3. Recognizing this fact, we feel that less importance attaches to the separate doctrines presented by the Areopagite. We must constantly keep in mind his fundamental principle. Greek Christianity evolved no ''dogmas," in the strict sense of the term, except those above discussed. We note particularly the lack of interest in matters pertaining to personal religious life. Men spoke of sin and grace with the same unsophisticated piety, or unsophisticated rationalism, in the centuries following as in those preceding the Nicene period. The problems which held the interest of Augustine leave no trace in the East. Yet it would be incorrect to regard the Oriental church as Pelagian, as the problem upon which Pelagius and Augustine joined issue does not even occur to their minds. The state of man fallen into sin is, after as before the Nicene age, painted in the darkest colors. The devil has gained posses- sion of the soul ; the serpent dwells as a second soul within our own (Macar. hom. 15. 35, 49): " Thus the evil prince clothed the soul and its whole substance with sin, and polluted it entire, and made it entire a prisoner to his kingdom, and did not release nor set free from him a single part, not the reasoning powers, nor the spirit, nor the body, but he clothed the soul in a garment of darkness. . . . The evil one put upon the whole soul, z. e.^ ^ Observe the transcendental character of the Neo-Platonic conception of God. Of God, as the Absolute Existence, everything existent must be affirmed and again denied (div. nom. i. 5-7; 7. 3; theol. myst. 3-5, cataphatic and apophatic theology). This accounts for the many combinations with vtrep and a privitive in the Areopagite. GREEK CHRISTIANITY. 293 the essential member and part of man, its malady, i. ^., sin, and thus the body became passible and mortal" (Macar. h. 2. i ; Marcus Erem. c. Nestor. 18). Thus the whole man, with all his powers, is imbued with sin. He is separated from God. The devil holds sway over his soul. Sensuality overpowers the reason. Man, originally destined for immortality, becomes transitory and subject to death — in all things the very opposite of his original character and condition (Greg, Nyss. cat. 5 . Athanas. c. gent. 3 f. Dionys. eccl, hier. 3. 3. 11). He has forfeited grace and boldness toward God, and has won for him- self *' mortality and the dullness of the flesh." He is '* sen- tenced to death" and ''subject to perdition" (Joh. Dam. iii. i), the emphasis being laid finally upon the latter. Sin is at the same time regarded not so much in the aspect of guilt as in that of infirmity or weakness — of mortality and death. This is a different attitude from that of the West. It directs the thoughts not only upon the forgiveness of sins, but upon the contemplation of the state of sin and its conquest by means of a ncAV inner life. That the entire human race fell into this condition through the fall of Adam is acknowledged. But, although the idea of the in- heritance of sin may at times appear to be advanced (Greg. Nyss. cat. 16 : '* The pleasurable pain of human birth teaches the beginning of death, having been made in one, has passed through upon the whole human nature" (de orat. 5): ''to speak again of the common debts of human nature, in which each and everyone who shares the lot of nature bears a part ' ' (Oehler iii. 300. Dionys. Ar. eccl. hier. 3. 3. 11 : " Having had its origin in corrupt births, it naturally pursues its course in a way conformable to its beginning " ) , yet it is only meant, after all, that since Adam the human race has been subject to corrup- tion. In view of the conflict between the spiritual and the sen- suous inclinations of man, it is difficult, or altogether impossible, to abstain entirely from sin (C^reg. Nyss. 1. c, p. 302). Hence we occasionally find new-born children referred to as "sinless " (Cyril, cat. 4. 19 init. ); or we read of "many" who have kept themselves "free from sin" (as Jeremiah and John); or the opinion is expressed that this would have been possible if obedi- ence had been rendered to the law (Athanas. c. Arianos serm. ^^^- ZZ \ ^^ incarn. 12). Commenting upon Rom. 5. 19, Chrys- ostom remarks that it is inconceivable that we should have become sinners through Adam's sin, but that we through Adam's sinning and becoming mortal have also become mortal. It is not meant that all are in Adam sinners, but that we have through him be- come mortal and thereby lost the power to give to the spirit 294 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. dominion over sensuality. The terrible thing is not guilt, but subjection to death. '* But whence did the evil spirit come and take up its abode with him ? It first assailed him from with- out through the hearing, then proceeded through his heart, and took possession of his whole being, and thus, he being subjugated, the whole creation beneath and above him was carried along with him " (the illustration of a chained nobleman with his vas- sals led after him has been used in the context). ** For through him death gained dominion over every living soul and darkened the whole likeness of Adam on account of. his sin, so that men were transformed and came to the worship of demons " (Macar. horn. II. 5 ; cf. 12. i). Marcus Eremita says likewise, that, since Adam had been given over to death on account of his sin, '*we have all, whether sinners or righteous, fallen from eternal life" (adv. Nestor. 18). Only death and not sin, properly speaking, is inherited. The latter is expressly denied by Marcus (de baptism. Gallandi viii. 50 D ; 54 B). Thus Adam is to blame for the wretchedness which has resulted, since it was through him that death gained the mastery and ruined the origi- nal image of Adam in us. There has, however, remained to man the Ubei'ty of deciding for God when grace is offered to him. This is the conclusion to which the view in question leads. The soul is free and lord of itself; the devil cannot drive it to do anything against its will, and God will not do so, since right- eousness would otherwise not receive its merited crown (Cyril. cat. 4. 21. Macar. h. 15. 40 ; 27. 9, 1 1. Joh. Dam. ii. 25 ff.). There still remains something good, therefore, in every man. It is his inner nature, his reason, or free will. Only a stimulus is needed, and man can then decide in favor of the good. But the free will is always in such connections innocently embraced in the thought, as a ''good co-operation (truv^pysia ayai^) for the attainment of salvation*' (Maxim, i. 414). But it is also often strongly insisted that no one can by his own strength overcome or drive out sin, and that to accomplish this divine help is always necessary (Macar. h. 2. 4; 3.4. Greg. Naz. or. 37. 13). ''Audit is not the case, as some, misled by false doctrines, say, that man is- totally dead and utterly unable to do anything good. For even a child, although it is not able to accomplish anything, nor to walk upon its feet to its mother, yet rolls upon the ground and calls and cries because it yearns for its mother. And this moves the mother's heart to pity, and she is pleased that her child, with struggle and outcry, seeks to come to her. And although the child cannot come to her, yet the mother, in view of this great yearning of the child, goes to it, constrained by love for the child, takes it up and cherishes and feeds it, with great love : GREEK CHRISTIANITY. 295 this does also the man-loving God for the soul that approaches and yearns for him" (Macar. h. 46. 3). It may be said, in brief, that the Fathers of this period remained throughout the entire range of their teaching upon the basis of the second and third centuries (vid. supra, p. 115 f., 139, 157). The fall of Adam made us mortal, giving free reign to sensuality. Since Adam, we are all sinners. Without his help there is no salvation. But we, by virtue of our liberty, may secure and accept his assistance. 4. The redemption achieved by Christ brings salvation. Here, too, the ideas of the past are adopted, without reduction or re- vision. In accordance with the conception of the primitive church, salvation is, first of all, dependent upon the death of Christ. The Damascene summarizes as follows : ** For the whole activity and wonder-working of Christ is most great and divine and wonderful ; but his precious cross is the most wonderful of all. For by nothing else was death destroyed, the sin of our first parent atoned for, hell despoiled, resurrection bestowed, power given to us to disdain things present and death itself, the restoration to original blessedness accomplished, the gates of par- adise opened, our nature seated at the right hand of God, we made children of God and heirs of heaven — but through the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. For through the cross have all things been set right " (fid. orth. iv. 11 ; cf. iii. 20). This, of course, does not set forth all the ideas accepted in the period, as such summaries never do (Eusebius demonstr. ev. iv, 12 and esp. Epiphan. ancor. 65). The ancient ideas are developed more at length : the innocent Christ became a sacrifice, a ran- som, which was brought to the Father that we might be made free from condemnation (Joh. Dam. iii. 27). It is also asserted that he intercedes with the Father for us (Greg. Naz. or. 30. 14). ,0n the other hand, he has by his death freed us from the dominion of the devil (ib. iv. 4. Dionys. eccl. hier. s- -^S- i^)- At the same time we find in'its crassest form the idea, that he ran- somed us from the devil by making satisfaction for Adam's guilt (Macar. h. 11. 10). The devil had a certain right to man, whom he had made his slave through lust. The justice of God prevented him from snatching us from the devil by force. There- fore Christ was offered to him as an object of exchange and ran- som. In this is displayed the kindness of God toward us, and his justice toward the devil. But his wisdom also appears in the transaction. In order not to alarm the devil at the outset, the divinity of Christ is concealed in the flesh. With the bait of the flesh the devil swallows also the fishhook of the divinity. Since life now appears in death, death is brought to nought. 296 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. The devil is outwitted (thus Greg. Nyss. cat. 22-24; cf. Cyril. cat. 12. 15). Gregory of Nazianzum, indeed, rejected this offering of a ransom to the devil as outrageous (J>^pt^)j as did also the Damascene (Greg. or. 45. 22 ; Joh. fid. orth. iii. 27): but they did not altogether break away from the idea (vid. Greg. or. 39. 13. Joh. fid. orth. iii. i). In this, as in the sacrifice brought to God, is manifested the goodness, justice, and wis- dom of God (Cyril, cat. 13. 33. Greg. cat. 23. Joh. Dam. iii. i).^ But the real central thought of the Greeks in connection with the doctrine of redemption was, after all, a different one. The conceptions of sin which we have traced are based not so much upon the idea of deliverance from the torment of the devil and from the wrath of God, as upon the thought that we are to receive life and be freed from the power of the devil. The con- trolling conception here was that, since God himself entered the human race in Christ, humanity has been deified and made im- mortal — a conception which may be traced back through Atha- nasius, Methodius, Irenseus, and Ignatius to John, We have cited passages of this character from Athanasius, the Cappado- cians, and Cyril of Alexandria (supra, pp. 212 ff., 251, 255). *' For, since he has made us partakers of his own image and his own spirit, and we have not guarded it, he in exchange became partaker of our dull and weak nature, in order that he might purify and immortalize us, and make us again partakers of his divinity" (Joh. Dam. iv, 13). Since one member of the body of humanity (Christ's body) becomes immortal, the whole body of humanity becomes so : * * just as when anyone of all the race is alive, the resurrection of the part, being communicated from the part to the whole, penetrates the whole in consequence of the continuity and unity of the nature" (Greg. Nyss. cat. 32). The Logos assumed a ' ' man, who became a divine man (^y,uptaxo faction rendered to God in order to secure forgiveness, as in the West, but rather a discipline for amendment, an inward purifica- tion and sanctification. Thus Clement and Origen had regarded GREEK. CHRISTIANITY. 30I the matter (vid. supra). Something of this idea long lingered^ even in the presence of the ecclesiastical ordinance of penitential discipline. The duty of confessing all their sins — even their secret thoughts — which was imposed by Basil upon the monks, was not, indeed, extended to the laity (vid., e. g.^ Chrysost. hom. 4 ; in Laz. 4); but the injunction to confess sin to God, in order thereby to deepen one's own conviction of sin, was often re- peated in homiletic exhortations (ib.). Upon the history of the ordinance of public repentance in the Greek church the History of Doctrines has no occasion to enter (cf. Holl, 1. c, p. 240 ff.). The EUCHARIST is, above all, enwrapped in the awe of mystery, as the chief symbol (^af>yj(Tu(i6ohiv^ Dionys. hier. eccl. iii. i; 2. i,,c|. supra, p. 290), since all the angels hover around the priest as he offers the * 'awful sacrifice " (Chrys. desacerd. vi. 4, and ac- counts by him of actual appearances of angels). Regarded from a dogmatic point of view (cf. Steitz's discussions of the doctrine of the Greek church concerning the Lord's Supper, in Jarbb. f. d. TheoL, vols, ix.-xiii.), we may distinguish a more scientific symbolic tendency from the practical metabolic view, a differ- ence which did not, however, produce any actual conflict (cf. p. 299). Basil says, for example : ** He called his whole mystic life (^^Trtdrjfj.ia') flesh and blood, and taught a doctrine composed of practical and natural and theological elements, by which the soLil is nourished and meanwhile prepared for the contemplation of things existing " (ep. 8. 4 fin.). Other teachers speak in a similar way of spiritual food, or spiritual reception of the flesh .of Christ (Athan. ad Scrap, iv. 19; in ps. 80. 17. Macar. horn. 27. 17). But it is not hereby intended to question a real presence of Christ. The difference between this and the metabolic view is, therefore, not so great. The latter regards Christ as himself miraculously dwelling in the elements. This is very plainly taught by Cyril of Jerusalem in his *' mystagogical catechisms." By means of the invocation, the miracle of Cana is repeated ; the bread becomes body, and the wine blood (i. 7 ; iii. 3 ; iv. 1,2). We are not to allow ourselves to be deceived by the sense of taste (iv. 6, 9). On the contrary, we call upon God '' to send forth the Holy Spirit upon that which lies before us, in order that he may make the bread the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ. For, if the Holy Spirit should touch this at all, it would be sanctified and changed QieraSioXrirat').''^ But with this we must also keep in mind the declaration : ' ' For in the type of bread is given to thee the body, and in the type of wine is given to thee the blood, in order that, partaking of the body and blood of Christ, thou mayest become of the same body 302 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. and blood (^(TfjfTf7a)/xo<^ a.nd aovaqxof^) with him" (iv. 3). Now this body of Christ imparts itself to our body and makes it a partaker of the divine nature (iv. 3; v. 15), and thus the eucharist works for us immortality. The Origenist, Gregory of Nyssa^ ex- presses himself in essentially the same way in his 'Marge cate- chism " (c. 37 ) . As the soul is purified in baptism through faith, so the eucharist bestows an antidote for the poison which has pene- trated the body : *' The body (of Christ) immortahzed by God, being in ours, tranforms and changes the whole into that body itself." Bread and wine, as the natural means of nourishment, are the potency of every body, including that of Christ. Hence, it is said: ** Well do we, therefore, now believe that the bread consecrated by the word of God is transformed into the body of the divine Logos." But the design of t,^is is ''in order that, by this union with the immortal, man might also become a partaker of incorruptibility." During the Christological controversies it became customary to regard the body of Christ, spoken of in connection with the Lord's Supper, as identical with the body which the Lord bore when on earth (thus Cyril. Al., supra, p. 262, cf. Chrys. in Tit. hom. 2. 4; in Eph. hom. 3. 3). Here again the Damascene summarizes the thought for us (orth. fid. iv. 13): He who framed for us a body from the blood of the Virgin, by the power of the Spirit also changes bread and wine into body and blood. The elements are now not ' ' a type of the body and blood " (pp. 271, 273), nor are they the body come down from heaven ; but they are transformed : * ' The body is truly the body from the Holy Virgin united with divinity, not that the ascended body comes down from heaven, but that the bread and wine are transformed into the body and blood of God" (p. 269). A remarkable conclusion, which reveals how little of a religious character attaches to this system ! The purpose of the bestowal of the body and blood is the forgiveness of sins — but, above all, unification with Christ ; and this means deification, or the bestowal of immortality (pp. 271, 272). To this is added ''communing, and being through this united with one another " (P- 273> Side by side with this line of interpretation runs the other, which regards the eucharist in the light of the * ' unbloody, mystic, God -appeasing sacrifice," as a repetition of the sacrifice of Christ (Euseb. vit. Const, iv. 45. Joh. Dam. de imag. or. 2. 17. Chrysost. de poenit. hom. 9), which only a priest can adminis- ter (Chrysost. de sacerd. iii. 4, 5 ; vi. 4), and which is efficacious for the living and the dead (Eus. 1. c. iv. 71. Chrysost. in i Cor. hom. 41. 5 init. Greg. Naz. ep. 240). ICONOCLASTIC CONTROVERSIES. 303 § 28. Iconoclastic Controversies. Final Dogma of the Greek Church. Literature. Vid. the Byzantine chronographies in Corp. sacr. hist. Byz., esp. Theophanes Chronographia, edited by De Boor, 1883. For details of the proceedings, vid. M. Act. cone, xii., xiii. JoH. Damasc. de imaginibus orat. tres. Theodor. Studita, opp., in Mi. 99. Also the modem delinea- tions of Walch, Ketzerhist. vol. x. Hefele CG. iii., ed. 2, 366 ff. Her- genrother, Kirchengesch. I, 528 ft. Harnack DG. ii. 450 ff. Schwarz- LOSE, Der Bilderstreit ein Kampf der griech. Kirche um ihre Eigenart u. um ihre Freiheit, 1890. Thomas, Theod. von Studion u. seine Zeitalter, Leipz., 1892. Bonwetsch, pre. iii., ed. 3, 222 ff. The 36th canon of the synod of Elvira (A. D. 306, or, per- haps, as early as A. D. 300) reads : ^^ It seems good to us that there ought not to be pictures in the church, nor should that which is worshiped and adored be painted upon the walls. ' ' This principle was carried out also in decisions and in action (Eus. ep. ad Constantiam, Mi. 20. 1545, cf. h. e. vii. 18. Epiph. opp. ed. Dindorf iv. 2, p. 85). But it was not the view of the theo- logians which influenced public conviction in the matter, but the latter compelled the acquiescence of the teachers {^e.g., in Joh. Dam. or. i. 27; 2. 23; 3. 42). It was an outgrowth of the exaggerated culture of mysteries (p. 290).^ That an assault upon images should cause a profound excite- ment, may be readily understood. It is not so easy to discern the motive which prompted it. Neither respect for the Jews nor re- gard for the Saracens can have been the stimulating force. The Emperor Leo the Is auri an appears to have received the suggestion from Phrygia (Bishop Constantine of Nicolaea). To a man holding a legalistic conception of the Old Testament, the idea seemed self-evident (the imperial edict based its argument upon the Old Testament prohibition of images, Ex. 20. 4 ; 2 Ki. 18 4; cf. Joh. Dam. or. i. 4ff. , and the first letter of Pope Gregory to the emperor); and it was as natural for the emperor to command the church in the matter as the limitation of the latter's power was desirable.^ In A. D. 726 the emperor forbade the worship of images (Hefele iii. 378 ff. ), on the ground that they take the place of the idols of the heathen, and that the worship of them is forbidden in the Scriptures. We dare not worship ** stones, walls, and boards." With the approval of the patriarch Anastasius, the agitation was renewed in A. D. 730. Energetic opposition was at once aroused upon the part of the ^ The controlling idea, that God is present in pictures of the Deity, is an- tique (see the Apologeles) and Neo-Platonic (see Zeller, Philos. der Griechen iii. 2,ed. 3, pp. 626, 697). ■•■ The discussion by Schwarzlose (p. 45 ff. ) of the imperial *' politics " is not satisfactory. 304 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. people as well as among the theologians, e. g., Germanus of Constantinople (in M. xiii. 100 ff.), Gregory II. of Rome (M. xii. 959 fF. ), John of Damascus (Mi. 94. 1227 fF. ). Appeal was made to tradition and custom, to the miracles wrought through the images, to which at any rate only venera- tion (^nf>i)rTx6\'7j(7(.^) and not worship (^Xarpeia) was rendered, to the cherubim, etc. The Roman bishop also reflected that '* the dogmas of the church are not an affair of the emperor, but of the bishops," and pointed to the position of Peter ''whom the kingdoms of the West regard as the earthly God," at the same time, in the most offensive manner, charging the emperor with outrageous folly. ^ John of Damascus published a comprehensive defense of the images. The images of Christ and' the saints may and must be honored, not, indeed, by divine worship (or. 3. 29 ff.), but by veneration. God himself is the originator of the use of images, having sanctioned it by the method of Old Testament revelation, the forms of Old Testament worship, and his own visible ap- pearance in Christ (or. 3. 12, 18, 21 ff., 26; i. 14, 20 ff.). Everything on earth is a picture of God ( i . 11). The spiritual, and, therefore, the revelation of God, can be revealed to us only through matter (S-iij). We honor the images just as we honor the gospels, the eucharist, the cross, the spear and sponge, or Golgotha (i. 16; 2. 14, 19) — not the materials composing them as such (2. 19), but as being bearers of the divine. The controlling idea of the age here finds expression : '^ Things made by our hands are holy, leading us through matter to the immaterial God (2. 23), through bodily vision to spiritual vision" (3. 12, 25). We must either surrender our veneration for the "parchments of the gospels" writ- ten with ink, and for the elements of the eucharist, or ac- knowledge *' the veneration of images of God and of the pre- cious things consecrated to the name of God, and thus over- shadowed by the grace of the divine Spirit " (2. 14). Images are, therefore, means of grace, since the material copy brings to us God himself C therefore I revere, aiSo), and through the unseen draw near and venerate, the material object through which salvation comes to me. But I revere it not as divine, but as filled with divine energy and grace," 2, 14). Such character is possessed by them not only as the '' books of the unlearned " (3. 9). Hence, to deny them veneration is Manichasism (i. 16 ; ^ Schwarzlose's attack upon the genuinenessof the two letters of Gregory has not convinced me. We may, at the most, acknowledge some alterations, which may perhaps be charged to the account of a contemporary Byzantine translator, who was familiar with the writings of the Damascene upon imagr--:. ICONOCLASTIC CONTROVERSIES. 305 2. 13). Not only does God himselfj with his whole revelation to man, thus defend the veneration of images, but it is just as fully supported by the tradition of the church (i. 27, 23 ; 2. 23 ; 3. 42). To abandon the veneration of images is a worse offense than fornication (3. 13). At any rate, the emperor has nothing to do with the inner life of the church : * ' The emperor's sphere is the right conduct of political affairs; the management of ecclesiastical affairs is the province of pastors and teachers " (2. 12). To the punctilious legality and Csesaropapy of the emperor is here opposed the historically well-defined Greek Christianity, not with- out suggesting the idea — in spite of recent events — of the inde- pendence of the church. In so far the worshipers of images were right. But it is Christianity as represented in the lower form which magically sinks the spiritual in the material (^. g., power of images against demons, i. 27, p. 231; miracles per- formed by them, i. 22; 3. 41 — hence religious veneration). In this — impartially considered — lies the error of the image worshipers, and of the piety of the church which they repre- sented. It must be left to Church History to trace the outward course of the resulting controversies. Constantine V. (Copronymus, A. D. 741-775) proceeded against the images with the greatest energy, particularly after an insurrection of their defenders under his brother-in-law, Artabasdus, had most seriously endangered his throne. A general council was now planned to set the stamp of ecclesiastical authority upon the emperor's view. It met at Constantinople, A. D. 754 (see the /loros of the council in M. xiii. 205 ff. ). Since the devil could not tolerate the adorn- ment of '* glorious doctrines " in the church, he was constantly re-introducing idolatry. As God in ancient times equipped the apostles to contend against ancient idolatry, so now has he en- dowed the apostolic emperors with the spirit of wisdom for the conflict against images. The council realizes that the ** iniqui- tous art of painting" reviles the incarnation of Christ, since Christ can be painted only by a Nestorian separation, or by a Eutychian confusion, of the divine and the human. Bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are the only authorized pictures of Christ. The Scriptures forbid images (Jn. 4. 24 ; Deut. 5. 8 ; Rom. I. 23, 25, etc.). Accordingly, images dare neither be made, nor placed in churches or private houses, nor kept in secret. Any cleric who violates the prohibition shall be removed from office ; any layman or monk so transgressing anathematized, in which case he is amenable to the civil law as '* an opponent of the commandments of God, and an enemy of the dogmas of 20 3o6 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. the Fathers." These decrees were executed with great energy. The clergy yielded, but the monks resisted. Pictures were de- stroyed, plastered over, or replaced with landscape and hunting views. The emperor pursued all who resisted with terrible cruelty. The monks were treated with special severity. The emperor went so far as to forbid the veneration of relics and prayers to the Virgin Mary and the saints (Theophan., p. 439 ; cf. Cedrenus, hist, compend. ed. Bekkerii., p. 3). Leo IV. (Chazarus, A. D. 775-780) espoused the principles of his father, but his cunning and ambitious wife, Irene, was friendly to the images. After the death of her consort, she felt herself constrained, in order to retain her position as guardian of her son, to depend upon the support of the image -venerating party (cf. Ranke, Weltgesch. v. 89, 91 f.). Advancing by slow stages, she crowned her efforts by securing the assembly of the Seventh Ecumenical Council at Nicaea, A. D. 787. The members of this council approved the veneration of images, sup- porting it by the Scriptures (ark of the covenant and cherubim, Gen. 32. 24), and a great number of patristic citations, and re- futing at length the horos of A. D. 754. The council's own horos laid stress upon the assertion, that it held to the doctrines of the first six ecumenical councils. With respect to images, it was maintained, with appeal to tradition, that veneration is to be shown, as to the cross, so also to images of Christ, of the stain- less lady, the angels and saints, whether depicted in colors or on stone, upon vessels, clothing, walls, or on the streets: '* for, as often as they are seen from time to time in pictorial representa- tion, so often are those who behold them incited to the recollec- tion of and desire for the prototypes, and to render to them affection and deep veneration ; not, indeed, true worship accord- ing to our faith, which is properly rendered only to the divine nature, but in such a way as to the symbol of the precious and life- giving cross and to the holy gospels, and to the other sacred ob- jects, and to make a presentation of incense and lights for the honor of such, as it was customary among the ancients piously to do. For the honor rendered to the image passes over to the proto- type. ' ' Clerics refusing to conform to these requirements are to be deposed, laymen excommunicated. The decree was sub- scribed by those present. With loud salutations of the new Helena and the new Constantine, and with abundant anathemas against all heretics, especially such as refuse to venerate the images and reject tradition, the seventh and chief session closed. A feature of Greek Christianity was saved, but it is a peculiar illustration of the irony of history, that the same city, Nicaea, in which the first dogma was framed, was also the birthplace of this FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS OF AUGUSTINE. 307 last Greek dogma. The two councils of Nicaea mark the course of Greek Christianity — from dogma to images. The further history of the iconoclastic controversies does not be- long to the sphere of the History of Doctrines. The restitution of the images naturally followed, and was accomplished without bloodshed. The superstitious practices in connection with images passed all bounds (see passages in Thomas, Theod. v. Studion, p. loi). The Armenian, Leo V., renewed the warfare against them. Michael II. (Balbus), and Theophilus followed in his steps. But the populace and the monks, led by the powerful abbot of Studion, Theodore, resisted, despite all oppressive measures (Thomas, p, 98 ff.). Theodora, the wife of Theo- philus, restored the images, A. D. 842, and in celebration of this act it was appointed that the '* festival of orthodoxy" should be annually celebrated. With this, the dogma of the Greek church reaches its con- summation ; for neither the separation between the Greek and Roman churches (Photius, Michael Cerularius, A. D. 1054) nor the later attempts to unite them (A. D. 1274, 1439) ^^^^ within the domain of the general History of Doctrines. The same is to be said of the heretics in the Russian church and the great schism dating from the age of Nicon, A. D. 1654. The study of these agitations furnishes nothing beyond what has been pre- sented in the two preceding paragraphs. As to the conditions of the present, see especially Le Roy Beaulieu, das Reich der Zaren, vol. iii. CHAPTER IV. foundation of anthropological dogma (sin and grace), development of the church in the west. doctrine of augustine. §29. The Fu7idamental Religious Ideas of Augustine and His Place in the History of Doctrines. Literature. The Works of Augustine, Maurine ed., 11 vols., Paris, 1679 ff. Reprint edit, tertia Veneta (from which we quote), Migne Lat. 32- 46. Cf. BiNDEMANN, Det h. Aug., 3 vols., 1844 ff. BoHRlNGER, Aurel. Aug., ed. 2, 1877 f. DoRNER, Aug., sein theol. System u. sein rel. phil. Anschauung, 1873. Reuter, Augustin. Studien, 1887. Harnack DG. iii. 54 ff. Feuerlein, Aug. Stellung in der Kirchen. u. Kulturgesch., Hist. Ztschr. xxii. 270 ff. DiLTHEY, Einleitung in die Geisteswissenschaft, i. 335 ff. EuCKEN, Die Lebensanschauungen d. grossen Denker, 1890, p. 258 ff. 3o8 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Cunningham, Saint Aug. and his Place in the History of Christian Thought, l88i. Bestmann, Qua rat. Aug. notiones phil. graec. adhib., 1877. LOsCHE, DeAug. plotinizante, 1880. Storz, Die Philos. d. h. Aug., 1882. SciPiO, Des Aur, Aug. Metaphysik im Ramen s. Lehre v.|^Uebel, 1886. SlE- BECK, Geschichte der Psychologic, i. 2, p. 381 ff. The general conception of Christianity which prevailed in the Western church in the third century has been seen (p. i98)tohave been that of a legal relationship between God and man, whose result is the salvation of souls (^salus animarurri). *' The whole foundation of religion and faith proceeds from obedience and the fear of God ' ' {observatioiie ac timore^ Cyprian, de hab. virg. ii.; cf. supra, p. 194 f.). We have seen, further, that in the Trinitarian and Christological controversies the West maintained its characteristic position (illustrated in Tertullian, p. 125 f.; also pp. 237, 255). Nevertheless, the Renaissance movement in the Eastern church made itself felt even here, as is manifest in the views of Hilary, and no less in the writings of Ambrose, who was largely dependent upon the Cappadocians (especially Basil), and in the prevalence of the allegorical method of exe- gesis (cf. also Jerome). Such a man as the orator Victorinus, in a way which reminds us of Augustine, applied the Neo- Platonic theory of ideas in the interest of Trinitarianism and — which is of special interest to us — was able to reproduce Paul's doctrine of justification, although not, indeed, without exhibit- ing a naive Pelagianism (vid. Mi. viii., also Diet, of Christ. Bio- graph, iv. 1 1 29 ff. R. Schmidt, M. Victorinus Rhetor, Kiel, 1895). At the same time, the chacteristic ideas of the West were not lost sight of, but even more fully developed. In the doc- trines of original sin and grace (where Tertullian is still the controlling influence, vid. p. 122; cf. also Cyprian and Com- modian, p. 192), Ambrose largely anticipated Augustine (vid. supra). The agitation which prevailed throughout the Western church from the days of Augustine was not without its forerun- ners. Ambrose was an Augustine before Augustine, and re- mained for the latter the controlling authority. But such a man as the Docetic Tyconius likewise prepared the way for Augustine, not only in his views concerning the church, but also by his em- phasizing of grace. At this point begin the labors of Augus- tine, who combined in himself all the elements of the culture and religion of his age, and yet produced something quite new. He is the dominating force for the History of Doctrines in the West during the following periods. The ideas which he ex- pressed gave birth to the dogmatic history of the West ; the form of piety which he represented remained as a model, and be- came one of the most powerful co-efficients in the intellectual FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS OF AUGUSTINE. 309 and spiritual life of the race. The labors of scholasticism no less than the emotions of the mystics, Roman hierarchy as well as the antihierarchical parties of the Middle Ages, Rome and Wittenberg, alike leaned upon him and found support (cf. Reu- TER, p. 479 ff. ). His formulas, his statement of the perplexing problems of theology, and his religious temper, are constantly reappearing as we pursue the subsequent History of Doctrines. Even where an entirely different spirit is manifest, there is no escape from the masterful influence of his thoughts and termi- nology. The history of his conversion is well known. Aurelius Augustine (A. D. 354-430) was, despite his fervid sensuous tem- perament and the errors into which it led him, a noble soul, free from everything sordid. He was inspired with an intense yearn- ing after truth and life. A disciple of the IVIanichgeans, he was won by the glory of the Catholic church (conf. v, 14 ; vi. r. 5, II ; vii. 19), the examples of her confessors (ib. viii. 2, 5, 6 f.), and the power of the grace of Christ (ib. vii. 5. i8f.; viii. 8ff.). The allegorical interpretations of Scripture in the preaching of the day (ib. vi. 5. 11 ; cf. vii. i), the teaching of Paul (ib. vii. 21 init.; viii. 6), and the spirit of the Neo-platonic philosophy prepared the way for him into the communion of the church. The universal significance of Augustine results from his return to the original Christian temper of soul. He was from his youth distinguished by an insatiable longing for happiness, life, and wealth. Not quiet contemplation, but the utmost exertion of every power, was from the very beginning of his career the ideal of this daring genius. The will is the essential part of man. It turns away from God and toward nothingness. It is, accord- ingly, the cause of all misery. On the other hand, the new will, inspired by God, /. ^., love, is the real blessing bestowed by di- vine grace. Only when God's will controls the will of man is man free (vid. conf. vii. 16. 22; viii. 5. 10 ; xiii. 10. 19; de civ. dei xxii. 22. i ; de sp. et lit. 30. 52). But God is the almighty Will, which controls and ordains all things. Over against and beneath the divine Will, stands the will of man. To be controlled and permeated by the will of God constitutes salvation and blessedness. Regarded from this point of view, religion is subjection to God in love. But from this same point all the positive and empirical ordinances of the church could ap- pear to Augustine to exist rightfully, because designed and appointed by God. But to this principle of Augustine, which, in the last analysis, rested upon the primitive Christian recogni- tion of the sovereignty of God and the subjection of the human will, was added the Neo-Platonic element in Augustine's sphere 3IO HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. of thought. Fundamentally considered, it is the will which leads man to knowledge. That which is willed becomes a constituent part of the soul, since the latter knows it. '* For certainly a thing cannot be loved unless it is known^^ (de trin. x. i. 2). But knowledge arises not only from the perception of these heavenly truths. There is innate in the soul an *' interior sense," which apprehends the nature of things through their intelligible forms {per intelligibile?7i specie?7ij de civ. dei, xi. 27. 2). This species iiitelligibilis is not attained, but innate. But here Augustine launches out into the '' intelligible world " of the Platonic sys- tem — into the contemplation of the ancient fantasies of the origi- nal forms of all existing things. The contemplation of the eter- nal becomes for him — in genuinely Greek spirit — salvation (cf. de quaest. oct. 1. 46. 2). These are the fundamental intellectual lines within which the thought of Augustine moved. First, voluntarism (God is Will and man is will \ love is blessedness). Then, the Neo-Platonic intellectualism (the contemplation of the intelligible world is blessedness). Both are, in a marvelous way, interwoven, and over all lies the enchantment of inner and personal expe- rience. It was in the midst of earnest struggle that Augustine found salvation in the fellowship of the living God, of whom he could so impressively speak. All that he has written bears the marks of its origin in the depths of his personal life and earnest striv- ing. There exist for him but two great realities : God and the Soul. God is hght, truth, life; in the soul dwell darkness, misery, death. But where the soul lays hold upon God and God lays hold upon the soul, there is clearness of vision and the power to do good — -there is blessedness, A few citations will best re- veal this fundamental religious temper of the man: ''What, therefore, dost thou desire to know ? . . . State briefly. God and the soul I desire to know. And nothing more ? Noth- ing at all." But this limitation of interest is a consequent upon the declaration ; ^^ I love nothing else but God and the souV^ (soliloq. i. 2, 7 ; viii. 15; xv. 27). '*Thou dost stir us up to find delight in praising Thee, because Thou hast made us for Thyself, and our heart is restless until it rests in Thee * ' (conf. i. i). ** For in this I sinned, that I sought pleasures, sublimities, truths, not in Himself but in his creatures, myself and others. And thus I rushed into griefs, confusions, errors" (ib. i. 20). *' Who will give tome that I may find rest in Thee? Who will give to me that Thou mayest come into my heart and intoxicate it, so that I may forget my evil ways and embrace Thee as my only good? Say to my soul : I am thy salvation " (ib. FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS OF AUGUSTINE. 31I i. 5). ** Too late I have learned to love Thee, Loveliness so ancient and so new — too late I have learned to love Thee. And behold, Thou wast within and I without, and there I sought Thee ; and I, unshapely, rushed upon the shapely things which Thou hast made. Thou wast with me and I was not with Thee. Those things held me far from Thee, which would not be if they were not in Thee. Thou hast called and cried aloud, and broken through my deafness. Thou hast sparkled and shone and driven away my blindness. Thou hast broken and allured my spirit, and I pant for Thee. I have tasted, and I hunger and thirst. Thou hast touched me, and I have been consumed with Thy peace" (ib. x. 27). *'And I sought a way of gaining the strength that would be capable of enjoying Thee, and I found it not until I embraced the Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus " (ib. vii. 18). *^ His coming is his humanity ; his remaining is his divinity. His divinity is the whither we are journeying ; his humanity is the where we are journeying. Un- less he had become for us the where we are journeying, we could never have come to him where he dwells (in Joh. tr. 42. 8). I have entered the depths under Thy guidance, and I have been able, since Thou hast become my helper. I have entered and have seen, as with a certain eye of my soul, above this same eye of my soul, above my mind, the unchangeable Light. ... O eternal Truth and true Love, and lovable Eternity, Thou art my God. . . And since I first have known Thee, Thou hast taken me to Thyself, that I might see that that exists which I should see, and which I who see am not yet . . . and I have trembled with love and terror " (conf. vii. 10). *' For when I seek Thee, my God, I seek blessed life. I will seek Thee, that my soul may live. For my body lives from my soul, and my soul lives from Thee " (ib. x. 20). '' For me, to cling to God is good ; this is the whole good. Do you wish anything more ? I grieve that you so wish. Brothers, for what more do you wish ? There is nothing better than to cling to God '* (in ps. 72. 34). '* God is to be worshiped by faith, hope, love *' fenchirid. iii.; cf. soliloq. i. 7. 14). ''Give what Thou appointest, and ap- point what Thou wilt " (conf. x. 37 ; cf. solil. i. i. 5). '' Do Thou suggest to me, do Thou show me, do Thou grant me help by the way . . increase in me faith, increase hope, increase love" (solil. i. i. 5). "But there is a delight which is not given to the wicked, but to those who willingly worship Thee, whose joy Thou Thyself art. And this is blessed life itself, to delight one's self toward Thee and on account of Thee ; this it is, and there is no other " (conf x. 22). A new spirit breathes through these utterances, and they illus- 312 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. trate at the same time the enrapturing diction of Augustine. The very existence of man is sin and misery ; but God is his salvation — not by virtue of fixed laws, not by way of reward or punishment, but in the direct personal fellowship of life and love. These are the ideas upon which rests Paul's view of sin and grace. But Augustine now proceeded, while maintaining as his central position that above indicated, to unfold his religious ideas within the lines of the traditional formulas and ideals of the church. He *' deepened " and transformed the latter. But he had also from the start demanded submission to the authority of the church (vid. de utilitate credendi ix. ff. ; c. ep. Mani- chaei 5.6: '* But I would not believe the gospel, unless the authority of the Catholic church impelled me " ). This has been manifest in our study of his Trinitarian and Christological utter- ances (p. 238). It comes to view again in his doctrine of sin and grace, as developed in the conflict with Pelagianism, although here the characteristic religious elements of his theology assert themselves with peculiar force. In the same light are to be viewed his utterances touching the church and the sacraments during the anti-Donatistic controversy, as well as his acceptance and ennobling of nearly all the teachings of the popular Catholi- cism. He remains himself almost everywhere, but he is yet, at the same time, an orthodox Catholic teacher in the church of his age. He did not, like Origen, develop a theological sj^stem, but he furnished to his age a wealth of fruitful religious and speculative ideas, giving back to it in a purified and profounder form what he received from it. His ^' doctrine " is deficient in unity, combining the most violent contradictions (gospel and philosophy, Catholic tradition and religion, voluntarism and in- tellectualism, etc.); but his writings proved stimulating in an unparalleled degree. He was a theologian and a philosopher ; but he was also more, a religious genius and a great man. It will be necessary for us to examine : (i) His doctrine of the church and the sacraments, in opposition to Donatism. (2) His doctrine of sin and grace, in opposition to Pelagianism. (3) His general view of theology and the church, in tracing which we must follow the lines of his only comprehensive dogmatic work, the Enchiridion ad Laurentium. § 30. Donatistic Controversy and Further Development of the Doctrines of the Church and the Sacraments by Augustine. Literature. Optatus of Mileve, de schismate Donatistarura II. 7 ed. Ziswa in Corp. scr. eccl. Lat. 26 (written perhaps A. D. 368, but see ii. 3). Synodal Acts and fragments of the same in M. iv. Original sources in Opp. Aug. xvii. 2446 ff. Also Deutsch, Drei Aktenstiicke z. Gesch. d. Donat. DONATISTIC CONTROVERSY. 313 1875. VOlter, Der Ursprung d. Donat, 18S3. Seeck, Quellen u. Urkun- den iiber die Anfange des. Donat., Ztschr. f. KG. x. 505 ff. Ribbeck, Dona- tus u. Aug., 1858. Hefele, in Wetzer u. Welte's Kirchenlex. iii. ed. 2, 1969 ff. THtJMMEL, Zur Beurteilung des Donatism, 1893. F. Hahn, Tyconius-Studien (Bonwetsch-Seeberg, Studien zur Gesch. derTheol. a. der Kirche, vi. 2), 1900. Bonwetsch, PRE. iv., ed. 3, 788 fF. Of the works of Augustine: c. epistulam Parmeniani, 11. 3 (ca. A. D. 400); de baptismo c. Donatistas, 11. 7 ; c. litteras Petiliani, 11. 3 ; de unitate eccl. (after A. D. 400); c. Cresconium, 11. 4 (ca. A. D. 406); de uiiico baptismo c. Petilianum (ca. A. D. 410); breviculus collationes cum Donatistis (A. D. 411); ad Donatistas post coUationem (A. D. 412); de gestis cum Emerito (A. D. 418); c. Gau- dentium 11. 2 (ca. A. D. 420). Upon Aug's conception of the church, vid. KosTLiN, Die Cath. Auffassung v. d. Kirche in ihrer ersten Ausbildung, in Deutsche Ztschr. f. chr. Wiss. u. chr. Leben, 1856, p. loi ff. , 113 ff. II. Schmidt, Des Aug. Lehre v. d. Kirche, in Jarbb. f. deutsche Theol., 1861, p. 197 ff. Reuter, Aug. Studien, pp. 231 ff., 47 ff. Seeberg, Begriff d. Kirche, i. p. 38 ff. Specht, Die Lehre v. d. Kirche nach dem. h. Aug., 1892. Upon his doctrine of the Sacraments, vid. Hahn, Die Lehre v. d. Sakr., 1864. DiECKHOFF, Theol. Ztschr., i860, p. 524 ff. I, The Donatistic Controversy. (^) The greatest schism in the ancient church arose from per- sonal and local conditions in the congregation at Carthage. As in the case of the Novatian schism, a persecution furnished the occasion. Various courses of action were advocated in North Africa in response to the demand for the surrender of the Scrip- tures during the Diocletian persecution. Bishop Mensurius of Carthage represented the milder view (surrender of other writings of indifferent character permitted). He and his arch- deacon Caecilian also opposed the exaggerated veneration of confessors and martyrs. Secundus of Tigisis advocated a rigoristic view. After the death of Mensurius, Caecilian, who was hated by the strict party in Carthage, was chosen bishop and consecrated to the office by Felix of Aptunga, whom the strict party regarded as a **traditor. " This election awakened great indignation among the ^' pious " (Lucilla), which was en- couraged by the foreign rigorists. The Numidian bishops had sent Docetus from Casae Nigrae to Carthage as vicar of the bishopric. An assemblage of 70 bishops in Carthage (A. D. 312) declared the ordination invalid. Majorinus was then elected Bishop of Carthage. His successor was Donatus the Great. Through a combination of many influences, this con- flict led to the formation of two warring churches sharply op- posing one another, the Catholic and the Donatistic. The pride of the martyrs, the spirit of piety quickened anew under the stress of persecution, the idea of the holiness of the church, ar- chaistic religious reminiscences, the pressure soon brought to bear by the civil authorities, the league of the Catholic church with the state, social distress, perhaps also national motives, all 314 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. united to expand the personal dispute into the great schism which distracted the church of Africa for a century. The Afri- can church was really split in two (in A. D. 330 there were 270 Donatistic bishops at a council, and in A. D. 311, at Carthage, 266). Outside of Africa, Donatism secured no following worthy of mention (a bishop in Spain and another in Rome are spoken of, gesta collationis i. 157), only Caecilian and his fol- lowers being recognized. The emperor, Constantine, after being drawn into the matter by the Donatists, assumed a similar atti- tude. He ordered an investigation of the subject ; then ex- amined it himself, deciding that Caecilian and Felix were inno- cent, but that their assailants were contemptible slanderers. Stringent laws were enacted against the latter, but, proving in- effectual, they were soon revoked. But the most important measure was that adopted, under the influence of Constantine, at the council of Aries (A. D. 316, according to Seeck, 1. c, p. 50S f. ; cf. Eus. V. C. 44, 45), /. ^. , the establishment of the milder view on the ground of principle. It was here decreed that even the ordination administered by a '* traditor " is valid, provided only that the persons so ordained '* remain reasonable " (can. 13); also, that persons who had been baptized by heretics should be questioned only upon the Creed, and that, if it be found that they have been baptized in the name of the Triune God, only the laying on of hands shall be further administered to them (can. 8). According to this, ordination and baptism are not dependent upon the worthiness of the administrant. Thus a doctrinal difference runs parallel with the personal and histori- cal conflict. The agitation spread with great rapidity, especially among the lower ranks of society. Socialistic ideas as to property and a reckless fanaticism, leading to a complete outward separa- tion, to frightful deeds of violence, and to wanton and con- temptuous surrender of life, became distinguishing marks of the church of the saints (Circumcelliones, Agonistici, vid. Opt. ii. 18 f. 21 ; vi. I f,;iii. 4. Aug. unit. eccl. 19. 50; c. ep. Farm, ii. 3. 6 ; c. Crescon. iii. 42. 46; brev. iii. 11). Against this, church and state were alike powerless. Restrictive measures under Constans and Constantius, as under Jovian, Valen- TiNiAN, Gratian, and Honorius, were unable to suppress the movement. The most serious obstacle encountered by the party was its division into mutually antagonistic groups (Rogatus, Tyconius, Maximian, and Frimian) — the fate of all separatists. Augustine, soon after entering upon the episcopacy, addressed all his energy to the work of reconciling the opposing factions. This resulted in the three-day conference at Carthage in June, 411 (vid. gesta collationis in M. iv. and Aug. brevic. coll.). DONATISTIC CONTROVERSY. 315 Both the historical and the doctrinal questions were here dis- cussed. No reader of the proceedings of this assembly can escape the impression that the Donatists here appear in the light of embittered fanatics, incompetent but vain, adepts in the most trifling legal quibbles, in questions of formality and in intrigue, always seeking to impede the progress of the proceedings. The imperial presiding officer (Marcellin) accorded the victory to the Catholics upon both points of dispute. His decision was a just one. Augustine continued to labor in the same spirit. Strict imperial edicts forbade the assemblage of the Donatists upon penalty of death, and their churches and church property were given over to the Catholics. The power of Donatism was broken, and it soon after disappears from church history. ((^) The doctrinal difference between Donatists and Catholics may be briefly expressed. Donatism does not question the epis- copal foundation of the church. It demands only that the bishops be holy men, and maintains that only when they are such are the sacraments administered by them eflectual. In this, as at other points, it could appeal to Cyprian. It was well known that Cyprian denied the validity of heretic baptism (p. 184). He taught that there was no virtue in the sacrifices or prayers of fallen priests (referring to Jn. 9. 31), and warned against the contamination of their touch (p. 181, n. i). When the Donatists appealed to the miracles performed by their bishops, to visions and dreams (Aug. unit. eccl. 19. 49), they had in this also a precedent in Cyprian (p. 181, n. 3). They maintained, further, that they were the only true and real Catholic church (gesta coll. i. 148, 202; iii. 22, 91, 165), the holy, persecuted church of the martyrs (ib. i. 45 ; iii. 116). The Catholics are not a church, but adherents of Caecilian, traditors, and blood-thirsty oppressors (Optat. ii. 14, 18 ; gest. i. 148; iii. 14, 29, 258). The Donatist church is in reality the holy bride of Christ, without spot or wrinkle, because it requires holiness of its bishops and its members (ib. iii. 75, 249, 258. Optat. ii. 20; vii. 2). They apply the term, Catholic, ** not to provinces or races," but : *' the name Catholic is that which is filled with the sacraments" (^sacra77ientis plenum ^ gest. iii. 102, cf Aug. brev. iii. 3), or, ** thou shouldst interpret the name Catholic, not from the fellowship of the whole world, but from the observance of all the divine commandments and of all the sacraments " (Aug. ep. 93. 7. 23). In accordance with the holiness of this church, its members are to carefully avoid asso- ciation with all who are not in its fellowship,^ all such being re- 1 Vid. Optat. i. 4; iv. 5 ; vi. 3. Aug. c. litt. Petil. ii, 83. 184. At the 31 6 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. garded as no better than heathen.^ Any connection whatever of the church with the civil government is regarded with abhor- rence : " What have Christians to do with kings, bishops with the palace?" (Opt. i. 22 ; Aug. c. litt. Petil. 92. 202).^ The dogmatic reason for this separateness lies in the invalidity of the Catholic sacraments. The moral unworthiness of the bishops of the traditor-church robs their sacraments of value : *' How can he give who has nothing to give?" (Opt. v. 6; cf. gest. iii. 258). Hence the repetition of the sacraments, the second bap- tism, and the repetition of extreme unction are necessary (Opt. i. 5 ; iii. 2 ; iv. 4 j v. i. 3 f. ; vii. 4). Yet it is going too far to regard re-baptism as, without any modification, a character- istic mark of Donatisra. The Donatist Tyconius advocated the validity of the Catholic sacraments, and maintained that this was the genuine Donatist view — a position that is supported by his- torical evidences from other sources (Aug. ep. 93. 43 ; cf. Hahn, Tyconius-Studien, p. 102 ff. ). ,But, since the Donatists have the full observance of the sacraments, they are the Catholic church. Hence, Christ and true baptism are to be found only among them : **For how can it be, if the church is one and Christ undivided, that anyone located without may obtain bap- tism (gest. iii. 258)?" The Catholic position, on the contrary, is as follows :^ The orthodoxy of the Donatists is acknowledged, as well as the validity of their sacraments, and they are regarded as Christian brethren (gest. i. 16, 55, 62; ii. 50. Opt. i. 4 f . ; iv. 2): '' Both among you and among us there is one ecclesiastical life (^conversatio')^ common texts, the same faith, the same sacraments of the faith, the same mysteries" (Opt. V. i). Even their baptism is unassailable, for baptism is baptism, even though administered by thieves and robbers (gest. i. 62); for it is not a man, but the holy Trinity, which here bestows a gift (Opt. v. 7). The Trinity is necessary in baptism, and also the faith of the recipient. These elements are unchangeable ; but the administrant is a variable element. '^Administrants may be changed, but the sacraments cannot be changed. If, therefore, you consider all religious colloquy at Carthage, the Donatists could not be induced to sit with the Cathohcs (gest. i. 45 ; ii. 3). i Optat. iii. II (cf. vi. 8): You say even to the clergy, ** Be Christians," and you dare to say to everyone : " Gai sei Gaia seta : adhuc paganus es aut pagana'^ (translating the Punic words, vid. remarks in Ziswa's edition, p. 277). 2 Yet the Donatists themselves called upon Constantine to act as umpire, and, as it appears, did not at a later day disdain the assistance of the secular arm (gest. iii. 194. Aug. brev. iii. 11). 3 We take no account for the present of ideas specifically Augustinian. DONATISTIC CONTROVERSY. 317 who baptize, they are administrants, not lords j and the sacra- ments are holy in themselves and not through men " (Opt. iv. 4, i). Thus regarded, the Donatists are also a part of the church. But they are not so in the full sense of the word, since they lack catholicity and are only quasi ecclesia. They build a ** ruinous wall" (Ez. 13. 10). There is no other house beside the house of God. What they build is only a wall, and that not even resting upon the corner-stone : '* your part is a quasi-church, but is not Catholic" (Opt. iii. 10). They array *' novelty against antiquity " (ib. iii. 2), and cut themselves off from the root (iii. 7). Among the Catholics, on the contrary, is found the house of God and the one Catholic church. It is the latter, because, according to the promise of Christ, it spreads abroad over all nations and is not confined ** to a small part of Africa, to the corner of a little region " (Opt. ii. i, 5 ; iii. 2, 3). But it is also the holy church, and this not because of the character of the men belonging to it, but because it has the *' symbol of the Trinity, the chair of Peter, the faith of believers, the salutary precepts of Christ " (ib. ii. 9, 10; vii. 2), and, above all, the sacraments : ^' whose holiness is derived from the sacra- ments, not measured by the loftiness of persons" (ib. ii. i). When the Donatists refuse to accord holiness to the church be- cause some bishops at the time of the Diocletian persecution be- came traditors, they magnify what is irrelevant, if true, and what is, moreover, historically incorrect (gest. i. 16, 55. Aug. brev. iii. 19 ff.). There are, indeed, unholy persons in the church, but we are forbidden to cast these out before the time by the parables of the tares and of the net in which are gathered good and worthless fishes (gest. i. 18, 55. Opt. vii. 2). Those passages of Scripture which speak of a state of unmixed holiness in the church are to be understood as referring to her condition of final blessedness (Aug. brev. iii. 9. Opt. ii. 20), The church, therefore, as a whole, is holy in the present day by virtue of the divine agency exerted within its bounds in the sac- raments, and it will one day be holy in all its members. The error of the Donatists consists in seeking to realize this final state before the time. It is certain that, viewed dogmatically, the Catholic position was the more correct, yet its victory was not a clear step in advance. The ancient idea, that the people of God should consist of holy children of God, was forced another step backward. 2. Augustine's Doctrine of the Church, the Sacra- ments, AND the Relation of Church and State. (iz) Augustine's doctrine of the church is a complicated structure. Ideas evolved in the conflict with the Donatists, the 3lS HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. popular conception of the church, his own doctrine of grace, and certain Donatistic tendencies are here brought into combina- tion. Augustine was influenced especially by Tyconius' concep- tion of the church. This Donatist maintained, indeed, that the church is composed of saints only, but he also taught that em- pirically the church for the present embraces evil as well as good persons, and that this is so by divine ordering. True, this mixed condition of the church is, according to his view, soon to be terminated, and to this end Donatism is a beginning (vid. Hahn, Tyconius-Studien, p. 80 ff. ). As opposed to Donatism, Augustine thus formulates the point at issue : '^ The question is, indeed, discussed between us. Where is the church, whether among us or among them?" (de unit. eccl. 2. 2). With Optatus, Augustine holds that the great church is the one Catko/ic chnich by virtueof the distribution of the latter throughout the whole world (c. litt. Petil. ii. 38. 91 ; iii. 2. 3 ; de unit. eccl. 6. 11 ff. )and by virtue of its connection with the church of the apostles, whose successors the bishops are (c. Cresc. iii. 18. 21 ; deunit. eccl. 11. 30, cf. in Joh. tr. 37. 6). Outside of this one Catholic church, the body of Christ, there is no truth, ^ no salvation (ep. 141. 5 ; de unit. 2. 2). Separation from it is sl sacri'/egi'um (c. ep. Farm, i. 8. 14; 10. 16). Only chaff is blown off by the fan (bapt. v. 21. 29); only pride and lack of love can impel 9, Christian to split the unity of the church (c. Cresc. iv. 59. 71 ; c. litt. Petil. ii. 77. 172). The declaration of Augustine is not, how- ever, inspired by hierarchial motive, but rests ultimately upon the thought that it is only in the Catholic church that the Spirit and love are bestowed upon man. But the saints are to be found only in the Catholic church. In this connection, Augustine championed the motto, Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, no less positively than Cyprian ; but, at the same time — ^as a result of the different character of the opposition — displayed less of hierarchical in- terest than the latter (cf. Reuter, 1. c, p. 253 ff. ), ((5) The idea of the Roman Primacy likewise receives no special elucidation at the hands of Augustine. We find a gen- eral acknowledgment of the ** primacy of the apostolic chair " (e. g,, ep. 43. 7), but Augustine knows nothing of any special authority vested in Peter or his successors. Peter is a ** figure of the church " or of the '^ good pastors," and represents the unity of the church (serm. 295. 2 ; 147. 2). In this consists the significance of his position and that of his successors (thus also Cyprian, p. 183). As all bishops (in contradistinction from the ^ £'g.f it is manifest, faith admits it, the Catholic church approves it, it is true (serm. 117. 4. 6). DONATISTIC CONTROVERSY. 319 Scriptures) may err (unit. eccl. ii. 28), so also the Roman bishop. This view is plainly manifest from the bearing of Augustine and his colleagues in the Pelagian controversy (vid. p. 355 f., cf. ep. 177, 191 ; pecc. orig. 21. 24, cf. 8. 9). The infallible authority of the pope in the church at large was a dogma in which only the popes believed (vid. the letters of Innocent, p. 355 ; cf. as to Leo, p. 268, and Callistus, p. 177). Dogmatically, there had been no advance from the position of Cyprian. The Africans, in their relations with Rome, played somewhat the role of the Gallicanism of a later period (cf. Reuter, p. 291 ff.). (c) The opposition between the Donatistic and Catholic churches was based upon their different conceptions of the sacra- ments. From the time of the Council of Aries (p. 314), the great point of discussion was whether baptism and ordination administered by an unworthy person retained their validity. Augustine's views concerning the sacraments, by an inner neces- sity, determined his attitude upon this question (cf. Reuter, p. 278). The sacraments are gifts of God, and the moral condi- tion of the administrator cannot detract from the value of the gift conveyed : "What he gives is, nevertheless, real {yeriini), if he gives not what is his own, but God's " (c. litt. Pet. ii. 30. 69; unit. eccl. 21. 58). Only thus is the result certain, and sal- vation dependent upon God, not upon men. It is not the intercession of men, but that of Christ, which helps us (c. litt. Pet. i. 3. 4; c. ep. Parm. ii. 8. 16). *' No reason is shown why he who cannot lose baptism itself can forfeit the right of administering it. For each is a sacrament, and each is given to man by the same consecration — the one when he is baptized, and the other when he is ordained : therefore, in the Catholic church neither dare be repeated" (c. ep. Parm. ii. 12. 28). This is ex- plained by the fact that these sacraments impart to the recipient a permanent character : ** just as baptism, so ordination 7'emains 7<;'/;(7/^ in them " (ib.). Baptism and ordination impress upon man a fixed " dominical character.' ^'^ This military form of ex- pression implies that, as there is a military brand (^nota militai-is') whose significance continues through the whole life, so also baptism and ordination have a perpetual and indelible (the term employed in the Middle Ages) force for the recipient (c. ep. Parm. ii. 13. 29). There remains in him something sacred, z. sanctum. The spirit is preserved to him, not in a moral sense, but in the sense of an official equipment. He may have committed heinous ^ Augustine introduced this terra into theology. He was also the first to use the expression obicetn opponere (ep. 98. 9). 3-0 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. crimes — may have severed himself from the church, yet this char- acter once impressed upon him remains, and the sacraments ad- ministered by him retain their force. If he be converted, there is no need for a repetition of the sacrament (c. ep. Parm. ii. ii. 24; 13. 28 f.; bapt. iv. 12. 18; vi. i. i ; de symbol. 8. 15; de bon. conjug. 24. 32: '*in those ordained, the sacrament of ordination remains; " bapt. vi. 5. 7 ; in i Joh. tract. 5. 7). It is evident that this character indelebilis may be employed as the most telling argument against Donatism ; but it also brought Augustine into new difficulties. If the sacraments have be- stowed such a character, how can objection be brought against the Donatistic church ? It was necessary, therefore, to maintain the validity of the Donatist sacraments, and yet to condemn them as seriously defective. This was accomplished by discrim- inating between the sacrament itself and the effectiis or usus sacramenti. By failing to observe this distinction, Cyprian and others were led to the n'iqv^ "• that the baptism of Christ cannot exist among heretics or schismatics." By observing it, we may say : ** its effect or use, in liberation from sin and in rectitude of heart, could not be found among heretics" (bapt. vi. i. i). Baptism imparts to the recipient an abiding character, but if he do not live in the church, the ^* effect " in the forgiveness of sin does not follow. The baptism cannot, indeed, be repeated ; but only when the individual is converted to the unity of the true church does it become effectual : *' He who has received the baptism of Christ, which they have not lost who have separated themselves ... in any heresy or schism, in which sacrilegious crime his sins were not remitted, when he shall have reformed and come to the fellowship and unity of the church, is not to be again baptized, because in this very reconciliation and peace it is offered to him, that the sacrament which, when received in schism, could not benefit, shall now in the unity (of the church) begin to benefit him for the remission of his sins" (bapt. i. 12. 18 ; V. 8. 9 ; vi. 5. 7). In the case of ordination, it was held that the character remains, bringing, however, to the individual himself not blessing, but the contrary : '*the Holy Spirit . . . fails, indeed, to effect his salvation ... yet does not desert his ministry, by which he works through him the salvation of others" (c. Parm. ii. 11. 24; de bon. conjug. 24. 32). By this means the Donatist theory is discountenanced and, at thef same time, the necessity of the return of its adherents to the Catholic church is made evident. (^iT) The means by which the church is built up are the sacra- ments, especially baptism and the Lord's Supper, and also the Word. *' Blood and water flowed (Jn. 19. 34), which we know DONATISTIC CONTROVERSY. 32 I to be the sacraments by which the church is built up " (civ. dei, xxii. 17). ''God begets sons from the church . . . we are, therefore, spiritually born, and we are born in the Spirit byword and sacrament. The Spirit is present, that we may be born ' ' (in Joh. tract. 12. 5; serm. 88. 5; ep. 21. 3). The term, sacramentum — corresponding exactly to ixtxsxripiov — is applied also to other ecclesiastical acts, such as confirmation (bapt. v. 20. 28; c. Faustum xix. 14), the presentation of the consecrated salt to catechumens (de catechizandis rudibus, 26. 50), ordina- tion (bon. conjug. 24. 32 ; c. ep. Farm. ii. 13. 28; cf. supra), exorcism (serm. 27). But the proper sacraments are the two Avhich proceeded from the side of Christ (civ. dei, xv. 26. i ; in Joh. tract. 15. 8 ; 120. 2 ; 50. 12 ; doctr. christ. iii. 9. 13), to which is to be added ordination. The representation of the divine agency exerted is essentially the same in the word and in the sacraments.^ The human transaction is accompanied by a divine, inwardly effectual act. The word is read in the hearing of others, preached, sung, and chanted by men : ** we enjoy the hearing of it, the truth speaking to us without sound in- wardly " (in Joh. tr. 57. 3 ; 40. -5 ; 71,. i ; 77- 2 ; bapt. v. 11. 24). Augustine is thus the first to formulate a doctrine of the word as a means of grace. The problem is here presented, how the spoken human word can be the medium through which the divine Spirit operates. In the same way in the sacra- ments as in the word, men work outwardly, God inwardly (c. ep. Farm. ii. 11; bapt. v. 21. 29; ep. 98. 2: *' the water, therefore, presenting the sacrament of grace outwardly, and the Spirit inwardly effecting the benefit of grace"). It is to be, however, here noted that the outward observance of the sacrament and the inner work of grace do not always correspond (bapt. iv. 25. 32; in Lev. iii., quaest. 84; enarr. in. ps. 77. 2). We are now in position to define Augustine' s conception of a sac- rament. We must, first of all, discriminate carefully between the outward sign and the inward power and efficacy : ' ' the sacra- ment is one thing, the virtue of the sacrament another " (in Joh. tr. 26. 11). Viewed in the first aspect, the sacrament is purely symbolical. Thereare needed, says Augustine, in genuine Neo- Platonic spirit, in religious associations * ' signs {signacula) or vis- ible sacraments" (c. Faust, xix. 11). The visible signs are symbols of an invisible content: "they are, indeed, visible signs of divine things, but in them are to be honored the invis- ible things themselves" (de cat. rud. 26. 50). **They are called sacraments, because in them one thing is seen, another thing ^ Even the word is included among the signs [sig-na), doctr. christ. ii. 3. 21 322 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. understood" (serm. 272). The symbol has at the same time a certain resemblance to that which it represents (ep. 98. 9). Ac- cordingly, the visible symbols become what they are through the interpreting word : ''the word comes to {accedit) the element and it becomes {Jit) a sacrament — itself also, as it werCj a visible word." The ''^ fit^'' is used here not in the objective, but purely in the subjective sense : '* Whence is there in the water such virtue that it can touch the body and purify the heart, unless the word effects this ? — not because it is spoken, but because it is be- HevciV (in Joh. tr. 80. 3). In the light of this explanation, Augustine would seem to have a purely symbolical view of the sacrament ; and it is beyond doubt that the Neo-Platonic caste of his thought at least inclined him in this direction. But we must not overlook the fact, that an actual ex-ertion of divine energy, as a rule, accompanies the sacrament. God really forgives sins in bap- tism, in it, as in ordination, imprinting a character upon the recip- ient. In the Lord's Supper there is really an effectual refreshment {salubris refectio) in the Lord's flesh and blood. Thus to drink is to live \ a spiritual eating and drinking accompanies the visible reception (serm. 131. i). The two-fold aspect of the sacramen- tal theory of the ancient church here comes into distinct promi- nence : The sacraments are purely symbols, but the reception of the sacraments brings real, objective exertions of divine energy. In Augustine, indeed, the whole conception is wavering, since there is no fixed connection between the sacrament and the gra- cious divine energy. Here, too, is felt the influence of his theory of predestination. As to the sacraxnental character , see p. 319- (^) The peculiarities of the separate sacraments may be briefly stated, (a) Baptism, as the sacramentum remissionis peccatorumj (bapt. V. 21. 29) works the forgiveness of sins, primarily the forgiveness of the guilt of original concupiscence ; in this con- sists its chief efficacy (cf. p. 314)- Augustine frequently speaks of a blotting out of sins (). But this idea was obscured by the penitential discipline (vid. sub) and by the relatively unimportant place of the forgiveness of sins in the UONATISTIC CONTROVERSY. 323 consciousness of Augustine (p. 346f. ). Compare Dieckhoff, 1. c, p. 536 ff. ). (/3) In contradistinction from Ambrose {e. g., de fide iv. 10. 124: ''through the mystery of the sacred prayer they are transfigured into flesh and blood "), the symbohcal char- acter of the sacraments comes in Augustine into distinct promi- nence : " The Lord did not hesitate to say, ' This is my body,' when he gave the sign of his body " (c. Adimantum Manich. 12. 3 ; in ps. 3. i): The blessing, or gift, of the sacrament iscon- ceived in harmony with this. The body of the Lord is the mystic body, or the church : '' hence he wishes the food and drink to be understood as the fellowship {societas) of his body and of his members, which is the holy church " (in Joh. tr. 26. 15, 14; serm, 272; civ. dei, xxi. 25. 2); or, ''this is, there- fore, to eat that food and to drink that drink — to remain in Christ and to have him remaining in us " (in Joh. tr. 26. 18 ; civ. dei, xxi. 25. 4). Augustine can even say that the eating of the body of the Lord is "delightfully and profitably to store away in memory that his flesh was wounded and crucified for us ' ' (doctr. christ. iii. 16. 24).^ It is true, there are not wanting passages in which Augustine expresses himself differently and more fully, speaking of the reception of the body of Christ, etc. (^. g., serm. 131. i ; bapt. v. 8. 9); but his real thought is even here not that which the words seem to convey, although he still has in mind the bestowaland reception of a real gift. Thus Augus- tine's theory of the Lord's Supper has more of a really religious character than his doctrines of baptism and grace, since the per- sonal nature of fellowship with God here finds due recognition. It is to be observed, further, that in the view of Augustine, Christ is, indeed, omnipresent according to his divine nature, but ac- cording to his human nature he is in one place in heaven {iibique totmn praesentem esse non dubites tanquam deu)n . . et in loco aliqtio caeli propter veri corporis mo diim, ep. 187. 12. 41). In this again we see the model after which the medieval theories were patterned. The genius of Augustine is manifest in his in- terpretation of the sacrifice of the mass : the congregatio sancto- rum presents itself to God in good works under its head, Christ. " This is the sacrifice of Christians : Many one body in Christ" * I purposely omit the famous passage which is usually cited in this connec- tion (by Loscher already, in the Weimar edition, ii. 742): '* Why preparest thou the teeth and the stomach ? Believe, and thou hast eaten" (in Joh. tr. 25. 12), for, in the context in which this occurs, the author has not the Lord's Supper in mind. The food to which he refers is the God-given command- ment, to believe on Christ ; and in order to receive (eat) this, the teeth are not needed, but faith. Compare the similar statements (ib. 26, i): " for to believe in him, this is to eat living bread ; " "he who believes eats ; *' and 35. 3 : ** with the mind, not with the stomach." 324 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. (civ. dei, x. 6). Of which thing [the sacrifice of Christ] he wished the sacrifice of the church (which, since it is the body of him, the Head, teaches that it offers itself through him) to be a daily sacrament [symbolical imitation] (ib. x. 20). (;') As to the sacrament of ordination, see p. 319 f., and cf. Reuter I.e., 253, 264 ff. (/) But we have thus far seen but one side of Augustine's conception of the church. When we remember that the infu- sion of the Spirit and of love makes the Christian (p. 347 f. ),we realize that we are brought to face another line of thought, (a) The good, who have the Spirit and love, constitute among them- selves a communion (^congregaHo, compages'). These saints are the unspotted bride of Christ, hisdove, and the house of God, the rock upon which the Lord builds his church, the church which possesses the power to loose and bind (unit. eccl. 21. 60; c. litt. Pet. ii. 58. 246; bapt. vii. 51. 99). It is not being outwardly in the church, nor partaking of the sacraments, that decides, but be- longing to the church in this sense : ' * Nor are they to be thought to be in the body of Christ, which is the church, because they become corporeally participants in its sacraments . . . they are not in the union {^compages') of the church, which, in the mem- bers of Christ, grows through connection and contact to the in- crease of God*' (c. litt. Pet. 1. c. ), It is this communion of the saints,^ united by the Spirit and love, through whose intercession sins are forgiven, and through whose mediation the gifts of grace are bestowed. To it, and not to the officials of the church, are given these great promises. *'God gives the sacrament of grace, indeed, through evil men, but not grace itself except through himself or through his saints. And, therefore, he effects remission of sins either through himself or through the members of that dove, to whom he says : If to anyone ye remit, they are remitted'* (bapt. v. 21. 29). *' Or does the sacrament and a secret dispensation of the mercy of God, perhaps, through the prayers of the spiritual saints who are in the church, as through the continuous cooing of the dove, accomplish the great thing, that even the sins of those who have been baptized, not by the 1 The term, communio sanctorum, is found m the first canon of the Council at Nimes (A. D. 394. Hefele, CG. ii., ed. 2, 62) and among the Donatists (Aug. in ps. -^6 ; serm. 2. 20 and opp. xvii. 2532). In Augustine's own writ- ings, serm. 52. 3. 6; cf. congregatio sanctorum (civ. dei, x. 6; bapt. i. 17. 26); communis unitatis corporis Christi {h^i.'^i. i. 4. 5); societas credentium (bapt. vii. 53. 102); Christiana societas (c. litt. PetiL ii. 39. 94); bonorum societas (ib. ii. 77. 174); also communio malorum (bapt. vii. 25. 49). At a later date, as is well known, it appears in the Creed (Nicetas v. Romatiana in Caspari, Anecdota, 355. Faust, v. Riez, ib. li%, Ps. Aug. serm. 240, 241, 242 ; cf. vol. xvii. i960). DONATISTIC CONTROVERSY. 325 dove but by the hawk, are remitted? " (ib. iii. 17.22; 18. 23). This is the essence of the communion of the good and pious : They love God and one another, and they pray for the church. This is the 'invisible union {compages) of love " (bapt. iii. 19. 26; de unit. eccl. 21. 60) with the invisible anointing of love {unctio caritatisj c. litt. Petil. ii. 104. 239). Butthis exists, and is conceivable, only within the Catholic church, separation from which is at once a renunciation of the Spirit and of love (ep. 141. 5, and citations on p. 318). Only in the Catholic church is the spirit of love thus present. But Augustine here thinks not only of the efficacious working of the sacrament, but also, and particularly, of the working of the Spirit upon the spiritual life through the personal fellowship of the believing and holy with one another. He has not, therefore, yet reached the position of medieval Catholicism. (;3) But is not the church then split into two churches, the mixed church of the present and the pure church of the future (Donatist criticism, brev. iii. 10. 19)? Augustine meets this objection with a variety of illustrations. The question is one solely of a present relationship. Good and evil are com- mingled in the church. According to the instructions of Christ, the latter cannot be outwardly excluded, although they are in- wardly entirely separated from the pious (c. ep. Farm. iii. 2. 12 ; c. Cresc. iii. 65. 73; bapt. vi. 3. 5; vii. 51. 99), just as are heretics : *' Whether they seem to live within or are openly with- out, that which is flesh is flesh. . . . And even he who in car- nal obduracy is mingled with the congregation of the saints is always separated from the unity of that church which is without spot or wrinkle ' * (bapt. i. 17. 26; alsovii. 51. 99 extr. ). But: '* he tolerates the wicked in comnmnione sanctoru7n ' ' (serm. 214. 11). It is a relationship like that between the wheat and the tar^s upon the same threshing-floor (bapt. v. 21. 29); between belonging to a house and being in the house (ib. vii. 51. 99); between the outerand the inner man (brev. iii. 10. 20); or even : ' ' thus there are in the body of Christ in some way evil humors ' ' (in I Joh. tr. 3. 4). We may, therefore, speak of '* the true and the commingled, or counterfeited, body of the Lord, " or of a ''commingled church." Hence, in the proper sense, the church consists of only the good and holy : the wicked and heretics only apparently belong to it by virtue of the temporal commingling and the communion of the sacraments " (doctr. christ. iii. 32. 45). We can see that Augustine takes some account of the de- mand of the Donatists ; but he effects only in thought the^sepa- ration which they sought to reahze in fact. '^We understand the departure (^recessio) spiritually, they corporeally " (serm. 88. 326 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. 20. 23). From a critical point of view, the Donatistic objection is not without justification, for the church of the sacraments and the church of grace can only with the greatest difficulty be in- tellectually harmonized. (;') This difficulty is intimately connected with Augustine's definition of grace, and it becomes still more serious when the doctrine of predestination is taken into account. '* The invisi- ble union of love " is not identical with the *' number of the predestinated. ' ' As the latter may extend beyond the bounds of the church (p. 351), so, on the contrary, some may belong to the church who are not in the number of the predestinated, and, therefore, do not have the ** gift of perseverance " (corr, etgrat. 9. 22; don. pers. 2. 2). Practically, indeed, Augustine did not realize this discrepancy any more than that between the in- ward and the outward church. That it nevertheless exists, can- not be denied, although Augustine only occasionally combines the conceptions, church and predestination.^ We may, accord- ingly, speak of a two-fold, or even a three-fold, definition of the church in Augustine. Cf, Reuter, 1. c, p. 47 ff. Seeberg, 1. c, 49 ff. (^) It must be mentioned, finally, that Augustine applied the term, kingdom of god, also to the church of the present, whereas the ancient church, as represented in other teachers, regarded the kingdom as the result and goal of the church's development,^ looking to the future for the highest good. But Augustine says : *'The church is even now the kingdom of Christ and the king- dom of heaven" (civ. dei, xx. 9. i ; cf. de fid. et op. 7. 10 j serm. 213. 7; 214. 11). This utterance means primarily only that the saints are the kingdom of Christ and reign with him. But this dominion is at once attributed to the leaders (^praepo- siti) ''through whom the church is now governed*' (ib. § 2). The kingdom of God is thus for Augustine essentially identical with the pious and holy ; but it is also the episcopally organized church. The contrast between the city of God {civitas dei) and the city^ of 1 We read, de bapt. v. 27. 28 : The church as an enclosed garden, paradise, etc. , consists of the jawf^z and y«j/2. Then appears as equivalent: " the cer- tain predestinated number of saints," and from this again: *'the number of the just." Yet many of the predestinati are now living carnally and unworthily — are heathen and heretics. And yet these are all to be considered as included in the enclosed garden, the church, which originally consisted of the holy and righteous. Cf. Seeberg, p. 53. 2 Vid., e. g,. Did. 10. 5. Cypr. de op. et eleem. 9; de unit. eccl. 14. Hieron. adv. lovin. ii. 19, Also Augustine himself, serm. 13 1. 6. 6 ; esp. brev. coUat. iii. lo. 20 ; 9. 16. 8 Cisjitas is here used as meaning **city" (civ. dei, xv. i. 25), a signifi- cation which in general historical connections passes over into that of ** state." Vid. Reuter, p. 131 f. DONATISTIC CONTROVERSY. 327 the world {^civitas viundi) , or of the devil, is for him that between Christanity and heathenism (in the first lo books): between the good and the bad, including the devil and angels (civ. dei, xii. i ; 27, 2), or between the saintsandthewicked even within the church; between the spiritual and the carnal, the love of God and self-love, grace and nature, those foreordained to glory or to torment (^. g. . XX. 9, 3 ; xiv. I ; 4. 2 ; 28 ; xv. i. 2 j 16. 3). The evil world is never represented, indeed, as itself equivalent to the state. But since the civitas dei may be and is conceived as the empirical church, the reader very naturally thinks of the civitas mundi concretely as equivalent to the state (^. g., xiv. 28 ; xv. 4 ; i. 35). This is encouraged by the fact that, although Augustine "recognizes the necessity of the (Christian) state and the civil law (xv. 4 in Joh. tr. 6. 25 f ), yet everything really and per- manently good is found upon the side of the church. From this it follows, that it is the duty of the state to execute the commandments of Christ, or of the church (xv. 2, ep. 138. 2. 14; 105. 3. 11). From this point of view, Augustine — in conflict with his earlier convictions (ep. 93. 5. 17) — desired the state to employ force against Donatists and heretics: ** Compel them to come in" (Lk. 14. 23 ; vid. ep. 93 and 185 in Joh. tr. 11. 14). Here, as so frequently, he falls into the current of the popular Chris- tianity of the day. The great work upon the ** City of God" — capable of many interpretations (a double line of aims and means running through the work, just as through Plato's ''State ' ' ) — became the criterion for the development of the church polity of the Middle Ages. Cf. Reuter, p. in f Such, in outline, was Augustine's conception of the church. The power of the historic Catholic tradition, the opposition of the Donatists, the fundamental tendency of his doctrine of grace, the predestination theory, and a grandly broad view of the course of history — were the threads woven into the texture. In it the best and the worst elements appear side by side. It is Evan- gelical and Catholic ; superior to the world and compromising with the world \ at once, true and untrue. Theoretically contem- plated, it is a malformation without parallel : practically consid- ered, a redundancy of large conceptions and impulses — not an organism, but a vessel full of fermenting elements. Augustine prepared the way for the medieval ecclesiasticism ; but he also revived and gave practical efficacy to a central idea of primitive Christianity — the present kingdom of God. He embraced the many treasures of Christianity in the one treasure — the kingdom of God, and thus made them concrete and histori- cally visible. He also, in his conception of the church, saved from the confusion of Donatistic ideas the primitive truth of the 3^^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. church as the communion of saints. In connection with this, he definitely asserted the natural character of the charis77iata. The Spirit, who creates new life, is the great gift of divine grace to the church. It may be said that Augustine was the first since Paul to renounce the grace of visions, dreams, and inner sugges- tions (cf. Cyprian and the Donatists), since he understood grace as consisting in the spirit of love animating the church. Not only could Rome appeal to Augustine, but the Evangelical theory of the church finds in him as well a champion. § 31. Establishment of the Doctrine of Sin and Grace in the Conflict with Pelagianism. Literature. Walch, Ketzerhistorie iv. v. Wiggers, Pragmat. Dars- tellung d. Augustinismus u. Pelagianismus, 2 vols., 1821, 1833. Jacoei, Die Lehre des Pelag., 1842. W5RTER, Der Pelagianismus, 1866. Klasen, Die innere Entwicklung d. Pelagianismus, 1882. Dieckhoff, Aug. Lehre v. d. Gnade, in Theol. Ztschr. von Dieckhoff u. Kliefoth, i860, p. II ff. Lan- DERER, Das Verhaltniss v. Gnade u. Freiheit, Jarbb. f. deutsche Theol., 1857. P- 500 ff. Luthardt, Die Lehre vom fr. Willen u. sein Verh. zur Gnade, 1S63. Rottmanner, Augustinismus, 1892. Dorner, Augustin, p. 113 ff. Hefele, CG. ii., ed. 2, 104 ff. Reuter, Augustin. Studien, p. 4ff. ; Thomasius, DG. i., ed. 2, 456 ff. Harnack, DG. iii. 151 ff. Worter, Beitrage zur DG. des Pelagianismus, 1898. I . Divergences of the Eastern and Western Churches. We have had occasion to observe (§ 27) that the Eastern church laid great emphasis upon the freedom of the natural man. This is done especially in moral exhortations, while, at the same time, when treating of the work of redemption, the state of the natural man was often depicted in the darkest colors {e. g., by Athanasius). We must bear in mind that the attitude of the Greeks toward the problem of free-Avill was fundamentally differ- ent from that of the Latins. They began with the intellect, to which the will was simply subordinate, as an organ through which it operates. Whatever a man thinks, that he is also able to will. The Romans, on the contrary, assign an independent position to the will. In the utterances of such a practical Greek teacher as Chrysostom, we find indeed both conceptions embodied, but that of human freedom holds the place of prominence: '* For God created our nature self-controlling" (aore^outno^j in Genes, hom. 19). Accordingly, it is only the separate acts of man that are regarded as evil. There is no sinful habitus: "Thou shouldst not acknowledge any substantial {^ivoTzofjraro^') power, but the evil deed, always coming into being and vanishing, not existing before it has occurred, and disap- pearing again after it has occurred" (in Rom. hom. 12). The BOCTRINE OF SIN AND GRACE. 329 result of the fall for us is that, as Adam thereby became mortal, so his descdhdants are also mortal (horn, in ps. 51). The concep- tion of grace is in harmony with this view. Man makes the be- ginning in that which is good, and grace comes to his aid : " For it is necessary that we first choose the good, and when we have chosen it, then he also brings his part. He does not anticipate our wishes, in order that our freedom may not be destroyed. But when we have chosen, then he brings great help to us . . . it is ours to choose beforehand and to will, but it is God's to ac- complish and lead to the result" (in Heb. h. 12 ; in Rom. h, 16; in Joh. h. 17). This expresses very fairly the position of the Eastern church, in which, moreover, the conception of grace itself becomes confused by its connection with the worship of the mysteries. Cf. Forster, Chrysostomus, 1869, pp. 6^ ff., 139 ff. August, c. Jul. i. 6. 21 ff. In contrast with the above, we may place the teaching of a Western theologian, Ambrose (f A. D. 397), the forerunner of Augustine upon the subject of sin and grace. In his conception of sin we can still trace the beginnings of a doctrine of original sin which we discovered in Tertullian, Cyprian, and Commodian (pp. 122 f., 193).^ {a) In his practical addresses, Ambrose also oc- casionally used strong language in placing the responsibility for evil deeds upon the free will of man (^. ^., enarr. in ps. i, § 30 ; de Jac. et vit. beata i. 10). But his thought is dominated by the view, that through the fall of Adam we come into the world as sinners, that sin is an attribute which belongs to us from our conception, and that we, therefore, being from the outstart sinful, must sin even when for the time being we do not desire to sin : * * Adam was, and in him we all were. Adam perished, and in him we all perished " (in Luc. vii. 234, 164). ''I fell in Adam, I was in Adam ejected from paradise, I died in Adam " (de excessu fratr. sui Satyri ii. 6).^ ** No one at all who has been born under sin can be saved, whom that very inheritance of ^ Hilary at this point betrays the influence of the Greeks, e. g., in ps. 118 lit. N. 20 : ** There is, indeed, in faith a gift of continuance from God ; but the source of the beginning is from us, and our will ought to have this of itself as its own, that it wills. God will give an increase of the beginning, because our infirmity does not through itself attain the consummation ; nevertheless, the merit of reachingthe consummation is, from the beginning, of the will." Yet he uses also the term, vitiutn originis^ and says : * ' In the error of the one Adam, the whole race of men went astray" (in ps. 119 lit. N. 20; P. 6; in Matt. i8. 6). Cf. Landerer, 1. u., p. 591 i. ^ Cf. also the so-called Ambrosiaster upon Rom. \. 12: " It is manifest that in Adam all sinned, as it were, in the mass ; for all whom he who was himself corrupted through sin begat were bom under sin ; from him, therefore all are sinners, because from him we all are." Vid. also the (apparently not Ambrosian) Apol. ii., David, §71. 33° HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. guilty condition has constrained to sin " (in ps. 38,^ 29). ** Be- fore we are born we are defiled by contagion, and before we enjoy the light we receive the injury of our very origin ; we are con- ceived in iniquity." In response to the question, whether this last assertion relates to the mother or to the child, it is said : '* But see whether it may not be known which. The one con- ceived is not without sin, since the parents are not without fault. And, if the infant of one day is not without sin, much more are all the days of maternal conception not without sin. We are conceived, therefore, in the sin (^peccato) of our parents and in their faults {^delictis') we are born ' ' (apol. David, 11. 56) . Hence also : ' ' We are led unwilling and reluctant into guilt ' ' (^culpani), and : ' * For our heart and our meditations are not in our power ' ' (de fuga seculi i. i ; ii. 9). According to these citations, Am- brose really taught the propagation of Adam's sin; but we do not find in his writings the idea of the imputation of Adam's guilt to the race sprung from him. He recognizes a physi- cal, but not a moral, original sin (cf. Forster, Ambr., p. 154 f.)- (/?) As to his doctrine of grace, we note that Ambrose very strongly emphasized the activity of grace, but yet knows nothing of its alone-activity. *' He who follows Christ, when asked why he resolved to be a Christian, can respond : ' It seemed good to me' " (Lk. i. 3). '' When he says this, he does not deny that it seemed good to God, for the will of men \% prepared by God. For that God may be worshiped by a saint is from the grace of God " (in Luc. i. 10). But also : '^ By free will we are either disposed toward virtue or inchned toward vice. And, therefore, either free affection draws us toward error, or the will, following reason, recalls us " (Jac. etvit. beat. i. i; de poenit. ii. 9. 80). It is Christ, coming to us and into us, who effects this" (in Luc. X. 7). But this occurs chiefly through baptism. The efficacy of the latter is seen in the blotting out of iniquity {iniquitas, the sinful habitus'), the forgiveness of sins, and the bringing of the gift of spiritual grace (^spiritualis gratiae munus') (apol. Dav. 13. 62): ''Thus perfect virtue destroys iniquity, and the remission of sins every sin " (de myst. 4. 20 ; ep. 7. 20 ; 41. 7 ; in Luc. ii. 79). If, indeed, after the manner of the ancient church, room is here found for the blotting out of sins by the endow- ment with new spiritual power, yet Ambrose could, nevertheless, write : ** I will not glory because I am righteous, but I will glory because I have been redeemed. I will glory, not because I am empty of sins, but because my sins have been forgiven me " (Jac. et vit.; b. i. 6. 21 ; cf. in ps. 44. i ; ep. 73. to). It is easily seen that this forerunner of Augustine was not unac- DOCIRINE OF SIN AND GRACE. 33I quainted with Paul.^ We find in him, it is true, a certain syner- gism. But while the Eastern theologians represent man as mak- ing the beginning for the attainment of salvation, and then ascribe a synergia to God, here it is God who begins the work, and the synergia is upon the part of man. The Eastern teachers think of a divine, the Western of a human synergy. Cf. FOrster, Ambrosius, 1884, p. 139 ff. Deutsch, Des Ambros. Lehre von der Siinde u. Siindentilgung, 1867 (Program of the Joachimsthal Gymn. in Berlin). EwALD, Der Einfluss der stoisch-ciceron. Moral auf die Darstel- lung der Ethik bei Ambr., 1881. 2. Pelagius and Pelagianism. Sources. Pelagius, epistula ad Demetriadem in the Works of Jerome, ed. Vallarsi, xi. 2. i ff. Ep. ad Livaniam, in fragments only in Augustine and Jerome. Marius Mercator, in his Commonitorium super nomine Caelestii, and in the Liber subnotationum in verba Juliani. Eulogiarum liber, fragments ^ We must not fail to note also the remarkable teaching of the monk, JoviNiAN (in Rome and Milan, about A. D. 390), although the sources do not enable us to form a perfectly reliable opinion in regard to him. Jovinian made a vigorous assault upon the low estimation of marriage, in which the in- fluence of Manichieism and heathenism was so plainly seen ; maintained the moral equality of marriage and celibacy, as also of fasting and the receiving of food with thankfulness ; and asserted an equality of reward for all believers (Jerome adv. Jovin. 1. ii. 5 ff- ). A difficulty meets us in his assertion (ib. i. 3 ) : ' * That those who have been with full faith regenerated in baptism cannot be subverted by the devil" (in ii. 1, "cannot be tempted," or, according to Julian of Eclanum, who had read the work of Jovinian, "cannotsin ;" vid. Aug. op. imperf. i. 98 ) . It is beyond question that Jovinian expresses this view, but it is also to be observed that he does so with appeal to Jn. iii. 9 ; v. 18 (ii. i), and that he did not deny to the baptized the possibility of repentance : " Al- though ye have fallen, irepentance will restore you " (ii. 37). His real opinion can scarcely be other than that expressed in ii. 27 : " But if the Father and the Son make their abode with believers, where Christ is guest, ikere can be nothing lacking." Hence, they in whom Christ dwells, who are baptized and believe, are good, and fundamentally free from sin. They constitute the one true church (ii. 18, 20, 27 ; i. 2). So far as their salvation is concerned, it matters not whether they are married or unmarried, whether they fast or not; and every sin is of equal guilt (n. 30 f. ). They shall receive at last the same reward. It must be noted, however, that he taught that ** before baptism it is possible to siu or not iosin''^ (Julian, 1. c), and : " But whoever shall yield to tempta- tion {tentati fuerini) are proved to have been baptized by water only and not by the Spirit, as we read of Simon ^lagus" (ii. l). That the former of these citations represents his view cannot well be doubted, and it proves that his theory of sin was not as yet of the Ambrose- Augustinian type. It is surprising that Jerome does not take more advantage from the second. Jovtinian proba- bly means that baptism is of immediate (vid. ii. 37) benefitonly when received in faith ( i. 3 ) . The student of the History of Doctrines will note in Jovinian premonitions of the interest soon to be awakened in the great problems dis- cussed by Augustine. Upon Jovinian, vid. Neander, KG. ii. 2, p. 574 ff. GRttTZMACHER, PRE. ix., ed. 3, 398 ff. Harnack, Die Lehre v. d. Seligk. allein durch den Gl. in d. alt. K., in Ztschr. f. Theol. u. K., 1891, p. 138 ff. W. Haller, Jovinianus, 1897. 332 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. in Augustine, de gestis Pelagii, and in Jerome in his Dial. c. Pelag. Frag- ments of the work of Pelagius, De natura, in Augustine's De nat. et grat. Of Pelagius, De libero arbitrio, 11, 4, also only fragments in Augustine. Com- mentary upon the Pauline epistles in the works of Jerome (Migne, 30. 645- 902). Libellus fidei ad Innocentium in Hahn, Bibl. der Symbole, ed. 3, p. 2S8ff. Of the many writings of Caelestius only fragments remain, especially from the Definitiones in Augustine's de perfectione justit. His confession of faith is found in the Appendix to the works of Augustine, xvii. 2728 ff. Vid. also citations in Marius Mercator (Migne, 48. 65 ft". ). Of 'Julian of Eclanum, who wrote Libri 4 and Libri 8 adversus Augus- tinum, we have very many fragments in August, c. Julianum, 11. 6, and espe- cially the Opus imperfectum. Vid. further the Confession, Hahn, ed. 3, p. 293 f., and Aug. opp. xvii. 272 ; also Marius Mercator (Migne, 48. 109 ff.). Further, the Pseudo-Augustinian work, De vita Christiana (opp. Aug. xvii. 1941), ascribed to Bishop Fastidius, and other writings (letters and trac- tates) perhaps belonging to a Briton, Agricola, in Caspari, Briefe, Abhand- lungenu. Predigten, etc., 1890, pp. 1-167. Vid. especially Opp. August, and Opp. Hieron. The Liber apologeticus of Orosius, ed. Zangemeister, p. 601 ff. Collections may be seen in M., Acta conciliorum iv,, and in the appendix to the works of Augustine, xvii. 2649 ff. Pelagius, a British monk of austere morality, began before the close of the fourth century to preach repentance with great earnestness. He seems to have been under Greek influence (Marius Liber, subnot. praef. i. 2).^ The starting-point of his exhortations was the natural moral ability of man. When con- fronted, as he speedily was, with the Augustinian : '^ Grant what Thou commandest, and command what Thou wilt ' ' (Aug, don. pers. 20), it but confirmed him in his theory and led him to express himself the more positively. Two fundamentally dif- ferent conceptions of Christianity were here brought into con- tact. The hitherto unharmonized doctrines of man's free will and the influence of divine grace presented a serious problem. Pelagius soon won, in the eloquent Caelestius, a disciple who stated the problems with keen discrimination and formulated them in a most aggressive way. Contemporaries spoke not without reason of the ^* Pelagian, or Caelestian, heresy." Their adherents were not few nor insignificant. After A. D. 418, the diplomatic and prudent Pelagius and the radical Caelestius were reinforced by the young bishop of Eclanum, Julian, a keen- witted but fundamentally rationalistic disputant, as champion of the new views. That these three men present a progressive de- velopment cannot be denied. The practical ideas of Pelagius are followed by the doctrinal formulation of Caelestius, and the con- 1 In the theory of sin, following Theodore of Mopsuestia, through the me- dium of a Syrian, Rufinus, who, according to Jerome (in Hierem., lib. i. i praef.), appears to be identical with Aquileia. Vid. also Aug., De pecc. orig. iii. 3. DOCTRINE OF SIN AND GRACE. ^;^^ captions of Julian, wrought out as component elements in his cosmogony, go beyond them both. As we are in other connections to follow the course of the controversy, we shall here attempt merely to set forth clearly the Pelagian view of Sin, Liberty, and Grace. *' Whenever I am called upon to speak upon moral training and the course of holy living, I am accustomed first to display the power and quality of human nature and show what it is able to accomplish, and. then from this to incite the mind of the hearer to (some) forms of virtues, lest it profit nothing to summon to those things which it would have thought to be impossible for it." In these words of Pelagius (ad Demetr. 2 init.) we recognize distinctly his moral temperament, (a) God has commanded man to do that which is good ; he must, therefore, have the ability to do it. That is to say, man is free, /. e. , it is possible for him to decide for or against that which is good : *' But we say that man is (always) able both to sin and not to sin, so that we confess ourselves to have always a free will " (Pel. in his confession). '* Freedom of th^ will . . . consists in the possibility of committing sin or of ab- staining from sin" (Jul. in Aug. op. imp. i. 78). This '* pos- sibility " has distinguished man ever since the creation : *' For God, wishing to endow (his) rational creature with the gift of voluntary good and with the power of free will, by implanting in man the possibility of either part, made that to be his own which he may choose, in order that, being by nature capable of good and evil, he might choose either and bend his will to either the one or the other" (Pel. ad Dam. 3, cf. de lib. arb. i., ii., in Aug. de gr. Chr. 18. 19; 4. 5).^ It, therefore, constitutes his essential nature, and is accordingly inamissible. Whether I will do good or do evil is a matter of my free will, but the freedom, **the possibility of this free will and of works," is from God: ^' By no means can I be without the possibility of good " (Pel. lib. arb. iii. in Aug. degr. Chr. 4. 5). The ideas of Pelagius move within the limits of this scheme of freedom of the will, a scheme alike insufficient as seen from the religious or the moral point of view. It follows from it, that there is no such thing as a moral development of the individual. Good and evil are located in the separate acts of men. The separate works finally decide whether a man is good or evil. But it is possible for one, by a free use of the *' possibility" of well-doing, to lead a holy life. This natural goodness {bonmn naturae)^ historically regarded, made very many heathen philosophers capable of the most lofty ' In this and the following citations from Augustine, the first figure refers to the chapter and the second to the numbered paragraph in the parallel notation. 334 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. virtues; how much more, then, may Christians expect from it? (Pel. ad Dem. 3. 7). There is no shrinking back from the in- ference, that an entirely sinless life is possible : ''I say that man is able to be without sin, . , but I do not say that man is without sin " (Pel. in Aug. nat. et grat. 7-8 ; de gr. Chr. 4. 5). Despite the cautious statement of the passage cited, this declara- tion was very sincerely interpreted by the Pelagians ; see Aug. de gest. Pel. 6. 16 ; ep. 156 (letter of Hilary from Syracuse to Augustine). Caelest. definitiones in Aug. de perfect, justit., and the Pelagian in Caspari, pp. 5. 114 ff. (ep. de possibilitate non peccandi). (^) From this position we can understand the doctrinal teaching concerning sin. This consists, as a matter of course, only in the separate acts of the will. There is no such thing as a sinful character or a sinful nature. Otherwise, sin would not be sin — not something which can be avoided ; and God could not charge sin to our account as guilt and punish it (Caelest. in Aug. perf. grat. 2. i ; 6. 15). Since sin cannot have been created by God, it is not a thing {res'), but an act (^actus) (ib. 2.4). It is a fault, not of nature, but of the will (in Aug. de pecc. orig. 6. 6; op. imp. i. 48). Man's peculiar nature, the justice of God, and the reality of sin, alike forbid us to speak of an ** original sin." If such were the nature of sin, a deliver- ance from it would be impossible : '^ Even if we should wish not to be able not to sin, we are not able not to be able not to sin, because no will is able to free itself from that which is proved to be inseparably implanted in (its) nature " (Pel. in Aug, nat. et grat. 49, 50, 57, 58). **If original sin be contracted by the generation of original nativity ... it cannot be taken away from infants, since that which is innate continues to the very end of him to whom it has adhered from the occasion of his ances- tors " (Jul. op. imp. i. 61). Inasmuch as sin consists only in separate acts of the will, the idea of its propagation by the act of generation is absurd. Adam was certainly the first sinner, but such a connection between his sin and ours cannot be estab- lished. The sins and guilt of parents no more pass over to their children than do those of children to their parents (op, imp. iii. 14, 19 f, ). '*If their own sins do not harm parents after their conversion, much more can they not through the parents injure their children*' (Pel. in Marius Com. 2, 10). The view of Augustine is habitually referred to by Julian as Manichseism {e. g., op', imp. vi. 10: **Your doctrine differs in nothing from the Manichseans "). In contravention of God's Word, it pronounces marriage and the desire for carnal intercourse sinful (de nupt. et concup. i. i, 2 ; ii. i. 2). Julian refuses to recog- DOCTRINE OF SIN AND GRACE. ^:^S nize Augustine's distinction between marriage {nuptiae) and concupiscence : *^ Natural sin within cannot be asserted without defamation of sexual intercourse " (op. imp. v. 5). Adam's little, childish sin (op. imp. vi. 21) is an act of disobedience which has only a temporary significance for him, /. e. , until his conver- sion (op. imp. vi. II f.), and none at all for us. Adam's death was not a punishment for sin, but only conformity to a law of nature (Aug. de gestis Pel. 11. 23 f.; op. imp. ii. 64, 93 f., but also vi. 30). Accordingly, new-born children are sinless, and baptism cannot in their case have any sin-remitting effect (vid. Caelest. in Aug. pecc. orig. 6. 6 ; Marius Lib. subnot. praef. v.; also Jul. op. imp. i. 53 : *' He bestows his gifts according to the capacity of the recipients").^ The passage, Rom. 5. 12, merely asserts *^ that sin has passed from the first man upon other men, not by propagation, but by imitation" (Aug. de peccator. meritis et remiss, i. 9. 9); or the term izavrz^ does not mean absolutely all (Aug. de nat. et grat. 41. 48). (r) This brings us to the Pelagian explanation of the univer- sality of sin, which all experience testifies. It is attributed to imitation, the '* long practice {longus usus) of sinning and the Jong habit (^longa consuefudo) of vices" (Pelag. ad Demetr. 8). * * For no other cause occasions for us the difficulty of doing good than the long custom of vices, which has infected us from child- hood, and gradually, through many years, corrupted us, and thus holds us afterward bound and addicted to itself, so that it seems in some way to have the force of nature " (ib. cf. 17 fin.). To this must be added the natural sensuous and worldly character of man (Pel. in Aug. de gr. Chr. 10. 11). This line of thought reveals the final conclusion reached by the naive Pelagianism of the Greeks : There are really no sinners, but only separate wicked acts. A religious conception of sin is hereby ex- cluded, and nothing more is needed than the effort to perform separate good deeds. But just as truly is a religious conception of the history of the race impossible, since there are no sinful men, but only wicked acts of individual men. (^) The religious and moral superficiality of this way of re- ^ It is of dograatico-historical interest to observe that the Pelagians were, on the one hand, charged with undermining infant baptism (Council of Car- thage, vid. Aug. ep. 157. 3. 22. Innocent in Aug. c. duas epp. Pel. ii. 4. 7 : '* They seem to me to wish to annihilate baptism itself " ) ; and that they were, on the other hand, very anxious to free themselves from the charge ( Aug. pecc, orig. ig. 21 ; c. duas epp. Pel. iv. 2. 2); the confession of faith of Pelagius and Julian, Caelestus, op. imp. iii. 146 ; i. 53 ; Hahn, Bibl. ed 3, 294, in refer- ence to which Augustine indeed says : " You fear to say, Let them not be baptized, lest not only your faces be defiled by the spittle of men, but your heads softened by the sandals of women" (c. Jul. iii. 5. 11). 33^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. garding the subject is very plainly manifest in the doctrine of grace. The necessity of grace for the attainment of salvation is not denied. On the contrary, Pelagius has declared that grace is needed ** not only for every hour or for every moment, but even for every separate act of ours" (Aug. de gr. Chr. 2. 2 ; 7. 8 ; 32. 36 ; de gest. Pel. 14. 31 ; PeL ep. ad Dem. 3 fin.; Jul. in op. imp. iii. 106 ; i. 52). Over against this affirmation of the *' help of grace, " or " di- vine assistance," Caelestius, indeed, declares in his fashion, ** that the will is not free if it needs the aid of God," and that ** our victory is not from the assistance of God, but from (our) free will" (Aug. de gest. Pel. 18. 42). This is but a blunt statement of the logical inference from the position of Pelagius. The latter wrote : ** grace is given in order that what is com- manded by God may be more easily fulfilled " (Aug. de gr. Chr. 26. 27), from which Augustine rightly infers : " that even with- out this, that which is divinely commanded can be done, although less easily. ' ' What do the Pelagians then understand by grace ? Really nothing more than the *' good of nature," or the endow- ment with free will, i. e., the possibility of doing good or evil. So Pelagius distinctly expressed himself at the council at Diospolis : '*this he calls the grace of God, that our nature, when it was created, received the possibility of not sinning, since it was created with a free will " (in Aug. de gest. Pel. 10. 22). The endowment with reason (Pel. ad Dem. 2) and free will is pri- marily grace. This was sufficient in the primitive age of the race (ib. 4 ff . 8). But when ignorance and the habit of sinning gained the upper hand among men, God gave the law (Pel. ad Dem. 8), and again, when the law proved too weak to break the power of evil habit, he gave the teachings and example of Christ (Aug. pecc. orig. 26. 30). Pelagius, indeed, writes: '^ We, who have been instructed through the grace of Christ and born again to better manhood, who have been expiated and purified by his blood, ^ and incited by his example to perfect righteous- ness, ought to be better than those who were before the law, and better also than those who were under the law " (ad Dem. 8); but the whole argument of this letter, where the topic is simply the knowledge of the law as a means for the promotion of virtue (9, 10, 13, 16, 20, 23), as well as the declaration, that God opens our eyes and reveals the future ' ' when he illuminates us with the multiform and ineffable gift of celestial grace " (Aug. de gr. Chr. 7. 8), proves that for him that the "assistance of God ' ' consists, after all, only in instruction. Augustine is correct ' The same idea occurs in Julian, op. imp. i. 171. DOCTRINE OF SIN AND GRACE. 337 in maintaining that, in addition to nature and the law, it is only the teaching and example^ of Christ which are thought of by Pelagius as embraced in the term, grace (de gr. Chr. 41. 45 ; c. duas epp. Pel. iv. 5. 11). ^'Briefly and summarily I reply to thee : ' He is a Christian in whom are to be found those three things which ought to be in all Christians : knowledge, faith, and obedience — knowledge, by which God is known j faith, by which (our) acceptance is believed ; obedience, by which the compliance of servitude is rendered to the one believed ' " (ep. de possibil. non peccandi, 5. i. Casp., p. 119). Christianity is law, and, as compared with the Old Testament, an enlarged law (ib. p. 71). It is, therefore, good works which decide whether anyone is good : '* For the wicked are so called from their wicked works ; thus, on the contrary, the good are so named from their good works ' ' (de vit. chr. 10). The Christian reads the '*word of God" as a laWj which requires to be not only known, but also fulfilled (Pel. ad Dem. 23). He acts, therefore, in accordance with it, and seeks to " extinguish habit by habit," since ''it is habit which nourishes either vices or vir- tues " (ib. 17. 13). He abandons the ** imitation of Adam," and lays hold upon the '' imitation of the holiness of Christ " (op. imp. ii. 146). This doctrine of grace is in entire harmony with the theory of sin. Sin is overcome through free will en- lightened by the reason, or by the giving of the law. This, properly speaking, is grace. That which is occasionally said of atonement through the blood of Christ, of the forgiveness of sins, and renewal through baptism, is inconsistent, and beyond the range of Pelagian ideas. Instead of attempting a summary, I cite in conclusion the six propositions into which the first antagonist of Pelagianism, Pauiinus of Milan, compressed the Pelagian doctrine: '* Adam was born mortal, and would have died, whether he had sinned or not sinned. The sin of Adam injured only himself, and not ^ For the Pelagian idea of following Christ (also de vita christ. 6, 14 ; Jul. in op. imp. ii. 146 ; ii. 223 ; Aug. degr. Chr. 2. 2), vid. Caspari, pp. 5, 20, 40, 121. Julian emphasized the truth that we are by Christ incited to a responsive love toward God : ** God, as is well known, did whatever he did toward us with in- estimable love, in order that we might, though late, love him in return " (op. imp. i. 94). Pelagius could not clearly explain wherein consisted the unutter- able impartation of grace which he maintained. He mentions, indeed, in reference to Rom. 4. 7, the forgiveness of sins ( ** in addition, faith is first im- puted for righteousness in order that he may be absolved from the past and jus- tified in the present, and prepared for future works of faith," Mi. 30. 688). But, under the Pelagian theory of sin, the significance of forgiveness is very slight, the more so since such forgiveness applies only to the sins committed before the renewal wrought in baptism (Aug. c. duas ep. Pel. iii. 8. 24 ; iv. 7. 17; degr. Chr. 34. 39). 22 33^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. the human race. Children who are now born are in the state in which Adam was before the fall. Neither does the whole human race die through the death or fall of Adam, nor does the whole human race arise from the dead through the resurrection of Christ. The law sends into the kingdom of heaven in the same way as does the gospel. Men were impeccable, i. rimum malum) of man is his unwillingness to do (nolle') that which God wishes. From this results the '* ignor- ance of things to be done, and the lust of things injurious ; ' ' hence *' error, distress, fear, i. e., the whole misery of men, as well as the death of the body " ( 24 f. ) . Adam by his sin ' ' viti- ated his posterity ... at the root, made them subject to the penalty of death and damnation." All who are begotten *' through carnal concupiscence" have original sin (26). The entire race is thus living in wickedness and subject to the *' most just wrath of God. ' ' This is evident both from the fact that the wicked willingly indulge their concupiscence, and the further fact that they are, against their will, visited with punishment. God is, however, not only just, but also merciful,^ and he, therefore, does not abandon men to their merited fate (27). Inasmuch as the angels are not bound together by natural descent, the fall of the evil angels had no effect upon the good (9. 28). It is de- signed that men shall (in, perhaps, larger numbers) take the place of the fallen angels (29). But that portion of the human race to whom God has promised deliverance attains that end not through the exercise of free will, for this has been lost, but only through grace. As servants of God, they become truly free (30) . Faith itself is a gift of God (31). God alone works in us to will and to do (Phil. 2. 13. Rom. 9. 16). *' He precedes him who is unwilling, that he may will ; he follows him who is willing, that he may not will in vain." It is false to say : ^*the will of man alone is not sufficient, if there be not also the mercy of God," for God works all things (32). ''When men were, through original sin, under this wrath, the more seriously and ruinously they had added to this more and greater (offenses), the more necessary was a mediator, that is, a reconciler, who should pla- cafe this wrath by the offering of one sacrificed The wrath of God is not a ** disturbance, such as that in the heart of an angry man," but it is *' his vengeance, which is nothing but just " (10. 33). The mediator became man (his divinity not being changed 1 This contrast, which we have met before (pp. 120, 295, 340, and already in Marcion, p. I02f. ), has been normative in dogmatics since the time of Augustine. 360 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. into flesh ) , sinless, * ' not such as is born from the two sexes through the concupiscence of the flesh with inevitable tendency to wrong- doing, " but of the Virgin, whose '^ integrity" was not impaired at his birth (34). Christ was God and man (35). It was no merit of the man Jesus which secured this combination, but only the grace of God (11. ^6). His human birth itself was awork of the Holy Spirit (37). But Christ is not, therefore, accord- ing to his human nature a Son of the Spirit, as he is according to his divine nature a Son of the Father (12. 3S f. ). But the grace of God is manifested in the incarnation '^ by which man, no merits preceding . . was joined with the Word of God in such unity of person, that the very same who was the son of man was the Son of God, and the very same who was the Son of God was the son of man " (40). The absolutely sinless Christ has now been pronounced "sin" (2 Cor. v.), since in the Old Testament the sin-offering was thus designated. Christ is, there- fore : "a sacrifice for sins, through which we might be able to be reconciled^ He became sin " in the likeness of the sin of the flesh, in order that . he might thus, in a manner, die to sin, when he dies to the flesh in which was the likeness of sin . . and might by his resurrection seal our new reviving life from the old death in which we would have died in sin" (13. 41). Hence, Christ died as a sacrifice for sin, as our rep- resentative, and he arose as an evidence of the new life brought to us by him. We have a reflection of this in baptism, as we die to sin and live through the washing of regeneration (42). All, therefore, have need of baptism. Children thereby die to origi- nal sin, and adults also to the further sins actually committed (43). The aim of baptism is the * ' remission of sins " (44 and 51; cf. supra, pp. 322, 349). It is asserted, notwithout probability, that children are bound also by the sins of their parents — not alone of the first human beings, but also their own parents of whom they were born " (cf. Ezek. 18. 2). But baptism has essentially to do with deliverance from original sin, as individual sins may also be atoned for through repentance (46). Original sin, as the root of all sins, is removed and destroyed only through the one medi- ator, the man Jesus (14. 48). The baptism of Christ was signifi- cant, not for him, but for us : ''in order that his great humility might be commended." The same is to be said of his death : *Mn order that the devil, overcome and vanquished by the truth of justice, not by the violence of power, since he had most unjustly slain him who was without any desert of sin, might most justly lose those whom he for desert of sin held in his power " (49). It is only as new-born in Christ that we can become free from the condemnation which rests upon all VIEWS OF AUGUSTINE. 36 1 through Adam (51). As to the way in which this is accom- plished : ** just as true death has occurred in him, so true remis- sion of sins in us ; and just as true resurrection in him, so true justification in us." The former takes place in baptism, which, however, has the latter as its goal (52, cf. supra, p. 322). As Christ is in this our pattern, so also in his whole history " in order that to these things, not only mystically spoken, but also done, the Christian life which is lived here might be con- formed " (53). The coming of Christ to judgment is here ex- cepted (54). That which we designate the doctrine of the Work of Christ is treated by Augustine under three aspects : as the sacrifice for sin, by virtue of which we receive the forgiveness of sins in baptism ; as deliverance from the devil ; and as a pattern and example for believers.^ ^ Sections 41, 42, 48, 51, 52, 53 reveal quite fully the aspects under which Augustine regards the work of Christ. We add a few remarks. The domi- nating thought is : Christ is the Head ; the church (the predestinated, in Joh. tr. iii. I ) is his body. All who are his and whom he has won belong to the church (pecc. mer. et rem. i. 26. 39 : civ. dei, xvii. 15 ; in Joh. tr. 21. 8 ; 108. 5 ; serm. 117. 10. 16). He who became man an4 yet remained God is, as man, the mediator or the way to God (often, following i Tim. 2-5, e. g.^ civ. dei, xi. 2; xxi. 16; ix. 15. 2; in Joh. tr. 82. 4; 105. 7). Hence, the rule is: From the man Jesus to God: '* If thou wishest to live piously and christianly, cling to Christ according to that which he has done for us, in order that thou mayest come to him according to that which he is and according to that which he was " (inJoh.tr. 2.3; 13. 14; cf.the pas- sages cited on p. 261), The Head now reveals and secures salvation as a whole for his members (civ. dei, x. 32. 3). Regarded more closely, Christ (l) has by his blood brought us the forgiveness of sins; by his sacrifice cleansed us from our sins, paid a ransom for us, taken away the wrath of God, bestowed upon us righteousness, reconciled us with God, and has become our advocate {e. g., in Joh. tr. 92. I ; 98. 2; 119. 4; 3. 13; 41. 6; 4. 2; 123. 4; 14. 13 ; civ. dei, vii. 31 ; x. 24; doctr. chr. i. 15, 17 ; serm. 134. 4, 5 ; 155. 8 ; 19. 3 ; conf. ix. 13 ; x. 43). (2) He has freed men from the power of the devil, who without any right seized upon the flesh of the righteous Christ, and to whom that flesh proved a bait (serm. 134. 3. 4 ; 5. 6 ; in Joh. 52. 6). (3) He has, as Mediator, in his person and work revealed to us God, his wisdom and love in : '* That we have, therefore, been reconciled to God by the death of his Son, is not to be understood as though the Son had reconciled us to him, so that he should now begin to love what he had hated, as when an enemy is reconciled to an enemy, so that they are thereafter friends, and they who have mutually hated now mutually love ; but we are now reconciled to him who loves us, with whom we have been at enmity on account of sin" (in Joh. tr. no. 6 ; cf. 2. 16 ; serm. 174 ; 126. 4. 6); by this love we are moved to love him in return (de cat. rud. 4. 7, 8). (4) He has given us an example and pattern of humility, patience, and trust in God [e. g.y civ, del, xviii. 49 ; in Joh. tr.4. 13; 25. 16, 18; 51. 11; 58. 4 ff.; 113. 4; 116. I ; 119. 2); but " the animal man . . . does not perceive what the cross of Christ con- fers upon those who believe, and thinks that by this cross was accomplished only that an example for imitation should be given to us as w^e contend even to death for the truth " (in Joh. tr. 98. 3). (5) He has through his incarnation, and especially through his death and resurrection, brought to us immortality, ^62 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. After thus treating of God, creation, sin, grace, and of Christ, Augustine, following the order of the Creed, comes to speak of the Holy Spirit. The church depends upon the Trinity : *' The proper order of confession requires that the church be subordi- nated to the Trinity, just as to the tenant his house, to God his temple, and to the founder his city." In this we are to have in view, not only the Christians yet sojourning on earth, but also glorified saints and angels (15. 56). There is then a discussion of angels, in which the author confesses his ignorance as to the orders of celestial beings, and the propriety of numbering among them the sun and the moon (Grig., supra, p. 151), or the kind of corporeality involved in the appearances of angels on earth (58 f.). It is more important to discriminate when Satan trans- forms himself into an angel of light, in order that we may not fol- low him upon his paths of error^ (60). The church is thus to be dividedintotheearthlyandtheheavenly. The redemption wrought by Christ extends also, in a certain measure, to the angels, inasmuch as by it the enmity between them and sinful men is removed, and the places vacated by the fallen angels are filled. Hence, as affirmed in Eph. i. 10, the heavenly is by Christ united in peace with the earthly, and the earthly with the heavenly (61, 62). This peace shall be complete for us only in the full vision of the future world, but it exists here already through the forgiveness of sins. Hence, the next item in the Creed is the forgiveness of sins. Renewal begins (Jncipit renovatio) with the blotting out of original sin in baptism, yet everyone needs beyond this the forgiveness of sins, since he is, though perhaps without crime {crimen), not without sin (64). But even in regard to crimes, we dare not despair of the mercy of God. The church excom- municates the criminal ; but let him repent. In this, not the extent of time, but that of the sorrow, is important. Since now it is only in the church that sins are forgiven, there are fixed ** times of repentance, in order that it may be exercised to the . satisfaction of the church as well " (65). The regenerate are also subjected to temporal penalties, in order that their guilt may in order thus to make us gods : ** to make us gods who were men, he who was God was made man " (serm. 192. i ; 166. 4) ; but also : "by loving God we are made gods" (serm. I2i. i). Augustine presents not a consistent theory, but elements of rehgious truth which are genuinely Christian. In this he has again furnished dogmatic material to the church of the West. Cf KOhner, Aug. Anschauung von der ErlosungsbedeutungChristi, 1890. Scheel, Aug, Anschauung iiber Christi Person und Werk, 1901. ^ This is, indeed, difficult, but the very difficulty of this thing is beneficial in that no one may be hope for himself, nor one man for another, but God for all his own. VIEWS OF AUGUSTINE. 363 not be charged against thenx for eternity (66). But there are Cathohc Christians^ who hold that, if they have been baptized and beheve, /. e., do not renounce the name of Christ, they will be saved despite the most grievous sins, ^' which they neither wash away by repenting nor atone for by alms," that *' they will be saved by fire — punished, doubtless, in proportion to the mag- nitude of their offenses and the duration of their shameful deeds, yet not with eternal fire" (cf. i Cor. 3. 11 ff.). Only faith manifesting itself in works saves : faith without works does not save (67). The fire in the scriptural passages under discussion refers to the pain endured in the giving up of that which is fervently desired (68). Augustine leaves it an open^ question whether a purifying fire does not exist also after this life for such as through repentance, and especially through almsgiving, have secured for themselves forgiveness — whether ''some believers are not saved more tardily or more speedily, through a certain purgatorial fire, in proportion as they have more or less loved the things that perish " (69). He adds, in explanation, that one cannot indeed daily atone by alms for sins which exclude from the kingdom of God, nor, forsooth, by them purchase for himself the right to sin in the future (16. 70). Turning now to the practice of repentance, Augustine de- clares : ** But for brief and light daily sins . . . the daily prayer of believers makes satisfaction" (satisfacit), i, e.^ the fifth petition of the Lord's Prayer. But this prayer also blots out grave offenses, when the believer forsakes them — and when he also forgives those who trespass against him. For forgiveness is also an alms, just as are all good works done for those in need. '* There are thus many kinds of alms, when we perform which we help to secure the remission of our own sins" (71, 72). Forgiveness of others and the love of enemies are the best alms (73). Only he who is ready to forgive receives forgiveness (74). Only he who also reforms his life becomes pure through alms (17. 75). Indeed, in a certain sense, everything is in- cluded in alms, if we give to ourselves the alms of charging guilt upon ourselves, /. e., if we by the mercy of God seek ^ As to the view of these "lay brethren," see retract, ii. 38 ; de fide et operibus ; civ. dei, xxi. 19 ff. These people are in no kind of harmony with the evangehcal view of justification by faith (despite Harnack, Ztschr. f. Theol. u. K., 1891, p. 165 ff. ). On the contrary, they anticipate the most extreme Catholicism : He who has accepted the teachings of the church, been baptized, received the Lord's Supper, and remainsin the church, will be saved, without any regard to his moral character, the deficiencies of which will be re paired in purgatorial fire. ^ Thus also civ. dei, xxi. 26. 4. 364 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. out ourselves in our misery (76; also serm. 87. 9. 10). The division of sins into peccata levia and gravia cannot be carried out fully by any means in our power ; but it is established by such passages as i Cor. 7. 5 ff. ; 6. i ff. (78). Some which seem light to us C thou fool ") are grievous according to the Scrip- tures (79J, while many which are really grievous are from force of habit regarded by us as light (80). We cannot resist sins, whether arising from ignorance or from infirmity, * ^unless we are divinely assisted" (19. 81). The mercy of God also impels us to repentance (82). He who does not believe, or despises, the forgiveness of sins in the church is guilty of the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost (83).^ ^ Augustine's view of repentance is, in its essential features, fully presented in his Enchiridion. It is merely a continuation of the Ancient Catholic teach- ing upon the subjects ( supra, p. 195 ) ■ Although the East also possessed a peni- tential ordinance (vid. Greg. Thaum. ep. canon, and Basil, ep. 199, 217), yet the penitential discipline of the church never there attained so rigid a develop- ment as in the West (cf. the homilies of Chrysostom upon repentance, and supra). The antecedent of the Western view is the distinction drawn between venial, daily, petty sins, and damnable or great {grandia) sins, such as idol- atry, the constellations of the mathematicians y heresy, schism, murder, adul- tery, fornication, robbery, theft, false witness (perf. just. 9. 20 ; in Joh. tr. 12. 14; op. imp. ii. 97; serm. 56. 8. 12). If we include repentance before bap- tism, there are three kinds of repentance : { l) Repentance for sins committed before baptism ; in the case of children, ' ' the faith of those by whom they are presented prevails" (serm. 351. 2. 2). (2) Repentance for the lighter daily sins, " whose committal runs through the whole of this life," the daily repent- ance, which brings to man a daily medicine of forgiveness (Augustine is fond of describing grace as medicina). This occurs through the daily use of the Lord's Prayer (fifth petition), as well as through alms and fasting (serm. 351. 3. 3 ff. ; 352. 2. 7 ; 18. 5 ; 58. 5. 6 ; de symbolo ad cat. 7. 14 ; civ. dei, xxi. 27. 4 ; cf. Ambrose, depoenit. ii. 5.35 : *' Hewhoexercisesrepentance, agit poenite^itiam^ ought not only to wash away his sin with tears, but also to hide and cover his greater offenses by better works, so that sin may not be imputed to him " ). (3) Repentance in the proper sense of the term (*' the more serious and pain- ful repentance, in which they are properly called penitents, poeriitentes^ in the church ' ' ) has to do with those who, on account of grave sins ( forbidden by the Decalogue), have been excluded from the holy communion [co^nmunio sacra, Ambros. ib. i. 15. 78), or the Lord's Supper (Aug. serm. 355. 4. 7). Such must make confession to the bishop, who assigns to them an appropriate *' sat- isfaction," and, if the matter has been publicly known, directs them to repeat the confession before the church (vid. 351. 4. 7-10; 352. 3. 8; ep. 265. 7. Also can. 30 of the council of Hippo, A. D. 393, Hefele CG. ii., ed. 2, 58), This repentance is, like baptism, to be granted but once (ep. 152. 2 ; 153. 3. 7; cf. Ambrose, 1. c. ii. 10. 95 ; the decretal letter of Pope Siricius toHimerius, A. D. 385, c. 5). Thus repentance becomes a continuation of baptism (ep. 56. 8. 12 init. Ambrose, 1. c. ii. 1 1.98: " Repentance is therefore a good thing ; for, if it did not exist, all would have to defer until old age the grace of cleans- ing"). But in this way repentance is externalized and set in opposition to grace, and thus was a new stone fitted into the hierarchical structure: " Let him come to the overseers (antistites), through whom the keys are admirris- tered for him in the church ... let him receive from those placed over VIEWS OF AUGUSTINE. 365 Augustine treats, finally, of the Resurrection. After some re- marks in regard to the resurrection body of the abortive fcetus (20. 85 f.) and of monstrosities (87), he declares that the mate- rial of the human body is for God not lost (SS); that in the res- urrection God will restore the entire body, it being not implied, however, that every particle of the matter shall become a portion of that member to which it once belonged (89). The bodies will not be all alike (e. g., the notes of an anthem), nor will they be repulsive (wan or corpulent). They will be spiritual bodies, but in substance still flesh {^caro'), although serving the spirit in all things (90, 91; of. civ. dei, xxii. 12 ff., 19 ff.). The lost have also a body ; a continual dying and decaying is their fate (92). This is the second death. Condemnation (^danmatio) is graded according to the measure of guilt, being lightest for chil- dren. ** Certainly the lightest punishment of all will be that of those, who, beyond the sin which they have inherited from their ancestry, have superadded none*' (93). It is only in the two- fold outcome of human life that we shall learn why one was saved and another left to condemnation. It will become clear how certain, immutable, and most efficacious is the will of God (21. 94, 95). Since God permits evil, its existence must be good; other- wise the almighty Will would not allow it (96). What God wills, that he does. But he wills that all men be saved (i Tim. 2.4; cf 23. 27), and yet by far the greater number are not saved (97). God in mercy turns the evil will of some into a good will, with- out any regard to future works. To others he is simply just (22. 98 f.). The will of God rules in all, even in the wicked : ** so that . . . even that which is contrary to his will does not occur without his will" (23. 100 f). Therefore: *^ he does not do anything wicked, nor does he do anything unless he wills to do it, and he does all things whatsoever which he wills to do " (102). At this point Augustine takes up i Tim. 2. 4 (103) and endeav- ors by a forced interpretation to bring it into harmony with the above (supra, p. 352). The will of man is always free, even and particularly when it can no longer will to do evil (25. 105). But free will would not have sufficed even in paradise to merit im- mortality : even there the divine assistance {^adjutofiuui) was needed — how much more since the fall ! (106). Hence, strictly speaking, eternal life is a matter, not of reward, but of grace. ' * It is to be understood, therefore, that even the good merits of man themselves are gifts of God, to which when eternal life is given, the sacraments {praepositi sacramentoruni) , the mode of his satisfaction" (sermo. 351. 4. 10). "Where, if ministers are wanting, how great ruin fol- lows those who depart from this world either not regenerated or bound" (ep. 228. 8). 366 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. how is grace given except (in exchange) for grace? "^ God's mercy is the ground of salvation; therefore let noone boast (107). Even the Mediator through whom salvation is secured is not only man but God. In description of his work, it is declared : **it was necessary for us to be reconciled to God in order to the resurrection of the flesh unto eternal life. ' ' Through him the resurrection is set forth, the devil conquered. Further, ''an example of obedience is by the divine man set before contuma- cious man," He showed to men also in his person how far they had departed from God (108). After death and before the resurrection, the souls of men are in a secret retreat (addita 7'eceptaaila), where it goes well or ill with them according to their deserts. For the alleviation of their condition, their friends may avail themselves of the sacrifice of the mass and of alms. But the latter avail as ^^ propitiationes " only for those who on earth have deserved that the benefits of these things should now be enjoyed (those who were *' not very wicked," 20. no; vid. also serm. 172.2; civ. dei, xxi. 27. 6). The civitas dei and the civitas diabolic both of which include men and angels, will continue to exist in eternity (m). There can be no doubt of the eternal duration of the punishments of hell. The most that could be deduced from Ps. 76. 10 would be a temporary alleviation or interruption. That condition it- self is one of dreadful torment : 'Ho depart from the kingdom of God, to be an exile from the city of God, to be alienated from the life of God, to be deprived, with so great a multitude, of the delightful fellowship of God " ( 1 1 2 f . ) . These are the doctrines " which are to be faithfully believed. " Out of faith spring hope and love. What we hope is shown by the Lord's Prayer. We hope only in God, not in men nor in ourselves. " Therefore only from the Lord God ought we to seek whatever we hope either to do well or to receive (in exchange for good works)" (27. 114). Then follows a short exposition of the Lord's Prayer, as given in Matthew and Luke (115 f. ). Then comes Love. " When it is asked whether anyone is a good man, it is not asked what he believes or hopes, but what he loves ... he who does not love, believes in vain, even though the things which he believes are true." True faith is that which works in love. Love is shed abroad in us by the Holy Spirit ; it annihilates concupiscence and fulfills the law " (28. 117 ; cf. supra, p. 348). The course of moral development is then sketched : ^ For this strained interpretation of the term '* merit," see further in Job. tr. 3. 10: **he crowns his gifts, not thy merits;" grat. et Hb. arb. 7. 16. Augustine, pf course, uses the term also in the ordinary sense, e. ^., ep. 214. 4 ; grat. et lib. arb. I init. VIEWS OF AUGUSTINE. 367 (i) '* Living according to the flesh, reason making no resistance — this is the first state (Jiaec sunt prwia) of man." (2) ^* Recog- nition of sin through the law," but ''sinning knowingly . . . this is the second state of man. " (3) Faith in the help of God : *' and that the man has begun to be moved by the Spirit of God, he lusts against the flesh by the stronger power of love ... his whole infirmity not yet being healed, pious perseverance — this is the third state of the man of good hope." (4) *' Final peace remains — after this life. Of these four different stages, the first is before the law, the second under the law, the third under grace, the fourth in full and perfect peace. ' ' The history of salvation has followed the same course (118). But grace brings the for- giveness of sins and removal of guilt (^reatus, 119). Every commandment of God has love as its aim. ''Therefore, that which is done either from fear of punishment or with any carnal aim, so that it cannot be traced to that love which the Holy Spirit sheds abroad in our hearts, is not yet, although it may seem to be, done as it ought to be done " (121). The treatise does not furnish the outlines of a doctrinal '* sys- tem," but a connected presentation of that which Augustine re- garded as essential in Christian teaching. The great underlying current of his thought runs through the composition. Into it he has interwoven his profoundest ideas upon sin, grace, and predes- tination. The metaphysical background is clearly traceable in his doctrine concerning God ; and the distinctively hierarchical ele- ments are to a remarkable degree overshadowed. He skillfully arranged his ideas in harmony with the orderly statements of the Creed ; but, as in all his teaching, so even in this brief epitome, he has introduced nearly all the elements of the popular Catholi- cism of the day (ideas of merit, fastings, alms, together with hierarchism, sacramental magic, saint worship, veneration of relics, and the ascetic ideal of life). Wherever he stepped, the scene became one of verdure and flowers. He could attach the profoundest ideas to the most external things ( 3S9, 3^5 ; Pelagian- ism, 353 ; Cassian, 370 ff . ; Faus- tus, 375 » Lucidus, 376 n. ; Coun- cil of Orange, 380, 38 1; Council of Valence, 379, 381 n. Acacius of Caesarea, 225, 225 n. Acacius of Constantinople, 274. Actistites, 278. Adam, sin of, 335* 337 ; original state of, 34r. Adiaphorites, 278. Aelurus, 273. Aeon, Christ as, 96. Aetius, 223, 225. Agapetus I., 276. Agatho, Pope, 282. Agency, Divine. In Paul, ^^ ; Apos- tolic age, 52 ; Apostolic fathers, 79 ; Augustine, 309 (see Will of God, Grace). Agnoetae, 278. (389) Agonisti, 314. Alcibiades, 90. Alexander of Alexandria, 205, 216. Alexandria, Council at (A. D. 362), 226; (A. D. 363), 227; A. D. 430), 263. Alexandrine Fathers, works of, I40 ; aim of, 140 ; moralism of, 161 ; vs. Gnosticism, 161 ; estimate of, 160 ; on confession, 158; on divinity of Christ, 161 ; on rule of faith, 160, 161. Almsgiving. In Clement, 76 ; Cy- prian, 195 ; Augustine, 363, 367. Alogi, 163. ApoUinarianism, condemned, 234 ; repressed, 272 ; and Antiochians, 246 ; and Cappadocians, 247 ; and Monophysites, 2/7 ; on Logos, 245- ApoUinaris, works of, 227, 244; prob- lem of, 247, 250, 253, 255 ; and Cappadocians, 247, 250 ff.; on per- son of Christ, 233 n., 240, 284 ; on incarnation, 245 ; on Chiliasm, 246 n. Apologists, The, iog-ii8; aim of, no ; vs. Judaism and heathenism, III; estimate of, 110,118; legal- ism of, 118 ; on God, 112 ; person of Christ, 113 f. ; Trinity, 114; work of Christ, 115 ; human ability, 115 ; sufferings of Christ, 116; the church, 116; worship, baptism, eucharist, 117; resurrec- tion, immortality, 117. 39° INDEX. Apostasy, 176. Apostles, words of, 36, 82 f. Apostolic Age. On interpretation of Scripture, 46, 52 ; words of Christ, 46, $2 ; Holy Spirit, 46, 52 ; God, 46 ; tradition, 46 ; do- minion of Christ, 46, 49, 52 ; ses- sion alright hand, 47 ; preexistence of Christ, parousia, 47 ; humanity and divinity of Christ, 47; sufferings and death of Christ, 47 ; incarna- tion, 47 ; new covenant, 47 ; the Word, 48, 52 ; new life, 48 ; faith, 48, 52 ; justification, 48, 49 ; sanc- tification, 49 ; righteousness, 48, 49» 5^1 good works, 48; hope, 48, 49 ; love, 52 ; the church, 49, 52 ; charisms, 52 ; sacraments, 52 ; resurrection of Christ, 52 ; morality, 49- Apostolic Fathers, works of, 55 ; legal- ism of, 79 f., 81 ; estimate of, 77, 81 ; on rules of faith, 82, 86 ; God, 77, 79; faith, 77, 79 f.; fruits of faith, 78, 86 ; depravity, forgiveness, righteousness, 78 ; work of Christ, 78 ; communion with God, 79 ; new law, 79, 81, 84; immortality, 79; baptism, 78, 79 ; the Word, 79 ; eucharist, 79 ; sin, merit, 79 ; love, 79 f.; the church, 80 ; human ability, 80 ; charismata, 80 ; baptismal formula, 82, 84 f. ; communion of saints, 80 ; eternal punishment, 81 ; Scrip- tures, 82 ; canon of Scriptures, 83 ; eschatology, 81 ; influence ot, in third century, 190. Ambrose, works of, 256 ; anticipates Augustine, 308, 329, 33$ ; on Trinity, 240 n., 308 ; person of Christ, 256 ; sin and grace, 308, 329 ff,; baptism, 330; synergism, 331- Anastasius, Emperor, 274. Anastasius II., Pope, 377. Anastasius Sinaita, works of, 288 ; on images, 303. Ancient Church, 287 ff. Ancyra, Council of, 244 ; formula of, 225. Angels. In Apostolic fathers, 79 ; Menander, 93 ; Origen, 147, 154 ; Theognostus, 186 ; Dionysius, 291 ; Augustine, 359, 362. Ante-Nicene Teaching. On theology and Christology, 169-174 ; on re- pentance, 174-180. Antichrist, 134 Anti-Gnostic Fathers. Aim of, no, 119; estimate of; on God, 119, 139 ; Trinity, 121 ; sin and human ability, 122, 139 ; new covenant, 123 ; state of grace, 131 ; tradition, 136, 140 ; the Scriptures, 135, 136 ; the church, 138 ; faith, salvation, 139- Antioch, Council at (A. D. 265 to 269, three), 165; (A. D. 341), 219; (A. D. 358), 224; (A. D. 363), 227 ; formulas of, 222, 224, 266. Antiochians z's. Sabellianism, 169 ; at Council of Ephesus, 265 ; later influence of, 281 ; relation to Paul of Samosata, 248 f. ; to Nestorius, 264 ; to Cyril of Alexandria, 264 ; on God, 250 ; person of Christ, 247, 284 ; work of Christ, 250. Aphraates, 174. Aphthartodocetes, 278, 279. Apocalypse, 49 ff. Apocalypse of Peter, 83. Apostolic succession, 137, 138, 318. Arcana discipHna, 290. Arianism, 201 ff.; Athanasius on, 206 f.; condemned, 216, 227; at Council of Ancyra, 224 ; at Sir- mian Council, 222 ; temporary vic- tory of, 222, 225 ; in Aetius and INDEX. 39' Eunomius, 223, 225 ; decline of, 236. Alius, works of, 202 ; activity of, 205 ; relation to Lucian, 252 ; to Monarchians, 202, 204 ; to Apolo- gists, 204 ; to Paul of Samosata, 204 ; at Nice, 217 ; at Aries, 217 ; at Alexandria, 227 ; on person of Christ, 202 f., 204. Ariminium, Council at, 224. Aristides, report of Christian teaching, "5- Aries, Council at (A. D, 316), 314; (A.D. 353), 222 ; (ca. A. D. 473), 376, 379- Arnobius, works of, 192 ; on divinity of Christ, 170 ; on salvation of souls, 192. Artabastus, 305. Artemas, Artemon, 164, 166, 205. Ascension of Christ, 153, 248. Asceticism, Gnostic, 98 ; in Mar- cion, 103 ; in Montanists, I06 ; Origen, 159 ; Methodius, 190 ; Greek Church, 298 ; Cassian, 370. Asclepiodatus, 164. Ascusnages, 236. Assistance, divine, Chrysostom, 329 ; Augustine, 341, 344, 34^, 349, 35°, 364, 365, 368; John of Jerusalem, 354; Pelagius, 336, 354, 355; Semipelagians, 369 ; Cassian, 371 ; "Deresurrectione gentium," 373 ; Coelestine, 378 ; Faustus, 375 ; Canons of Orange, 382. Athanasian Creed, 241. Athanasius, works of, 206 ; estimate of, 206, 210; vs. Arianism, 207; and Nicene Creed, 218 ; banished and restored, 219, 222, 226, 227 ; condemned, 222 ; attitude toward Marcellus, 221, 233 ; toward Ho- moiusians, 226 ; contrasted with the Cappadocians, 232 ; triumph of, 228; on God, 206, 210; on divinity of Christ, 206 if. ; work of Christ, 212 f.; Logos, 206, 20S f . ; person of Christ, 209 ff. ; incarna- tion, 211, 213; communion with God, 214; Holy Spirit, 215, 227, 231 ; depravity, 328. Augustine, works of, 307, 338 ; esti- mate of, 258, 308 f., 312, 327, 352, 367; as Manichccan, 257, 309; per- sonal experience of, 309, 310, 340 ; Neoplatonism of, 257, 309, 310, 340, 341 ; contrasted with Athana- sius, 258; with Paul, 349; relation to Ambrose, 308, 329, 338 ; enchiri- dion of, 357 ff.; legalism of, 308; compared with Luther, 340; on God, 310, 340, 367 ; will of God, 309, 365 ; communion with God, 311,312; communionof saints, 324, 324n. ,325 ; charisms, 328 ; homou- sia, 238 f. ; Trinity, 237 ff. , 362; person of Christ, 258^,360; Logos, 257 f. ; humiliation of Christ, 260 ; work of Christ, 361 n.; resurrection of Christ, 365 ; Holy Spirit, 324 f., 348 ; human will, 309 ; original state, 341 ; sin, 312, 364; original sin, 338, 341, 342 ff., 345, 359; concupiscence, 345, 347, 348, 359 ; depravity, 338, 341 ff., 367 ; guilt, 342 ; human ability, 339, 341, 344, 350, 353. 359, 365; angels, 359, 362; Donatism, 314, 325, 327; the church, 309, 312, 317 f., 324 f. ; sacraments, 312, 319 f. ; baptism, 319 f-, 322, 347, 3^0, 364 n.; infant baptism, 253 ; eu- charist, 320 ; the Word, 321 ; au- thority of Scriptures, 358 ; original good, 346 ; righteousness, 345, 348 ; repentance, 362, 364 ; justifi- cation, 347, 348, 349; faith, 310, 340, 347, 349, 352, 358, 366, 367 ; forgiveness of sins, 322, 347, 350, 362; grace, 312, 324 f., 338 f.. 392 INDEX. 346, 349> 350. 352, 359, 365 ; di- vine assistance, 341, 344, 346, 349, 350, 364 f., 368 ; predestination, 326, 350, 351 f. ; perseverance, 351. 353; infusion of good-will, 349 f. ; order of salvation, 349 ; love, 310, 324f., 347, 348, 366; hope, 366; knowledge, 310, 347 ; divine calling, 351 ; satisfaction, 363 ; merit, 366 ; peace, 367 ; almsgiving, 363, 367 ; purgatory, 363, 366 ; summary of views of, 357 ff. Augustinianism, in church, 368 f.; criticism of, 372. Aurelian, Emperor, 166. Autun, Council at, 241, 242. Axionicus, 93. B. Baptism. In Gospels, 36, 37 ; Paul, 46 ; Apostolic age, 52 ; Hermas, 60, 62 ; Ignatius, 68 ; Barnabas, 71, 73 ; Didache, 74, 75 ; Clement, 76 ; Apostolic fathers, 78, 79 ; Apologists, 117 ; Hippolytus, 131 ; Tertullian, 132; Clement of Alex- andria, 145 ; Origen, 155 ; Metho- dius, 188, 189; Western Church, 193 f-> 198; Cyprian, 193 f.; Commodian, 193 ; Greek Church, 291, 299 ; Dionysius, 299 ; Do- natists, 316, 320 f.; Augustine, 319 f., 322, 347, 360, 364; Am- brose, 330 ; Jovinian, 331 n. ; canons of Orange, 381 f. ; Caeles- tius, 355. Baptism, office of, 156 ; form of admin- istration of, 194 ; formula of, 36, 37, 82, 84 ff.; repeated, 179, 314, 316,320; requirements for, 299; infant, 155, 335, 353. 355; three- fold, 98 ; by heretics, 184, 314, 315. 3i9f- Bardesanes, 93. Barnabas, Epistle of, 55 J legalism of, 72 ; on divinity, incarnation, and sufferings of Christ, 70 ; interpreta- tion of Scriptures, 72, 73 ; Judaism, 72 ; forgiveness of sins, 70, 73 ; baptism, 71, 73; new law, 71 ; new life, ^oi., "j^ ; new covenant, 70 ; old covenant, 72 ; faith, hope, justification, 71 ; good works, 72 ; eschatology, 73> Basihdes, 93, 227. Basil, the Great, works of, 227 ; prom- inence of, 239 ; on homousia, 229 ; on eucharist, 301 (see Cappado- cians). Basil of Ancyra, 224, 225. Basilicus, Emperor, 273. Benediction for the lapsed, 178, 180. Beryl of Bostra, 168 n. Bishops, office of, 67, 80, 175, 189; duties of, 58 ; authority of, 140, 180, 182, 185 ; authority of, for- feited by wickedness, 181 ; divine right of, 180, 182, 183; charismsof, 137, 181 ; not to be deposed, 177, 178 ; beyond criticism, 181 ; have visions, l8i ; collegeof, 182; repre- sent the church, 182, 185, 326 ; guardians of tradition, 80, 140, 385 ; successors of apostles, 137, 138, 318 ; fallible, 319 ; obedience to, 67, 69 ; confession to, 301 ; and papacy, 386. Bitterae, Council at, 222. Body, the spiritual, 92 (see Resurrec- tion). Boniface II., Pope, 381. Bostra, Council at, 169. Caecilian, 313, 314. Caelestius, works of, 332 ; expelled from Rome, 356 ; excommunicated, INDEX. 393 354) 355 7 ^^ f^s^ will and grace, 332, 33^ ; infant baptism, 353 ; bap- tism, 355 ; papal infallibility, 355. Caesarius, on grace, 379 ; decrees of Orange, 380, 3800. Call, special and general, 373 ; effec- tual and ineffectual, 351. Callistus, literature upon, 176; ex- communicated, 175 ; ondivinityof Christ, 168 ; second repentance, 177 ; church and episcopacy, I77f.; papal infallibility, 176,386. Canon. See Scriptures ; of truth, 85, 136. Cappadocians, The Three, works of, 227; aim of, 228; relation to Athan- asius, 228, 232 ; to Origen, 228 ; criticized by Arius, 230 ; Platonic ideas of, 231 ; vs. Apollinaris, 247, 250 f.; subordinationism in, 233 ; estimate of, 232 ; influence of, 308 ; on us?a and hypostasis, 228; Trinity, 228 f.; the term, "persona,'' 230; homousia of Spirit, 231 ; communicatio idioma- tum, 251 ; Holy Spirit, 231, 232 n.; orthodoxy, 198, 199. Carpocrates, 93. Carthage, Council at( A. D. 252), 180; (A. D. 255-6), 184 ; A. D. 416), 354; (A. D. 411 or 412), 354; (A. D. 4i7or4i8), 356; (A. D. 418), 356, 386. Cassian, works of, 370 ; on asceti- cism, 270 ; sin, ability, and grace, 370 ; divine assistance, 371 ; con- version, 371 ; merit and repent- ance, 372 n.; good- will infused, 370, 372. Catholic Church, Ignatius on, 66 ; claim of, 317, 318 ; Donatists on, 315 ; and tradition, 384. Celibacy, Origen, 159 ; Methodius, 190 ; Cyprian, 197 ; Jovinian, 331 n.; Ebionite, 91. Cerdo, 102. Cerinthus, 93. Chalcedon, Council of, 269, 270, 271. Chalcedon, Creed of, estimate of, 272, 273, 284 f. ; under Leo, Basilicus, and Zeno, 273 ; under Justinian, 275 f.; at Constantinople, 283 ; on papacy, 386. *' Character'* in sacrament, 319, 320. Charism of the truth, 137- Charisms in Apostolic age, 52 ; Apos- tolic fathers, 80 ; Montanism, 105 f.; of bishops, 181; Augus- tine on, 328. Children, unbaptized, 376, 383. Chihasm. In Papias, 70 ; Barnabas, 73 ; Apostolic fathers, 81 ; Jewish Christian, 89 ; Dionysius of Alex- andria, 185 ; Ireneeus, 134 ; Cy- prian, 197; Apollinaris, 246 n. Chrism, 291, 298. Christ, as aeon, 96 ; ascension of, 153, 248 ; as example, 260 n., 297 ; as lawgiver, 77, 78, 297 ; as physi- cian, 153, 158; as second Adam, 129; as teacher, 115, 143, 148, 155, 193. Christ, death of. In Paul, 33 f., 44, 47, 65, 68 ; Apostolic age, 47 ; Barnabas, 70, 73 ; Apos- tolic fathers, 78 ; Origen, 154 ; Apologists, 116; Athanasius, 214 ; John of Damascus, 295 ; Augus- tine, 360. • Christ, divinity of. In Gospels, 35 ; Paul, 39 f., 40 ; Apostolic age, 47 ; John, 50 ; Clement of Rome, 56 ; Hermas, 62; Ignatius, 63 f.; Poly- carp, 69 ; Barnabas, 70 ; Didache, 73 ; Ebionites, 88 ; Apologists, 113, 115 ; Antignostic fathers, 121, I24ff., 139; Irenseus, 124; Ori- gen, 147, 149; Alexandrine fa- thers, 161 ; second century, 162 ; Patripassians, 167 ; Callistus, 168 ; 394 INDEX. Novatian, 169 ; Arnobius, Lactan- tius, Cyprian, 170 ; Dionysius of Alexandria, 171, 173 ; Dionysius of Rome, 171, 206 ; Methodius, 174 ; ancient church, 201 ; Alex- ander of Alexandria, 205 ; Athan- asius, 206 ff. ; Council of Antioch, 219; Marcellus, 220; Aetius and Eunomius, 223 ; Basil of Ancyra, 226 ; Cappadocians, 229 f. ; Au- gustine, 237fF., 257 ff.; Apollinaris, 244; Cyril of Alexandria, 252 f.; Hilary, 255 ; Ambrose, 256 ; Nes- torius, 261 ; Council of Chalcedon, 271 ; Sergius, 279; Maximus, 280 ; John of Damascus, 288. Christ, dominion of, ^;^^ 46. Christ, exaltation of, 40, 47, 69, Christ, humanity of. In Apostolic age, 47; Apologists, 115; Iren- ceus, 125; Tertullian, 126; Anti- gnostic fathers, 139 ; Origen, 147 ; Synod of Bostra, 169 ; Cappado- cians, 247 ; Antiochians, 248 ; Ibas, 249 ; Ambrose, 256 ; Augus- tine, 257, 258 ; Nestorius, 261 ; Council of Chalcedon, 271, Maxi- mus, 281. Christ, indwelling of. In Paul, 41 ; Ignatius, 66, 68 ; Apostolic fathers, 77; Methodius, 188, 191'; West- ern theologians, 198 ; Athanasius, 213. Christ, intercession of. In Apostolic ^g6> 47 ; Western Church, 193 ; Eastern Church, 295. Christ, ^gnosis of. In Hilary, 256 ; Augustine, 260 ; Pope Leo, 270. Christ, mediation of. In Origen, 155 ; Western Church, 193 ; Au- gustine, 261. Christ, obedience of, ;^;^, 45 ( see Work of). Christ, passibility of. In Ignatius, 65; Clement of Alexandria, 143; Origen, 152 ; Praxeas, 167 ; Athan- asius, 212, 263 ; Cyprian of Alex- andria, 254 ; Hilary, 256 ; Nesto- rius, 264 ; Severians, 278 ; John of Damascus, 287. Christ, person of. In Judaism, 31, 33; Gospels, 35 ; Paul, 39 f.; John, 50 ; Clement of Rome, 56; Hermas, 58 f., 62 ; Ignatius, 63 f., 68 ; homily of Clement, 75 ; Apostolic fathers, 78 ; Ebionites, 88, 91 ; Elkesai, 89 ; Gnostics, 96 ; Marcion, 103 ; Apologists, 113- 115; Irenaeus, 124; Tertullian, 1 25 ff. , 243 ; Hippolytus, 1 27 ; Antignostic fathers, 139; Clement of Alexandria, 143 ; Origen, 152 ; Monarchians, 163 ; Paul of Samo- sata, 164, 169, 221,244; Praxeas, 167 ; Noetus, Epigonus, Cleo- menes, 167 ; Pierius, 171 ; Theo- gnostus, 171, 186 ; Methodius, 173 ; Aphraates, 174 ; Arius, 202 ; Alexander of Alexandria, 205 ; Athanasius, 206 ff., 210 ff.; Mar- cellus, 220 ; Photinus, 221 ; after Council of Nice, 222 ff.; Apolli- naris, 233 n.; 244 f., 284; West- ern Church, 243, 255 ; Diodorus, 249; Antiochians, 247 f., 284; Cappadocians, 247, 250 f.; Cyril of Alexandria, 252 f., 262f., 269, 284; Hilary, 256 f. ; Ambrose, 256 ; Augustine, 258 f., 360 ; Eutyches, 267, 270 ; Pope Leo, 270 ; Council of Chalcedon, 271 ; Leontius, 275, 284 ; Severus, 277 ; Julian, 277; Monophysites, 273 ff. ; Niobes, 278 ; Council of Constan- tinople, 283 ; John of Damascus, 286 f.; Maximus, 281, 285. Christ, preexistence of. In Gospels, 35 ; Paul, 40 ; Apostolic age, 46, 47, 52 ; Clement of Rome, 56 ; Hermas, 59; Ignatius, 64, 66; INDEX. 395 Barnabas, 70 ; homily of Clement, 78; Judaic Christianity, 88; Diony- sius of Rome, 173; Apollinaris, 246 ; Augustine, 258 n. Christ, resurrection of. In Gospels, 34 ; Paul, 40, 41, 42 ; Apostolic ag^j 52; Irenaeus, 129 ; Origen, 153- Christ, session of, at right hand of God. Apostolic age, 47 ; Origen, 153- Christ, words of. In Gospels, 36 Paul, 46 ; Apostolic age, 52 Apostolic fathers, 82. Christ, work of. In Gospels, ;^^, 35 Paul, 34, 44, 45 ; Apostohc age, 47, 52; Clement of Rome, 56 f. Ignatius, 64 ; Polycarp, 69 ; Bar- nabas, 70 f. ; Apostolic fathers, 78 Irenceus, 125, 128 ; Tertullian, 127, 131; Hippolytus, 128; Ori gen, 153, 154 ; Cyprian, Lactantius, 193 ; Augustine, 361, 361 n. ; John of Damascus, 287, 295 . Christ, worship of. In Paul, 40; Origen, 154 ; Diodorus, 249 ; Cyril, 262; Nestorius, 264 ; John ofDamascus, 2S7 ; Augustine, 311. Christ, virgin birth of, denied, 89. Christianity, essence of, 52 ; in hom- ily of Clement, 77 ; adapted to all men, 148 (see Greek Christianity). Christian life. In Gospels, 34, 36 ; Paul, 41 f. , 48, 49 ; Hermas, 60 ; Ignatius, 68 f. ; Polycarp, 69 ; Bar- nabas, 71 ; Didache, 75 * Clement, 76 ; Gnosticism, 142 ; Clement of Alexandria, 143, 146; Theognos- tus, 186; third century, 198 ; Me- thodius, 289 ; Maximus, 288 ; Dionysius, 290. Church, The. In Gospels, 34 ; Paul, 38, 45; Apostolic age, 49, 52; Clement of Rome, 58 ; Ignatius, 66 ; Hermas, 62 f. ; Barnabas, 72 ; Didache, 74 ; epistle of Clement, 77 ; Apostolic fathers, 80 ; Apolo- gists, 116; Antignostic fathers, 138 ; Clement of Alexandria, 145 ; Ori- gen, 159; second century, 175 J Callistus, 177 f.; Novatian, 179 ; Methodius, 189 ; Cyprian, 180, 185, 198 ; Augustine, 309, 312, 317 f., 324f.; Jovinian, 331 n.; Fulgentius, 363 n.; a necessity, 161 ; marks of, 138 ; nature and holiness of, 174 ; no salvation outside of, 183, 318; represented by bishops, 182, 185 ; secularization of, 162; term '* Catholic" applied to, 66; un- worthy members of, 46 ; visible and invisible, 159, 324, 325 ; and predestination, 326 ; and the state, 166, 218, 222, 234, 274, 279, 285, 289, 3°3f 3<^5^ 327- Chrysostom, works of, 288 ; on hu- man ability and sin, 328 ; the fall, 329 ; grace, 329. Circumcelliones, 314. Circumcision demanded, 88, 89. Clement, homily of, 55 ; legalism of, 76 ff.; on Holy Spirit, 75 5 inimor- tality, 75 ff.; baptism, repentance, obedience, righteousness, good works, 76 ; resurrection of the body, 77 ; eternal punishment, 76, 77 ; mt^rit, 77. Clement of Alexandria, works of, 140 ; estimate of, 141 ; on God, Trinity, 142 ; Scriptures, 142; faith, 142, 144 ; Christian life, 142, 146 ; Docetism, 143 ; Logos, passi- bility of Christ, 143; human ability, righteousness, 144 ; knowledge, love, 144 ; Holy Spirit, the church, baptism, 145 ; eucharist, resurrec- tion of the body, 146; conversion after death, 146. Clement of Rome, 55 ; on God, 56 ; divinity of Christ, incarnation, 56 . 39^ INDEX. work and sufferings of Christ, 57 ; justification and obedience, 57 ; the church, 58 ; resurrection of the body, 58 Clementines, 90. Cleomenes, 167. Coelestine I., Pope, and Nestorius, 263; letter of, 377 f., 385 ; and Semipelagianism, 377 ; on the fall, 377 ff- ; grace, co-operation, 378. Commodian, 169, 192, 193 f. Conimunicatio idiomatinn. In the Cappadocians, 251 ; Cyril of Alex- andria, 252 f. ; Pope Leo, 270 ; John of Damascus, 287. Communion of saints. In Barnabas, 72 ; Apostolic fathers, 80 ; Augus- tine, 324, 324 n., 325. Communion with Christ. In John, 50; Polycarp, 69; Origen, 153, 155 ; Dionysius, 276. Communion with God. In John, 5 1 ; Apostolic fathers, 79 ; Iren^eus, 129; Tertullian, 131 ; Gnostics, 142, 144 ; Athanasius, 214 ; Diony- sius, 291 f. ; Augustine, 311 f. Concupiscence, 41, 343^-7 345> 347» 359, 374- Confession to God. In Didache, 75 \ Tertullian, 133 ; Origen, 158 ; Methodius, 190; Greek Church, 301. Confession to man. In Alexandrine fathers, 158 ; Tertullian, 175 ; Greek Church, 301 ; Methodius, 190 ; to bishops, 190. Constans I. In Arian controversy, 221 ; inDonatist controversy, 314. Constans II. In Monothelete con- troversy, 280 ; Typos of, 280 ; tyranny of, 280. Constantine I., at Nice, 216; and Nicene Creed, 219 ; and state church, 218 ; and Donatists, 314, 316 n. Constantine Pogonatus. In Monothe- lete controversy, 282 ; in Icono- clastic controversy, 305. Constantinople, Council at (A. D. 360), 225 ; (A. D. 381), 234; (A. D. 382), 235; (A. D. 448), 267; (A. D. 533 or 531), 276; (A. D. 680), 282,386; (A. D. 754), 305- Constantius. In Arian controversy, 221 ; in Donatist controversy, 314. Contemplation (see Communion with God); Mystic, 291 ff. Conversion. In Paul, 42 ; Cassian, 371 ; after death, 146. Co-operation, of God with man (see Assistance); of man with God, 373> 378- Cornelius, 179. Cosmology of Jews, 31. Council, at Alexandria (A. D. 362), 226; (A. D. 363), 227; (A. D. 430). 263 ; at Ancyra (A. D. 358), 224 ; at Antioch (A. D. 265-269, three), 165; (A. D. 341), 219; (A. D. 358), 224; (A. D. i^z\ I'l'j ; at Ariminium (A. D. 350), 224; at Aries (A. D. 316), 314; (A. D. 353), 222; (ca.A.D. 473), yi^, 379; at Autun (A. D. 670), 242 ; at Bitterae (A. D. 356), 222 ; at Bostra (A. D. 244), 169; at Carthage (A. D. 252), 180 (A. D. 255, 256), 184; (A. D. 411 or 412), 354 ; (A. D. 416), 354 ; (A. D.4i7or4i8),356;(A. D.418), 356, 386 ; at Chalcedon (A. D. 451), 269, 270; at Constantinople (A. D. 360). 225; (A. D. 381), 234; (A. D. 382), 235; (A. D. 448), 267 ; (A. D. 533 or 531), 276, 277; (A. D. 680), 282, 386; (A. D. 754), 305; Diasco- polis (A. D. 415), 354, 355; Elvira (A. D.306?), 303; Ephesns INDEX. 397 (A. D. 430, 264, 265 n.; (A. D. 449), 268; Iconium (A. D. 235), 1S4 ; Jerusalem (A. D. 415), 354; Lydda (A. D.4i5)» 354; Lyons (ca. A. D. 473), 376; Milan (A. D. 355), 222; Mileve (A, D. 416), 354; Nice (A. D. 325), 215 f., 227; (A. D. 787), 306; Orange (A. D. 529), 379 n., 380; Rimini, 226; Rome (A. D. 369 or 370), 234 ; (A, D. 382), 235; (A. D. 417), 355; (A. D. 649), 281 ; Valence (bef. A. D. 529), 379. 381. Counsels and precepts, 133. Covenant, the new. In Paul, 23 f-, 44 r.; Apostolic age, 47; Barnabas, 70; Antignostic Father?, 123. Covenant, the old. In Barnabas, 72 ; Antignostic fathers, 123. Covenants, the three, 123. Cross, worship of the, 286, 297. Creation, 187. Creationism, 187, 344, 377. Creatures, 151- Creed, the Apostles'. Text of, 84f. ; influence of, 86 ; in Paul, 37 ; Ori- gen, 84; Antignostic fathers, 136. Cyprian, works of, 178, 191, 198; legalism of, 198, 308 ; relation to Donatism, 315 5 on incarnation, 170; excommunication, 175; bishops, 179, 180; thelapsed, 178 ; the church, 180-185, ^9^7 priest- hood, 182; heretic baptism, 184; salvation of souls, immortality, 192 ; baptism, 193 f. ; faith, 194 ; repentance, satisfaction, eucharist, 195; good works, 193, 195; sac- rifice, celibacy, 197 ; millennium, purgatory, 197 ; papacy, 386. Cyril of Alexandria, works of, 251 ; relation to Nestorius, 262, 263, 271 ; relation to Severus, 277 ; religious aims of, 255 ; deposed and restored, 264, 265 ; at Coun- cil of Ephesus, 264 ; as leader of Monophysites, 267 ; estimate of, 254, 255, 263, 267 ; final in- fluence of, 285 ; on person of Christ, 252ff., 262 ff., 284, 369 ; Logos, 252, 262 ff. ; communicatio idiomatum, 252 ff. ; work of Christ, 255; *'MotherofGod," 262, 263 ; passibility of Christ, 254, 263. Cyril of Jerusalem, catechism of, 288 ; on orthodoxy, 289 ; good works, 289 ; eucharist, 301. Damascus, 234. De fide orthodoxa^ iZ' De montibtis Sina et ^ir-:n^ 166 De principiis^ 146 ff. De vocatione gentium^ yj2. ff. Deacons in Greek Church, 291. Decian persecution, 178 ff. Deification of man, 212, 296. Demiurge. In Marcion, 102 ; Origen, 152. Demons, 96. Depravity of man. In Judaism, 31 ; Paul, 41, 42 ; Apostolic fathers, 78 ; Gnostics, 96 ; Origen, 157, 161 ; Dionysius, 292 f. ; Eastern Church, 32S ; Pelagius, 335 f- 1 Augustine, 338, 34I f., 367 ; Cas- sian, 370 ; decrees of Orange, 381. Desce7isus ad inferos y 1 53. Devil. In Origen, I47, 157 \ Greek Church, 292 ; Dionysius, 295. Diospolis, Council at, 354, 355. Didache, 37 ; character of, 55 ; au- thority of, 83 ; on Holy Spirit, Trinity, church, 74 ; baptism, 74, 75 ; eucharist, 74, 75 ; eschatology, immortality, 74, 75 ; repentance, confession, 75. Diodorus, works of, 247 ; on person 398 INDEX. of Christ, 249 ; " Mother of God," 249. Dionysius of Alexandria, writings of, 185 ; influenced by Origen, 185 ; on divinity of Christ, 171, 173. Dionysius of Milan, 222. Dionysius of Rome, on divinity of Christ, 171, 206 ; Trinity, 172. Dionysius the Areopagile, Neoplaton- ism of, 292, 299 ; on God, 290, 292 n.; Christian life, "hierarchy," 290; hierarchy of angels, 291 ; sacred mysteries, 291, 297, 298 ; mystic contemplation, 291 ; devil, 292, 295 ; depravity, 292 f.; thefall, original sin, 293 ; human ability, 294; work of Christ, 295 f.; deifi- cation of man, 296 f. ; incarnation, 296 ; good works, 297 ; worship of cross, etc., 297 ; means of grace, 298; baptism, 299 f.; repentance, forgiveness of sins, 300. Dioscurus, Monophysite views of, 267 ; estimate of, 26S ; at Ephesus, 268; atChalcedon, 270; exiled, 272. Docetism, 143. Doctrine, substance and form of, 21 ; of New Testament summarized, 52. Dogma, definition of, 19 ; fallibility of, 20 ; abuse of, 21 ; acceptance of, 21 ; estimate of, 388. Dominical character, 319. Domnus of Antioch, 268. Donatism, origin of, 313 ; teachings of, 315 ; decay of, 315 ; relation to Cyprian, 315 ; estimate of, 315. Donatistic controversy, 312 ff. ; sacra- ments, 320. Donatists on baptism, 316, 320 f,; papacy, 386. Donatus, 313. Dualism, Ebionite, 91 ; Gnostic, 95 ; in Marcion, I02. Dyotheletism. In Maximus, 280 fF.; John of Damascus, 286. E. Eastern Church, in third century, 198, 199 ; doctrines of, 387 ff.; piety of, 201 ; vs. Western Church, 19 ; in post-Nicene age, 328 ; on eucha- rist, 89 ; dualism, 91 ; depravity, 328; synergism, 331 ; orthodoxy, 198, 199. Ebionites, 87-91 ; gospel of, 88 ; on celibacy, 91. Ecthesis pisteos^ 280, 281. Elect, number of the, 351, 351 n.; vs, called, 339. Election. In Paul, 39 ; Augustine, zz% 340. Elkesai, 89 f. Elvira, Council at, 303. Emanation of the world, 90. Enchiridion^ 357 f- Energy vs. power. In God, 220. Ephesus, Council at (A. D. 431), 264, 265 n. ; on papal infallibility, 386; Pelagianism, 387 n.; council at (A. D. 449), 268 ff.; second confession of, 269. Epigones, 167. Episcopate. In Clement of Rome, 58 ; Ignatius, 67, 69 ; Apostolic fathers, 80; Antignostic fathers, 137 ff.; Callistus, 177 f. ; Cyprian, 175, 179, 180 ; Methodius, 189 ; Au- gustine, 326 ; Vincent, 3S5 (see Bishops). Eschatology. In Gospels, 34 ; Paul, 46 ; Apostolic age, 49, 52 ; John, 50 ; Papias, 70 ; Barnabas, lo ; Didache, 74 f.; Apostolic fathers, 81 ; Gnosticism, 98 ; Montanism, 105 ; Iren?eus, 134 ; Dionysius of Alexandria, 185 ; Cyprian, 197 ; ApoUinaris, 246 n. Eucharist, The. In Gospels, 37 ; Paul, 46 ; Apostolic age, S^ ; Ig- natius, 68 ; Apostolic fathers, 79 i INDEX. 399 Didache, 74, 75 ; Ebionites, 89 Apologists, 117; IrensEus, 134 Clement of Alexandria, 146 Origen, 156 ; Cyprian, 195 ; Basil the Great, 301 ; Cyprian of Jeru- salem, 301 ; John of Damascus, 302; Augustine, 320 f.; and im- mortality, 79, 146, 302 ; and word, 156; as a sacrifice, 196, 301, 302, 323; benediction in, 178, 180; benefits of, 74, 117, 146, 156, 195, 301, 323; denied to the lapsed, 178 f.; in Greek Church, 291, 301 f.; real presence in, 134 ; sym- bolic view of, 301, 323 ; water as element in, S9, 117. Eudoxius, 225. Eugene I., 282. Eunomians, 223, 225. Eunomius condemned, 234. Euphronius, 241. Eusebius of Caesarea, confession of, 216, 217 ; banished and restored, 217, 219; on Nicene Creed, 218. Eusebius of Dorylaum, 268. Eusebius of Nicomedia, relation to Lucian, 202 ; relation to Arius, 202, 205 ; at Council of Nice, 216 ; as bishop of Constantinople, 219. Eusebius of Vercelli, 222. Eustathius, 219. Eutyches, deposed and excommuni- cated, 267 ; appeal of, to Rome, 268; restored, 268; exiled, 272; rejected by Monophysites, 277. Eutychian controversy, 267-272. Eutychianism condemned, 273. Euzoius, 223. Evil. In Gnosticism, 96 ; Augustine, 358, 359- Excommunication. In Tertullian, 175 ; Callistus, 177 ; Cyprian, 178. Externality. In Eastern Church, 289, 290, '299 ; in Western Church, 290. Extreme unction, 99. F. Faith, definition of, 21 ; in teaching of Christ, 34 ; Paul, 38, 42, 44 ; Apos- tolic age, 48, 52 ; John, 50 f.; Clem- ent of Rome, 57 ; Hermas, 60 ; Ig- natius, 65 f. ; Polycarp, 69 ; homily of Clement, 76 ; Apostohc fathers, 77, 79f. ; Marcion, 103; Irenaeus, 130 ; Antignostic fathers, 131, 139 ; Clement of Alexandria, 142, 144 ; Origen, 158, 160 ; Cyprian, 194; John of Damascus, 286; Augustine, 310, 340, 347, 349, 352, 358* 366, 367 ; Faustus, 375 ; canons of Orange, 381 ; alone, 43) 35^ ; ^s assent, 21, 42, 61, 76, 139, 142, 144, 158, 166, 191, 194, 286, 289, 299, 347, 381, 388 ; as trust, 21, 57, 79, 131, 158, 310, 340 ; as obedience, 21, 42, 48, 132 ; a gift of God, 42, 44, 74, I30> 349. 367, 375 ; a receiving, 42 ; a spiritual activity, 42 ; med- ieval idea of, 373 ; and hope, 48, 69, 71, 366 ; and knowledge, 144, 158, 347 ; and love, 42, 50, 66, 69, I39» M4, 310, 340, 347» 348, 349, 352, 358, 366, 367. Fall, The. In Irenaeus, 129 ; Metho- dius, 188 ; Dionysius, 293 ; Chrysostom, 329 ; Pelagius, 334 ; de vocatione gentium, 373 ; Coeles- tine, 377 f.; Augustine, 392. Fanaticism, 314. Fastidius, 382. Fasting, 76, 331 n. Faustus, works of, 374, 375 ; on grace, 374, 375 ; original sin, con- cupiscence, 374 ; human ability, 375 ; divine assistance, faith, 375 ; predestination, 376 ; unbaptized children, 376 ; traducianism, 377- Felicissimus, 179. 4-00 INDEX. Felix III. In Monophysite contro- versy, 274. Felix IV., 380. Felix of Aptunga. In Donatistic con- troversy, 313,314. FiHoqtte, 237. Firmilian, on Roman primacy, 183. Flavian, 26S. Forgiveness of sins. In New Testa- ment, 2>^ ; Paul, 44 ; Hermas, 60 f.; Barnabas, 70, 73 ; Apostolic fathers, 78 ; Origen, 157 ; second century, 175 ; Western theology, 193; Dionysius, 300; Augustine, 322, 347> 350^362; Ambrose, 380; announcement of, 159; by bishops, 177, 184, 190; of others, ^6^ (see Baptism). Formula macrostichos, 219. Fornication, 176, 177- Fortunatus, on the lapsed, 179 J and the Quicunque, 241. Freedom from the law^, 42, 44. Fulgentius, works of, 253 ; on grace, predestination, 379>3S3ii-> system of theology, 383 ; original sin, re- pentance, good works, church, 383 n. ; unbaptized children, 383 n. Gaianites, 278. Gelasius I., on Pelagianism and Semi- pelagianism, 377 ; papal suprem- acy and infallibility, 386. Generation, act of, 35?) 374i^-j 38211.; generation of Christ, 149, 205, 209, 219, 222. Gennadius, works of, 383 ; on grace, 374 n.; on systematic theology, Germanus on images, 304. Gnosis. In Barnabas, 72; Didache, 74- Gnosticism, Gentile-Christian, 91- 102 ; aims and principles of, 93 ff. ; systems in, 93 ; condemned by John, 92 ; specific teachings of, 95 f. ; on demons, depravity, 96 ; asceticism, immorality, 98 ; mys- teries, eschatology, 98 ; miracles, extreme unction, 99 ; estimate of, 100, iiS, 119 ; the later, 141 f . ; higher mysteries in, 142 ; on com- munion with God, 142, 144 ; on perfection, 145, 148; condemned by Alexandrine fathers, 161. God, Greek conception of, 28 f. ; Jewish-Gnostic conception of, 31 ; in Paul, 38 f.; Apostolic age, 46 ; Clement of Rome, 5^ > Ignatius, 63 ; Apostolic fathers, 77, 79 ; Clementines, 90; Apologists, 112; Antignostic fathers, 1 19, 139 ; Clement of Alexandria, 142 ; Ori- gen, 147 ff. ; Theognostus, 186 ; Western theologians, 193 ; Atlian- asius, 206 f.; Antiochians, 250; John of Damascus, 286 ; Diony- sius, 290, 292 n. ; Augustine, 310, 340, 367 ; Coelestine, 378 ; as Father, 149; a, Spirit, 120; good- ness of, 120, 149; justice of, 120, 149, 352 ; known only by revela- tion, 120 ; unity of, 120 (see Christ, Trinity). Good, original, 346. Gospel. In Ignatius, 66 ; Origen, 155 ; as legacy to the church, 388 ; the everlasting, 160. Grace. In Paul, 39, 43 ; Polycarp, 69; Justin Martyr, 116; Augus- tine, 312, 324, 328, 338, 339^341, 346, 349. 352, 359» 365 ; Chrysos- tom, 329; Ambrose, 329, 330; Pelagius, 336 ; Council of Car- thage, 356 ; Cassian, 370 f.; Gen- nadius, 374 n. ; Faustus, 374, 375 ; Fulgentius, 379 ; Coelestine, 378 ; Caesarius, 379 ; Council of INDEX. 401 Valentia, 379, 38111; decrees of Orange, 381; libertines of, 374; means of (images), 304; (vari- ous), 298, 299 ; (word and sacra- ments), 320; sacramental, 381 ; state of, 131. Gratian. In Donatist controversy, 3H- Greek Christianity, 288-302 ; aim of, 292; externality of, 289 f., 299; doctrine in, 292 ff.; central idea of, 296 ; elements of true religion in, 299; on God, 290 ; Logos, 171, ^73} 179; tradition, 289; sacra- ments, 291 ; hierarchies, 291 ; chrism, 291, 298; Monasticism, priesthood, 291, 299 ; mysteries, 289 f., 291, 297, 298, 303, 329; asceticism, 298 ; images, 298, 304 ; confession, real presence, 301. Greek philosophy, on reason, Logos, 29; and Judaism, 31. Gregory of Nazianzen, works of, 227 ; on person of Christ, 250 ; ransom from the devil, 296 (see Cappado- cians). Gregory of Nyssa, worksof, 227, 228 ; on person of Christ, 250 (see Cap- padocians). Gregory Thaumaturgus, 185. Gregory IL of Rome, on images, 304. Guilt. In Paul, 43 ; Augustine, 342. H. Habitus, 328, 330. Harnack. On dogmas, 21 ; millen- nial expectation, 81 ; Tertullian's Christology, 127 ; Greek piety, 285 ; Catholic doctrine, 382. Heathenism, Greek- Roman, 28 f.; morality in, 29 ; Apologists on, III. Hebrews, Epistle to the, 47. 2') Hell, 366, 375 n. Heracleon, 93. Heraclius, in Monophysite contro- versy, 279. Heretics in Apostolic age, 92. Heresy, conception of, 162, 384. Hermas, works of, 55 ; authority of, 83 ; legalism of, 61 ; on incarna- tion. Logos, 59 ; forgiveness of sins, 60 f. ; baptism, 60, 62 ; sin, 62; the church, 62 f. ; second re- pentance, 61, 63, 175. " Hierarchy " in Greek Church, 290, 291. Hierarchy of angels, 291. Hilary (layman), on predestination, 368. Hilary of Poitiers, banished, 222 ; works of, 255 ; on person of Christ, incarnation, 255 f.; passibility of Christ, 256; kenosis, 256 ; original sin, 329 n. ; Trinity, 308 ; predes- tination, 368. HippolytuSj works of, 1 18; on per- son of Christ, 127 ff.; subordina- tionism, 128; incarnation, bap- tism, 131 ; Patripassianism, 16S. History of Doctrines, office of, 19 ; sources of, 22 ; aims, methods, di- visions of, 22, 24 ; scope of, 23 ; literature of, 25 f. Holy Spirit, The. In Gospels, 35, 36,38; Paul, 41, 42,46; John, 50 ; Apostolic age, 46, 52 ; Di- dache, 74 ; homily of Clement, 75; Apologists, 114; Antignostic fathers, 121 ; Iren£eus,_ 125, 130, 139; Clement of Alexandria, 145; Origen, 147, 150; Theognostus, 186; Council of Nice, 227 ; Athan- asius, 215,227, 231 ; Macedonius, 227 ; Council at Alexandria, 227 ; Augustine, 348 ; homousia of, 215, 227, 231 ; infusion of, in baptism, 133 ; procession of, 232, 237, 239; 402 INDEX. various conceptions of, 231 (see Trinity). Homoiusians, recognized by Athana- sius, 226. Horoousia of the Son. In Tertul- lian, 126; Origen, 149; Council at Antioch, 166 ; Alexander of Alexandria, 205 ; Athanasius, 209 f.; Council at Nice, 216; Ni- cene Creed, 218 ; post-Nicene con- troversies, 222 f. ; Council at Ancyra, 224 ; Cappadocians, 229 ; Meletius, 234 ; John of Damascus, 236 ; Augustine, 238 f.; Apolli- naris, 244 f.; Antiochians, 247 f.; Cyril of Alexandria, 252; Mono- physites, 277 ; Christological con- troversies, 284. Homousia of the Holy Spirit. In Athanasius, 215 ; Council at Chal- cedon, 227 ; Cappadocians, 231. Homousians, triumph of, 228. Honorius, Emperor, in Donatist con- troversy, 314. Honorius, Pope, anathematized, 282 ; on theandric energy, 278 ; Mono- theletisra, 280. Hope. In Apostolic age, 48, 49 ; Polycarp, 69; Barnabas, 71 ; Au- gustine, 366, Horae, 121. Hormisdas. On Monophysite con- troversy, 274, 276 ; Semipelagian- ism, 378 f-; papacy, 387. Hosius, 222. Hylic, The, 98. Hymns, Gnostic, 99. Hypostasis. In Origen, 149 ; Athan- asius, 210, 2281.; Basil of An- cyra, 225 ; Augustine, 239; Cyril, 253 f-» 263 ; Leontius, 275 ; John of Damascus, 286 (see ** Person of Christ"). I. Ibas. On humanity of Christ, 249 ; condemned, 276. Iconium, Council at, 184. Iconoclastic controversy, 303 f. ; esti- mate of, 305. Idiomata, 228 ff. Ignatius, v^orks of, 55. On God, 63 ; divinity of Christ, 63 ; Logos, person of Christ, 64 ; incarnation, 64, 68 ; passibility of Christ, 65 ; Christ in us, 66, 68 ; faith, love, 64,66; the church, 66; bishops, 67; baptism, eucharist, 68 ; Judaism, 68; Christian hfe, 68 ff. Images, worship of. In Greek Church, 298, 304 ; John of Damas- cus, 304 ; Gregory of Rome, 304, Immortality. In the Gospels, 52 ; Ignatius, 68 ; Didache, 74, 75 ; homily of Clement, 75!.; Apos- tolic fathers, 79 ; Gnostics, 98 ; Apologists, 117 ; Antignostic fathers, 122; Irenasus, 130, 131, 139 ; Clement of Alexandria, 146 ; Methodius, 187, 189 ; Cyprian, 192 ; Western theology, 198 ; Greek Church, 302 ; and baptism, 131, 189; and eucharist, 68, 75» 79, 146, 302 ; not an original en- dowment, 122. Imperialism. In the church, 1 66, 218, 222, 234, 274, 279, 285, 289, 303* 305- Incarnation, The. In Gospels, 25 I Paul, 40 ; Apostolic age, 47 ; John, 50, 51 ; Clement of Rome, 5^1 Hermas, 59 ; Ignatius, 64, 68 ; Barnabas, 70; Irenaeus, 125, 129; Tertullian, 126 ; Hippolytus, 131 ; Origen, 152 ; Ante-Nicene fathers, 170; Cyprian, 170 ; Theognostus, 186; Athanasius, 211, 213 ; Apol- linaris, 245; Antiochians, 247 f.; INDEX. 403 Cyril of Alexandria, 252 f.; Hi- lary, 25s ; Ambrose, 256; Augus- tine, 258 f.; Maximus, 281 ; John of Damascus, 286 ; Dionysius, 296. Infallibility of the Pope. In Ter- tullian, 137; 386; Callistus, 176, 386; Pope Stephanus, 183, 386; Pope Innocent I., 354, 355, 356, 386 ; Pope Leo, 270 f. ; 386 ; Augustine, 319 ; under emperors, 222, 235, 268f., 272n., 276f., 281,303, 356. Infusion of good-will. In Augus- tine, 349 ff-; Cassian, 370, 372; decrees of Orange, 381. Innocent I. On Pelagianism, 354 f., 355 n. ; papal infallibility, 356, 386. Intercession, of Christ, 47, 193, 295 ; of martyrs, 156. Intercourse, sexual, 366 (see Concu- piscence). Intermediate state, 366 (see Purga- tory). Introhypostatic nature, 275. Irenseus, works of, I18 ; on person of Christ, 124; incarnation, 125, 129; Holy Spirit, 125, 130, 139; work of Christ, new law, 128; second Adam, the fall, communion with God, 129; immortality, 130, 131,139; faith, 130; justification, 131 ; new life, 131, 132 ; resurrec- tion of the body, 134, 139 ; eucha- rist, millennium, antichrist, resur- rection of Christ, 134; authority of Scriptures, 135; papal infallibility, 137, 386. Irene, Empress. On images, 306, Jacob el Baradai, 279. Jacobites, 279. Jerome. On Pelagius, 354 ; primacy of Rome, 386. Jerusalem, Council at, 354. John, influence of, 50 ; character of, 50 ; on death of Christ, ;^^ ; justi- fication, 48 ; divinity, dominion, and person of Christ, 50 ; escha- tology, 50 ; Logos, incarnation, 50, 51 ; communion with. Chiist, Holy Spirit, regeneration, 5*^ 5 faith, love, 50, 51 ; new law, righteous- ness, sin, repentance, 51. John Ascusnages, 236. John II. , Pope. On Monophysite controversy, 276 ; Monothelete controversy, 280. John of Antioch, 264. John of Damascus, works of, 236, 286, 288 ; de fide orthodoxa of, 286, 288 ; deficiency in the theol- ogy of, 286 ; estimate of, 288 ; on Trinity, 236 f. ; God, person of Christ, 286 f.; worship of saints and relics, 286 ; systematic theol- ogy, 286 n. ; passibility of Christ, communicatio idiomatum, 287 ; death of Christ, ransom, 295 ; eucharist, 302 ; images, 304. John of Ephesus, 278. John of Jerusalem, on divine assist- ance, 354. John Philoponus, 236. Jovian. In Donatist controversy, 314 ; Christological controversy, 233. Jovinian, teachings of, 331 n. Judaic Christianity, 87-91 ; legalism of, 87 f. ; on divinity of Christ, 88 ; justification, 89. Judaism, legalism in, 30 ; Barnabas on, 72 ; on original sin, 31 ; Logos, 88; and Greek philosophy, 31; and Christianity, 68. Julian, Emperor. In Christological controversy, 233. Julian of Eclanum, works of, 332 ; on 404 INDEX. original sin, 357 ; and Pelagius, 356; and Augustine, 357. Julian of Halicarnassus, 277. Julianists, 277 ; on passibility of Christ, 278. Julius, Pope, letter of, 219. Justification. In Paul, ^S^ 43, 44, 45 ; John, 48 ; Apostolic age, 48, 49 ; Clement of Rome, 57 ; Bar- nabas, 71 ; Judaic Christianity, 89 ; Irenasus, 131; Origen, 158; Vic- torinus, 308 ; Augustine, 347, 348, 349- Justin Martyr, works of, 109 (see Apologists). Justin, the Gnostic, 93. Justinian. In Monophysite contro- versy, 274, 278 ; on state church, 278 ; papacy, 387. K Kainites, 93. Kingdom, millennial (see Millen- nium). Kingdom of God. In the future, 74, 77, 81 ; in the present, 326, 327. Knowledge. In Gnosticism, 93 f. ; Clement of Alexandria, 144, 145 ; Origen, 158 ; Augustine, 310, 347. Lactantius, works of, 192 ; on di- vinity of Christ, 170. Lapsed, The, Roman Church on, 178, 180; Cyprian on, 178; No- vatian on, 179; eucharist denied to, 178 f.; benediction denied to, 178, 180. Law, freedom from the, 42, 44 ; and gospel, in Paul, 38, 43 f. ; Marcion, 102 ; Pelagius, 338 ; natural, 123 ; of Christ, 69, 71 (see New Law) ; of love, 123, 128, 139 ; true ful- fillment of the, 134 ; written in the heart, 33 f. Law, the new. In John, 51 ; in Bar- nabas, 71 ; Apostolic fathers, 79, 81, 84; Irenseus, 128 ; TertuUian, 131; Origen, 153; Western theo- logians, 193 f. Legahsm. In Judaism, 30 ; Hermas, 61 ; Barnabas, 72 ; homily of Clement, 76 f.; Apostolic fathers, 79, 81 ; Judaic Christianity, 87; Apologists, 118; Alexandrine fathers, l6l ; TertuUian, 132, 133, 139; Cyprian, 198, 308; Augus- tine, 308 ; Pelagius, ssy. Leo I., Emperor, and Chalcedon creed, 273. Leo IV., Emperor, and Iconoclastic controversy, 303. Leo, Emperor, the Isaurian, and Iconoclastic controversy, 306. Leo I., Pope. In Eutychian contro- versy, 268 ; at Council of Chalce- don, 269 ; excommunicated, 269 ; doctrinal letter of, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 279; on communicatio idioraatum, 270 ; papal infallibil- ity, 27of, 271 n., 386; Pelagian- ism, 377. Leontius i/s. Nestorius and Eutyches, 275 ; and formulas of Chalcedon, 275 ; on person of Christ, 275 f., 284. Libelh of the lapsed, 178. Liberius, of Rome, 222, 233. Logos, The. In Greek philosophy, 29; John, 50, 51 ; Clement of Rome, 56 ; Hermas, 59 ; Ignatius, 64 f ; Judaism, 88 ; Apostolic fathers, Ii3f. ; Irengeus, 124 ; Ter- tuUian, 125 ; Hippolytus, 127 ; Clement of Alexandria, 143 ; Paul of Samosata, 164; Greek theol- ogy* i7i» I73» 199; Methodius, 174, 189; Arius, 203, 207; Lu- INDEX. 405 cian, 204 ; Athanasius, 206, 208 f. ; Marcellus, 220 ; Apollinaris, 245 ; Antiochians, 248 ; Cyril of Alex- andria, 252, 262 f. ; Hilary, 255 ; Ambrose, 256; Augustine, 257 f-j Kestorius, 261 f.; Leontius, 276; Sergius, 279 ; John of Damascus, 286 ; Dionysius, 296. Love. In John, ^o, ^i ; apostolic age, 52 ; Clement of Rome, 57 ; Ignatius, 66 ; Polycarp, 69 ; Apos- tolic fathers, "J^f.; Clement of Alexandria, 144; Augustine, 310, 324 f., 347, 348, 366. Lucian, relation to Paul of Samosata, 201 ; relation to Arius, 202 ; on Logos, 204. Lucidus, on human ability, redemp- tion, predestination, 376 n.; hell, 377 n. Lucifer of Calaris, 222. Lucilla. In Donatist controversy, 3^3- Lutheran Church, doctrine of, 388. Lydda, Council at, 304. Lyons, Council at, 376. M. Macarius, homilies of, 288. Macedonians condemned, 234. Macedonius, 227 Majorinus. In Donatist controversy, 3^3- Malchion, 165. Man, deification of, 212, 246; origi- nal state of, 341 : preexistence of, 151, 157, 186, 187. Manger, worship of, 286, 298. Manichseans, 227. Marcus Erimita, on sin, 294. Marcellians, condemned, 234. Marcellus, the creed in, 84 ; and the Arians, 220 ; attitude of Athanasius toward, 221, 233 ; on unity and Trinity of God, 220 ; Logos, per- son of Christ, 220 ; condemned, 222. Marcellinus, In Donatist controversy, 315* Marcianus, works of, 109. Marcion, 93 ; career and teachings of, 102 f.; asceticism of, 103; on law and Gospel, 102 ; demiurge, 102, 103 ; dualism, 102 ; faith, resurrection of the body, 103 ; interpretation of Scriptures, 104. Marcionite, congregation, 104 ; con- troversy, 104. Marcionites, 169. Maronites, church of the, 283. Martin I. In Monothelete contro- versy, 281 ; on eucharist, 282. Martyrdom. In Origan, 156. Martyrs, intercession of, 156. Mass, the, 323. Maximian, 314. Maximilla, 105, 107. Maximus, works of, 288 ; exiled, 282; in Dyotheletism, 28of.; hu- manity of Christ, 281 ; person of Christ, 28 1, 285 ; Christian life, 288. Median being. In Arianism, 202 f. Melito, works of, 109. Melitius of Antioch, 234. Memnon, at Council of Ephesus, 264, 265. Menander, on angels, 93. Mensurius. In Donatist controversy, 3^3- Merit, human, 77, 79, 147, 366, 372 n. (see Works, Good). Messiah, the, Jewish conceptions of, Scriptural representation of, ^;i. Methodius, works of, 173; estimate of, 191 ; relation to Origen, 186 ; on Trinity, 173 ; Logos, 174, i8g; interpretation of Scripture, 187 ; preexistence of souls, creation, 4o6 INDEX. human ability, resurrection of the body, 187 ; the fall, 187 f.; death, 188 ; salvation, 188 ; baptism, 188, 189 ; the church, 189 ; ascet- icism, celibacy, 190 ; repentance, confession, 190 ; Christ in us, 191 ; immortality, 191 ; orthodoxy, 190 n., 289; good works, 289. Michael II., and images, 307. Milan, Council at, 222. Mileve, Council at, 354- Millennium. In Papias, 70 ; Bar- nabas, 73 ; Apostolic fathers, 81 ; Judaic Christianity, 89 ; Irenteus, 34 ; Dionysius of Alexandria, 185 ; Cyprian, 197 ; ApoUinaris, 246 n. Miltiades, works of, 109 ; vs. Mon- tanism, 107. Miracles. In Gospels, 36 ; Gnostic, 99- Monarchianism, 162, 163, 168, 169; estimate of, 169 ; in Anus, 202, 204; Dynamistic, 162, 167 ; Patri- passian, 162, 166 f., 169. Monasticism. In Greek Church, 291. Montanism, nature of, loi ; rise and decay of, 105, 108 ; charisms in, 105 f.; eschatology in, 105 ; asceti- cism in, 106; congregations of, 106; condemned, 107 f.; results of, 108. Montanus, career and teachings of, 105. Monophysite controversy, 273 f., 279, 284, 285 ; pantheism, 278 n. Monophysitism, attempted suppres- sion of, 275 ; spread of, 279; dis- sensions in, 277 ; in Greek piety, 285. Monothelete controversy, 279-283, 285. Monotheletism, revival of, 283. Morality, heathen, 29; Christian, 42,49; double, 197. ** Mother of God." In Antiochians, 249 ; Diodorus, 249 ; Cyril of Alexandria, 254, 262 f. ; Nestorius, 261, 262, 264. Mysteries. In Gnosticism, 98, 142 ; Origen, 155 ; Greek Church, 289 f., 291, 297, 298, 303, 329. N. Naasenes, 93. Nazarenes, 87. Neoplatonism, influence of, 146 ; in Dionysius, 292, 299 ; Iconoclastic controversy, 303 ; Victorinus, 308 ; Augustine, 309, 310, 341, 357. Nestorian controversy, 261-266. Nestorians condemned, 266, 267, 273, 284. Nestorius, works of, 261 ; Christology of, 261 f.; and Cyril of Alexandria, 261, 262, 263, 271 ; and Pope Coelestine, 263 ; and Antiochians, 264 ; condemned, 264 ; at Council of Ephesus, 265 ; on ** Mother of God," 261, 262, 264; Logos, 261 f.; passibility of Christ, 264. New law, the. In John, 51 ; Bar- nabas, 71 ; Apostolic fathers, 79, 81 ; Irenseus, 128; Tertullian, 131 ; Origen, 151 ; Western theolo- gians, 193 f. New life. In Paul, 34, ^8, 42, 48 ; Apostolic age, 48 ; Barnabas, 70 f., 73; Irenseus, 131, 132. Nice, Council at (A. D. 325), 2i5f., 227; (A. D. 787), 306. Nicene Creed, the, adopted, 216, 217 ; opposition to, 218 ; endorsed, 227 ; established at Constantinople, 234 ; history of, 235 ; ascendency of, 235 ; estimate of, 235. Noetus, 167. louf vs. fpvxV', 15'* Novatian, rebaptism by, 179; and Novatus, 180 ; on Trinity, 169; purity of Ihe church, 179. INDEX. 407 Novatianism, spread of, 180 ; esti- mate of, 1 80 ; at Council of Nice, 217. Novatus, and Novatian, 180 ; on res- toration of the lapsed, 179, O. Obedience. In Paul, 42 ; Apostolic age, 48; Clement of Rome, 57; Hermas, 61 ; Polycarp, 69 ; homily of Clement, 76 ; Apostolic fathers, 79 ; Tertullian, 131 ; to bishops, 67, 69 (see Works, Good). Obstacle, to grace, 319 n. Office-bearers, influence of, 49, Ophites, 93. Orange, Council of, 379 n.; decrees of, 380 f; decrees confirmed, 381 ; on Pelagianism and Semipelagianr ism, 381 ; sin, depravity, ability, grace, 381 ; infusion of good- will, 381 ; faith, baptism, 381 ; divine assistance, predestination, 382. Ordination. In Paul, 38 ; validity of, 314; indelible character of, 319, 320. Origen, works of, 140 ; influence of, 185 ; influence on the Cappado- cians, 228, 229 ; de principiis of, 1 46 f ; and Methodius, 1 86 ; on interpretation of Scriptures, rule of faith, 147 ; God, divinity of Christ, 147; angels, 147, 154 ; devil, 147, 157; merit, good works, 147, 158 ; hypostasis and usia, I49; subordina- tionism,l5o; Holy Spirit, 147, 150; Trinity, 151; Logos, 149, 152, 155 ; human ability, 147, 151, 157 ; creatures, 151 ; incarnation, person of Christ, 152 ; passibility of Christ, demiurge, 152 ; mys- ticism, 153 ; descensus, resurrec- tion, ascension, session of Christ, 153 ; work of Christ, new law, gospel, 153 ; sufferings of Christ, satisfaction, 154 ; mediation of Christ, 155 ; baptism, 155 ; eu- charist, martyrdom, 156 ; commun- ion with Christ, 153, 155; de- pravity, 157, 161 ; predestination, 157; knowledge, repentance, con- fession, justification, 158 ; faith, 158, 160; asceticism, the church, forgiveness of sins, 159; paradise, purgatory, parousia, 159; celibacy, 159; resurrection of the body, 160. Origenists at Nice, 218. Original state, 341. Orosius, on Pelagius, 354. Orthodoxy. In Methodius, 1 90 n. , 289; Eastern theologians, 198, 199 ; Cappadocians, 233 ; Cyprian of Jerusalem, 289 ; Theodosius, 234 ; triumph of, 234. P. Pantaenus, 141. Papias, works of, 55 ; Chiliasmof, 70. Paraclete. In Gospels, 35 ; Mon- tanus, 105. Paradise. In Origen, 159. Parousia of Christ. In Gospels, 34 ; Paul, 40, 47 ; Apostolic age, 47, 52 ; Papias, 70 ; Barnabas, 70, 73; homily of Clement, 77; Origen, 159; in the believer, 188. Passibility of God, 167 f., 171 (see Christ, Passibility of ). Patripassians, 162 ; on divinity of Christ, 167 ; Trinity, 168. Paul, on death of Christ, 33 f. ; work of Christ, 34, 44, 55 ; Trinity, rule of faith, 36 ; new life, 34, 38, 42, 48 ; ordination, 33 ; law and gospel, 38, 43 f.; spirit and flesh, 38, 41 f.; church, 38, 45; God, 38 f.; election, 39; grace, 39, 43 ; dominion of Chri'^t, 39, 46 ; divin- 4o8 INDEX. ity of Christ, 39, 40 ; incarnation, person of Christ, 30 ; resurrection of Christ, 40, 41, 42 ; preexistence of Christ, 40 ; parousia of Christ, 40, 47 J prayer to Christ, 40 ; Holy Spirit, 41, 42, 46 ; original sin, concupiscence, 41 ; depravity, 41, 43 ; salvation, Christ in us, 41 ; spiritual believers, 42 ; resur- rection of the body, faith, 42, 43, 44 ; faith and love, 42 ; con- version, sanctification, 42 ; guilt, 43 ; justification, 43, 44, 45 ; free- dom from the law, 44, 45 ; good works, peace, 44 ; new covenant, ^'^j 44, 45 ; sacraments, eschatol- ogy, 46. Paul of Samosata, works of, 162 ; on Logos, 164; person of Christ, i6g, 221, 224 ; relation to Arius, 204 ; relation to Antiochians, 248 f ; condemnation of, 227. Paulinus of Antioch, on person of Christ, 234. Paulinus of Milan, on Pelagianism, 337, 353- Peace, 44, 367. Pelagianism, 331 ff.; on sin, 3370.; human ability, 353 ; Paulinus on, 337, 353 ; Augustine and bishops on, 354 ; Innocent I. on, 354, 355 n.; canons of Orange on, 381 ; condemned, 357. Pelagius, works of, 331; legalism of, 337 ; at Council of Jerusalem, 354 ; at Council at Diospolis or Lydda, 354; confession of, 355, 356; ex- communicated, 355 ; expelled from Rome, 356 ; on human ability, 332 f., 337, 355 ; depravity, 331 ff., 338; infant baptism, 335 n., 355; grace, divine assistance, 336, 354, 355 ; good works, 337 ; resurrec- tion, 338 ; papal supremacy, 355. Penance, as sacrament, 197 (see Re pentance). Perates, 93. Perfection among Gnostics, 145, 148. Perseverance, 351, 353. Petrus FuUo, 273, 276. Petrus Mongus, 273. Phantasisasts, 278. Philaster, 383. Philippicus, Bardanes, 282. Philoponus, 236. Philosophy, Greek, 29, 141. Photinians, condemned, 234. Photinus, on person of Christ, 221 ; condemned, 221, 222. Phthartqlatry, 278. Pierius, works of, 185 ; on person of Christ, 171 ; subordinationism, 186. Pistis- Sophia f 91. Pitra of Alexandria, on preexistence of souls, resurrection of the body, 186. Pneumatic believers, 197, 181. Pneumatic Christology, 64. Polycarp, works of, 55 ; on divinity and sufferings of Christ, resurrec- tion, righteousness, grace, faith, hope, love, obedience, Christian life, communion with Christ, 69. Polychronius, formula of, 282. Post-apostolic writings, authority of, 83. Power vs. energy of God, 220.^ Praedicatio Petri, 77, 80, 83. Praxias, 167, 168. Prayer. In Gospels, 34 ; Apostolic age, 34 ; homily of Clement, 76 ; for the dead, 291, 298 ; to Christ, 40, 154, 249, 262, 264, 287. Predestinated, number of the, 351. Predestination. In Origen, 157 ; Augustine, 326, 350, 351 f., 369 ; Hilary, 368, Prosper, 368,372; in Semipelagians, 369; Gaul, 369 f; Vincent, 374; Faustus, 376; Lu- INDEX. 409 cidus, 37611.; Fulgentius, 379, 383 n. ; canons of Orange, 382 ; and the church, 326, 366 ; and the sacraments, 322; to death, 352; of Jesus, 260 n. Predestinattis J 374. Preexistence, of Christ (see Christ) ; of souls, 151, 157, 186, 187; of flesh of Christ, 246. Preface, Author's, to Editions I. and II., vi-vii ; to Enghsh Edition, v. Preface, Translator's, iii. Priesthood. In Cyprian, 182 ; Greek Church, 291 ; universal, in Apos- tolic fathers, 80; Tertullian, 138. Primian, 314. Prisca, 105. Priscillian, 385, 385 n. Procession of Holy Spirit, 233, 237, 239. Prosper, on predestination, 368, 372 ; and decrees of Orange, 380, 380 n. Pseudo- Cyprian, 288. Pseudo-Dionysius, 191. i^XV ^-T- vovQ, 151. Psychic believers, 97. Ptolemaus, 91, 93. Punishment, eternal. In homily of Clement, 76, 77 ; Apostolic fathers, 81. Purgatory. In Origen, 159 ; Cy- prian, 197 ; Augustine, 363, 366. Q- Quadratus, 109. Quicunque, 241 (see Athanasian Creed ) . R. Redemption. In Apostolic fathers, 78; Irenaeus, 128 f.; Athanasius, 212 f.; Antiochians, 250; Cyril of Alexandria, 255 ; John of Damas- cus, 295; Dionysius, 295 f.; uni- versality of, 376 n. (see Christ, Work of). Righteousness, actual. In the Gos- pels, 34 ; Apostolic age, 34, 48, 51 ; John, 51 ; Polycarp, 69 ; homily of Clement, 76 ; Apostolic fathers, Clement of Alexandria, 144; Augustine, 345, 348. Rimini, Council of, 226. Ritschl, on Greek piety, 285. Rogatus, 314. Rome, Church of, attitude in Christo- ^ogy, 172 ; attitude in Monophysite controversy, 276 ; attitude toward Pelagianism and Semipelagianism, 377 ; on rule of faith, 173 ; treat- ment of lapsed, 178; heretic bap- tism, 184; sacraments, 185; doc- trines of grace, 378 ; legates of, in councils, 265, 268 ; Pelagius on, 355 ; Jerome on, 386. Rome, Council at (A. D. 369 or 370) , 234; (A. D. 382), 235; (A. D. 417), 281 ; (A. D. 649), 355. Rome, Primacy of. In Antignostic fathers, 137; Stephanus, Firmilian, Cyprian, 183 ; Augustine, 318, 354 f.; Pope Innocent I., 355 f.; Pelagius, 355 ; Jerome, Chalcedon Creed, 386 ; Hormisdas, 387. Rule of faith. In Gospels, 36 ; Paul, 36 ; Apostolic fathers, 86 ; Origen, 147 ; Alexandrine fathers, 160, 161 ; Roman Church, 173. S. Sabellianism vs. Antiochians, 169 ; in Africa, 171, 202 ; at Council of Alexandria, 222 ; at Council of Constantinople, 234. Sabellius, 168. Sacrament, parts of a, 321. 4IO INDEX. Sacramental grace, Dionysius, 300 ; Augustine, 320. Sacraments. In Gospel, 36 ; Paul, 46; Apostolic age, 52; Catholic Church, 185 ; Western Church, 185 ; Greek Church, 291 ; Dion- ysius, 298, 299; Augustine, 312, 319 fF.; efficacy of, 321 ; symbolic view of, 322 ; validity of, 184, 314, 315, 316, 3i9f. Saints, worship of, 286, 306. Salvation, as aim of divine dealings, 123; blessings of, 41, 52, 213; assurance of, 207, 352 ; conception of, in Apostolic age, 48, 52 ; Anti- gnostic fathers, 139 ; in Methodius, 188 ; Athanasius, 213 ; John of Damascus, 295 ; Augustine, 300 ; means of, in Greek Church, 298 f. (see Word and Sacraments). Sanctification, 42, 49 (see Christian Life). Satisfaction. In Tertullian, 133 ; Origen, 154; second century, 175 ; Cyprian, 195 ; Western Church, 198, Augustine, 363. Satornil, 93. Scintilla, 346. Scriptures, authority of. In Paul, 46 ; Apostolic age, 52 ; Apos- tolic fathers, 82 ; Antignostic fath- ers, 135 ; Irenaeus, Tertullian, 135 ; Augustine, 358 ; canon of, in Apos- tolic fathers, 83. Scriptures, interpretation of, allegori- cal. In Barnabas, 72 ; Clement of Alexandria, 142 ; Origen, 147 ; Methodius, 187 ; literal, in Mar- cion, 104 ; Alexandrine fathers, 148. Scriptures, reading of, 298 n.; sur- render of, 313 ; three-fold sense of, 147. Secularization of church, 162. Secundus. In Donatist controversy, Self, love of, 345. Seleucia, Council at, 224, 226. Semi-Arians, 223, 225, 234, Semi-Pelagian controversies, 368-382. Semi-Pelagianism, attitude of Rome toward, 377; downfall of, 377, 379; decrees of Orange on, 381 ; on predestination, divine assistance, 369- Sergius, on theandric energy, 279 ; ecthesis pisteos of, 280. Session of Christ at right hand of God, 47, 153. Sethians, 93. Severians, 277, 278. Severinus, on Monotheletism, 280. Severus, 274 ; on person of Christ, 277 ; relation to Cyril, 277. Sign in sacrament, 321. Simon, the Pseudo-Messiah, 93. Sin. In Paul, 41 ; John, 51 ; Her- mas, 62 ; Apostolic fathers, 79 ; Antignostic fathers, 122 ; West- ern Church, 193 ; Dionysius, 293 ; Ambrose, 308, 328 ; Augus- tine, 312, 364; Chrysostom, 328; after baptism, 189; as inner mal- ady, 293 ; of Adam, 335 (see Fall, The). Sin, original, Jewish idea of, 31. In Paul, 38, 41 ; Antignostic fathers, 122, 139; Tertullian, 122; Ori- gen, 157, 161 ; Western Church, 193 ; Dionysius, 293 ; Ambrose, 329; Hilary, 329 n.; Theodore of Mopsuestia, 332 n.; Pelagius, 334, 338 ; Augustine, 338, 341, 342 ff., 359 ; Council of Carthage, 356 ; Julian, 357 ; Faustus, 374 ; de- crees of Orange, 381 ; Council of Valence, 381 n. ; Fulgentius, 383 n.; sense of, 31 ; Didache, INDEX. 411 75 ; penalty of, 294 ; propagation of» 343. 344. Sins, confession of (see Confession) ; forgiveness of (see Forgiveness) ; great and light, 364 ; purged by sufferings, 146; venal and mortal, 62, 175 ; willful and accidental, 79- Sirmia, Council at (A. D. 347), 221 ; (A. D. 351), 222; (A. D. 357), 223; (A. P. 358), 224. Son of God, Scriptural sense of the terra, 35 (see Christ). Sophronius, 279. Spiritual believers, 42. Subordination. In Tertullian, 126; Hippolytus, 128 ; Origen, 150 ; Arnobius, Cyprian, Lactantius, 170 ; Dionysius of Alexandria, 171 ; Theognostus, Pierius, 186; Sirmian formula, 222 ; Cappado- cians, 233 ; John of Damascus, 237- Substantia and persona. In Tertul- lian, 125 f.; Origen, 149. Symbol, applied to sacraments, 322. Symbols, sacred, 297. Synergism, Ambrose, 331 ; Eastern and Western theologians, 331. T. Tertullian, works of, 118 ; legalism of, 132,133,139; influence of, on Latin theology, 171, 173, 237, 256, 270, 284, 308, 329; on Trinity, 122; original sin, 122 ; human ability, 123 ; person of Christ, 125 f., 243 ; work of Christ, communion with God, new law, obedience, 131 ; Soteriology, 132; baptism, 132; repentance, confession, satisfaction, 133; counsels and precepts, 133; Christianity, 134 ; authority of Scriptures, 135 ; universal priest- hood, 138 ; second repentance, 176; salvation of souls, 192 ; papal infallibility, 386. Testamentaduodecimpatriarcharu7?ij 88, 169. Theandric energy, 277, 279, 281. Theodora. In Monophysite contro- versy, 275 ; on images, 307. Theodore I., on Monotheletism, 280. Theodore of Mopsuestia, on problem of Apollinaris, 247 ; Paul of Samo- sata, 248; sin, 332n. ; condemned, 276. Theodore of Studium, 307. Theodoret, 207; views of, 266; for- mula of, 265 ; deposed, 268 ; at Chalcedon, 270 ; condemned, 276. Theodosius of Palestine, 273, 278. Theodosius the Great, patron of or- thodoxy, 234 ; codex of, 234 ; at councils of Constantinople, 235 ; attempt of, to win Arians and Mace- donians, 235 ; and Nestorian con- troversy, 262, 264 ; and Pope Leo, 269. Theodotus, 93. Theodotus the Fuller, 163 ; the money-changer, 164. Theognostus, works of, 185 ; on per- son of Christ, 171 ; God, Holy Spirit, 186; Subordinationism, angels, incarnation, 186; system of theology, 186. Theology, beginnings of Christian, no, 118, 119; in Alexandrine fa- thers, 160, 161 ; in third century, 198; systematic, 186, 286n., 331 n., 349, 357» 362, Z^Z. Theopaschite supplement, 276, Theophilus, on images, 307. Three-chapter controversy, 276, 277 n. Tradition. On Gospels, Z^ f- J Apos- tolic age, 46 ; Antignostic fathers, 136, 143 ; Greek Church, 289 ; 412 INDEX. Vincent, 384 ; Western Church, 384 f. Tradition, value of, 388. Tradition vs. Spirit, 80. Traditors vs. Donastic controversy, Traducianism, 344, 377, Trichotomy, 245, Trinity, The. On Gospels, 35, 37 ; Paul, 35, 41 ; Didache, 74; Apos- tolic fathers, 78, 86 ; Apologists, 114; Antignostic fathers, 121, 139; Tertullian, 122; Clement of Alex- andria, 142; Origen, 151; Patri- passians, Sabellians, 168; Nova- tian, 169; Dionysius of Rome, 172; Methodius, 173; ancient church, 201, 243; Marcellus, 220; Basil of Ancyra, 225 ; Cappadocians, 228 ff. ; Council at Rome, 234 ; John of Damascus, 236 f.; Augus- tine, 237 ff., 362 ; Ambrose, 240 n., 308; Athanasian Creed, 241 ; Greek Christianity, 289 ; Victori- nus, Hilary, 308 ; analogies of, 240 ; immanent and economic, 241. Trisagion, The, enlarged, 276. Tritheism, 236. Tyconius. On church, 318; church and grace, 308; Donatism, 314; Catholic sacraments, 316. Typos of Constans II., 280, 281, U. Union, mystic, 214. Unity of God. In Monarchians, 167 ; 169; Dionysius of Rome, 172; Athanasius, 206, 210 ; Marcellus, 220 ; Augustine, 238. Unpredestinated, The, 351, 352. Ursacius, 221, 223. Osza, 149, 210, 224, 225, 227, 228 f., 230, 239. V. Valence, Council at, date of, 379 n., 381 n. ; decrees of, 380 ; on human ability, sin, grace, predestination, 381 n. Valens, 221, 223. Valentine, 93, 227. Valentinian I. In Donatist contro- versy, 314. Valentinian III., on papacy, 387. Valentinians, 169. Vices, the chief, 370 n. Victor, 164, 167, 168. Victorinus, 308. Vigilius, Pope. In three-chapter con- troversy, 276. Vincent of Lerins. On the Qui- cunque, 241 ; predestination, 374; systematic theology, ;}S^ ; tradition, 384 f. Virginity of Mary intact, 270, 360. W. "Western theology, traits of, 198; ex- ternality in, 290 ; on salvation of souls, 192, 198, 199, 308 ; God, sin, forgiveness, 193 ; church, bap- tism, 193, 198; new law, 193 f.; double morality, 197; sacraments, satisfaction, 198 ; Christology, 255, 383 ; Trinity, 383 ; tradition, 384. Will, good, infusion of. In Augus- tine, 349 f.; Cassian, 370, 372; decrees of Orange, 381. Will of God. In Paul, 38 f.; Apos- tolic age, 46; Antignostic fathers, 120 ; Augustine, 309, 365. Will of man. In Eastern and West- ern Churches, 328 ; Augustine,'309, 341, 365 ; Pelagius, 333 ; Faustus, 375- Willow tree, in Hermas, 60, 63. Wisdom of God (personified), 164, 203. INDEX. 413 Word, The. In Apostolic age, 48, 52 ; Apostolic fathers, 79 ; Augus- tine, 321 ; in eucharist, 156 ; preaching of, 74. Works, Good. In Judaism, 30 ; Paul, 44 ; Apostolic age, 48 ; James, 49 ; Barnabas, 72 ; homily of Clement, 76 ; Apostolic fathers, 79 f., 81 ; Tertullian, 133 ; Origen, 147, 158 ; second century, 175 ; Cyprian, 195, 198 ; Methodius, 289 ; Cyprian of Jerusalem, 289 ; Dionysius, 297 ; Pelagius, 337 ; Fulgentius, 383 n. Worship, elements of, 117. Worship, of Christ (see Christ) ; of relics, 286, 298, 306 ; of saints, 286, 306 ; of the Virgin Mary, 306. Zeno. In Monophysite controversy, 273 ; henoticon of, 273. Zephyrinus, 164, 168. Zosimus, 355 f» TEXT-BOOK OF THE HISTORY OF DOCTRINES BY DR. REINHOLD SEEBERG, professor of Theology in Ordinary in Berlin. REVISED, 1904, BY THE AUTHOR. TRANSLATED BY CHARLES E. HAY, D. D. COMPLETE IN TWO VOLUMES. VOL. 11. HISTORY OF DOCTRINES IN THE MIDDLE AND MODERN AGES. . PHII^ADELPHIA, PA. : I^UTHERAN PUBIvICATlON SOCIETY. Copyright, 1905, BY THE I^UTHERAN PUBWCATION SOCIETY. CONTENTS. BOOK II. THE PRESERVATION, TRANSFORMATION, AND FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE IN THE MIDDLE AGES. PART I. HISTORY OF DOCTRINES FROM THE SEVENTH TO THE TENTH CENTURY. CHAPTER I. Introduction. Theology of Gregory the Great, ^^^^ ^ 35. Chai- act eristics of this Period 15 \ 36. Theology of Gregory the Great 1 7 1. Theology, Christology, Councils, Scripture 17 2. Work of Christ 19 3. Doctrine of Sin and Grace 21 a. Original Sin 21 b. Grace 22 c. Predestination 23 d. Repentance 24 e. Mass, Purgatory 24 4. The Church 25 5. Relation to Augustine 26 CHAPTER II. Doctrinal Conflicts of the Earlier Middle Ages. \ 37. Adoptionist Controversy 27 1. Migetius, Elipandus, Felix 27 2. Alcuin, Decision of the Controversy 28 \ 38. Eastern Church and Worship of Images. Filioque Controversy . . 29 ^ 39. Controversy Upon Augustinian Doctrine of Predestination 30 1 . Gottschalk 31 2. Opponents of Gottschalk 31 3. Leaders of Both Parties 32 4. Councils at Chiersy, Valence, Toucy 33 \ 40. Divergent Vie%vs Upon Parturition of the Virgin -^"^ \ 41. Controversies Upon the Lord^ s Supper 34 I. Popular Views 34 (i) 11 CONTENTS. PAGE 2. Paschasius Radbertus 35 3. Critical Estimate 37 4. Rabanus 37 5. Ratramnus 38 6. Result 39 CHAPTER III. Hierarchical Principle. History of Ordinance of Repentance. § 42. Papacy and Hierarchy 40 1 . Situation 40 2. Problems 40 3. Donation of Constantine 40 4. Pseudo-Isidore 41 § 43. Repentance in Mar Her Middle Ages 4I 1. Limitation of Public Repentance 42 2. Private Repentance 42 3. Penitential Praxis and Theory 43 4. Historical Situation <, 46 PART II. HISTORY OF DOCTRINES IN SCHOLASTIC AGE. CHAPTER I. Foundations of Hierarchical and Religious Ideals and of Scholastic Theology. I 44. The Church and the World, 49 1. Cluny 49 2. Humbert, Gregory VII 50 3. Canon Law and the Church 51 ^ 45. Christianity of St, Bernard. 52 ^ 46. History of Theology from Anselm to Peter the Lombard 52 1 . Methods of Treatment 54 2. Beginnings, Lanfranc, Anselm, Abelard, Roscellin 55 3. Abelard's Theological and Philosophical Position, His Followers. 57 4. Opposition to Abelard, Honorius Augustodunensis, Hugo of St. Victor, Robert PuUus 60 5. Peter the Lombard, Heads of Doctrine 62 \ 47. Christology of Abelard and the Lombard, Opposition of Gerhoh. 64 1. Christology of Abelard 64 2. The Lombard, Nihilianism 65 3. Christology of Gerhoh 66 § 48. Doctrine of Atonement. Anselm and Abelard. , 60 I. Anselm's Theory of Satisfaction, Critical Estimate 66 CONTENTS. Ill PAGE 2. Abelard's Criticism, His Theory of Atonement 7^ 3. Bernard vs. Abelard 72 4. Atonement in the School of Abelard, in Honorius, Hugo, Robert. 73 5. Atonement in the Lombard 73 49. Berenger of Tours and Doctrine of Lord'' s Supper 74 1 . Berenger 74 2. Opposition to Berenger 76 3. Development of the Doctrine, Transubstantiation 77 4. Honorius, Hugo, Robert, the Lombard 77 5. Dogmatic Establishment of Transubstantiation 78 50. Definition of Sacraments. Seven Sacraments 79 1. Origin of the Number Seven 79 2. Definition 80 3. Baptism So 4. Confirmation 81 5. Lord' s Supper 81 6. Repentance 81 u. Abelard 81 b. Hugo 82 t. Robert Pullus 83 d. The Lombard 83 7. Extreme Unction 84 8. Ordination 84 9. Marriage 85 51. Conception of the Church 85 I. Hugo, Robert, John of Salisbury 85 -:. Church, Hierarchy, Relation to State 85 CHAPTER IL Development of Christian Doctrine During Second Period OF Scholasticism. 52. Aims of the Church. Religious Life. Efforts at Reform 87 1. Innocent III., Boniface VIII 87 2. Francis of Assisi and His Influence 88 3. Popular Practical Christianity go 4. Preaching, Penitential Praxis 91 5. Heretical Movements, Cathari, Waldenses, Begards 94 53. History and Characteristics of Theology in the Thirteenth Century. 96 1. Scholasticism and the Secularization of the Church 96 2. Development of Scholasticism in Thirteenth Century 97 Alexander of Hales 98 Albert the Great 99 Thomas of Aquino, Divisions of the "Summa" 99 Bonaventura 100 IV CONTENTS. PAGE 3. Leading Scholastic Ideas 100 a. Revelation, Scriptures, Symbols, Pope 100 b. Faith lo-j t. Reason vs. Faith 104 d. Universals 104 4. Two Aspects of Scholasticism, Roger Bacon, Lullus, Henry of Ghent, Richard of Middleton 105 § 54. Doctrine of God and Christology I06 1. Advance of Thomas in the Doctrine of God 106 2. The Trinity, Richard of St. Victor, The Lombard, Joachim of Floris, Fourth Lateran Council 108 3. Christology log \ 55. The Work of Christ no 1. Alexander, Bonaventura no 2. Thomas I13 ^56. Doctrines of Original State and Sin 114 I. Original Righteousness, Synteresisy Donum superadditum 1 14 X. Original Sin 116 § 57- Doctrine of Grace and Human Freedom 118 1. Man Cannot Deliver Himself 118 2. Gratia^ creata and increata 1 18 3. Grace and Free-will 119 4. Justification, Infusion, Forgiveness of Sins, Assurance 120 5. Faith and Works, Meritum de condigno and de congruo I2i 6. Evangelical Councils and Christian Perfection 124 \ 58. Sacram-ents and the Church. Dogma of Seven Sacraments 124 1. Dogmatization by Eugene IV 124 a. Nature and Number of Sacraments 125 b. Definition of Sacraments 125 c. Relation of Sign and Grace 126 d. Effect, *' Character " 127 c. Ex opere operate 128 2. Baptism 129 3. Confirmation : 130 4. Lord' s Supper, Transubstantiation, Concomitance, Accidents, Bodily Presence and Local Limitation, Efli'ect, Sacrifice of the Mass, Definition of Eugene IV 131 5. Repentance I35 M. Contrition and Attrition, Confession and Absolution, Thomas and Duns, Biel 135 b. Satisfaction 13^ c. Indulgences 139 6. Extreme Unction 140 7. Ordination 14^ 8. Marriage H^ CONTENTS. V FAGB 9. The Church, In Thomas, Current Definition, Conmiunio sancto- rum^ The Pope ^44 10. The Kingdom of God on Earth 146 CHAPTER III. Gradual Dissolution of Scholastic Theology. Religious and Ecclesiastical Crisis at Close of Middle Ages. § 59. Theology of Duns Scotus and its Significance for the Histoiy of Doctrines 1 47 1. Philosophical Position of Duns 147 2. Revelation, Symbols, Romish Church, Faith 149 3. Conception of God, Predestination 150 4. Sin, Original Sin 153 5. Christology 154 6. Mariology 155 7. Redemption, Criticism of Anselm's View 156 8. Definition of Grace, Habitus, Merit, Justification 158 9. Sacraments 161 10. Significance of Duns in History of Doctrines 162 \ 60. Criticism of Hierarchical Conception of the Church 165 1. Situation of the Curia, Reform Councils, Leo X. 165 2. Marsilius and Occam, Separation of Church and State, Tasks of Pope and Clergy, Fallibility of Pope and Infallibility of Scrip- tures, Rights of the Laity 167 3. Theory of Natural Right 170 \ 61. Church Life and Religious Agitations at the Close of the Middle Ages _. 1 72 1. Crisis, Superstition, Expectations 173 2. Influence of the Church Upon the Masses, Penitential Praxis, Attrition, Indulgences, Jubilee Indulgences 174 3. German Mysticism 1 78 4. Christian Socialism, Wickliffe 181 \ 62. Review of History of Theology in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries. Nominalism and Augustinianism 1 85 1 . Duns and the Nominalists 1 85 a. Nominalists 185 b. Thomists 186 c. Paduan School 187 d. Augustinian Eremites 187 e. Return to Augustine, Gerson, Forerunners of the Reformation 188 2. Nominalist Theory of Knowledge 190 3. a. Criticism and Skepticism 191 b. Submission to Doctrine of Scriptures and Church, Theory of Inspiration 192 VI CONTENTS. PAGE 4. Faith, Fides implicita 195 5. Collapse of the Scholastic System 196 § 63. Labors of Later Middle Ages Upon Separate Dogmas and Doctrines 197 1. Sin, Human Freedom 197 2. Atonement, Redemption 198 u., Aureolus, Baconthorp, Durand, Capreolus 198 b. Biel 198 t. Practical View of Atonement 200 3. Sacrament of Repentance, Attrition, Justification, Meritum de cong7'uo and de condigno, Assurance 201 4. Lord's Supper 203 a. Occam, Durand, D'Ailli, Substance of the Bread 203 b. Bodily Presence, Ubiquity in Occam, Faber Stapulensis .... 204 c. Wickliffe's Criticism of Transubstantiation 206 5. Augustinian Tendency 207 a. Bradwardina 207 b. Wickliffe's Doctrine of Predestination 208 t. Goch, Wesel and Wessel upon Grace 208 6. Criticism of Sacrament of Repentance and Indulgences by Wick- liffe, Wesel and Wessel 209 7- Conception of the Church in Wickliffe, Wesel and Wessel 211 ^ 64. The Renaissance and Humanism in their Significance for the History of Doctrines 212 1. Literary Agitation 213 2. Lorenzo Valla, Religious Attitude of Erasmus 213 3. Lack of Reformatory Elements in Erasmus, Colet, Review and Prospect 215 BOOK III. FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE THROUGH THE REFORMATION AND FIXATION OF THE DOCTRINES OF CATHOLICISM. PART I. GENESIS OF PROTESTANT DOCTRINE. CHAPTER I. The Views of Luther. § 65. Luther's Place in the History of Doctrines 221 1. Luther's Personality 221 2. Influence of Sacramental Repentance and of Augustine Upon Luther 222 CONTENTS. Vll PAGH 3. Early and Later Views of Luther Compared 223 4. Luther and Scholasticism 223 5. Evangelical Repentance as Central Point in Luther's Reformatory Views 224 6. Reformatory Work of Luther 225 66. Luther's Views Before the Reformation Period 227 1. External and Internal Word, Law and Gospel 228 2. Original Sin 229 3. Christology and Redemption 229 4. Grace, Faith 231 5. Sacrament of Repentance 234 6. The Church 234 7. Old Forms with New Content 235 67. Criticism of Sacrament of Repe^itance. Evangelical RepentaJice. Faithy SiUy Grace, Justification, Atoneinent. 235 1. Theology of the Ninety-five Theses 235 2. «. Contrition a Fruit of Faith and Love, The Law 237 b. Confession and Absolution 240 c. Satisfaction, Advance Upon Previous Theories 241 3. a. Sin and Original Sin 242 b. Enslaved Will and Predestination 243 t. Wrath of God, The Devil 245 4. w. The Law as Natural Right, The Sabbath 246 b. The Gospel 248 t. The Law 249 d. The Law and Penitence, Agricola 249 e. Law and Gospel 25 1 5. Faith 252 a. Its Origin, God Revealed in Christ as Loving- Will 252 b. Its Nature — Acceptance, Trust, Faith and Redemptive Realities 254 c. Faith and Regeneration 256 d. Feeling, Experience, Assurance 256 6. Good Works. From Faith, through Christ, in Liberty 258 7. Justification Secured by Faith, Actual and Imputed Righteous- ness, Harmony of Luther's Earlier and Later Teachings 260 8. Grace and Gifts 263 9. Work of Christ 265 u. Satisfaction, Payment, Kingdom of God 265 b. Sacrifice, Satisfaction Rendered to the Wrath of God and the Law, Release from Dominion of Devil 266 c. Intercession 269 d. Christ the Second Adam, Example, Following of Christ .... 269 e. Content and Critical Estimate of Luther's Doctrine of the Atonement, Relation to Duns 271 Vlll CONTENTS. PAGE lo. General Summary 272 ^ 68. Evangelical Ideal of Life 273 1. Significance of Luther's Ideal of the Christian Life 273 2. Christian Perfection 273 3. Secular Callings 274 4. Content of the Christian Life, The Kingdom of God 275 5. Luther and Social Problems 278 \ 69. Word and Sacrainent 279 1. The Spirit and the Means of Grace 279 2. The Word and the Spirit vs. the Inner Word of the Fanatics.. . . 279 3. Conception of the Sacraments 282 4. Baptism, Infant Baptism 283 5. Luther's Earliest View of the Lord's Supper, Honius and Carlstadt 285 6. Luther vs. Sacrifice of the Mass 289 \ 10. Reformatory Conception of the Church 289 1. Significance of the Leipzig Disputation 289 2. New Conception of the Church 291 3. Fundamental Features of the New Conception 292 a. The Communion of Saints, Invisibility of the Church 292 b. The Church and the Means of Grace 293 t. The Church as Seen 293 d. The Ecclesiastical Office 293 e. Nature of the Church 294 f Marks of the True Church 294 § 71. Luther' s Attitude Toward the Traditional Standai'ds of Doctrine^ i. e.y the Scriptures and the Dogmas of the Church 296 1. Attitude of Luther Toward the Traditional Standards 296 2. a. Sole Authority of the Scriptures 298 b. Difference as Compared with View of the Later Middle Ages, Christ the Content of Scripture, Biblical Criticism 299 c. Luther's Treatment of the Scriptures 301 3. Attitude of Luther Toward the Dogma of the Ancient Church. . 302 4. Attitude of Luther Toward the Trinitarian Dogma 304 CHAPTER II. Doctrine of Zwingli. Opposition of Luther and Zwingli Upon the Doctrine of the Lord's Supper. \ 72. Reformatory Principles of Zzvingli 306 1. Zwingli' s Dependence Upon Luther 307 2. Authority of the Scriptures 308 3. Doctrine of Sin 309 4. Work of Christ, Its Objective and Subjective Aspects 309 5. F"aith 310 CONTENTS. IX PAGE 6. The Law of Christ 3*1 7. The Ideal of Ufe 312 8. Predestination, Conception of God ^12 9. The Church 315 10. The Sacraments, Baptism, Infant Baptism 316 11. Medieval Limitations of Zwingli 317 73. Controversy Upon the Lord'' s Supper 318 1. Origin of Zwingli' s Doctrine, Tactics of the Conflict 318 2. Doctrine of Zwingli 320 3. Luther and the Words of Institution 322 4. Christology of Luther as Related to His Doctrine of the Lord's Supper 323 5. The Right Hand of God, Mode of Bodily Presence, Relation to Occam 325 6. Reception and Blessing of the Sacrament 327 7. Marburg Colloquy, Schwabach Articles 330 8. Wittenberg Concord, Bucer, Schwabian Compromise 331 CHAPTER HI. The New Dogma. 74. The Augsburg Confession 332 1. Relations Between the Civil Authorities and Theologians in the Establishment of Protestant Doctrine 332 2. Aim of the Augsburg Confession 334 3. The Trinity, Sin, The Confutators 335 4. Faith, Justification, Doctrine of Justification in the Apology 336 5. Good Works, Ideal of Life 339 6. The Church, Ministerial Office 340 7. The Sacraments, Baptism, The Lord's Supper, Repentance .... 341 8. Practical Demands 343 75- The Karlier Reforined Co7tfessions 344 Justification, Faith, The Church, The Sacraments 344 PART II. THE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT AND (PROVISIONAL) COMPLETION OF PROTESTANT DOCTRINE. CHAPTER I. Lutheran Doctrine to the Adoption of the Formula of Concord. \ 76. Theology of Melanchthon. Its Significance for the History of Doctrines 347 CONTENTS. PAGE 1. Melanchthon and Calvin 347 2. First Edition of the Loci 348 3. Deviation from Luther in the Theory of Conversion 349 4. Deviation from Luther Upon the Lord's Supper, Article X. in the Variata 350 5. Later Revisions of the Loci^ Attitude Toward the Scriptures, the Ecclesiastical Dogmas, and the Authority of Luther 351 6. Theology and Philosophy 353 7. The Church, Visible and as Object of Faith, " Pure Doctrine".. 354 8. Justification, The Law and Contrition, The Gospel and the Atone- ment, Forensic Theory, Faith and Regeneration, Self-con- sistency of Melanchthon' s Theology 358 77. Theological Controversies in the Lutheran Chtirch from the Death of Luther to the Adoption of the Formula of Concord. 362 1. Significance of Melanchthon for the History of Doctrines 363 2. The Interim, Adiaphoristic Controversy 364 3. Majoristic Controversy, Menius, Amsdorf, Flacius 364 4. The Antinomistic Controversy, Amsdorf, Poach, Otto 365 5. Controversy Upon the Lord's Supper, Brenz, Crypto-Calvinists, Consecration of Elements 366 6. Synergistic Controversy, Pfefifinger, Strigel, Flacius 367 7. The Osiandrian Controversy 369 a. Osiander's System 369 b. His Opponents 373 £. Stancar 374 8. Christological Conflicts 374 a. Brenz 374 b. Chemnitz 374 9. Predestinarian Controversy, Aepin Upon Descent into Hell 378 78. The Formula of Concord 378 1. Political Reasons for Harmony, Frankfort Recess, Weimar Con- futation, Naumburg Diet, Corpora Doctrinae 378 2. Genesis of the Formula of Concord 380 3. Original Sin and Free Will '}>^'i 4. Doctrine of Justification 3^4 a. Obedience of Christ 3^4 b. Imputed Righteousness 3^4 c. Faith and Justification 3°4 5. Good Works 385 6. Law and Gospel 3^5 7. The Lord's Supper 3^6 8. Christology 3^7 9. Descent into Hell 3^8 10. Adiaphora 3^8 11. Predestination Z°° CONTENTS. XI PAGE 12. Factions and Sects 3^9 13. Critical Estimate of the Formula. .* 389 CHAPTER II. Completion of Doctrinal Construction in the Reformed Church. § 79. Theology of Calvin. Its Influence Upon the History of Doctrines. 390 1. Theological Type of Bucer, Theology of Bucer, Luther, Bucer, and Melanchthon, Bucer and Calvin 390 2. Calvin as Theologian and Churchman 394 3. Calvin's Doctrine of the Scriptures and Inspiration 395 4. Conception of God 396 5. Sin 398 6. Atonement and Redemption 399 7. a. Faith 401 b. Repentance 402 c. Justification 403 d. Human Freedom 405 e. Election 405 8. The Church and its Organization 408 a. The Totality of the Predestinated 408 b. The Visible Church 408 t. Outward Organization 409 d. Relation to the State 410 9. The Sacraments 411 u. Definition of a Sacrament 411 b. Baptism 412 t. The Lord's Supper 412 10. The Significance of Calvin for the History of Doctrines, Medie- val Element in His View 414 \ 80. Triumph of Calvin* s Doctrine of the Lord'' s Supper. 417 1. Bullinger's Revival of Zwingli's Theory 417 2. The Consensus Tigurinus 417 3. Reformed Confessions 417 \ 81. Fundamental Evangelical Principles in Later Reformed Con- fessions 418 1. Reformed Confessions in Harmony with Calvin 41S 2. Atonement, Faith, Repentance 418 3. The Church, The Glory of God 419 \ 82. Triumph of the Doctrine of Predestination 420 1. Pighius, Consensus Genevensis 420 2. The Symbols 421 3. Remonstrants and Contra-remonstrants, Decrees of Dort 42 1 4. Place of Predestination in Doctrinal System 423 5. Amyraldus, The Formula Consensus Helvetica 424 Xll CONTENTS. PART III. COMPLETION OF DOCTRINAL CONSTRUCTION IN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. PACE I S3. Establishment of Aledieval Theology by the Council of Trent 427 1. Reformation and Counter-reformation 427 2. Jesuitism 429 3. The Council of Trent 431 4. The Scriptures and Tradition 431 5. Original Sin, Sin of Adam, Propagation, Relation to Baptism, Concupiscence, Exemption of the Virgin Mary 432 6. Justification, How Attained, Preserved, Lost, Synergism, Impu- tation or Infusion, Inherent Righteousness, Prevenient Grace, Disposition Good Works, Repentance 433 7. The Sacraments 438 8. Baptism 439 9. Confirmation 439 10. The Lord's Supper 439 a. The Dogma 439 b. Withholding of the Cup 440 t. Sacrifice of the Mass 441 11. Sacrament of Repentance, Indulgences, Purgatory 442 12. Extreme Unction 445 13. Ordination 445 14. Marriage 446 15. Curialism vs. Episcopalism, Conception of the Church in the Cat- echismus Romanus 446 16. Significance oftheTridentJne Confession for the History of Doctrines 448 \ 84. Revival of the Aiigustinian Doci?'ine of Grace and its Eccle- siastical Rejection 449 1. Decadence of the Augustinian Doctrine of Grace 449 2. Bajus, The Bull, Ex omnibus affiictionibtis 450 3. Molina 451 4. Jansen, The Bull, Cum occasione 452 5. Quesnel, The Constitution, Unigenitus 454 6. Immaculate Conception 456 \ 85. Completionof the Romish Dogma of tJie Chw'ch. The Vatican Council 456 1. Episcopalistic Movements, Declaration du clerge de France 457 2. Febronius, The Punctation of Ems 45 7 3. Synod of Pistoja 458 4. Increased Respect for the Papacy in the Age of the Restoration.. 459 5. The Vatican Council, Schema defde^ Inspiration 460 6. Infallibility of the Pope 460 7. Present Significance of Dogma in the Roman Catholic Church. . . 462 Conclusion. Significance of Dogma in Protestantism 464 BOOK II. THE PRESERVATION, TRANSFORMATION, AND FUR- THER DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE IN THE MIDDLE AGES, PART I. HISTORY OF DOCTRINES FROM THE SEVENTH TO THE TENTH CENTURY. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. THEOLOGY OF GREGORY THE GREAT. § 35- Characteristics of this Period. 1. Viewed historically, this period is characterized chiefly by the disintegration of the ancient world. New nations and new governments appear upon the scene. Yet the life of antiquity is perpetuated among the barbarians by the church. Theology becomes the bearer, not of doctrine alone, but of philosophy and culture as well. For this task it was well fitted by the inti- mate connection of the fixed doctrines of the church with the ancient modes of thought, and by the universal spirit of Augus- tine. Wisdom belonged to the past. ''The first precept of safety is to guard the rule of right faith and to deviate in nowise from the ordinances of the fathers" (Vol. I., p. 387) — such is the motto of the doctrinal history of the period. The only man who indulged in independent speculations, the philosopher Scotus Erigena, was misunderstood by his age. With Augustine, he recognized two sources of knowledge, sound reason {recta ratio) and proper authority {vera auctoritas) . He endeavored from a combination of the two to construct a speculative system. But the speculative-pantheistic tendency prevailed, and the Scriptures were subordinated by means of allegorical exegesis. His specu- lations had no influence worthy of mention upon the History of Doctrines (cf. Christlieb, Leben und Lehre des Joh. Scotus Erigena, i860). 2. The German nations received Christianity from the church in fixed forms and as a fixed formula. For them Christianity became simply dogma, and faith the acceptance of tradition/ ^ The only ** dogmas," in the full sense of the term, in the Middle Ages as for the preceding period, were those of the Trinity and the two natures of Christ Cf. sub. under Gregory the Great and also, eratum. Com- pared with the ancient penitential praxis, there are here new fea- tures of great importance : (a) The substitution of private for public penance. (3) The extension of the sphere of peniten- tial discipline to a wider range of outward conduct and into the realm of inner experience, (c) The consequent representation of man's relation to God as a legal one. {d) The introduction of ^* redemptions " for penalties prescribed. But just at this point the logical sequence of the theory was broken, inasmuch as (e) the reconciliation of the sinner was, in course of time, made more and more dependent solely upon penitential sorrow and con- fession. (/) This led to a transformation of the conception of repentance, the forgiveness of sins being associated with a itents" of the age who were unwilling to forego the carrying of arms (Morin. X. 19. 7). 1 Thus, for example, in Anselm, Meditat. 4 fin., "to be cleansed {mun- dari) by repentance and confession." But forgiveness is located in the con- fessioy since the latter embraces in itself the intention of the repentant one, e. g., homil. 13 : " They are cleansed in the very confession on account of the repentance which they are about to exercise, . . . they begin to work righteousness, and the working of righteousness is their purification" [tnun- datio ) . ^ This conception is frequently met with, as already in Eligius of Noyon : otnnis vita christiani semper in poenitentia et compunctione debet consistere (in Hauck, i. 289 n. i). ^ In contrast with the unevangelical conception of repentance, it may be well to call attention to the emphasis laid upon faith [Jidticia) in the peniten- tial praxis, c. g.^ Otmar of St. Gall in Wasserschl., p. 437 : *' swell [surge) with faith and true credulity ; " cf. de ver. et fals, poen. 5. 15 ; 7. 18. Sor- row for sin is attributed to a divine inspiration (ib. 17, ^^ ; cf. Otmar, I. i;., P'437)- REPENTANCE IN EARLIER MIDDLE AGES. 47 penitent frame of mind and confession, and the works of satis- faction with deliverance from purgatory. It was only after this idea had become prevalent that (g) repentance could become a sacrament in the strict sense of the term, for only then was there thought of a special divine gift imparted to the penitent, whereas repentance had hitherto consisted merely in a series of human transactions. Such was the history of the ordinance of repentance from about A. D. 700 until about A. D. iioo. The History of Doctrines must present it with clearness, as an accurate knowledge of it is essential to a correct understanding of the dogmas formulated in the Reformation period. As the permission of the redemptions gave occasion in that age for a certain evangelizing of the con- ception of repentance, so, four hundred years later, opposition to them led to an evangelizing of the church. Tor otbcr foundation can no man lay than that is laid, w1)icb is Jesus €brist. now if any man build upon this foundation flold, silver, precious stones, wood, bay, stubble ; et^ery man's work sbal! be made manifest: for tbe day sball declare it, because if sball be repealed by fire$ and tbe fire sball try eoery man's work of wbat sort it Is,—/ Cor. ///. ii-is. PART II. HISTORY OF DOCTRINES IN SCHOLASTIC AGE. CHAPTER I. FOUNDATIONS OF HIERARCHICAL AND RELIGIOUS IDEALS AND OF SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY. § 44. The Church and the World. I. The historical result of the movements and tendencies within the church from the end of the tenth to the close of the thirteenth century is found in the reformatory ideas which centered at Cluny, and which gradually brought the church under their con- trol. It was an ethical reformation which was sought. A check was to be placed upon the secularizing of the cloisters, the rude- ness and immorality of the clergy, and the anarchy which marked the social life, especially under the domination of the robber-nobility. It was a genuinely reformatory idea — the world was to adopt the principles of the church, and the church was to be free from the world. But both objects were sought in the spirit, and by the means, of the prevalent type of piety. The conception of the '*City of God " {civitas dei) began to be re- garded in a practical way, and the ** State " of Charlemagne was abandoned. Many measures were employed, such as the revival of the religious practices of Mysticism, increased severity in cloister discipline, celibacy of the priesthood, repression of simony, /. ^., investiture by civil authorities, the complete inde- pendence of church property. But the movement was soon combined with the effort to realize the pseudo-Isidorian ideals (p. 41), which were interpreted entirely in the interest of the papal power. The mystical piety of the ancient Monasticism, the pseudo-Isidorian writings, and the church property were the ruhng motives in the attempted Reformation. The church was actually reformed by it ; but in the line, of course, of the motives indicated. It promoted the religious life of the individual, partly by giving a marked impulse to the worship of saints and relics, the craving for miracles, superstition, asceticism, pilgrimages, etc., but also by a real deepening of the religious sensibihty. 4 (49) 50 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Cf. Sackur, Die Cluniacenser in ihrer kirchl. u. allgemeingesch. Wirksamkeit, 2 vols., 1892-94 ■ Hauck, KG. Deutschl. iii. 445ff-» 459 ff- 2. The movement for reform opened and smoothed the path to the realization of the pseudo-Isidorian ideals by the papacy. This can be studied to advantage in the work of Cardinal Hum- bert ; Libri tres adv. Simoniacos (Mi. 143), in which the fol- lowing line of progress is manifest : Independence of the civil authority on the part of the church, its officials and property (iii. 3, 5, 10), and therefore of the investiture by secular rulers, which is simony (iii. 6, u f. ); denial of the efficacy of the sac- raments when administered by simonists, since simony is heresy and can bring only ruin (ii. 20 ff. , 26 ff., 34) ; summons to in- surrection against the civil government (iii. 16).^ The life-work of Gregory VII. aided in the attainment of these ideals. His ideas form the classical expression of the claims of the papacy in the Middle Ages. In the twenty-seven propositions of the Dictatus attributed to him, they are presented with precision (cf. especially Ep. ad Herimannum, Registrum viii. 21 ; Jaffe Monum. Gregoriana, Mi. 148 ; also in Mirbt, Quellen zurGesch. d. Papsttums, 1895, pp. 47-64): The Roman church has never erred and never will err. Only he is catholic who agrees with it. Accordingly, only the Roman bishop is universalis ; he has author- ity over all other bishops, whom he can appoint and remove; his legates outrank all bishops. The other bishops are only his substi- tutes (registr. i. 12, 60 ; iv. 11), and it is their duty to support him even to the extent of furnishing soldiers whenrequired (reg. vi. 17a; ep. coUectae 1 3 fin. ) . * ' To him alone it is permissible to estab- lish new laws according to the need of the time. ' ' All the graver matters of dispute in any portion of the church are to be brought be- fore his tribunal (cf. reg. i. 17; iv. 27). *'No section [of a law] nor book may be regarded as canonical without his authority. "^ The pope alone decides matters at councils (reg. iii. 10). Only his foot is kissed by the princes. He can remove emperors, but can himself be judged by no one. The canonical ordination gives him sancity : **by the merits of the blessed Peter he is in- fallibly made holy. " He is not only the lord of the church, ^ It is interesting to note the two conceptions of the relation of church and state existing side by side. On the one hand : " That the laity are forbidden to take charge of ecclesiastical affairs just as they conduct secular affairs" (iii. gin.); on the other hand : **Just as the soul is higher than the body and instructs it, so the sacerdotal dignity excels and instructs the regal, as, e. g.j the celestial the terrestrial. . . It is the duty of kings to obey ecclesiastics " (iii. 21). This is Augustinian, but Gregory VII. still holds the same position. 2 In Gratian the inscription of Part I. dist. 19, c. 6 reads : " The decretal letters are counted among the canonical scriptures." THE CHURCH AND THE WORLD. 5 1 but universal dominion (^universale regimen) has been committed to him, and he is " prince {f>rinceps) over the kingdoms of the world" (reg. ii. 51, 75; i. 63). Upon this is based the supremacy of the pope over civil governments and their princes. The latter are to receive their authority in trust from him (reg. viii. 26, 23 ; iv. 28). They stand related to him as the moon to the sun (reg. vii. 25 ; iv. 24J. Independent dominion on their part is based on sinful pride. As they are notoriously dependent upon the priests in spiritual things, since they cannot administer (^conficere) the communion, and do not have the power of the keys, so it is a valid maxim that in secular affairs they are subject to the pope alone. He who can bind and loose in heaven can surely do so on earth (reg. viii. 21). ** i^ut if the holy apostolic chair judicially determines spiritual things by the original authority divinely granted to it, why not also sec- ular things ? " (reg. iv. 2). The power of the keys is therefore the magic key which opens up to the pope all authority (cf. iii. loa; vii. 14). Gregory indeed allows to the state a relative in- dependence (reg. i. 19; vii. 25; cf. Mirbt, Stellg. Aug. inder Publicist, desgreg. Kirchenstreites, 1888, pp. 91, 94 f. , 96), but it presupposes the willingness of the state to serve the church and obey the pope. Thus Gregory had given currency to an ideal of the papacy whose assumptions could not be surpassed. The in- faUible pope has authority over body and soul, the world and the church, time and eternity. To this extreme was the Augustinian idea of the civitas dei carried. He who opposes the pope is a heretic (e.g., Henry IV. ; vid. reg. iv. 7, 12 ; viii. 21).^ All these claims rested, in the last analysis, upon the objective effect of the sacrament of ordination. But the hierarchical idea was carried too far by Gregory (cf. Cyprian, Vol. I., p. 184) when, in his struggle against the marriage of priests and simony, he denied the efficacy of the consecration of schismatics and of the sacraments administered by them (vid. reg. vi. 5b ; v. 14a ; iv. 2 and 11).^ 3. The reform, as Gregory regarded it, brought the church ^ This is a new conception of heresy. In Irenseus, heresy was the denial of the ecclesiastical, biblical doctrine ; in Cyril, rebellion against the ecclesiasti- cal organization (schism). Now it is opposition to the hierarchy. ^ Vid. upon these conflicting views during the great conflict the exhaustive discussion of Mirbt, Publicistik in Ztalt. Greg. VII., pp. 378-446. The ac- ceptance of the ecclesiastical or of the sacramental conception, alliance with the reformatory movement or adherence to the hierarchical tradition, deter- mined the position taken in each case as to the efficacy of the simonistic sacra- ments. ** In the later sects which rejected the sacraments administered by unworthy priests was reaped the harvest of the seed which the popes of the eleventh century had helped to sow." MiRBT, p. 445 f. As to Gregory's use of the ban and interdict, vid. ib. pp. 202 ff., 219 ff. 52 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. into the most intimate relations with secular life. He exalted the hierarchical idea as no one before him had done, but at the expense of reducing the church to the position of a political fac- tor in worldly" affairs. '*The more completely the religious spirit of the Middle Ages subdued the world, the more entirely must the church become the world" (vid. Eicken, Gesch. u. Syst. d. mittellalt. Weltanschauung, 1887, p. 741). Well did Bernard write to Eugene III. : ** To evangelize is to pasture ; do the work of an evangelist, and thou fulfillest the work of a pastor" (de considerat. iv. 3. 6). Even he acknowledged : ** Some are called to the lot of care ; thou to plenitude of power ' ' (ib. ii. 8. 16), and \h\s plenifudo potestatis was the dominion over church and world. Nowhere is the secularization of the church in this age more clearly seen than in the impress given to the papal canon law. The church is to be governed by the laws of the papal decretals. They have binding authority. Collections of them are made, and they constitute the law of the church. The body of laws which had been historically developed was increased by fraudulent additions. , But, in the last resort, abo\e this posi- tive law stood the natural law of reason (vid. supra, Gregory's argument for the authority of the pope over worldly affairs).^ The legal manuals (Gratian's Decretal, etc.) were the control- ling authority for the theologians of the day upon the nature and mission of the church. Since the church had become the world, it was to be governed by the ^'divine ecclesiastical law." To portray the struggles between the papal and the national concep- tions of fundamental law, which continued until the Concordat of Worms (A. D. 11 22), is not the province of the History of Doctrines. Cf. upon paragraphs 2 and 3, MiRET, Die Publicistik im Ztalt. Greg. VII., 1894. Martens, Greg. VII., 2 vols., 1894. Hauck, KG. Deutschl. iii. 752ff., 844 ff. Von SCHULTE, Gesch. derQuellen d. Kirchenrechts i., 1875. Von Doelunger, Das Pabsttum, 1892, p. 40 ff. Moeller, KG. ii. 283 ff. MuETXER, KG. i. 436 ff , 447 ff. §45. Christianity of St. Berna?'d. But the agitation for reform became the occasion also of an actual revival and deepening of personal piety. The best thoughts of Augustine were revitalized. Reverent speculation f Anselm) drew inspiration from his writings, as well as that mys- tical absorption in Christ which Bernard of Clairvaux (f A. D. 1 153) so vividly portrayed to the piously inchned in the Middle ^ Cyprian already appealed — when it suited his purpose — to the "sound mind" in opposition to tradition {Vul. I., p. 184). CHRISTIANITY OF ST. BERNARD. 53 Ages. To gain a knowledge of the compass of his rehgious thought, we must study his homilies upon the Song of Solomon (Mi. 182). (a) The strongest feature of Bernard is the energy with which he leads the souls of his hearers and readers to immerse themselves in the contemplation of the humanity of Jesus, par- ticularly his passion. " For what is so efficacious for the curing of the wounds of conscience, and for the clarifying of the vision of the mind as sedulous meditation upon the wounds of Christ? " (sermo. 62. 7). We should allow the contemplation of his passion to lie upon our breast like a bundle of myrrh (43. i ff. ). Thus God draws near to us in the man Jesus, and his love is re- vealed to us (61.4; 20. 2; II. 9). ((^) This love now awakens a responsive affection in our hearts (20. 7 ; 11. 7). Devout contemplation of the man Jesus leads us, further, to a blessed union with his divinity. It is the " outgoing of a pure mind into God, or a pious descent of God into the soul. Let it receive him, gliding from heaven, with the deepest emotions and with the very marrow of the heart" (31. 6). Ecstatic contemplation is the personal experience {proprium experimentiini) (3. i.) of the soul. It is a blessed and delightful embrace between the loving soul and its beloved (7. 2 ; 73.10; 75.1; 74.4.). The heavens are opened, new ideas flow down from above into the heart, which, like a fountain, pours forth from within the words of wisdom. There is the bridegroom present (74. 5 ; 69. 6). ((t) But only he can obtain this goal who produces the fruits of repentance in pious works (3. 2-4; 18. 5f. ; 67. 8; 11. 2), who follows Jesus as his teacher, and seeks to follow his example beneath sufferings and the cross (22. 7; 21. 2; 61. 7; 47. 6; 20. 7). He himself gives the needful power to this end : "I thus receive examples for myself from the man and aid from the Mighty One" (15.6). '* If I with the name call to mind Jesus the man, meek and lowly of heart, kind, sober, chaste, merciful, and conspicuous for everything honorable and holy, and the same as the omnipotent God, who both restores me by his example and strengthens me by his aid." (^/) But Bernard does not himself attain to a regular and constant life with Christ. The enchant- ing blessedness of pious contemplation gives place to hours of poverty, vacuity, and obtuseness of spirit (9. 3 ; 14. 6 ; 32. 2, 4; 74. 4). From this Bernard did not draw the inference of Quietism, but emphasizes the truth that, in addition to the contemplative life, the active life with the good works of love is also necessary (58. 3; 85. 13; cf. de diligendo deo 10): Martha is the sister of Mary (51. 2). This is all purely a gift of grace. ** Grace restores me to myself, justified freely and thus liberated from the service of sin " (67. 10 ; cf. Ritschl, Rechtf. 54 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. u. Vers. i. iii ff. ). But Christ has two feet, mercy and judg- ment. If we were to cling only to the first or the second, the result would be most injurious security or despair. We should, therefore, grasp both feet at once {6. S, 9). (e) Bernard here follows a suggestion found in Augustine : * * The humanity of Jesus is a way to (his) divinity " (vid. Vol. L, p. 361 n.); but when he, the preacher of Crusades, makes the entire practical knowl- edge of God dependent upon the contemplation of the good deeds of the historical Christ, he goes beyond Augustine. For him — and in this he fixes the type of piety for the Middle Ages — the whole of Christianity is an imifafion of Christ. His Christ is not merely a dogmatic formula, not only the eternal judge of the world, but the actual historical Christ, the personal revelation of God, and he led the way in apprehending this Christ in a relig- ious way. But these ideas were interspersed with the demands of the Areopagite Mysticism. Communion with Christ is at best attainable only in the ecstatic state. Hence, in the contempla- tion of the historical Christ, the soul does not after all experience a revelation of the living and present Lord, and such contempla- tion is only the bridge by which to reach the ecstatic union. Cf. Neander, D. h. Bern. u. s. Ztalter ed. Deutsch, 1889-90. Reuter, Ztschr. f. KG., 1877, 36 ff. Ritschl, Geschichte d. Pietism., p. 46 ff. Seeberg-Thomas., do. ii. 2, p. 267 ff. § 46. History of Theology from Anselm to Peter the Lombard. BuLAEUS, hist, universit. Paris, 1655. Denifle, die Universitaten d. MA. i. 1885. Kaufmann, Gesch. d. deutsch. Univ. i. 1888. Haur^au, Hist, de la philosophic scolastique, 2 parts in 3 vols., ed. 2, 1873. Nitsch, Art. Scholastik, PRE. xiii. Reuter, Gesch. d. rel. Aufklarung im MA., 2 vols., 1875-77. Prantl, Gesch. d. Logik im Abendlande, 4 vols., 1855 ff. Ueber- weg-Heinze, Gesch. d. Philos. ii., ed. 7, 1883. Ritter, Gesch. d. Philos., vols. vii. and viii., 1844-45. Erdmann, Gesch. d. Philos. I, ed. 4, 1896. Stockl, Gesch. d. Philos. d. MA., 2 vols., i864f. Willmann, Gesch. d. Idealism., vol. ii., 1896, p. 321 ff. Lowe, der Kampf. z. d. Nominalism, u. Realism., 1876. Schwane, DG. d. mittleren Zeit, 1882. Thomasius- Seeberg, DG. ii., ed. 2, 55 ff. Harnack, DG. iii. 5i2ff., 419 ff. I. The term, Scholasticism, is used to designate the theology of the period from Anselm and Abelard to the Reformation, /. e. , the theology of the Later Middle Ages. Its peculiarity, briefly stated, consists in the logical and dialectical working over of the doctrine inherited from the earlier ages. The History of Doc- trines cannot attempt to present an exhaustive history of the genesis and progress of the scholastic method, nor to note in de- tail all the doctrines espoused by the scholastics, as it would thus invade the domain of the Piistory of Theology. It is our task simply to trace the scholastic theology in so far as it was influen- FROM ANSELM TO PETER THE LOMBARD. 55 tial in the creation of new dogmas (the sacraments) or in the modification of the traditional dogma (Augustinianism). The material to be selected must be such as will illustrate the influence exerted by the reformatory and anti-reformatory movements (Councils of Trent and the Vatican) in the moulding of dogmas. As to the arrangement of the material, the question arises whether we shall present the scholastic doctrines as a whole in the various stages of their development (Harnack, Loofs), or trace each separate doctrine in its historical development through- out the entire scholastic period (Schwane, Thomasius). Much can be said in favor of either method ; but we decide upon the former, although in pursuing it we can scarcely avoid some repe- titions, for the reason that the historical development can be thus so much more clearly seen. The method cannot, of course, be carried out to its full extent, as the result would be a history of scholastic theology. 2. The beginnings of Scholasticism were closely associated with the pedantic methods employed in the study of theology in the cloister schools (the schools of Tours and of Bee were of great importance) and in the universities, which began to appear in the early part of the thirteenth century. It received an im- pulse from the revival of interest in philosophy, and particularly in dialectics, which was enkindled and sustained by the study of Aristotle, as from the middle of the twelfth century onward, and especially since the thirteenth century, theologians became, partly through Arabian literature, better acquainted with all the works of Aristotle. But it was also in no small degree the natural logic of the situation which led to Scholasticism. If the traditional dogma was an inviolable legacy, the spirit of the age could be exercised upon it in no other way than in presenting by dialectic methods the evidence of its harmony with sound reason. This tendency first arrested the attention of the church at large in the controversy of Berenger (f A. D. 1088).' He appealed in arguing to the ratio ^ and denounced the senselessness {vecor- dia) of his opponents ; but the latter met him with arguments based likewise upon reason ((?. g., Lanfranc). There was an ever-widening circle of disputants who either depended solely upon rational arguments or held that faith should at least find confirmation in the deductions of reason.^ And although there may have been some theologians who were content to simply ac- * As to earlier instances, vid. Hauck, KG. Deutschl. iii. 331 f., 935, 952 f. ^ Anselm : cur deus homo ? i. 2 fin.; " They ask the reason because they do not believe, but we because we believe ; yet that which we ask is one and the same thing." 5 6 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. cept the doctrines received by tradition, theirs was not the future (vid. Hauck, iii. 956 f., 963 f.). Two theologians are to be considered as the founders of Scholasticism, Anselm of Canterbury (f A. D. 1109) and Peter Abelard (f A. D. 1 142). The contributions of Anselm to the general history of Scholasti- cism consist in the following particulars : (a) He possessed a great talent for formulation, having the ability to express the traditional ideas in forms which would arrest the attention of his own age. His work, Cur deus homo ? is, e, g., a masterpiece in this respect, since Anselm here taught his contemporaries to apprehend the meaning of redemption under the conceptions of the then prev- alent penitential praxis (satisfaction). (^) He maintained the realism of universals. Boetius had, in the commentary accom- panying his translation of the Isagoge of Porphyry,* left the ob- jective existence of universalia, or genera and species, an open question ; but in the commentary accompanying his translation of Victorin he pronounced in its favor. The so-called Nominalis- tic view, according to which the general conceptions are not realities {res^, but only sounds {voces') and names {nomina), was derived also from a passage, in Boetius, in which the latter asserts that the reality {res') is apprehended by the mind {intel- lectus), and given expression by means of the voice {vox). These problems were discussed at an early period.^ Anselm became involved in the controversy through Roscellin of Com- piegne, who applied the Nominalist theory, that universals are merely subjective conceptions (breaths — flatus voa), to the Trinity, and thus approached Tritheism (vid. Anselm, ep. ii. 35. 41 ; de fid. trin. 2.3). This Anselm considered simply foolish- ness. To him universal conceptions appear as presenting truth and reality, and the individual species as simply manifestations of the genera. Thought is trustworthy only as it looks to the uni- versal (vid. dial, etverit. ). But Anselm did not further develop these ideas. We have an evidence of his view in the Proslogium (cf. c. Gannilanum), which presents the ontological proof of the existence of God, /. e. , from the idea of God his real existence is inferred. Thehighestcan bethought of onlyas existent ; therefore God cannot be imagined as non-existent. Existence belongs abso- ^ The passage of Porphyry is as follows : Concerning genera and species I decline to say, indeed, whether they subsist or are located in the bare intel- lect alone ; whether they are corporeal or incorporeal substances ; and whether they are located apart from sensible things or insensible things, and existing in connection with them. 2 Vid. Prantl, Gesch. d. Logik, ii. 118 ff., 41 fF. Barach, Zur Gesch. d. Nominalism, vor Roscell., 1866 ; also Gunzo v. Novara, Mi. 136. 1294; cf, Hauck, iii. 33 r. FROM ANSELM TO PETER THE LOMBARD. 57 lutely to the highest being (c.Gannil. 3ff. ). (c) Theobject of theo- logical research is faith, of which Anselm has a two-fold concep- tion. He first interjects into subjective faith the idea of a striv- ing after knowledge, which leads to the rule : ** The Christian ought to advance through faith to knowledge, not to come through knowledge to faith, nor, if he cannot know, recede from faith. But when he is able to attain to knowledge he rejoices ; and when unable he reveres that which he is unable to grasp " ( ep. ii. 41). Faith is always the necessary beginning of knowledge. We must always first of all grasp the object as such. Only then can an experience (^experientia) of it be attained, and this then leads to a knowledge {intelligere) of it (de fide trinit. 2). This is the familiar ** faith seeking knowledge : I believe, in order that I may know" (proslog. i; meditat. 21; cur deus homo? i. 2). It is a tending toward God {tendere in deiimy monolog. 75 f. ). Just what Anselm meant by this faith becomes evident when we consider the other requirement associated with the above, that the faith of the Catholic church, i. e., the faith of the three symbols (Apostolic, Constantinopolitan, and Athanasian, vid. ep. ii. 41), is to be maintained (de fide trinit. 2 in.), and this even though knowledge (the intelligere) in the matter be denied to the intellect (monolog, 64). This faith, accordingly, which reaches a higher stage in knowledge, is the acceptance of the teachings of the church as true, which is at the same time a '^ tending toward God," and, just on this account, attains its summit in love (monolog. 76 f.). This is the Catholic conception, (d) With this conception of faith, it is easy to comprehend how Anselm could undertake (cur deushomoPi. i f., 10, 20, 25; ii. 9, 11, 15 ; de fide trinit. 4) to establish the faith of the church (incar- nation, existence of God, Trinity) ** by reason or necessity," and could believe that he had " by reason alone made manifest not only to Jews but even to pagans " (ib. ii. 23) the necessity for the incarnation. The speculative, rationalistic character of Scholasticism is here betrayed. The intellectual independence of the system, the energetic penetration into the nature of things which we observe, for example, in Duns Scotus, has its first great representative in Anselm. Cf. Reuter, Gesch. d. Aufkl. im MA. i. 297 ff. R. Seeberg, Die Theologie des Duns Scotus, 1900, pp. 3 ff., 599 ff. Ans. Werke, ed. Gerberon, 1675, in Mi. 158-59; cf. Hasse, A. v. C, 2 vols., 1843-52. Rule, Life and Times of St. Ans., 2 vols., 1883. 3. Anselm is commonly called the father of Scholasticism, but if we regard the entire movement, the title of honor belongs rather more fully to Abelard. This wide-awake, richly endowed, and keen spirit furnished a wealth of suggestions, both positive 58 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. and negative, which continue to exert a marked influence upon the development of Scholasticism, whereas Anselm's views upon particular points, even his discussions of the atonement, seldom find an echo in the subsequent periods. At one time, indeed, in the history of English theology, the spirit of Anselm exerted an important influence, (a) When Abelard in his Su et JVon (ed. Henke et Lindenkohl, 1851) collected a number of mu- tually contradictory passages from the Bible and patristic litera- ture, he introduced the method by which Scholastic dialectics sought to reconcile these discrepancies (Sic et Non, prol., p. 1349, Mi.), (d) He, too, placed raf/o hesidG ^des. He op- poses as well the ** pseudo-dialecticians " who think that they can prove everything (theol. christ. iii., p. 1226 f., 1212 f., 1 2 18) as the mere authority-faith, which makes faith rest only in the mouth and not in the heart. **Not because God said anything is it believed, but because it has been proved to be so it is accepted" (introductio ad theol. ii. 3, p. 1050). Faith is the foundation. Faith, particularly the trinitarian faith, is, according to Athanasius, necessary to salvation (ib. i. 4ff.). Faith is not to be, properly speaking, proved, but only made clear and probable to reason (ib. ii. 2, p. 1040 ; theol. christ. iii., p. 1227). Yetthere wasin thisthinkeran independent atti- tude toward tradition which was foreign to his age. The writ- ings of the fathers are to be read ** not with the necessity of be- lieving, but with the liberty of judging." Inquiry is the chief key of knowledge, *'forby doubting we come to inquiry, and by inquiring we discover the truth." He halts only when brought face to face with '* the excellency of the canonical au- thority of the Old and New Testaments. " Here no error is possible. If it appears so, either the codex or the interpretation must be defective. The opinions of later writers may be errone- ous ** unless it can be defended either by sure reason {^certa ratione) or that canonical authority "* (Sic et Non, prol. Mi., p. 1347)- These principles are not, however, always adhered to. In his expositions of the Trinity, as well as in his theory of the atonement, there is a very prominent rationalistic tendency, as judged by the prevailing view of the age. ^ An illustration of his 1 Cf. Reuter, Aufklar, i. 224 fif., 326 fif. His judgment of Abelard is, how- ever, in keeping with the tendency of the book, one-sided. He has no sym- pathy with the healthful tone in Abelard's theology, but sees him too largely through the spectacles of Bernard. Vid., on the other hand, Deutsch, Pet. Ab., 1883, p. 173 fF. 2 Vid. Abelard's tract, condemned at Soissons, A. D. I121, De unitate et trinitate dei, ed. Stolzle, 1891, and also the Theologia christ. The leading proposition reads : " Thus it is, therefore, that God is three persons, ... as if we say that the divine substantia is powerful, wise, good ; or, rather, that it FROM ANSELM TO PETER THE LOxMBARD. 59 intellectual independence is seen in his expositions of the Trinity. He maintains the unity of substance and the personal trinity. He teaches, in full harmony with Augustine, *'each one of the three persons is the same substance" (de un. et trin. 32, 36, 76), and he rejects Sabellianism j but he thinks that, although the divine attributes and works belong without division to the entire Godhead, yet in a special and peculiar way {specialiter et proprie) power pertains to the Father, wisdom to the Son, goodness to the Spirit. That this attempt to interpret the Trinitarian idea was essentially inferior to the method in- herited from Augustine will scarcely be affirmed.^ (c) It is to be remarked, further, that Abelard proposed a new method of dividing systematic theology. In the Introductio ad theolo- giam has been preserved for us only a fragment of his dogmatic scheme. This great work was arranged under the headings : fides, sacramentum, caritas (introd. i. init. ). Four works have been preserved whose intimate dependence upon Abelard is evi- dent from the adoption of this scheme and from many internal indications : The Epitome iheol. christ. ( first edited by Rheinwald in 1835); the anonymous Sentences of the Convent Library at St. Florian, preserved only in manuscript ; the Sentences of Mag- ister Omnebene, likewise only in manuscript ; and the Sentences of Roland {z.iX.^r^zxA Pope Alex. III., ed. Gietl, 1891 ; cf. Denifle, Ab. Sentenzen u. die Bearbeitungen seiner Theol. in Archiv f. Litt. u. KG. d. MA. i., 402 ff., 584 ff. , especially 419 ff., 603 ff. ). Among the disciples of Abelard was Peter the Lombard, of whom further notice must betaken. Abelard' s arrangement of topics preserved in a very marked way for the doctrine of the sacraments the position which that doctrine held in the religious life of the Middle Ages. In correcting the scheme of Augustine's Enchiridion by substituting the sacra- ments for the second heading of the latter, /. ^., hope, he proves his dogmatic talent. It is this, too, which, to a great extent has is power itself, wisdom itself, goodness itself" (de unit, et trin., pp. 3, 2, 62). ^ At the basis of Abelard' s theory lies the correct conviction that the inter- pretations of the Trinity must set forth the three-fold life z.% personal^ which is not the case in the analogues of subject and object, appointer and appointed. But Abelard himself falls into the same error when he compares the Trinity with matter and object formed of matter {materia ei viateriatum) , and with wax and waxen figure (theol. chr. iv., p. 1288, Mi.); whilst, on the other hand, the declarations that the persons of the Trinity are related to one an- other as different names for the same object, e. g,, mucro zxi^ gladius (de unit, et trin., pp. 51, 6), as attributes to th-e soul (p. 68), as the three gram- matical persons when applied to the same individual (pp. 63, 70), lie very close to the SabeJlian theory. 6o HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. given him such an important influence upon the development of Christian doctrine. (^) We must note, finally, the place of Abelard in discussions of the theory of perception. His teacher, William of Champeaux, had advocated an extreme Realism, maintaining that universals are the true realities, vi^hich are present entire and undivided in all individuals, so that the latter do not differ essentially, but their differences are produced simply by the variety of their accidents (Abal., hist, calamitatum, 2, Mi. 178, 119). Abelard forced his instructor to a modification of this view (vid. Deutsch, p. 103 f. , n.). His own utterances upon the question are not entirely clear. On the one hand, general conceptions not only have a subjective existence, but they are called into being as thus subjective by virtue of the nature of things. They are thus objective in so far as begot- ten of objective things and subjective in so far as existing only in the subject (cf Glossulae super Porphyr. opp. ed. Cousin ii. 761). Yet, on the other hand, Abelard deduces the species from the genus through the influence of the form, according to the common reaHstic theory (cf. Prantl, ii. 177 ff.). There are not wanting in his writings, however, utterances which betray a certain mistrust of the conception of universals (vid. Deutsch, p. 106 ff. ). His view cannot now be reproduced with certainty, but his limitations of Realism were not lost upon succeeding ages. Works of Abelard, edited by Cousin, 1849-59, ^^ ^i- 178. Cf. Deutsch, Pet. Abalard, 1883. 4. The first half of the twelfth century witnessed a remarkable intellectual activity. On the one hand wQxt those, prof essores di- alecticae, whose arrogance was so great that, " despising the uni- versal authorities, ' ' they thought themselves able to comprehend everything by their little reasonings {ratiuncuHs) (Ab. theol. christ. iii., pp. 1218, 1212 f.); on the other hand, the the- ology of Abelard and his widespread following (Denifle, Archiv. i. 613 f.). A storm of opposition now arose against the Master. It was charged that the faith of simple believers was ridiculed by him, the mysteries of God emptied of their meaning, the Fathers scorned — that '* human genius was usurping all things to itself," that Abelard proclaimed a new ' ^ fifth Gospel ' ' (Bernh. de errori- bus, Abael. 5. 12; cf.Wilhelm v. St. Thierry in Mi. 180. 249 ff.). Dialectics was declared to be useless and fooHsh, ridiculous, and even Satanic (JoH. of Salisbury, Walther of St. Victor ; vid. Bulaeus, hist. univ. Paris, ii. 402, 629 if. Reuter, 1. c, ii. 16 f. Bach, DG. d. MA., ii. 384 ff.). Similarly spoke Gerhoh and Arno of Reichersberg. The former especially charges Nestorianism upon the dialectics of his time (vid. De in- vestigatione Antichristi, ed. Scheibelberger, 1875, ^^*^ Bach, FROM ANSELM TO PETER THE LOMBARD. 6 1 ii. 390-722)/ Abelard was confessedly vanquished by his oppo- nents at Soissons (A. D. 1121) and Sens (A. D. 1141). The agi- tation led to various attempts to present the ''positive theology" in systematic form. The work of Honorius Augustodunensis (Augsburg or Autun), in which he undertakes to embrace in a short compass the entire Christian doctrine (vid. Elucidarium sive dialog, de summa totius christ. theol. in Mi. 172, 1109 ff.) seems to have appeared even before the outbreak of the contro- versy, /. e., about A. D. 1120.^ Then came Hugo of St. Victor (f 1141) with his great work, De sacramentis and the Summa sententiarum (Mi. 176). The chief content of the Holy Scriptures consists of the the works of human restoration (^opera restaurationis hiunanae) , but for the proper understanding of these the work of the natural state (^opus conditio7iis) must first be pre- sented (de sacr, prolog. 2, 3). From this soteriological point of view are the doctrines of Christianity presented for the purpose of promoting a right understanding of the Scriptures. Having first treated of creation, the fall, original sin, etc. (lib. i. pars 1-7), he comes to reparatio (p. 8), and presents the work of re- demption in harmony with the ideas of Anselm. The great Physician has appointed the sacraments as means of healing (c. 12). These therefore constitute the chief part of the work. The principal sacraments are baptism and the Lord's Supper (6, 7). But since the sacraments are sacr amenta fidei, and since fides belongs to salvation (8), part 10 treats of faith; then part 11 of natural law, and part 12 of the written law. The Second Book begins with a discussion of Chris- tology, followed by a section upon the church, the ecclesiastici ordines, etc. The author then turns to the sacraments, ''bap- tism, confirmation, body and blood, and the minor sacraments and sacred things" (ii. 9), simony, marriage, vows, vices and virtues ; then treats of confession and repentance and remission of sins (ii. 14), and finally of the anointing of the sick and of eschatology. Hugo professes to be guided throughout only by the authority of the Scriptures (summ. praef. ) Only the faith that has no experience (^experimenttim) , and no reason (^ratio'), 1 Vid. also Rocholl, Rupert of Deutz, 1886, p. 1S9 ff. 2 He treats first of God, creation, the devil and the fall ; then of the neces- sity of satisfaction (here using Anselm, vid. I., 8, 16 f., 21), then of Christ's life and activity, the mission of the Spirit, the church as the mystical, and the eucharist as the actual body of Christ. The Second Book treats of sin, predes- tination (9), the origin of the soul, marriage, ranks, and orders (18), the for- giveness of sin through confessio and baptism (20), theprophets and the Holy Scriptures (27), guardian angels and demons, anointing of the sick (30) and death. In the Third Book he treats exhaustively of blessedness, perdition, and purgatory (3). Does i. 2 betray an acquaintance with Abelard ? 62 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. is meritorious (ib. i. ii, part 59).^ However little we may be impressed with the systematic arrangement of this great work, it is very instructive to observe the subordination of the entire structure to the sacramental idea and the disregard of the ratio. But already in the Sentences of Robert Pullus (f ca. 1150, in Mi. 186), which were accepted by Bernard, the ratio asserts its claim along with the atictoritas (^. ^. , i. 12 ; iii. 23), and dialectic investigation begins to appear in the midst of the posi- tive presentation of traditional doctrine. The modern spirit carries the day, but it does so only by making concessions to the ancient spirit. 5. This is most plainly evident in the compendium of a dis- ciple of Abelard, which became the manual of dogmatic study in the Middle Ages.^ Peter the Lombard (f 1160 ; accord- ing to some authorities, 1164) in his Quatuor libri sententiariim furnished a work which, by virtue of its wealth of materials, its adaptation to the times, and the prudent withholding of the author' s own opinions, was admirably fitted to become the basis of further dogmatic labors. The author proposes to set forth faith and the sacraments of the church. He rejects the . . . garruli ratioci- natores (i. dist. 4B) and a *' new dogma of their own desiring." He says in the prologue : *' We have by the aid of God brought together this volume, in which thou wilt find examples and the doctrine of the greater teachers." His book is, accordingly, a great collection of citations from the Fathers. None the less, however, it is dominated by the ratio and the dialectic method. Reason is recognized along with authority (^. ^. , iv. dist. 4 E; 15 B). Questions are raised, authorities collected, and a result reached by dialectic treatment ; but in the end the author refrains from a positive solution of the problem in hand (^. g., i. dist. 19 O; iii. d. 7 N). He crosses swords with Abelard, yet constantly reveals the influence of his method and his teach- ing. In his positive presentations the Lombard frequently, often in the very terms employed, avails himself of the writings of Hugo of St. Victor and Gratian. Between the Sentences of a * The genuineness of the Sentences ascribed to Hugo has been assailed by Denifle (vid. Arch. f. Litt. u. KG. d. MA. iii. 634 ff. ); but see, on the contrary, GiETL, Die Sentenzen Rol. S. xxxiv. ff. A part of Hugo's Sen- tences have come down to us as the tract, theologic. of Hildebert of Lavardin (Mi. 171, 1067 ff. Col. 1150 closes with the passage found in Sent. iv. 3, Mi. 176, 121). Cf. Haur£au, Les oeuvres de Hug. de St. Vict., 1886, p. 71. As to the spuriousness of the seventh tractate (de coniug. ), see Gietl, 1. c, S. xl. f. 2 Gerhoh opposed the Lombard, and Walther of St. Victor counted him among the ruinous dialecticians. His orthodoxy was even assailed at Synods (Hefele, CG. v.. ed. 2, 616 ff, 710 f ) FROM ANSELM TO PETER THE LOMBARD. 63 certain Master Gendulph and those of the Lombard, there is a manifest relationship. Already in the Middle Ages the Lom- bard was declared to be the borrower — whether justly or not, cannot be certainly known until the appearance of the work of Gendulph, which is still preserved in manuscript. The Lom- bard closes the first period of Scholasticism. His dogmatic sys- tem is that of the future, /. ^., Abelard's method combined with the traditional reverence for authorities. The Lombard was familiar with the dogmatic works of the Damascene and made use of them. ^ The arrangement of the latter had great influence upon him (Vol. L, p. 285 f. ), but he labored also with the Augustinian problems, and treated exhaustively the doctrine of the sacraments. His arrangement, briefly stated, was as follows: Book I. treats of God, his existence, trinity, and attri- butes; BookIL, of the creation, man, sin, liberty, and grace; Book IIL, of Christology, the work of redemption — and, incidentally, whether Christ had faith and hope as well as love — of the cardi- nal virtues, the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and the commandments ; Book IV., of the seven sacraments and eschatology. If we take a general view of this scheme, its similarity to that of the Damascene will be as evident as its variations from the latter are characteristic. Imperfect as is the plan, defective as its develop- ment, and loose its structure, there is yet a decided advance upon the dogmatic system of the Damascene. True, we will seek in vain in either for a real comprehension of the gospel. The Augustinian elements are presented with the Semipelagian interpretation of the Middle Ages. Really, the only feature which challenges our admiration is the consistent development of the doctrine of the sacraments, and here Gratian had already led the -way. But it was not only the commendable features of the work, but in even greater degree its faults, that won for it the unique historical position which it came to occupy. It has been printed times without number. The Franciscans have furnished ' a critical edition in the publication of the works of Bonaventura, vid. vols, i., iv., Quarrachi, 1882 ff. Cf. R. Seeberg, PRE. xi. 630 fl".; O. Baltzer, Die Sentenzen des Petrus Lombardus (in Bon wetsch -Seeberg, Studien zur Gesch. derTheol. u. der Kirche, viii., 1902. Protois, Pierre Lombard, 1881. Vid. also the * It is said of him in i. dist. 19 N ; ** The greatest among the teachers of the Greeks in the book which he wrote concerning the Trinity, and which Pope Eugene (iii. v. 1 145-53) caused to be translated." Another translation is mentioned by Duns Scotus in Sent. iii. dist. 21. quaest. unica, ^ 4. Then follow citations from the De fide ortho, iii. 6, 4. As to the time of composi- tion of the Sentences, we may accept the years between A. D. 1 147 and 1150 (vid. Seeberg, PRE. xi., ed. 3, 631). 64 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Sentences (5 books) of Petrus Pictaviensis (f 1205) in Mi. 211). The separate doctrines of the period under review must now be examined in so far as they exerted an influence in moulding the forms of doctrinal statement. Such are the following : i. Christology. 2. Doctrineof the Atonement. 3, Berenger's theory of the Lord' s Supper and the fixing of the church' s doctrine upon that subject. 4. Doctrine of the Sacraments. 5. Conception of the Church. A few further doctrines will be reserved for treatment in another connection, i. e.. Sin, Grace, Liberty, Faith, Works. It is proper for us at this point to call attention to the fact, that the real theological work of the church in the Middle Ages was not performed by the masters of dialectics who followed Thomas Aquinas, but was done in the present period by Anselm, Abelard, Hugo, and the Lombard. § 47. Christology of Abelard and the Lombard. Opposition of Gerhoh. Bach, DG. desMittelalters, ii. 390 ff. O. Baltzer, Beitrage zur Geschi- chte des christologischen Dogmas im nth and 12th centuries (Bonwetsch- Seeberg, Studien zurGesch. der Theol. u. der Kirche, iii. i, I098). I, The Christology of Abelard follows the Western, or Augustin- ian, type (vid. Vol. L, p. 2 59f. ). Its fixed premise is : One per- son in two substances, or natures {una in duabus substantiis vel naturis persona^. In connection with this, it is maintained with special emphasis, that the immutability of God remains unim- paired. The incarnation does not involve for God the introduc- tion of a new element, *' but we indicate a certain new effect of his eternal will " (introd. ad theol. iii. 6, p. 1104 f., Mi.). So also the becoming, in his becoming man, is not to be understood in the strict sense of the word. There is in the incarnation no 77iutatio of the divine nature, and the proposition, God is man, can be understood only in a unliteral sense : nee hoino esse proprie dicendus est (ib., p. 1107 f., 1106).^ As to the mode of union of the divine and the human natures in Christ, Abelard repro- duced the orthodox formulas, but yet gave a peculiar turn to the thought. Christ is the man assumed by the Word {assumptus a verbo); this man now fulfills in all things the will of the divinity dwelling within him. " That this assumed man never sought to do anything because he hoped that it would be agreeable to hini- 1 Abelard makes the remark that ** transfers of names are often made from the whole to the parts, or from the parts to the whole, e. g.^ when it is said of the Son of God that he is born (exposit. symb., p. 626, Migne) ; cf. Deutsch, Abelard, p. 302 n. CHRISTOLOGY OF ABELARD AND THE LOMBARD. 65 self, but because he believed that it would be pleasing to God (expos, of Rom. v. 15, p. 963).^ Thus, at this point also, the keen-witted man indicated a needed modification of the church's teaching by locating the union of the divine and human natures in the sphere of the will or person.^ Yet he might, not without reason, be charged with Nestorianism. 2. The Lombard, of course, adopts the formulas of the church. The second person of the Godhead assumed the impersonal hu- man nature (sent. iii. dist. 5 C) : *' he assumed the flesh {^carnem) and soul {animam),buX not the person {^personam^^oi^. man. ' ' But he was greatly exercised over the question, whether the humanity of Jesus was not, after all, to be conceived of as d^ persona j de- ciding in the negative, because at the time of the assumption body and soul had not yet been combined, into one person (^In unam personam) ^ (iii. d. 5, A, D, E; d, 10 C). " The intel- lectual development of Jesus was, accordingly, only apparent," not, indeed, in himself, but in others {in aliis) (iii. d. 13 B). In treating of the question, whether the Son in the incarnation became anything, the Lombard betrays his affiliation with Abe- lard, since he, though only by silence, indicates his preference for the view, that the Logos merely assumed human nature like a garment in order that he might be visible to human eyes. Thus the Logos-person remains '^ one and the same unchanged " (iii. d. 6 F ; d. 10). God has become man, because he '* has a human nature " (^est habens hominem, iii. 7 K). Since, in this case, the human nature is not to be conceived as personal, it was inferred by some that ** Christ, according to his human nature, is not a person nor anything" (iii. 10 A, see also Gietl, p. 179), but not a word can be cited from the Lombard in support of this absurd proposition. The view, which was called Nihilianism, was disapproved by Alexander IIL, A. D. 1163 and 1179.^ As a consequence of the sharp discrimination between the divinity 1 This way of regarding the relationship became current in the school of Abelard. Christ is ** The Word possessing the man " and " the man possess- ing the Word " [verbum habens hominem and ho?no habens verbum), (epitome 24 extra Rol. sent., p. 171 f., 180. Omnebene in Denifle, Archiv. i. 466 f.). Roland here further appeals, and rightly, to Augustine (against Gietl, p. 175 n., vid. Aug. in Joh. tr. 19, 15 ; cf. Hilarius, de trin. x. 22, Mi. 10, 360, supra, p. 28). The view is clearly stated, Epit. 24, p. 1733, Mi.: ''Thus that soul was subject to the Word, so that it could give no motion to the body except as far as the Word inspired." Vid. also c. 25, de volunt. assuinpti homin. ^ The problem of Christology is to be solved, not in the sphere of nature, nor of attributes, but of the person. ^ Not condemned. Vid. Reuter, Gesch. Alex, iii., vol. iii. 703 ff. He- FELE, V. 618, 719. 5 66 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. and humanity, it was held that divine worship {latria) was not to be rendered to the human nature of Christ, but only servitude (^dulia) (iii. d, 7), and that the sufferings of Christ were, as to substance, limited to his human nature (iii. d. 15 D). This formally orthodox conception of the subject receives its peculiar coloring on the one hand from the difficulty of a rational combi- nation of the divine and the human, and on the other hand from the influence of the Augustinian Christology. 3. But contemporaries felt bound to condemn these views as Rationalism and Adoptionism. The most elaborate presentation of the subject in opposition was made by Gerhoh of Reichers- berg. He follows in the path of Cyril, He starts with the con- crete God-man, in whom divinity and humanity are united, in nature as well as in person.^ This union is not impossible, since the finite is capable of comprehending the infinite.^ Gerhoh proves the importance of his view by its practical bearing upon the doctrine of salvation. Since God became man, human nature has been raised to the right hand of God, and a fire has entered human nature which destroys sin. The God-man is as man our way and example, and as God the truth and the life (^e. g., de investig. antichr. ii. i, p. 190 f.). According to this view, the Nestorianism of the age is a curse. Christ, the one God-man, is *' to be adored with one adoration " (de glor. et honore fil, hom. 12. 3, Mi. 194. 1114). Another inference relates to the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper. Christ can at the same moment be in a thousand places at once. *' And whence this unless because the same spiritual body has risen above all limitation of places and times . . . For neither is Christ, who, just as he wishes, is everywhere, to be thought of as corporeally in one place, however beautiful or desirable " (de invest, ii. 51, p. 299 f. Similarly, Arno of Reichersberg, vid. Bach, ii. 685). Thus the balder Western theory was in the early stages of Scholasticism opposed by the ancient Alexandrian Christology. See the writings of Gerhoh cited p. 60, and Mi. 194. Cf. Bach, DG. ii. 390 ff. § 48. Doctrine of Atonement. Anselm and Abelard. I. In his work. Cur deus homo? Anselm made the first attempt to present in a harmonious and consistent way the doctrine of 1 The one and the same Christ is *' at the same time a divine and a human person,'* in proof of which it is naively argued that, as when a person be- comes good he is not thereby doubled, so also Christ did not duplicate his person when his divine person became the human person (de investig. aniichr. ii. 40, p. 278). 2 The perfectly pure humanity in Christ was, as a white cloud, capable of DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT. 67 the work of redemption (salvation). He seeks to prove upon rational grounds the necessity of the incarnation and redemption, although the omnipotence of God could have stood in no need of these (i. 6). Of any claim of the devil upon man, he knows nothing (i. 7; cf. medit, ii. ). In addressing himself to the solution of the problem, he proceeds upon the assumption that man can attain salvation only through the forgiveness of sins (i. 10, extr. ). Sin consists in the creature's withholding from God the honor which is his due. ** He who does not render to God the honor due, robs God of that which is his and dishon- ors God, and this is to sin" (i. 11). Man has thus violated the obligation laid upon him as a rational being. The expecta- tion sometimes cherished, that the divine mercy will remit sins, cannot be met, because the non-punishment of sin unatoned for would bring disorder into the kingdom .of God, **but it is not proper that God should overlook anything disorderly in his king- dom " ( i. 12). But order is preserved by righteousness. *' Nothing is less to be tolerated in the order of things than that the creature should withhold the honor due to the Creator — should not render that which he withholds " . . . '* God there- fore preserves nothing with more just cause than the honor of his majesty." From the necessity of maintaining the order of the divine government and the honor of God is deduced the rule : *' It is therefore necessary, either that the honor withheld be rendered, or that punishment follow" (i. 13). By either means the divine honor is vindicated — in the one case, since God thus displays himself as the Lord of the rebellious man (i. 14); in the other, in that the guilty one by a willing satisfaction for his offense re-establishes the violated order. Thus the above- cited rule assumes the form : It is necessary that satisfaction or punishment follow every sin (i. 15). But God has not pur- sued the way of punishment, or man would have gone to ruin and God would not have accomplished his purpose (ii. 4). God chose the way of satisfaction. Since men are to fill up the num- ber of the angels who fell (i. 16 ff. ), God cannot accept them as sinners (i. 19). Satisfaction must however be subject to the rule : '* It does not suffice merely to restore that which was withheld ; but, for the contumely inflicted, he ought to restore more than he withheld" (i, 11). But since the most trifling sin, as an im- proper glance, weighs more than the whole world, a satisfaction must be rendered to God which is more than all things outside of God (i. 20 ; ii. 6). And since man dishonored God by sub- receiving the divine light, and that light was capable of imparting itself to it. Bach, DG. ii. 425. 68 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. mitting to the devil, satisfaction in this case must include the conquest of the devil by man — under more trying circumstances (i. 22 f, ; ii. ii). As, on the one hand, the satisfaction required is so great and comprehensive, so, on the other hand, man is ab- solutely incapable of rendering it, for whatever good he may do he is already under obligation to render to God, and it cannot therefore be taken into considersition els safi's/acfw (i. 20). Satisfac- tion of the character demanded only God can render. But a man must render it, one who is of the same race, in kindredship with humanity (ii. 8): (Unless there be a satisfaction), '* which no one except God can render and no one but man owes : it is necessary that the God-man render it." The God-man must do for the honor of God something which he is not already under ob- ligation to do. This cannot be the obedient fulfilling of the will of God, since this every rational creature is under obligation to render. But the free surrender of his infinitely precious life to death will suffice (ii. 11). The infinite value of this life is more than sufficient as a payment of all the sins of the whole world (ii. 14 fin.; 17). Thus the incarnation and sufferings of the God-man are necessary as a satisfaction rendered to the divine honor. Only incidentally does Anselm indicate a connection of Christ with humanity, speaking (ii. 11 fin.; 19 init.) of the in- struction and example which Christ was able and desired to give to men ; but the two points of view are not expressly and clearly combined. This oversight explains why Anselm is so lacking in clearness when he attempts to show how the result of the work of Christ inures to the benefit of mankind. The Father cannot suff*er the nieritum of Christ to go unrewarded, or he would be either unjust or impotent. Since he cannot give anything to the Son, who needs nothing, the reward accrues to the advantage of those for whom the Son died. *' To whom should he more ap- propriately attribute the fruit and reward of his death than to those for whose salvation ... he made himself man and to whom by dying ... he gave an example of dying for right- eousness ; for in vain will they be imitators of him if they shall not be participants in his merit ? " (ii. 20). ''Thus the sins of mankind are remitted " (ib. ) In this way the divine justice is preserved as well as mercy (ii. 21 ). And thus also the doctrine of the Scriptures is proved ''by reason alone" (^so la rati one, ii. 23). This discussion is of importance as the first attempt to present a connected view of the work of Christ.^ It is a master- 1 Gregory the Great is to be specially mentioned as a forerunner of Anselm (p. 19). As to Augustine, vid. Vol. I., p. 361 u. DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT. 69 piece, because the author really understands the subject under discussion and makes it intelligible to others. The cross of Christ, which was so often mentioned in pretentious phrases, was here recognized in clearly defined language as a means of salvation. Anselm anticipates the scholastic method, combining logical dem- onstration with juristic principles. The argument is based upon the (Germanic) legal maxim, which dominates the book: pun- ishment or satisfaction ( poena aut s at isf actio)} Of special inter- est is the attempt of Anselm to deduce the divinity of Christ from his work. Whereas the ancient Greek theology, when speak- ing of the work of Christ in such connections, had in mind his ''deifying" activities, Anselm sought to prove the necessity of his divinity from his sufferings and death. At all events, a proper recognition must be given to the effort of Anselm, not simply to accept the divinity of Christ in a merely external way as a dogma, but to understand it in its inner necessity, and none the less to his tact in bringing the matter home to the hearts of his generation by connecting it with the penitential practices of the day. On the other hand, the serious faults of the treatment of the subject are very apparent : (^z) Anselm recognizes only a legal relationship between God and man — not, indeed, a per- sonal legal relationship, but that of a subject to his legal ruler. (/^) Redemption is based in a very one-sided way upon the death ^ Cf. Cremer, Die Wurzeln d. anselm. Satisfactionsbegr., Stud. u. Krit. , 1880, 7 ff. , and ib. 1893, 316 ff. The attempt is here made to trace the depend- ence of Anselm' s theory upon the fundamental principle of the Germanic legal system, poena aid satisfaction showing that the principle of a substitution for penitential penalties was transferred from the penitential discipline (supra, p. 45) to the doctrine of the atonement. Cf. Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgesch. i. 163: "The right of challenge belonged only to the offended party or his blood relative. It depended upon the choice of the relative, whether the offender with his relatives should respond to the challenge {^die Feindschaft tragen), or render the composiiio fixed by law." The validity of this associa- tion of ideas has indeed been recently called in question from the juristic point of view (vid. Von Moller, Stud. u. Krit., 1899, p. 627 ff. ). Moller shows that the Germanic penance through money has itself a primitive char- acter, and that the idea of substitution is not embodied in German jurispru- dence. According to this, the parallelism, ^^ aut poena anl satisfacdo,^^ \s not specifically German. Nevertheless, the general conception of the subject may be characterized as Germanic. It is only in the light of this system of procedure that we can understand the inner harmony of the transaction as viewed by Anselm, the emphasis laid upon the divine honor, the princely mildness in the conception of God (ii. 16), the substantial character of the service rendered by Christ (cf. Wergeld), the importance attached to the racial -relationship of Christ to mankind, since only a relative could perform specific works of satisfaction. Tlie introduction of the idea of nierituni is beset with difficulties (cf. Gregory, p. 20). In other connections also Anselm attributes to the sinner the obligation of rendering satisfaction {^deb- itutn satisfaciendi)\ vid, De concej^tu virginal. 2. 70 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. of Christ, the latter being, under the influence of the juristic con- ception of the satisfaction regarded as a material contribution. (*r) The connection between the active life and the sufferings of Christ is not made clear. (^) The transfer of the benefits of the work of Christ to the church is not intelligibly stated, {e) Above all, the change in the attitude of God toward the sinner which Anselm maintains cannot be made intelligible from a re- ligious point of view by the means which he employs, etc. Cf. Baur, D. chr. Lehre v. d. Versong., p. 155 ff. Hasse, Ans. ii.^ 485 ff. Cremer, 1. c. Ritschl, Rechtfertigung, u. Versonung. i. ed. 2, 33 ff. Harnack, iii. 341 ff". , as also the presentation of the subject by Duns Scot, in Sent. iii. dist. 20 qu. un. 2. If we leave out of the account the theory of redemption as a ransoming from the devil, which Anselm rightly disowned, we will find in the theological contributions of the West, in ad- dition to the soteriological construction of Anselm, especially that conception of the divinity of Christ in which he ap- pears as revealing the love of God, and, by teaching and example, leading to responsive love and piety. It was perfectly natural that this view should soon assert itself in opposition to the theory of Anselm, as it did in the person of Abelard (vid. Ritschl, 1. c, i., ed. 2, 48 ff. Seeberg, Die Versdnungslehre Ab. u. ihre Bekampfgung durch Bernh. in Mitteil. u. Nachr. f. d. ev. K. in Russl. 1888, 121 ff.; also in Thomas, ii., ed. 2, 124 ff. Mourier, Abel, et la redemption, these Montaub. 1892). In his com- mentary upon Romans (under Rom. 3. 22 ff.), Abelard de- velops his doctrine of the atonement. He, too, rejects the theory of a meeting of the claims of the devil. Redemption has to do only with the elect, over whom the devil never had any power. Furthermore, the devil cannot by the wrong perpetrated upon mankind have gained any right over them. He can be re- garded only a jailer and torturer, to whose power God commits men. God could before the death of Christ forgive the sins of men, as he did in the case of the Virgin Mary. To what end then did the Son of God take upon himself the burden of his sufferings ? If Adam's slight off"ense required so great an atonement, what atonement will the slaying of Christ demand? Shall we think that God was pleased by the death of his Son, that he on account of this greater sin forgave the less? And to whom should the ransom of the blood of Christ be paid ? Not to the devil ; hence, to God. But is it not improper that the blood of the innocent should be demanded as a ransom? Can God have pleasure in the death of his Son, so that through it he should be reconciled to the whole world? (Mi. 178. 833-36). There- DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT. 71 fore the opinion of Anselm, that God is reconciled by the death of Christ, is disproved. Abelard's positive statement of the doctrine is as follows: Through the works of the law no one could have become right- eous. But in Christ the lo.ve of God was made manifest, in that he assumed our nature, and, as our teacher and example, re- mained faithful unto death. This love of God admonishes us to an answering love toward God and awakens it in us. By virtue of our faith in the love of God made manifest in Christ, we are united with Christ, as with our neighbor, by an indissoluble bond of love. The love thus awakened in our hearts is the ground of the forgiveness of sins, according to Lk. 7. 47. The phrase in Rom. 3. 25, *'for the display of his righteousness," Abelard understands as referring to the righteousness imparted to men, that is, *'of the love which justifies us before him" (p. 833). Thus we are redeemed from sin and from fear, since Christ works love in us. ** Our redemption, therefore, is that supreme love in us, through the sufferings of Christ, which not only liberates from the servitude of sin, but acquires for us the true liberty of the sons of God, so that we fulfill all things from love rather than from fear of him who has shown to us such grace that, as he himself declares, no greater can be conceived" (pp. 836, 832 f. ).^ Side by side with this line of thought we find another. Under Rom. 5. 12 ff., Abelard declares that Christ, in becoming man, subjected himself to the commandment of love for others. This law he fulfilled ** both by instructing us and by praying for us. " It is in this way, since his prayers must on account of his righteousness be heard, that Christ *' supplements from his merits what was lacking in ours" (p. 865). As instruction is still given by Christ (p. 859), so also his mediation through prayer in behalf of his followers continues (cf. serm. 10, p. 449). We are, therefore, redeemed through Christ, *' dying once for us and very frequently praying and diligently instructing us" (p. 861).^ The view of Abelard is thus evidently : God sent his Son to the sinful human race as a revelation of his love, and as a teacher ^ Cf. 836 : Bat to us it seems that by this means we are justified in the blood of Christ and reconciled to God ; that through this particular favor manifested toward us, that his Son assumed our nature and persisted even until death in instructing us both by word and by example, he has very strongly drawn us to himself through love, so that, inflamed by this great benefaction of divine grace, true love now shrinks not from the endurance of anything whatsoever. ^ The other passages which claim attention in this connection (serm. 5, p. 419 f.; serm. 12, p. 481 ; serm. 10, p. 452, in Com. to Romans, p. 860) all fall into place naturally in this line of thought, as shown in my comments, 1. u., p. 131 ff- 72 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. and example. By this means faith and love are aroused in sinful men. This love becomes the ground of the forgiveness of theirsins. On the other hand, the love of Christ leads him*to continue to teach men and to intercede for them before God. Thus their in- sufficient merits are completed. But when Abelard now, in response to the inquiry, why it was the Son and not the Father who became man, declares that the Son, or the divine Wisdom (supra, p. 59), became man, in order to instruct us by word and example (theol. christ. iv. p. 1278 f Cf serm. 5, p. 423), it would seem that the former line of thought was the dominat- ing one in his theology (cf. Seeberg, 1. c, p. 136 ff.). This theory derives from the treasures preserved in the traditional theology of the church certain views which serve to coun- terbalance the one-sidedness of Anselm. It was in harmony with the medieval form of piety, since it represented the pious walk of love as the aim of redemption. There is lacking, indeed, as in Anselm, the association of the work of Christ with the institution of the sacraments. If the latter were, in the medieval conception, the vehicles of salvation for the regenerate, then must they be expressly made intelligible as a product of the work of salvation. But as, in Abelard' s expositions of the sub- ject, no specific importance attached to the death of Christ, he fell into the error of one-sidedness in the opposite direction. 3. Abelard's doctrine of the atonement was in turn assailed by St. Bernard (vid. ep. 190, and Seeberg, 1. c, p. 143 ff.). Abe- lard, he contended, curtails Christianity, making Christ only a teacher. In reality, Christ brings the forgiveness of sins and justification, and releases from the bonds of the devil (7. 17 ; 8. 20). Just as little as the example of Adam made us sinners does the example of Christ suffice for our redemption (8. 22 ; 9. 23). No place, he holds, is reserved for the blood and the cross of Christ in the system of Abelard, ''who attributes everything pertaining to salvation to devotion (^devotioni) ^ nothing to regen- eration, ... he locates the glory of redemption, . . . not in the value of the blood, but in its effects in our walk and conver- sation " (9. 24). It is certain, indeed, that the example of the love of Christ is great and important, *' but they have no foun- dation, and hence no tenable position, if the foundation of redemp- tion be wanting. . . . Therefore neither examples of humility nor proofs of love are anything without the sacrament of redemp- tion '^ (9. 25). Instruction (^institutio) or restoration {resti- tutio'), that is the question (9. 23). Bernard made practical use, perhaps to a greater extent than Abelard himself, of the latter's method, maintaining that we should meditate upon the love of Christ in order to be incited to a responsive love toward him (in DOCTRINE OF ATONEMENT. 73 Cant. serm. i6. 5; 43. 1-3). He is our teacher and example (ib. serm. 15. 6 ; 43. 4 ; 22. 7 ; 21.2; 61. 7 ; 47. 6 ; 20. 7 ; 24. 8). But the Other aspect of the doctrine is also made prom- irient. The blood of Christ is the ''price of our redemption. Unless he had tenderly loved, his majesty would not have sought me in prison. But to affection he joined wisdom, by which he might ensnare the tyrant, and suffering, by which he might ap- pease the offended God the Father" (vid. 20. 2). Bernard constructed no theory ; but the association of the two concep- tions — the love of Christ begets love in response, he is teacher and example ; the blood of Christ redeems us from sin, death, and the devil, and effects the reconciliation of the Father — pre- sents the general view of the subject which prevailed in the Middle Ages. 4. The central thought of Abelard was perpetuated in his fol- lowers. Thus, the author of the Epitome answers the question. Cur dens homo ? with a reference to true love and a good exam- ple (chap, 23, p. 1731, Mi.). And the Sentences of St. Florian assert that redemption was wrought **inthe person of the Son " in order that, as often as we should recall the love which he has shown for us, we might abstain from sin. We have ourselves, '* on account of the wonderful love which he has shown toward us," freed ourselves from our subjection to the devil {Denifle, archiv. i. 431). But the other contemporary theologians share the attitude of Bernard, t. e., of Anselm. Honorius Augusto- DUNENSis repeats the thoughts of Anselm (elucidar. i. 8, 16, 17, 21). Hugo likewise reproduces him. It is necessary to '* ap- pease God," and this is accomplished by making good the dam- age {damnum restaurare) and making satisfaction for the insult {de cotitemptu satisfacere^. This the God-man does. Even if this method of redemption cannot be shown to be necessary, yet it is the most appropriate, inasmuch as the magnitude of our guilt and of the future glory is thus set forth (de sacr. i. 8. 4, 6, 7, 10; ii. 1.6). Robert presents both views. Christ has freed us by his sacrifice rendered to God, not to the devil (sent. iv. 14). This was the most appropriate, though not the only possible, way of effecting redemption (iv. 15). It is an appropriate way, be- cause it makes known to us the magnitude of our sin and of the divine love (iv. 13). The work of redemption is, here too, presented under the aspect of instruction and example (iii. 28). 5. Peter Lombard, in his discussion of the problem in the 18th and i()th. Dtstinctzons of his third book, betrays as well his dependence upon Abelard as his correctness from the ecclesias- tical point of view. His starting point is the merit of Christ. By his pious life Christ merited for himself glorification and free- 74 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. dom from suffering (i8 A, B). His death occurred therefore ** for thee, not for himself '* (i8 E). And by it he merited for us admittance to paradise and redemption from sin, punishment, and the devil. ** Christ the man was a sufficient and perfect hostage," i. e., for our reconciliatio (i8 E). According to this, it may be asked how this deliverance from the devil, sin, and punishment is effected by his death. To this it is replied, first of all, with Abelard, that the death of Christ reveals to us the love of God. *' But so great a pledge of love toward us being displayed, we also are moved and inflamed to love God . . . and through this we are justified, /. erfectw virtuiis, dist. 12 G ; infusion of grace, Hugo, sacr. ii. 8. 7). Finally, he considers the Lord's Supper under the aspect of a sacrifice. It is a daily sacrifice : * ' But he is daily immolated in the sacrament, because in the sac- rament there is a commemoration of that which was once done. * ' The sacrifice is repeated on account of our daily sins. '•' Christ was both once offered and is daily offered \ but then in one way, now in another" (dist. 12 G). This sacrifice represents that upon the cross only as a picture of the latter (Petr. Pictav, sent. v, 13). Here, as often, theory tardily followed praxis.^ 5. The doctrine thus elaborated by the theologians was exalted to the position of a fixed dogma by Pope Innocent III. at the Fourth Lateran council (A. D. 1215): '* The body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar under the forms {speciebus^ of bread and wine, the bread transubstantiated into the bodyand the wine into the blood by divine power. . . . And this sacrament no one can in any case administer except a priest who has been properly ordained" (Mansi, xxii. 982. Vid. already Can. 6 of the Council of Piacenza, A. D. 1095, Hefele, v. 216). ^ But side by side with these fruitful ideas stands the barren suggestion that, at the first celebration of the Supper, Christ for a time laid aside his mor- tal nature, and as mortal bore his immortal self in his hands: **In that which gave he was mortal, and in that which was given he was immortal ; and, nevertheless, he who as mortal gave, and he who as immortal was given, were not two but one self" (de sacr. ii. 8, 3). ^ Other theologians of the twelfth century also treated exhaustively of the Lord's Supper. Vid. Bach, i. 392 ff. Special mention may be made of the theory of Rupert of Deutz. If Radbert understood the transformation of the elements as a creative act, Rupert conceived it as analogous to the incar- nation. As the divine nature assumed the human without destroying it, *' so it does not change nor destroy the substance of the bread and wine according to outward appearance subject to the five senses, when by the same Word he unites the latter in the unity [in unitatem^ of the same body which hung upon the cross " (in Exod. ii. c. 10, Mi. 167, 617 f. ■). DEFINITION OF SACRAMENTS. 79 The " multitude of incompetents," the logic of the theologians, and the hierarchy combined in the production of this dogma. It was a corruption of the church's best possession {^cor^-uptio optimi)\ yet it served at least to preserve one article of religion to the Christian world. § 50. Definition of Sacraments. The Seven Sacraments. I. The significance of Scholasticism for the History of Doc- trines consists chiefly in the establishment of the Catholic doc- trine of the sacraments. The decisive steps in this direction also were taken during the present period. The divine efficiency is located in the sacraments, not in the word. Augustine, as we have seen, had a much more profound conception of the signifi- cance of the word. The definition of a sacrament was, to begin with, by no means clear, largely because of uncertainty as to the number to be recognized. Bernard still speaks of many, and enumerates ten (Mi. 183, 271 f.). Hugo of St. Victor recog- nizes among the sacraments the sign of the cross, the invocation of the Trinity (de sacr. i. 9, 6J, and all manner of ecclesiasti- cal symbols and formulas (ib. ii. 9). Roland thus designates the incarnation (p. 157). But in the twelfth century the con- stant tendency was to give prominence to certain definite sacra- ments. Robert (sent. v. 24) contrasts the unrepeatable (bap- tism, confirmation) and the repeatable (repentance, the Lord's Supper).^ Hugo treats in his Summa of: baptism, confirma- tion, the eucharist, extreme unction, marriage, but also repent- ance (6. 10 ff.; cf. de sacr. ii. 14), and the power of the keys, which is conferred through ordination (6. 14). This is practi- cally a recognition of the number seven. Here, too, the influ- ence of the school of Abelard was felt. The Epitome has : bap- tism, confirmation, the Lord's Supper, extreme unction, mar- riage (similarly the sentences of St. Florian, Denifle, archiv. i. 432); repentance is treated of in the third section of the system under the heading of *'love" (c. 35 ff.).^ Roland and Om- nebene, on the other hand (vid. Denifle, 1. c, p. 467), have : baptism, confirmation. Lord's Supper, repentance, extreme unc- tion, in connection with which the power of the keys and ordi- nation (RoL, p. 267 f.) are spoken of, and marriage. Since Omnebene appears to have made use of Roland (vid. Gietl, Sent. Rol., p. 54), Hugo and Roland must be regarded as the ^ It is not correct in view simply of the incidental utterance at vii. 14 to re- gard him as including ordination as a fifth sacrament. ^ Abelard himself appears to have divided in the same way. Vid. Ethica, ^. 23. 8o HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. first to have placed the number of sacraments at seven. But not until we reach Peter Lombard do we find this number clearly and definitely fixed (sent. iv. 2 A).^ It was even then still cus- tomary to speak, of baptism and the Lord's Supper as the chief sacraments, which were said to have flowed from the side of Christ (Lomb. sent. iv. 8 A; Hugo, de sacr. i. 9. 7 ; ii. 2. i). 2. The old (Angustinian) definition of a sacrament, as the *'sign of a sacred reality" (^sacrae rei signuin) or a "visible sign of invisible grace," was still in vogue (Roland, p. 155 ; epit. i.). But the conception was gradually becoming more precise : *' God instituted the remedies of the sacraments against the wounds of original and actual sin " (Lomb. iv. i A; Hugo, de sacr. i. 8. 12). They are not merely signs, and were instituted not only for the sake of signifying (^significandt gratia) ^ but for the sake of sanctifying (^sanctificandi gratia) (ib. B). Faith and repentance are mentioned as the subjective condition required for a profitable reception (ib. iv. 4 B). But no one so clearly expressed the controlling thought as Hugo : '* A sacrament is a corporeal or material element, openly (and) sensibly presented, representing by similitude and signifying by institution, and con- taining by consecration, some invisible and spiritual grace (de sacr. i. 9. 2). Thus, e. g.^ it may be said of the water of bap- tism : ''By consecration (^sanctificatione) it contains spiritual grace" (ib. ii. 6. 2). This fully expresses the sacramental con- ception which dominates the Middle Ages. The sensuous ele- ments somehow contain grace ; with them grace is infused into the recipients. There are, indeed, differences between the vari- ous sacraments : *' Some, as baptism, offer a remedy for sin and confer assisting grace ; others, as marriage, are for remedy only ; others, as the eucharist and ordination, strengthen us with grace and virtue " (Lomb. iv. 2 A). As we shall have occasion here- after to discuss each sacrament separately, we here offer but a few brief comments. 3. Baptism accomplishes man's renewal by a putting off of vices {depositio vitium), and a contribution of virtues {coltatio virtutum) (Lombard iv. 3 L). Original sin is remitted, because (i) through the grace of baptism the vice of concupiscence is ^ According to the above, my statement in Thomas. DG. ii., ed. 2, 216, must be modified. It is inaccurate to say that the Lombard was led to enume- rate seven sacraments by combining those acknowledged by Hugo and Robert (see note I, p. 79). It seems chronologically impossible that the Lombard should have been influenced by Roland (vid. Gietl, 1. c, p. 16 f.). The Lombard started out with the enumeration customary in the school of Abe- lard (vid. the Epitome), and, following Hugo, added to these repentance and ordination. But this was a natural result of the theological tendencies of the age. DEFINITION OF SACRAMENTS. S I weakened (^debilitatur) , and (2) guilt (^reatus^ is abolished (^aboletur') in baptism (ib. ii. 32 B). 4. Confirmation works the bestowal of the Holy Spirit for strengthening (ib. iv. 7 A.; infusion of grace, Hugo, de sacr. ii. 7. i). *' Confirmation is as much worthier than baptism, as it is worthier to be made an athlete than to be cured of disease. ... Wherefore confirmation is now granted only by a bishop ' ' (Robert, sent. v. 23 ; Hugo, 1. c, ii, 7. 4). Roland, on the other hand, declares that baptism is the worthier in its effect, and that confirmation can be called worthier only because it ought to be administered by a worthier person (p. 213).^ 5. As to the Lord's Supper, see Section 49, 3, 4. 6. We must examine the discussions of repentance somewhat more fully, since the theologians of the period attempted to justify upon theoretic grounds the advances made in the statement of this doctrine. Here, too, Abelard and his school exerted a great influence. Hetaughtthat (i) True repentance consists in contri- tion of the heart (^confritio cordis) .'^ Where this exists, God grants the forgiveness of sins (ethica 19). Also the Epitome (35) and Roland (sent., pp. 243, 245). Usually confessio vfiW immediately follow contrition (eth. 24; epit. 36; cf. praxis, serm. 8 fin.); it is not, however, a condition required for the forgiveness of sins, but ''a large part of satisfaction " (eth. 24). (2) But this forgiveness has reference only to the eternal punishments of sin : ** For God, when he pardons sin to the penitent, does not remit all penalty to them, but only the eternal" (eth. 19; epit. 35). The '^ penalty of satisfaction," on the other hand, was held to release from all temporal ■^wmshm^nl of sin, either in this life or in purgatory. If these works of repentance are not sufficient,"* God will complete the punishment **by afflicting with purga- torial punishments either in this or in a future life" (expos, in Rom. 2. 4, p. 840 ; eth. 25 ; cf. epit. 37 ; Roland, p. 248). (3) Roland established the necessity of confession and works of satisfaction as follows : ** We offend God by thinking wickedly, and we scandalize the church by acting perversely : and just as we offend both, we owe it to both to render satisfac- tion — to God through contrition of heart, to the church through confession of the mouth and satisfaction by works, if the nature ' Vid. also Petr. Pict. sent. v. 9: ''Baptism . . is more useful . . . confirmation better and worthier and more precious, just as water is more use- ful than wine, but wine more worthy and excellent." ^ According to the Epitome, 5j it arises " not from fear of punishment, but from love of righteousness." ^ Observe the keen remarks of Abelard concerning " some of the priests . . . entrapping those under their care in order that for the oblation of coins they may condone or relax the penalties of the enjoined satisfaction " (eth. 35). 6 82 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. of the time demands" (p. 249). Abelardthus deduced the pro- priety of works of satisfaction from the necessity of expiating the temporal penalties of sin, and by this means solved a prob- lem raised by the new penitential praxis. But, as he made the remission of the eternal penalty dependent solely upon contri- tion, he increased the difficulty attaching to another problem of the same praxis, /. e.^ that absolution seems to be robbed of its chief significance and the office of priest becomes merely to give advice in reference to works of satisfaction for temporal penalties. {b^ Hugo of St. Victor, controverting the views of Abelard, becomes, upon the doctrine of repentance as elsewhere, the rep- resentative of the hierarchical orthodoxy. For him the confes- sion is the chief thing in repentance, as was doubtless the case in the prevalent praxis {oi. supra, p. 46). It presupposes contri- tion and the willingness to render satisfaction (de sacr. ii. 14. I ; summa 6. 10). He who will not make confession is a de- spiser of God (sacr. ii. 14. 8). But repentance is actually secured only through confession and satisfaction : ' ^ He confesses his sin to the priest, who imposes upon him a just satisfaction, for he is bound to make satisfaction, not according to his judg- ment, but according to the judgment of the priest, and then the priest releases him from the debt of future damnation " (summ. 6. 11).^ Absolution accordingly follows confession, but it is granted in view of the satisfaction imposed in connection with the former (see foot-note). Hugo thus theoretically comes to the support of the theory of the older penitential praxis (p. 43 f. ). Finally, he vigorously assails the opinion that priestly absolution has only an ecclesiastical and declaratory signification. Against this he argues : The sinner is bound in a two-fold way : ** by ob- duration of the mind and by the debt of future damnation. ' ' The former, God removes through the grace which works penitence in us, *'so that . . . penitent we merit to be absolved from the debt of damnation" (sacr. ii. 4. 8, p. 565), As the resusci- tated Lazarus was by the apostles '* loosed" from his grave- clothes, so the priests, by means of a power divinely conferred, release the penitent sinner from eternal, perdition (ib. p. 565 f. , ^ It is necessary to observe that Hugo is aware that forgiveness depends upon contritio and confessio : *' But there is this remedy, that he repent of his fault in his heart and confess it with his mouth ; which, when he has done, he will then no longer be a debtor of damnation" (sacr. ii. 14. 8, p. 5^7)- The passage above cited does not exclude this view, as the *' then " refers only to the imposing of the satisfaction. Cf. somewhat later (p. 149)- " The priest releases , . . from the debt of future punishment by absolving through the satisfaction which he imposes." DEFINITION OF SACRAMENTS. 83 568, and summ. 6. ii).^ In this idea lies the dogmatic signifi- cance of Hugo's teaching. (c) Robert Pullus, on the other hand, locates the essence of the sacrament in absolution and confession. ''Absolution, which is, in confession, pronounced above the penitent by the priest, is a sacrament, since it is the sign of a sacred reality ' ' (sent. vi. 6i). But the priestly absolution is only the announce- ment of the forgiveness which God, upon the ground of peni- tence, imparts to the sinner (ib.; likewise Petr. Pict. sent. iii. i6). But after absolution it remains necessary to perform the penitential works (vi. 52). If the latter be not rendered, they will be completed by the penalties endured in purgatory (ib. and vii. T ; vi. 59). (^) The Lombard betrays also here the influence of Abelard. Repentance embraces the usual three parts (sent. iv. 16 A). It is a punishment, and, as such, of a satisfactory nature {poena satisfacit, iv. 14 A, B, 15 C). The admission (iv. 17 C), that forgiveness presupposes only contrition and confession be- fore God, is supplemented by the declaration : " Confession ought to be offered first to God and then to the priest, nor if there be opportunity for this can entrance to paradise be other- wise attained (ib. D), since the latter is a kind of punishment of sin " (ib. F). This does not involve any divergence from Abelard. Confession is then followed by absolution (dist. 18). The question, whether God or the priest forgives, is thus decided : " That God only remits and retains sins, and nevertheless he has conferred upon the church the power of binding and loosing ; but he absolves in one way and the church in another '^ (18 E).^ The priests decide whether the sinner * ' is regarded as released in the view of the church " (F). But the priests further bind and loose by imposing and mitigating the satisfaction, and by the admission to participation in the sacrament of those who have been purified by rendering the required satisfaction. But since this was, in fact, dependent upon absolution, the Lombard further interprets his language : It is to be observed that, be- cause they bind some with the satisfaction of repentance, by ^ The practical frame of mind which harmonizes with this theory cannot be better expressed than by Hugo : " How can I know when my repentance is sufficient [condigna)} Because thou canst not know this, therefore thou hast need always to repent. Thou canst make satisfaction ; thou canst not do too much. It is better to do more than less . . . Nevertheless, in order that the conscience of the sinner may sometimes find comfort, the mode and measure of external repent- ance has been appointed, so that when the latter has been completed and perfected, thou mayest begin to have confidence" (de sacr. ii. 14. 2 fin.). ^ Here, as often in the Lombard, we have the theology of " Yes and No." In iv. 18 D the views of Hugo and Abelard are cited. 84 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. that very act they show such to be released from their sins, since penitential satisfaction is not imposed upon anyone except such as the priest judges to be truly penitent. But upon any other they do not impose it, and by that very act they adjudge that his sin is retained by God (G). A defective exercise of re- pentance results in the tortures of purgatory : ''And they are more severely punished than if they had fully completed their repentance here " (20 B).^ The Lombard advanced the doctrine of repentance by assuring to absolution, by virtue of its close con- nection with confession, a secure place in the sacrament, follow- ing in this in the footsteps of Hugo. The dogmatic contribu- tion of the present period lay in the fact that it began to estab- lish a connection between confession and priestly absolution, and to argue the necessity of satisfaction in view of the tem- poral, i. e.j purgatorial, punishment of sin. 7. The custom of Extreme Unction, based on Jas. 5. 15, was in the present period included among the sacraments. It serves a double purpose : * * for the remission of sins and for the alleviation of bodily infirmity ' ' ( Lomb. iv. 2 3 B ; Hugo, de sacr. ii- 15- 3}- 8. The origin of the sacrament of Ordination has been traced in Vol. I., p. 319 f. A new motive was furnished for the careful statement of the doctrine by the enlargement of the penitential system and the sacramental conception of grace. The priest receives through ordination the two keys, discretio dA\d potestas. *' In consecration these two are given to all, i. f., the office of exercising discretion and the office of exercising power. ' ' Binding and loosing are thereby committed to them (Hugo, summ. 6. 14; cf. Roland, p. 264 ff.; Lomb. sent. iv. 19 A-C). Yet this is only one aspect of the matter. Through ordination is imparted a more abundant grace {ampHor gj'atia, Lomb. iv. 24 A j, as wellas a spiritual power {spiritualis potestas) and spiritual character {character spiritualis') (ib. K). To it those are to be admitted ''who may be able worthily to administer the Lord's sac- raments " (ib. B). If this applies to all the seven orders (ostiarii, lectores, exorcistae, acolythi, subdiaconi, diaconi, presbyteri), it has yet special reference to the priesthood. "The word priest {sacerdos) is derived from the Greek and Latin, t. e. , sacrum dans, or sacer dux. For just as a king {rex) receives his title because he reigns {a regendo), so a priest {sacerdos) receives his because he consecrates {sacrando) , for he consecrates and sanctifies ' ' (ib. J) . In the conception of this sacrament, as elsewhere, no full and ^ The Council at Aachen, A. D. S36, mentions it among the duties of the spiritual adviser (Mansi, xiv. 681). Item, at Pavia, A. D. 850 (Hefele, iii. 177). The custom is first met with among the Gnostics (vid.Vol. I., p. 99). CONCEPTION OF THE CHURCH. 85 clear conclusion was attained in the present period, but the con- trolling thought is clear enough. Ordination imparts the spiritual authority to administer the sacraments, and through them to sanc- tify the laity (cf. Greg, vii., supra, p. 51). 9. The sacrament of Marriage betrays the juristic origin by the form of statement. It is clear from the evidence above adduced that the theolo- gians of the twelfth century had already clearly wrought out the materializing of grace through the sacraments. The theologians of the thirteenth century inherited, indeed, a number of un- solved — and insoluble — problems, but also the firmly established fundamental conception which proved the regulating force of medieval Christianity, /. e. , Grace is the power efficaciously manifested in the sacraments, whose administration belongs by divine right to the priesthood. § 51. Conception of the Church. 1. The task of the present chapter would be imperfectly per- formed if we should fail to note the acceptance by the theolo- gians of the day of the conception of the church which Gregory VII. introduced (supra, p. 50 ff. ). The utterances of the Scholastics upon the subject are confessedly meagre. Neither the system of Abelard nor that of the Damascenes gave occasion for its discussion. The conception was a self-evident premise, whose application must be made practically by the canonical laws and theologically in the doctrine of the sacraments. It is, therefore, all the more significant that Hugo of St. Victor and Robert Pullus should have expressed themselves plainly upon the subject. We have also discussions of the relation oi church and state in the Polycraticus of John of Salisbury (f 1 180, opp. ed. Giles, 5 vols., 1848. Cf. Gennrich, Die Staats- u. Kirchenlehre d. Joh. v. Sal., 1894).^ 2. Augustine indicates the starting point in his query : ^' What is the church except the multitude of the believing, the whole number of Christians?" (jnultitudo fide Hum , universitas chris- tianoruni). (Hugo, de sacr. ii. 2. 2). But inasmuch as, ac- cording to this, believers are simply Christians, this definition by no means brings us '*to the true Christian idea of the church *' (LiEBNER, Hugo v. St. Victor, p. 446); it only declares that the Christian world constitutes the church.^ The correct ' Vid. also HONORIUS Augustod.; **The highest glory composed of the apostoHc and the imperial." Mi. 172. ^ Interesting is the definition of Alanus ab Insul.: *' the church is the con- gregation of believers confessing Christ and the guardian {subsidium) of the sacraments" (de articul. oath. fid. iv. in., Mi. 210. 613). 86 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. conception is gained by the division of Christians into rulers and subjects (^pj-aelati et subjecti) (Hugo, ib. ii. 2. 5 ; cf. Robert, sent. vii. 19: '^ prelates governing the church"). This for- mula, frequently occurring already in the writings of Cyprian (Vol. I., p. 180 ff.), signifies that the right side of the church con- sists of the clergy and the left side of the laity (Hugo, ii. 2. 3). There are, therefore, two lives or two nationalities, of which one ministers to temporal necessities, and the other administers what pertains to the spiritual life (ib. 3). Each of these nationalities is subject to a ruler, i. e., the king and the pope (ib. 4). The nature of the church is in harmony with this idea, and there are discussions of its orders ^ sacraments, dJ\d precepts. The grada- tion of the orders is then treated of. The special privileges of bishops, as compared with priests, are placed upon the ground that otherwise the subjects might take advantage of their superi- ors and forget the obedience due the latter (ib. ii. 3. 12). The archbishops and the four patriarchs stand above the bishops, and over all is the pope {papa), i. e., father of fathers, whom, pre- siding in place of Peter, the chief of the apostles, every ecclesi- astical order is bound to obey, who alone has as prerogatives of his high rank the keys of binding and loosing all things upon earth (ii. 3. 5). No one but God may pass judgment upon him (Johann. Polycr. viii. 23 ; opp. iv. 363). According to the in- terpretation of the Augustinian conception of the two states which dominates Hugo, it is but a self-evident conclusion that the spiritual power stands far above the secular ; it is the older and has authority to institute the latter and sit in judgment upon it (ii. 2. 4; cf. Robert, vii. 7): ''This sword, therefore, the prince receives from the hand of the church. , . . The prince is, therefore, a minister of the priesthood, and one who exercises that part of the duties of the priests which seems unworthy of the hands of the priesthood " (Polycr. iv. 3 in.).^ Yet the state is also to be regarded as a divine institution (Polycr., 1. c, iv. i), but must be subject to spiritual (clerical) direction. Robert expresses the opinion that, according to Matt. 22. 21 : "The priesthood is superior to the kingdom in those things which it administers for God, and the kingdom to the priesthood in those things which pertain to the world " (vii. 7, p. 920 f. Cf. Hugo, ii. 2. 6, 7; Gregory VH., supra, p. 50). These utterances furnish a precise outline of the Gregorian conception of the 1 John, says: "Therefore the prince is a minister of the public utility and a servant of equity " (Polycr. iii. 2). The gravest crime is tyranny, which is directed ''against the very body of justice." From this is deducted the right of slaying tyrants : " To kill a tyrant is not only allowable, but right and just " (ib. iii. 15 ; viii. 17 in., 18 fin.). AIMS OF THE CHURCH. 87 church : ( i ) The clergy are related to the laity as a government to its subjects. (2) This exalted position of the clergy is ex- plained by their authority to dispense the sacraments. (3) The clergy is a graded organism, whose summit is the pope. (4) The secular power is by divine right subject to the spiritual. CHAPTER II. DEVELOPMENT OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE DURING THE SECOND PERIOD OF SCHOLASTICISM. § 52. Aims of the Church. Religious Life. Efforts at Refo7'm. I. We are now standing upon the summit of the Middle Ages. The cornerstone and foundation of their theological structure were laid in the former period, its scope and tendency deter- mined. The decisive work was not done by the leaders of the thirteenth century, but by their forerunners in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. This is true of the theologians no less than of the ecclesiastics and the reformers of the church's devotional hfe. We must first of all trace the development of the hierarchical ideas and the religious ideals, whose introduction was noted in Sections 44 and 45. We recall the firm adherence of the later popes to the principles of Gregory VII. Innocent III. claims special attention. He held that *' The pope is the vicar {incarius^ of Christ, placed midway between God and man, be- neath God and beyond man, less than God and greater than man, who judges concerning all and is judged by none (Mi. 217. 658). Thus Aristotle once spoke of the genie as '* O, thou to men divine ! " (Pol. iii. 13. 8). Not only the whole church, but the whole world, is subject to the sway of the pope : * ' James, the brother of the Lord . . . left to Peter not only the whole church, but the whole world, to be governed " ( registr. ii. 209). Inno- cent accordingly sought to adminster the affairs of the church as its sole ruler (cf. the confirmation of bishops, their oath of obe- dience, their being called to the duty of ^(?//r/V////^, appellation to Rome, the Roman land titles, etc. Vid. the bull of Eger. , A. D. 1 213, in MG. leg. ii. 224 f.; reg. i. 495, 496), and claimed also supremacy over states. As the moon receives its light from the sun, '' so the royal power receives the splendor of its dignity SS HISTORV OF DOCTRINES. from the pontifical authority " (reg. i. 401, Mi. 217. 1 180. Cf. DoUinger, Papsttum, p. 401 f. ).^ These ideas were most abruptly expressed in the bull * ' Unam Sanctam, ' ' issued by Boniface VIII. , A. D. 1302, whose leading declarations are as follows: **We are compelled by the faith to believe . . . one holy catholic church . . . outside of which there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. . . In which there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism. . . Therefore of this one and only church there is one body and one head, not two bodies, as though it were a monster, viz. : Christ and the vicar of Christ, Peter and the successor of Peter. . . . That in this and in its power are two swords, viz., the spiritual and the temporal. . . . There- fore both are in the power of the church, viz., the spiritual and the material sword ; but the latter to be exercised for the church, the former by the church. The one is in the hand of the priest ; the other in the hands of kings and soldiers, but at the command and permission (^ad mitu7n et patientiain) of the priest. But it is fitting that sword be under sword, and that the temporal author- ity be subject to the spiritual. . . But that the spiritual power excels both in dignity and nobility any earthly power whatsoever. . , For, truth being the witness, the spiritual power has (the right J to establish the earthly, and, if it have not been good, to judge it. . . . Whosoever, therefore, resists this power thus or- dained of God resists the ordinance of God, unless, like Mani- chaeus, thou dreamest that there are two principles. . . . More- over, to every human creature we declare, say, define and pro- nounce, that to be subject to the' Roman pontiff is absolutely necessary to salvation " {^de necessitate salutis). 2. The writings of St. Bernard exerted a profound influ- ence upon the devout speculation of the following period, but it does not lie within the province of the History of Doctrines to follow them in detail.^ We must not, however, overlook the protest against the secularization of the church which, at the time when the hierarchy was at the summit of its power, and when even ideas of reform had become merely a means for further secularization, was raised by the Brethren of the Poor Life of Christ. The power of love was revealed in Christ to ^ Innocent maintained that the popes had in the time of Charlemagne transplanted the Greek Empire to Germany, and that in consequence the *' right and authority of examining the person elected to be king" belonged to them (de elect. 34, in Mirbt, Urkunden, p. 78). ^ Vid. the mystical writings of Hugo (f 1141) and Richard (f 1173) of St. Victor ; also Bonaventura, Itenerarium mentis, as presented in detail in Thomasius, DG. ii., ed. 2, 2728". Religious mysticism is here systematized and developed into a philosophy. These writings may he described as the beginnings of theological ethics. AIMS OF THE CHURCH. 89 Francis of Assisi. The poor life of Christ overwhelmed his soul ; the imitation of Christ became his ideal. He became the knight of *'holy poverty." Poverty set him free from the world. As he, surfeited with the old life, shook off his relations with the world, he soon found something else and more than his ideal had promised — he found himself and individuality. He did not clothe his thoughts in doctrinal statements. The gospel frame of mind was everything to him. The love of Christ kept his tears of joy ever flowing and taught him to perform miracles of love. The whole creation testified to him of the love of God, and all living things demanded of him love. ^'Everything temporal " was to him ** only an image," the image of the soul, which belongs to its God. Thus his life, and with it the whole crea- tion, became a hymn of praise to God, for the service of free love. '* Praise and bless the Lord, and render thanks, and serve him with grand humility ' ' (Song of the Sun) . '* My God and all, who art thou, sweetest Lord, my God ; and who am I, an insignificant worm, thy servant? Most Holy Lord, that I might love thee ! " (opp. Franc, ed. v. d. Burg, 1849, p. 44). '* May the glow- ing and mellifluous power of thy love absorb, I pray, O Lord, my mind from all things which are under heaven, that I may die from love of thy love, who hast deigned to die from love of my love" (ib. p. 43). Or, as Jacopone sings: ''Make me truly to rejoice with — cling to Jesuline ; then at length shall I have lived. ' ' Francis was made the founder of an order by the church of his age. But he sought and attained more than this. He discovered human individuality and opened to it an immediate intercourse with God. It may, perhaps, be correct to say that he wished to make all men monks ; but he did cer- tainly also teach the children of men to. become Christians and men. As he found God and love in the Jesus of the gospels, and attained liberation from the world in the following of Jesus, he exerted a powerful stimulus upon his contemporaries. He taught the world the directly individual character and the present blessedness of the religious life, and he led men to look upon the world and mankind simply and without dogmatic spectacles. He glorified poverty and love, and taught men to realize in them the sense of personal perfection. His influence can be easily traced in the religious life, as well as in the art and literature, of the following period. This is especially true with reference to the direct and loving appreciation of the human life of Jesus which was manifested in the ensuing age. The one precious pearl of the church's tradition was thus found anew. How exhaustively and how lovingly have not Bonaven- TURA (Meditationes vitae Chr. opp. vi.) and Ludolf of Saxony 90 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. (Vita Christi ; vid. also De vita et beneficiis salvatoris Jesu Chr. devotissimae meditationes) portrayed the human life of Jesus : '* in order that in all places and deeds thou mayest be in mind, as though thou wast present in body*' (Bonav. c. 88 fin.). Into the heart of him who thus regards the life of Jesus there comes a certain ** familiarity, confidence and love " for the Lord (ib. proem.). He is, as is constantly emphasized, for us the good example : '* Who to this end was sent from heaven to us in order that he might go before us in the path of virtues, and might give to us in his example a law of life and discipline " (Ludolf, pro- log.). This is the way *' to behold him inspirit " Tib. ii. c. 89). Upon this point cf. Seeberg, in Ztschr. f. K. Wiss. , 1888, p. 163 ff. The lessons taught by St. Francis were, thanks to his monastic order and despite it, not lost upon the Christian world. He was a '^pioneer of the reformers." Cf. Hase, Fr. V. Ass. 1856. Sabatier, Leben d. h. Fr., German trans- lation, 1895. Hegler, Ztschr. f. Theol. u. K. 1896. K. Muller, Die Anfange des Minoritenordens, etc., 1885. Thode, Fr. v. Ass. u. die Anfange der Kunst d. Renaissance in Ital., 1885. Ehrle, in Archiv. f, Litt. u. Kirchengesch. d. MA. iii. 554 ff. 3. The reformatory agitations very naturally exerted a marked influence upon the piety of the laity. This was especially true in regard to the penitential brotherhoods attaching themselves to the third order of St. Francis. But it must be acknowledged, further, that among the great masses of the population an external eccle- siastical religious life was perpetuated. The people believed in God, Christ, the Virgin Mary, and the saints. They believed just " what the church believes."* " There is a certain body of the faith to which everyone is bound, and which is sufficient for the simple and, perhaps, for all laymen, /'. e. , that every adult be- lieve that God is, and that he is a rewarder of all the good. Likewise must all believe the other articles implicitly^ i. e. , that everything which the universal church believes is true. ' ' These words of Innocent IV. ^ justly represent the actual state of things.^ Faith in God consists in the conviction that he guides the for- * The "faith" is the Apostles' Creed, e.g., Schonbach, Altdeutsche Pre- digten i. 41, 46. Its essential content is the Trinity, ib. i. 4; ii. 115 ; "i. 114. It includes also the divinity of Christ and the seven sacraments (vid. Altdeutsch. Pred. ed. Wackernagel, p. 77 ff. ). Vid. also i. 42 : **I believe all that which I as a Christian man ought to believe." Compare Tertullian's "credidi quod credere debui." 2 Apparatus quinque libror. decretalium i. i. Vid. Ritschl, Fides impli- cita, 1890, p. 10. ^ It was the law for inquisitors : They have power to excommunicate laymen disputing publicly or privately concerning the Catholic faith (Bernard. Guid. practica inquisit. iv. , p. 207). AIMS OF THE CHURCH. 9 1 tunes of men, rewarding the good and punishing the wicked. Christ by his death overcame the devil (e, g.j Schonbach, Alt- deutsche Predigten, iii. 76, 174). He became for us an example of virtue, humility, and poverty (ib. iii. 7, 238, 252, 40). He is **the heavenly King" (ib. iii. 6). By faithful fulfillment of one's duties in the church the favor of God may be secured. Then comes the intercession of the saints, particularly of the Virgin Mary,^and the protective influence of relics, and, finally, almsgiving. Life should be spent in constant view of the future world. Every act of the Christian has reference to reward or punishment there. ^ And as he thus stands in constant touch with the other world, so its wonders are constantly injected into the present life.^ The providence of God, implicit faith, Christ the vanquisher of the devil and the teacher of virtue, ecclesias- ticism, alms, saints, relics, and the future world constitute the chief articles of practical Christianity."* But in the most culti- vated circles of the age even the utterance attributed to Frederick II. concerning the three deceivers (Moses, Jesus, and Moham- med) found currency (cf. Reuter, Gesch. d. rel. Aufklarung. ii. 276 ff. ). Vid. Knoeler, Kathol. Leben. im MA., 4 vols., 1887 ff. (after Digby). FoSTE, ZurTheol. d. Berthold v. Regensburg, Zwickauer Gymnasialpr. , 1890. SoMMER, Deutsche Frommigkeit in I3ten Jalirhundert, 1901. Michael, Kulturzustande des deutschen Volkes wahrend des i3ten Jahrhunderts, 1903. 4. The means by which the church influenced the religious life of the age were chiefly the following : {a) Preaching, which con- sisted mainly of admonitions to a moral life, in connection with which doctrine was presented only in general outlines, the liturgy explained, and the history of Christ and of the saints repeated.^ ^ Adoration of the virgin was rapidly gaining in popularity. So early as A. D. 1 140 an attempt was made at Lyons to introduce a festival of the im- maculate conception of Mary, but Bernard expressed himself positively against the idea. Vid. ep. 174. For the position of St. Francis, vid. ep. 11, 12, and p. 400pp. Konrad of Wiirzb. in the Gold. Schmiede (especially 210, 282, 488, 632 : Du hist ein ewic fundament — dar uffe de geloube stat — diu Kristenheit gemuret hat — ir zuoversiht uf dine kraft, 1374, 1832, 1992. Altd. Predigten, ii. 79 : ** Our Lord is the King and our lady the queen." ^ Two brothers were expelled from that monastery. Unless these two shall have returned, its condition will never be good. One of these is called Give [Date): the other Take [Dabitur) (Caesar. Heisterb. dial. iv. 68). ^ Vid. especially the Dialog, miraculorum of Caesar, v. Heisterbach (ed. Strange, 1851), and Peter Venerabil., De miracuHs sui teraporis, in Migne 189. * There has, strangely enough, been as yet no systematic presentation of the religious ideas of medieval literature, although Schonbach has made a begin- ning : Uber Hartmann v. Aue, 1894. 5 Cf. LiNSENMAYER, Gesch. d. Predigt in Deutschl., 1886, p. 157 ff. Vid. ScHt^NBACH, Altdeutsche Predigten, 3 vols., 18S6 ff. Honorius Augustodu- 92 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Then came the Sacrament of Repentance. The transformation of the church's teaching upon this point in the twelfth century (supra, p. 45) gave rise to a number of new questions, as: Whether contrition is sufficient in itself, or if it requires also confession before a priest. Gratian still leaves it an open question, whether *' sins are remitted upon contrition of the heart, not upon con- fession of the mouth," or whether '* without confession no par- don can be merited" (decret. pars ii.; causa 33; quaest. 3 can. 30, 60, 89). The theologians finally decided for the latter position (vid. sub). Inasmuch as confession before the priest thus became the controlling factor of the sacrament/ the indica- tive form of absolution gradually supplanted the optative.^ It is, therefore, now the church which, through its representatives, grants ''absolution from penalty and guilt." Again, it was asked whether all sins, or only mortal sins, were to be confessed. In general, it was the rule that for a multitude of lighter sins the '* general repentance in the church, the Lord's Prayer, fasting, and giving alms to the poor, and, at most, the salutary host of the altar," were sufficient (Hugo, de sacr. ii. 14. i ; Lombard, sent. iv. dist. 21 E ; ^an anoymous tract of the twelfth century, de poenit., Migne 213. 880. Cf. Die taegeliche buoze, Schonb. altd. pred. iii. 34). There was a constantly growing tendency to substitute indulgences for the actual performance of works of satisfaction, and for this purpose various occasions and forms were devised (opposing heretics, jubilee celebrations, the build- ing of churches, feasts of dedication, festivals of Corpus Christi and the Virgin Mary, canonization of saints, brotherhoods, gar- lands, crucifixes, etc. Vid. Wildt in Kirchenlex. i., ed. 2, 102 ff.).^ Thus repentance came to be regarded as the chief sacrament : *' Where there is repentance {poenitentia') there is nens., speculum ecclesiae (Mi. 172). Alanus, ab Insulis, Summa de arte praedicatoria (Mi. 210). GuiBERT, de Novigent., lib. quo ordine sermo fieri debeat (Mi. 156), col. 26: "But by the grace of God faith now becomes known to the hearts of all, and although it has been necessary very often to inculcate and discuss this anew, yet it is none the less proper to speak even much more frequently of those things which may instruct their morals." ^ The new view appears with peculiar distinctness in Abelard, Serm. 8 fin., and later, e. g.^ Schonbach, Altd. Pred. iii. 88. 2 Honorius still differently, Specul. eccl., Mi. 172. 826. The Synod of Treves, A. D. 1227, already employs the formula, ego te absolvo (Hefele, CO. v. 948). Cf. Lea, Hist, of conf. and indulg., i. 482 ff. ^ Faith in the virtue of indulgences became a special criterion of orthodoxy. The Council of Constance directed that those suspected of heresy should be asked : ** Whether they believe that the Roman pontiffs can grant indulgences on reasonable grounds? " Later, pilgrimages were imposed upon those found guilty of heresy. Vid. Bernard. Guid. practica inquis., ii. 5,11; iii. i, 8, 13, 45 fin. Meanwhile, the further custom of commutation arose (ib. ii. il, 22), and for money (ii. 23, 25 ; cf. iii. 45, p. 166 f.). AIMS OF THE CHURCH. 93 also indulgence. ... As often, therefore, as God gives to a man repentance, so often does he give also indulgence " (Mi. 213. 873). The rule, that for public offenses there must be also pub- lic repentance, is still maintained in theory/ but, in point of fact, public repentance fell rapidly into disuse. Honorius Augustodu- nensis already speaks of those performing public penance as rid- iculing God {demn irridentes^ elucidar. ii. 18). In the four- teenth century it had been in many places entirely abandoned. ''In such things, according to the course of the present age, there is seen rather a scandal than edification" (Durand. sent, iv. dist. 14 qu. 4 a. 3). Innocent III. established the follow- ing rule at the Fourth Lateran council (A. D. 12 15); '* Let every believer of either sex, after arriving at years of discretion, faithfully confess all his sins alone at least once a year to his own priest, and endeavor with all his strength to observe the penance enjoined upon him, receiving at least at Easter the sacrament of the eucharist. . . . I^et the priest bediscreet and cautious . . . inquiring diligently as to the circumstances of both the sinner and the sin, from which he may prudently judge what counsel he ought to give to him, and what kind of remedy he ought to im- pose " Tc. 21, Mansi xxii. 1007). This law was very often em- phasized and observed (Councils of Narbonne, A. D. 1227, c. 7 ; Treves, A. D. 1227, c. 3 and 4 ; Canterbury, A. D. 1236, c. 18 ; Toulouse, A. D. 1229, c. 13, where confession three times an- nually is recommended. Vid. Hefele, v. 943,946, 1052,982). Cf. GOETZ, Revue internat. de theol., 1894, 300 if., 431 ff., and Ztschr. f. KG. XV. 321 ff. Lea, A history of auric, conf. and indulgences, 3 vols., London, 1896. (<:) The other sacraments must also be mentioned. "And to them (the priests) the almighty God has committed the seven sacraments in order that they might with these sanctify Chris- tians to the world, as they journey into the world, and as they journey through the world, and as they journey out of the world, with holy baptism, and with holy marriage, and with holy con- firmation, and with holy confession and penance, and with the holy body of God, and with holy oil, and with the judgments " (Berthold of Regensb. ed. Pfeiffer, i. 142). We postpone for the present the further discussion of these, stopping at present ^ £. g., Schonbach, altd. pred. i. 36 : *' A man does penance for his sin in two ways, public and private." A discrimination was made between /t'£'?z- itentia publica 2.Xi^ poeniteiitia soleninis. The latter was appointed only by the bishop, was performed with peculiarly solemn ecclesiastical rights, and could not be repeated (Alex. Hal. summ. iv. quaest. 64; membr. 2. Thorn, summ. iii. suppl. qu. 28, art. 3. Ricardus de Medievilla in sent. iv. dist. 14, princ. II, quaest. I and 2. Cf. MORIN, de discipl. v. 25. 2 ff. Hefele, vi. 183, 220, 502). 94 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. only to observe how closely the whole course of the Christian life has been bound to the church, /. e., the hierarchy.^ 5. Finally, brief mention must be made of the heretical move- ments which assumed such large proportions after the eleventh and twelfth centuries. The controlling aim of Western Chris- tianity was the salvation of souls (^salus aniviarujii) through the church (Vol. I., p. 192). It was in consistency with this that the church of the Middle Ages expressed its characteristic thought in its theory of the church and the sacraments, especially the sacrament of repentance (penance). The same controlling aim, however, gave impulse also to the heresies and schisms (Novatianism and Donatism) which arose in the Eastern church.^ Even the great heretical groups of the Middle Ages display their essential characteristics, not in their divergence from the accepted theological views, but in the practical desire to secure liberation from sin and, at least in the conception of their leaders, to rein- state the holy apostolic church. We have to do with the two great branches of medieval heresy — the Cathari and the Wal- denses. The Cathari, indeed, in keeping with their Oriental origin, revived, with various modifications, almost the entire Gnostic system, t. e., Manichaeism (two Gods, Gnostic Christ- ology. Dualism, etc.). But even these agitations culminated practically in the ideas that the Romish church was the whore Babylon, her hierarchs Pharisees, and her sacraments invalid ; whereas the Cathari were the only holy church, with the true and holy hierarchy and effectual sacraments. The *' good Christians" and ''the true imitators of Christ " are persecuted by the church which is not a church ; but only they can actually release from sin by their baptism and penance (^consolmnentuin, melioramen- tian)} Among the Waldenses the doctrinal divergence (denial of purgatory, opposition to the worship of saints and images) was given comparatively little prominence ; but practically these preachers of apostolic poverty rejected finally Rome and its hier- archy (especially the Lombards), opposed their own hierarchy to that of Rome, and offered the true sacrament of repentance to their 1 This is the medieval conception of the relation of the individual believer to the church. Vid. Greg. VII., supra, p. 51, and cf. Hagen, Minnesinger, lii. II a: **Wirwaeren doch verirret gar, unt heten wir der pfaffen niht." Thom.-Sepberg, DG. ii., ed. 2, 214. ^ The same is true of the Reformation. 3 Vid., i-. ,^., Reiner's Summa de Catharis, etc. (Martene, Thes. anecd. V. ) , p. 1764 ff., as well as in the original documents, published by D6LLINGER (Beitrage zur Sektengesch. d. MA., vol. ii.), e. g.^ pp. 17, 286, 322, 372 (church); 188,6,39, 280, 295 (hierarchy); 197, 280, 198,371, "S* 294 (sacraments); 280, 313, 323, 326, 370, 373 (repentance) ; and also BERNARD. Guid. practicainq. iii. c. 32, -^i ; iv., p. 222 f. ; v. i. i. 2, 3,4. AIMS OF THE CHURCH. 95 followers.^ Neither of these parties overstepped the bounds of medieval Christianity. For them, as in the church at large, Chris- tianity consisted in purification through the sacraments, obedi- ence to the hierarchy, and good works in imitation of Christ. The church, from her point of view, rightly charged upon them : *' they annulled the sacraments and made void the priesthood."^ The immediate result of these agitations, constituting as they did the most energetic assault upon the church since the days of Gnosticism, was only a more distinct assertion of the ecclesiasti- cal and sacramental character of Christianity (vid. especially chapters i, 3, and 21 of the Fourth Lateran Council, Hefele, V. 878 ff., 881 f , 888). More and more, for faith in God was substituted the summons to '^ obey the mandates of the Roman church."^ On the other hand, the '* free thinking "* heresy of the Regards, which from the middle of the twelfth century was propagated in Germany, presents — with its pantheism, its ethi- cal indifferentism, and its essentially anti-ecclesiastical spjrit^ — a symptom of the growing independence and discontent as against the church and her institutions. This is true of the rad- ical Franciscanism^ and of the apocalyptic speculations (the '* everlasting gospel*'), which from the time of Joachim of Floris (■]■ 1202) agitated and disturbed the church. Vid. original documents in MOller, KG. ii. 374f., 383 ; Bernardi Gui- donis praclica inquisitionis haereticae pravitatis ed. Douais, 1886; cf. Ch. Schmidt, Hist, et doctrines de la secte des Cathares ou Albigeois, 2 vols., 1849. DOllinger, Beitr. z. Sektengesch d. MA., 2 vols., 1890. Dieck- HOFF, Die Wald. im MA., 1851. K. Muller, die Wald. u. ihre einzeln. Gruppen, 1886. Preger, Abh. d. bayr. Akad. d. Wiss. xiii.,xiv. Preger, Gesch. d. deutschen Mystik, i. 207 ff., 461 ff. Reuter, Gesch. d. rel. Aufkl. ii. 240 ff. JUNDT, hist, du panth^isme populaire, 1875. Denifle, Dasev. aet. in Arch. f. Litt. u. KG. des MA. i. 49 ff. Ehrle, Die Spiri- tualen, iii. 553 ff.; i. 509 ff.; ii. 108 ff., 249 ff.; vi. i ff. Haupt, Ztschr. f. KG. vii. 372 ff. 1 In D5LLINGER, ii., pp. 7, 287, 252, 306, 97, 288 f., 306, 332, 335 {Romish and Waldensian hierarchy); 256, 115 (sacraments); 288, 304, 332 (repentance). Bernard, Guid. pract. inq. iii. 34, 35 ; v. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. ^ In addition to the above citations, see the collection of Seeberg-Thomas., DG. ii., p. 192 f. 3 Thisis the ever-recurring formula in the renunciation of heresy. Vid., e. ,^., Bernard, pract. inq. iii. 10 f., 14, 46, p. 168; v. 6. 2, 4, 8, 11 ; 8. 7, 10. * '' Ein fry Geist " (Dollinger, ii. 386). ^ Vid., f. ^., Dollinger, ii. pp. 384, 390 (impeccabiles), 417, 3S4, 385 f , 390 (one with God, pares Christo)\ 390, 416 (omnia sunt deus. Oi?inia fiunt a deo)\ 386, 387, 403, 416 (ethics); 398, 416, 398 (Christology, pur- gatory), etc. ^ The ideals of Francis are by this party exalted as a " fifth gospel, ' ' with the severest criticism of the church, which has become Babylon. Vid., c. ^. , Bernard, pract. inq. iii. 39 ; v. 4. 5 ; v. 3. 2, 3 ; 8. I ff. As they very often combined forces with the Begards, they were also designated by the latter term. 96 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. § 53. History a?td Characteristics of the Theology of the Thirteenth Century. See Literature cited under Section 46 ; also Etole in Archiv. f. Lit. u* KG. des MA. v. 603 ff. Thomas. -Seeeerg, DieTheologie des Duns Scotus, 1900, p. 600 ff. I. The history of the church's intellectual life from the middle of the eleventh to the end of the twelfth century may be depicted in the lives of three men — Pope Gregory VIL, St. Bernard, and Abelard. The thirteenth century was likewise characterized by the activities of three great leaders — Pope Innocent III. (§ 52, i), St. Francis (§ 52, 2), and Thomas of Aquino. The hierarchy had reached the zenith of its power, and maintained its position as against the world and the encroachments of heresy. But at the same time there was quietly inaugurated a process of liberation and refinement of the inner life, and, simultaneously, a fuller and more vigorous devel- opment of scientific study than had been previously known in medieval history. Antiquity was again the teacher. Hitherto only the dialectic writings of Aristotle had been known, but to them were now added his metaphysics, physics, psychology, and ethics.^ Their study was pursued with eager interest and enthu- siasm. Men like Albert the Great and Thomas of Aquino wrote commentaries upon them. There was a larger conception of the universe, and the sphere of thought was refined and more ac- curately delineated. Aristotle, the ^^ praecursor Christi in natur- alibus,'' became the regulating authority and the master of method. The effect of the knowledge of Arabic philosophy was also manifest. The materials and the problems of knowl- edge were rapidly multiplied. But all knowledge must in the end serve the church. Religion and secular learn- ing are not yet separated. Thus the dogmatic systems con- tinue to grow apace, being presented partly in commentaries upon the Sentences of the Lombard, and partly in independent works (summa theologiae).^ The ancient dialectic method is still followed, and the wider the range of material becomes, the greater 1 Vid. JoURDAiN, Recherches critiques sur I'age et Torigine des tra- ductions latines d'Aristotele, 1843. Haureau, hist, de la philosophic scolastique, ii. I. 124 ff. Upon the culture and learning of the age, vid. V. LiLlENCRON, der Inhalt d. allg. Bildung in d. Zeitd. Schol. Munich, 1876. Cf. also PRANTL, in d. Sitzungsberichten d. Miinch. Akad., 1867, ii., p. I73fir. In the Chartularium universit. Paris (ed. Denifle), i., p. 644 ff., may be found a very interesting catalogue of the books which the booksellers of Paris had for sale in A. D. 1286, together with the prices. 2 The title, ** Summa," was employed before the times of the Lombard. Vid. Denifle, Gesch. d. Univ. i. 46. THEOLOGY OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 97 becomes the number of proofs and authorities pro and con, the keener the logical distinctions, and the more complicated the lines of dialectical discussion. Dogmatics again became, as with the Alexandrines of the second and third centuries, a great system of the philosophy of religion, appropriating for itself all the learning of metaphysics and physics, with all the power of the church and her institutions, and which must never lose from be- neath it the basis of the rule of faith and the accredited dogmas of the church. And yet it was evident that the structure thus reared must fall by its own weight, for during the very period of its construction it was discovered that the elements here joined together were mutually irreconcilable. The secularized church had a secular theology. Every church is secularized which strives toward any other goal than the kingdom of God and its gospel ; and every theology is secularized which seeks anything further than a true understanding of the gospel. And both alike must come to grief — missing the gospel, which they do not seek, and no less the world, which they seek. This was the sad ex- perience of the medieval church. Boniface "VIII. and Duns Scotus were contemporaries. The pope, who made the most audacious claims for papal supremacy (vid. § 52, i),^ aroused against that theory the opposition which has never since been allayed ; and the theologian who carried the dialectic pre- sentation of the doctrines of the church to the greatest extreme himself fell into error as to the proper relation of faith and phi- losophy, and gave the final occasion for the severance of the two (vid. sub). 2. Taking a general view of the history of Scholasticism in the Second Period, we observe that nearly all the theologians claiming our attention belong to the Dominican or Franciscan orders. A few remarks may be necessary to insure a proper under- standing of the historical course of events before entering upon the study of the leading theologians of the age. It is well known that there were sharp lines of contrast between the great leaders (as, e. g,, Thomas and Duns). These find their explanation in the historical development. All received their inspiration from Aristotle. But this was in the first instance mainly formal. In the general conceptions of truth, the pre- dominant influence was chiefly that of Platonic-Augustinian Idealism. The reality of ideas was acknowledged, and they were regarded from a religious point of view. From Augustine was borrowed the view of the primacy of the will, in contrast ^ The chief thesis of the bull : Porro subesse, etc., is taken from the Opusc, i. error. Graec. of Thomas. 98 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. with the reason. The symbolic conception of the sacraments is also Augustinian. Thus, for example, taught both Alex- ander OF Hales and William of Auverne. But Aristotelian- ism gained ground. The reality of ideas began to be questioned. The Greek primacy of the intellect was reasserted. Separate doctrines were more and more subdivided and established upon the basis of Aristotelian dialectics. It appeared to be a '* modern" theology which was advanced by Albert and Thomas of Aquino. The ecclesiastical authorities at first met these ^innovations" with severe censure (Stephen, bishop of Paris, Robert Kilwardby and John Peckham, archbishops of Canterbury, vid. Chartularium universit. Parisiensis, i. 543 ff. , 558 ff., 624ff.). The Thomistic doctrine is charged with con- tradiction of Augustine. On the other hand, Alexander and Bona VENTURA are lauded (chart, univ. Paris, i. 634), This ac- counts in part for the attempt of the older theology to maintain itself, not hesitating to employ to that end the scientific means furnished by the age, /'. e., Aristotelianism. In this attempt Henry of Ghent and Bonaventura were most prominent. But English theology brought important aid to this tendency. The traditions of Anselm were still influential in England. To these was added the stimulus of the important work of Robert Grosseteste of Lincoln (f 1253), who combined the Augus- tinian Realism with a Realism of the empirical philosophy as applied to individuals. Such men as Richard of Middle- ton, and, above all, Duns Scotus, as also Roger Bacon, con- tinued to promote this tendency. Thus from various directions the older Platonic -Augustinian theology antagonized the modern Aristotelian dialectic theology, but in such a way as to turn the entire scientific fabric of Aristotle against the Aristotelians. It may be said that the two tendencies which were once repre- sented by the schools of Tours and Bee, and which then in the first period of Scholasticism found in Abelard and Anselm typical representatives, /. e., the rational-critical and the speculative, have been perpetuated to our own times. Upon one side stood the Aristotelians, and upon the other the Platonizing Augustin- ians. Both parties were, indeed, dependent upon the scientific method of Aristotle ; but the differences which separated them may be rightly traced as above to their source. We now, having gained a general view of the situation, turn to note the individual theological leaders of the period. At the head of the list we place Alexander of Hales {doctor irrefragabilis^ f 1245). He composed a Summa universae theo- logiae. He already betrays the influence of Aristotle. In his great work, the problems and methods of the later Scholasticism THEOLOGY OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 99 distinctly appear, and he exerted a controlling influence upon his successors, particularly in the doctrine of the sacraments. The new spirit is yet more plainly manifest in Albert the Great {^doctor universalis, f 1280). It was he who first employed the system of Aristotle in a comprehensive way in the construction of theology. His discussions upon metaphysics and the theory of knowledge moulded the thought of Thomas. Besides his Paraphrases upon Aristotle, special mention must be made of his Co7nmentary upon the Sentences of the Lombard, a (not com- pleted) Summa, and a Summa de creaturis (0pp. 21 vols., ed. Jammy, Lyons, 1651 ; cf. Bach, Alb. Mag. 1881). In the spirit of Albert, his greater disciple, Thomas of Aquino (a/z- gelus ecclesiae, f 1274) toiled on. In him, with a comprehen- sive acquaintance with Aristotle and the ecclesiastical writers (the Areopagite now comes into prominence), were combined complete harmony with the teachings of the church and a gen- uinely religious spirit, together with pre-eminent dialectic talent. Thomas can scarcely be called a man of genius, but he was as great in systematizing as was Albert in collecting. Among his writings we may mention the Commentary on the Sentences of the Lombard, the Summa totius theologiae^ the Summa de veri- tate cath. fidei contra gentiles, the Expositio symboli, and the Compendium theologiae } The systematic talent of Thomas is at once manifest in the simple arrangement of the material in his Summa : (i) Concerning God. (2) Concerning the approach of the rational creature toward God, or of man. (3) Concern- ing Christ, who, on account of his being man, is for us the way of approach to God — under which he treats of Christ, redemp- tion, and the sacraments. From God — to God — through Christ: this is the simple foundation thought. The work is confessedly unfinished, closing abruptly at the doctrine of repentance ; but it was completed by the disciples of Thomas from his other writings. The scheme of the work is as follows : A question {quaestio') is stated, and then divided into a series of articles, each of which is presented in an interrogative form. Then, with the introductory formula, videtur quod non, a number of ar- guments, perhaps from the Bible, the Fathers, or Aristotle, are presented against the question. Then are given, introduced by a sed contra est, a number of other arguments on the affirmative ^ They were often edited. Before me lies the Antwerp edition of 1612. I cite the Summa from the edition of Frette and Mare (Paris, 1882 ff. ), and the Compendium according to the edition of Albert, 1896. The literature connected with his name is also almost limitless. Vid. Werner, d. h. Thorn., 3 vols. Wagenmann, PRE. xvi. 570 ff. Portmann, Das Syst. d Summa d. h. Thorn., 1894. lOO HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. side, upon this follows the decision, beginning w\\h Respondeo dicendum, and usually answering the question in the affirmative. The supposed counter-arguments are then answered under the captions: Ad primum, Ad secundiiin^ etc., dicendum} We cite an illustration. In the First Part of the Su7nnia the fourth article under the eighth question reads : '' Whether to be every- where is an attribute of God ? (i) It appears that to be every- where is not an attribute of God." Four philosophical argu- ments are adduced for this position, partly from Aristotle, and then are added two arguments from Augustine. (2) **But upon the opposite side is what Ambrose says.'" (3) Here fol- lows the answer : *' I reply : It is to be said, that to be every- where is, from the beginnin_g and essentially, an attribute of God." Then we have the establishment of this proposition, and afterward a refutation of the six arguments for the negative : '*To the first, second, etc., it is to be said." With Thomas, the Aristotelian, we here mention his friend, the Franciscan, Bonaventura (^doctor seraphicus, f 1274), who, however, in theology maintained the old Augustinian-Platonic theories. Bonaventura attached a greater importance to the mystic element in his theology than his predecessors. It is not to be inferred, however, that he pursued with any the less energy the dogmatic and philosophical problems of his age. He de- clared himself, in comparison with Alexander, a " poor and lean compiler" (in sent. ii. declaratio). Of his writings, we mention his Commentary upon the Sentences, his dogmatic Compendium breviloquium, and also his Compendium theol. veritatis, the Declaratio termino7'um theologiae, and the mystical Compendium itinerarium mentis in deuni.^ 3. Before scrutinizing the teachings of the age upon separate doctrines, it will be well for us to observe, in the case of Thomas, who was so influential in determining them, the method and aim of scholastic labors. ((?) The Object of faith, and there- fore also of theology, is supernaturally revealed by God. The necessity of revelation grows out of the fact that human reason cannot by the power of nature recognize the nature of God, e, g., the Trinity. But revelation extends also to such matters ^ This is the treatment of 'material introduced by Abelard. The conclusio printed in most editions at the end of the separate articles is not the work of Thomas himself. ^ His works were often edited : At Rome, 1588 ff.; Lyons, 1668 ; Mayence, i6og; Venice, 1751 ; Paris, 1863 f. The best edition is that of Quaracchi, 1882 ff. Hefele edited the Breviloquium in 1861 and Vicetia in i88i. It is not to be imagined that Thomas held a monopoly of the theological ideas in the thirteenth century. Bonaventura both as a Mystic and as a Scholastic followed to a large extent an independent course. THEOLOGV OK THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. lOI as reason might perhaps by itself discover, but only slowly and at a late period (c. gentil. i. 3 ff. ; summ. i. qu. i, art. i). In this way man becomes absolutely certain in regard to his religious knowledge, since it comes ** immediately from God through rev- elation " (summ. i. q. i, art. 5). But revelation is contained in the Holy Scriptures. Their real author is God : auctor sacrae scripturae est deus (ib. i. q. i, a. 10). By inspiration God im- parted to the prophets definite items of knowledge by the way of transient impression {impressionis transeuntis). *' Prophecy is a certain knowledge {quaedam cognitlo') impressed upon the mind of a prophet by divine revelation through some manner of in- struction (per modum cupisdam doctrinae) (cf. ii. ii. q. 171, a. 2, 6; q. 172, a. 3).^ God has immediately confirmed this by the history of the diffusion of faith, as well as by miracles and signs. And thus he shows the teacher of the truth [to be] in- visibly inspired (c. gent. i. 6). It must therefore be said: '*The authority of those should be believed to whom revelation has been made " (summ. i. q. i, a. 8). As the Scriptures must, on the one hand, be believed because of their origin, they are, on the other hand, the only sure and binding authority. ** But one uses the authorities of the canonical scripture properly and in arguing from necessity ; the authorities of other teachers of the church in arguing, as it were, from one's own resources, but with probability. For our faith rests upon the revelation given to the apostles and prophets who wrote the canonical books, but not upon revelation, if such there were, given to other teachers " (ib.).^ Thus did Thomas distinctly proclaim the Holy Scriptures as the revelation of God — as the source and absolute authority of Christian doctrine. Precisely so did Bonaventura also teach : '* Authority resides primarily in the Holy Scriptures, which have been wholly established {condtta tota) through the Holy Spirit for the directing of the catholic faith" (brevil. 5. 7). But reve- lation is a doctrine.^ Its necessity is deduced, not from the ex- * Vid. Bonaventura in hexaem serm. 9 (opp. i. 35 f. ), c. g.^ it is proper that faith be confirmed, through the inspired word. Albert, summ. i. tract, i, qu. 4 ; qu. 5» membr. 2. It will be observed how moderate is the view here taken of inspiration. In tlie earlier Middle Ages A.gobard had rejected the view which so represented the matter as though * * the Holy Spirit had not only breathed into them iinspiraverit) the sense of the preaching and the modes or arguments of their speeches, but had also himself from without formed in the mouths the corporeal words." Speech is not produced in the prophets as in Balaam's ass (vid. adv. Fredegis. 11, Mi. 104. 166). ^ Cf. Quodlibeta xii. a. 26 : " The sayings of expositors do not carry with them necessity, that it should be necessary to believe them, but alone tlie ca- nonical scripture which is in the Old and New Testaments." ^ The proper object of revelation, i. 959^ 956). According to Jerome, the bishops were originally the same as the priests, and it wasonly atalaterdaythatoneof the latterwas selected to be, as it were, a superintendent. There can hence be no thought of any such thing as a divine authority of bishops or popes (Mars. ii. 15). The papacy, as such, can by no means be described as an institution absolutely necessary for the church. No more cogent arguments can be adduced for a monarchical than for an aristocratic form of civil government. And even though the monarchy be preferable in civil life, it can scarcely be so in the world-embracing government of the church. Here Christ reigns as the only supreme Head (Occ. dial., p. 818 f. ). Thus the question of the papal primacy is treated entirely from the view-point of the natural reason ; it has for our author no positively religious aspect. The discussion is regulated by the transfer of the idea of popular sovereignty to the church. The Scriptures, Occam holds, do not teach us that Christ l68 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. appointed Peter as the prince of the apostles. All the apostles received the Spirit in the same way. Paul does not consider himself subordinate to Peter, and the latter does not preside at the first council. The injunction to feed the lambs is given to him only as the representative of the other apostles. Even in Matt. i6, Peter is only " in a certain way " designated as a foundation. The real and absolutely necessary foundation of the church is Christ. It is only as an incidental historical foundation that Peter comes into view (dial., p. 846-863. Mars, ii. 22, p. 264). According to Marsilius, it yet remained to be proved from the Scriptures that Peter was ever at Rome ; and, in any event, Paul was certainly there before him (ii. 16). Accordingly, the papacy is to be regarded as an institution worthy of commendation upon practical considerations, but by no means as one enjoined by religious precept. The duties of the pope, as of the clergy in general, are purely spiritual. Christ bestowed upon Peter, as upon the other apostles, the keys of the kingdom of heaven and the power to bind and loose. They were commissioned to spread the teach- ing and the moral principles of Jesus, and to baptize believers. But the ^ItmXnde oi'pov^tr {J>Ienitudo potestatis) consists really in the exercise of the priestly functions of the sacrament of repent- ance. But, inasmuch as the forgiveness of sins and the imparting of grace are matters for God alone, the priestly absolution has merely a declarative signification. Beyond this, the pope — or any other priest — may allow the substitution of a temporal satis- faction for the pains of purgatory. It seems of doubtful propriety, on the other hand, to allow the clergy to administer the great excommunication. An unjust excommunication, it is true, does the victim no spiritual harm (" can do no harm for the state of the future world, because God does not always follow the church, /. e., the decision of the priests, when, e. g., they condemn anyone unjustly"); but it is hurtful for the present life through the accompanying disgrace. It seems, therefore, prudent to commit the duty of casting out from the church to the church itself, or to a council, as suggested in Matt. 18. 17. Finally, to the clergy belongs the power of administering (coi?- ficiendi^ the sacrament of the eucharist (vid. Mars. ii. 6, p. 205-209). The right of the pope in spiritual things consists, therefore, in the authority to issue precepts and prohibitions in the church as required by the common good {utilitas communis'). In temporal affairs, he has only the right to proper sustenance : ' ' the right of asking for temporal things for his support and for the execution of his office" (Occ. dial, p. 786). These sentiments indicate an immense revolution of thought. The canon law. HIERARCHICAL CONCEPTION OF THE CHURCH. 1 69 the jurisdiction of the church, exemption of the church from taxation, and the holdings of the church in property, are all here surrendered, and there remains no intelligible reason why the state should not hold the prebends and the congregations them- selves elect and remove their pastors.^ The pope ceases to be a dogmatic entity ; he is an administrator of the devotional services of the church, and is bound to the positive instructions ot the New Testament. He is fallible, as are all other men. He cannot therefore establish any new articles of faith. His declaration does not make any opinion hei^tical, but the crucial question in regard to every doctrine is, whether it can be deduced from the Scriptures (Occ. dial., p. 420). It would be altogether irrational to suspend one's recognition of the truth until a papal declaration could be secured. Our faith would thus be made subject to the opinion of a man, whereas Paul in the second chapter of ist Corinthians instructs us not to let our faith rest upon the wisdom of a man, but upon the power of God (com- pend. error., p. 976). Here, for the first time, the infallible Scriptures are set over against the fallible pope : '* Holy Scrip- ture cannot err " {cn-arenon potest); but, *' the pope . . . can err " (ib. p. 843).^ But if a pope should stubbornly fall into error, i. e.y become a heretic, he may, according to both law and reason, be deposed (p. 464 ff., 568 ff. ). God has indeed promised to lead his church into all truth ; but this promise by no means applies to the pope (for popes have become heretics, ib., p. 464, 468 fif., 958, 976, 994), nor to the college of cardinals — not even to the Romish church nor a general council, for in case every member of such a council were to fall into error before his arrival, how should his falli- bility be removed by his arrival at a certain locality or place (p. 495 f. ) ? It is very possible that God may at certain times so order it that the truth may be preserved among the laity alone : ^ Vid. especially Mars. ii. 9, 17, 13. 2 Let it be observed, that it is the same juristic, abstract infallibility which had been ascribed to the pope, which is here transferred to the Scriptures. It is based upon a strict theory of inspiration, and falls short of the evangelical view of the Scriptures. But it is yet important to observe that it was practical considerations which determined the attitude of Occam. His religion drove him to the Scriptures. But his religion was epitomized in the doctrine of poverty. When popes and cardinals denied this doctrine, which Occam believed to be found in the Scriptures, it was evident to him that their teach- ing was erroneous, and he was compelled to assert the authority of the Scrip- tures against that of the hierarchy. The same considerations impelled him to free the civil government from the dominion of the hierarchical power. Thus inner motives led him to the Scriptures. It would be instructive to compare his experience at this point with that of Luther. Vid. Seeberg upon Occam in PRE., ed. 3. 170 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. **He is able to give the poor, simple, illiterate, and rustic for the edification of the orthodox church " (p . 498 ) . This dare by- no means be limited to the clergy. The clergy have indeed, in the canon law, limited the term ecclesia onesidedly to the clerici^ but the Scriptures understand by it the whole number (^congre- gatio) of Christian believers. It may therefore be said that '* laymen and women are ecclesiastics {^personae ecclesiasticae) as truly as the clergy, because they are as truly of the church {^de ecclesia) as are the clergy'* (ib. p. 502). A new conception of the church breathes in these words. The truth surrendered by the hierarchy may be preserved among the women of the church, and if not among them, among the children. The laity have the full rights of membership in the church. Kings and laymen should be admitted even to the councils (p. 603 f., 605 ; cf. Mars. ii. 20). The papal tyranny must not control the church, for the gospel is a law of liberty (p. 776 f. ). Plain laymen, guided by the Scriptures, may soar beyond the knowl- edge of the ecclesiastical authorities. " Let it be granted, that the simple are not legally (^regulariter) bound to believe any- thing explicitly except those things which have been by the clergy declared necessary to be believed. Yet the simple, never- theless, in reading the divine Scriptures with acuteness of reason, in which even the simple are not altogether lacking, observe that something which the pope and cardinals have not declared follows evidently from the divine Scriptures — this they can and ought to in that case believe explicitly, and they are not bound to consult the pope and cardinals, because the sacred Scripture is to be preferred to the pope and cardinals." Further : ** The pope and cardinals are not the rule of our faith " (p. 770). The transformation in the conception of the church which is foreshadowed in this movement consists in the following points : ( I ) The state is independent of the church. ( 2 ) The sphere of the spiritual (clerical) office is not lordship, but doctrine and the administration of the sacraments. (3) The hierarchical organization of the church has become historic, but is not a religious necessity. (4) Not the pope, but Scripture, is the infallible authority in the church. (5) Pope and clergy may err, and are liable to deposition. (6) In secular affairs, the clergy are subject to the secular jurisdiction. (7) The laity are independent members, and the compeers of the clergy, in the church. 3. But these ideas and their critical motive must, in order to be fully understood, be viewed in a wider connection. Very early in the Middle Ages the Old Germanic idea of a purely legal state was so far modified, after the pattern of the church and the HIERARCHICAL CONCEPTION OF THE CHURCH. I?! ancient theory of the state, that the state was no longer regarded as existing only by virtue of the law and for its execution, but as having in view the further object of promoting the common weal, and as based upon natural motives. A compromise of the con- tradiction between the Germanic idea, that the state exists for the law, and the ancient idea of the subordination of the law to the common weal — both of which ideas existed side by side — was attempted by the combination of the positive and the natural law. The statutes of the positive law, it was maintained, whether expressions of the will of the ruler or of that of the sovereign people, have their norm in the law of nature. Noth- ing which contravenes the law of nature can be regarded as au- thoritative. This primacy of the natural law was, indeed, limited by the condition, that its execution must always be guided by the concrete circumstances in any case. As the idea of popular sovereignty furnished, on the one hand, the controlling thought in the struggles of the councils against the popes, so, on the other hand, the criterion of the natural law was relentlessly ap- plied in criticism of the positive ordinances of the church. The ancient juristic ecclesiastical conception of the primacy of natural law,^ which had hitherto been employed by the church in criticism of secular laws, was now turned against the church herself. But the application of this weapon was here, no less than in the secular use of it, subject to serious limitation by the positive forms of the church life. Criticism was applied with a keen relish and carried ruthlessly to its logical conclusions ; but no one thought of abolishing the papacy, the hierarchy, the canonical law, or the accepted dogmas of the church. Even the boldest agitators sought no more than a correction of the existing system within its own limits. What is then the content of natural law ? ^ Natural law is the law of reason, and it is the divine law : *' Employing the natural dictate {^dictameji) of reason, this is employing natural law;" or, '' natural reason {ratio~) is natural law" (Occ. dial., p. 629, 568). It is, therefore, man's innate ideas of law and order in the world (p. 932).^ Now, the same God who implanted these ^ Vid., e. g.^ Isidor, etymol. v, 4 f. Gratian, decret., pars I, dist. 5. Cf. Greg. VII. '^ I do not enter further upon the differentiation of \.\\^Jus naturale^ lex dei, 2Xi6. commune jus geniiujn. Vid. GIERKE, J. AUhusius, p. 273. ^ The latest offshoot of this theory of infallible moral ideas innate in man is in the modem definition of conscience as the voice of God. Its origin is to be sought in the idea entertained by the Apologetes — of the Logos-sharing upon man's part. According to Thomas, natural law is the content of the con- science. Vid. supra, p. Ii4n. Also Seeberg, Gewissen u. Gewissensbildung, 1896, pp. 6ff., 69 f. 172 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. ideas in man, has imparted them likewise through inspiration in the Holy Scriptures. The law of God is, therefore, identical with the law of nature {lex del et jus naturae, ib. pp. 772, 778, 783, 786, 934). From this is derived the idea of the absolute authority of the law of reason and nature — and of the Scriptures : *' Human laws founded in divine and natural law" (ib. p. 587). *^No just positive law can be contrary to natural law " (p. 629). '^ There can be no law which is repugnant to the higher law or to plain reason. ' ' Hence, whatever civil law is repugnant to the divine law, or to plain reason, is no law. In the same way, the words of the canonical or civil law, in any case in w^hich they are repugnant to the divine law, /. ^. , the Holy Scripture or right reason, are not to be observed" (p. 630). But all of these declarations are but repetitions of definite ideas of the canonical law (vid. Gratian, decret., pars i., dist. 1-9). This was, there- fore, the path which led to the establishment of the authority of the Scriptures. Scripture and reason are identical. The Scriptures present not positive revelation, but the universal truth of reason. It is quite evident that in this way the Scriptures should come to be regarded more and more from the view-point of the law. And it is further beyond question, that this entire legal way of appre- hending the church and religion could not possibly lead to a spiritual conception of the nature of the church. On the con- trary, it was just in this age of reform councils and of conflicts w^ith the Curia that the church came to be almost universally re- garded as a polity, based upon juristic principles. RiEZLER, Die litt. Widersacher d. Papste, pp. 194 ff., 243 ff. A. DoRNER, Staat u. K. nach Occ. Stud. u. Krit., 1886, p. 672ff; Friedberg, Die mittelalt. Lebren iib. d. Verhaltn. zw. Staat u. K., 1874. K. MOller, Der Kampf Ludw. d. Bay, mit. d. Curie, i879f. Gierke, J. Althusius u, die Entwicklg. der naturrechtl. Staatstheorien, 1880, p. 77 ff., I23fr.,264ff. Von Bezold, Hist. Ztschr., vol. 36, p. 33ofF, Kropatscheck, Occam und Luther (Beitrage zur Forderung christl. Theol. iv.), 1900. § 61. Sketch of Church Life and Religious Agitations at the Close of the Middle Ages. Literature. Jani^sen, Gesch. d. deutsch. Volkes seit Ausg. d. MA. i. 14 A., 1887, and in connection, Kawerau, Ztschr. f. K. Wiss., 1882, p. 142 ff., 263 ff., 313 ff., 362 ff. Moll, Die vorref. KG. d. Niederlande, deutsch. Von Zuppke, ii. (1895), pp. 396-406, 554-565, 579-768. MoLLER, KG. ii., 481 ff., 531 ff. Lamprecht, Deutsche Gesch., vol. v. i, 1894. VoN Bezold, Gesch. d. deutsch. Ref. (Oncken Allg. Gesch.). Gothein, Polit. u. rel. Volksbewegg. vor. d. Ref., 1878. Berger, Die Kulturaufgaben d. Ref., 1895. Geffcken, Der Bilderkatechism. d. 15, Jarh., 1855. Joh. Nider's Formicarius, and in connection, SCHIELER, Mag. J. Nider, 1885, pp. T95- 248. Hasack, D. chr. Gl. d. deutsch. Volkes b. Schluss d. MA., 1868. Lechlkr, J. V. Wicl. u. d. Vorgesch. d. Ref., 2 vols., 1873. Bratke, CHURCH LIFE AND RELIGIOUS AGITATIONS. 1 73 Luther's 95 Thesen u. ihre dogmenhist. Voraussetzungen, 1884. Vid. Kro- PATSCHECK, Das Schriftprincip der luth. Kirche, vol. i. (Mittelalter), 1904. Hrieger, Das Wesen des Ablasses vor Ausgang des MA. Leipziger Pro- graram, 1897. I. Every great revolution in the history of religion is preceded by a crisis period. Traditional forms and aspirations no longer satisfy the world. Some blame the old order of things, and long for a new order which they know not how to secure. Others glorify the old order. The new requirements of the age, which even they must recognize, are to be met by the diligent and' thorough use of the old means. Harsh criticism of the tradi- tional positions and customs and abnormal devotion to them are here closely associated. It is still hoped that the stones may be made bread. The crisis through which Luther passed in the cloister had been hovering over the church in the fifteenth century. The individuality of the modern man and the deepening of religious experience crave a personal assurance of faith and inner cer- tainty. The church offers instead the rule of faith and the power of the sacraments. The heart seeks life through the for- giveness of sins ; the church points to confession and absolution. The consciousness of the independence of the world and its interests is crushed beneath the ancient claims of the hierarchy ; the increasing prosperity of the world and the new business en- terprises are in conflict with the ideal of '* poverty. " New necessities and old methods, with the zealous attempt to draw from old forms the satisfaction of new requirements — this consti- tuted the crisis. It was naturally first felt among the cultured classes ; but it penetrated also the masses. All the phenomena in the religious life of this period — the ecclesiastical institutions, the brotherhoods,^ the indulgences, the pilgrimages, the increasing adoration of relics, of Mary and the saints, the spread and exagger- ated terrors of the faith in devils and demons,^ the craze upon the subject of celibacy,^ the mysticism, the revolutionary Christian- social plans, the contempt for the clergy and the monks, are all closely connected with the crisis. So loud were the complaints that eyes were turned to the future in expectation of a new era of " prophecy" and the ''introduction of a new religion."^ We must observe {a) the means by which the church at- 1 Vid. Lea, Ahist. of conf. and indulg. iii., 470 ff. Moll, KG. ii., 646 ff. 2 Vid. esp. the bull of Innocent VIII., Summis desiderantes affectibus, the Malleus maleficarum, and Joh. Nider*s Formicarius, lib. v. Cf. Roskoff, Gesch. d. Teufels, ii. (1869), p. 206 ff., 226 f. 3 Vid. Examples in Schieler, Nider, p. 203 ff. " Vid. Tritheraius chronolog. myst. 18 fin. Cf. Schneegans, Trithemius, P- 183 f. 174 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. tempted the culture of piety, (^b) the way of salvation as con- ceived by the *' Friends of God," and (^r) the scope of the reformatory ideas of the age. 2. The means by which the church sought to influence the multitudes remained the same as of old, except that there was — - as required by the demands of the age — an increased zeal in the use of them. The duty of preaching is insisted upon with greater emphasis. It is required that all members of the church be acquainted with the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Ave .Maria, and the teachings of the church concerning mortal sins and the sacraments. Louis of Bavaria, e. g., proved his orthodoxy by repeating the Lord's Prayer, the greeting of the angels, and the Apostles' Creed (R. MCller, Der Kampf Lud- wigs mit der Curie, ii. 75). This knowledge is to be tested at the confessional, which thus becomes a religious examination.' The Ten Commandments were frequently here used as the criterion.^ In preaching, the moral element still predominates; but with it are combined quite rigid doctrinal discussions, miraculous narratives, and commendations of indulgences and the grace accompanying them. If it cannot be said that the church shirked the new task assigned her, she certainly dis- covered no new means to apply in the performance of it. The sacraments bring grace, as the power enabling their recipients to perform meritorious works (Hasack, p. 419, 133, 262 f. ). But Repentance appears as really the chief sacrament.^ The religious unrest of the age and the financial schemes of the Curia ^ E, g., Hefele, vi. 608, 696, 706, 721, 944. Moll, KG. ii. 396 ff., 653 f. Geffcken, Bilderkatech. , p. 24 ff., and suppl., p. 191 f.; Beichtanweisung aus d. 15 Jarh., ed. Wagner, Ztschr. f. KG. ix. 445, 462. The ** Christian faith" consists, as before, of the twelve or fourteen articles of the Apostles' Creed (as to the number, vid. Hefele, vi. ed. 2, 220 a. ) ; its content is especi- ally the doctrine of the Trinity and Christology, e. g.^ Gabr. Biel, De festi- vitat. serm. 21, fol, 2141, and Hasack, 1. c, p. 138 ff. All are required to believe **what the holy church commands to believe" (Ztschr. f. KG. ix. 462). As examples of open heresy, Occam adduces the denial of the unity and trinity of God and of the birth of Christ from the Virgin (dial., p. 631). 2 E. ,^., Hasack, 1. »-., p. 191 ff., 227 f. Geffcken, 1. c, Ztschr. f. KG. ix. 445 ff. , 462 ff. 3 The Augustinian, John of Paltz, has in his Coelifodina (Lips. 1510) undertaken to uncover the mine of grace — for the guidance of preachers. Of what does he treat? First, there is a detailed exposition and application of the passion history ; then, sins in thought are discussed, and death ; then the sac- raments are explained, with all the emphasis upon repentance and indulgences. In the Suppleraentum Coelifodinae (Lips. 1516), indulgences are defended at length and the doctrine of the sacraments again presented. Vid. also the many manuals of confession at the close of the Middle Ages, t. ^i,"-., in Hasack, 1. c. As to the biography of Paltz, vid. Kolde, Die deutsche Augustinercongrega- tion, 1879, p. 174 ff. CHURCH LIFE AND RELIGIOUS AGITATIONS. 1 75 here joined hands. The whole reUgious life of the times finds its centre in the ordinance of repentance. Here faith is confessed and sins are forgiven : here meritorious works are assigned and men thus justified ;^ but here, too, may release from them be purchased. The dominant conception of confession and abso- lution is in thorough conformity with the scholastic theories (supra, p. 135). As the logic of the theory led by necessity to the recognition of attrition as the starting point of repentance (p. 136), so in praxis the latter came to be regarded as entirely sufficient. John of Paltz considers the advantage of the new covenant over the old to consist precisely in the fact, that it does not require contrition, as does the old, but is content with attrition, which is then by absolution transformed into con- trition, this contrition being the destruction of sin.^ To do this, however, is a matter for the priest (Coelifodina, Cc. i v). '* Under the new law, the mode of repenting and of salvation is easier " (ib. Q. 5 v). Paltz gives an excellent definition of attrition. ''And such attrition cannot be better defined in common speech than as ' gallows-penitence ' (^galgenrew') ^^ because the attrite mourns that he has sinned — on account of the infernal gallows " (ib. Q. 6 v). It has for its basis servile fear and the fear of death, whereas contrition springs from filial fear and the love of God (ib. Q. 6 r). Very few get beyond the former: "About all of our people who confess in Lent do not have true contrition, nor do they have attrition in the first grade, because they would then do entirely what they can to attain true contrition ; but they often have attrition in the second grade, doing in some measure what they can, and such are assisted by the priests in the sacramental absolution " (ib. R. I v). It is therefore sufficient if there be within the heart a certain discontent with self and fear of hell, begotten by the con- templation of the commandments (supra, p. 174). This will be sufficient to secure the forgiveness, /. ^., the destruction, of sin. There was a recognition of the fact, that in the days of the first love there had been no need of indulgences : * ' But now, love having grown cold in these last times, neither are satisfac- ^ Vid., c. ^. , in Hasack, p. 137 : *' Grace justi6es man : whatever infirmity (Bresten) clings to man, it punishes this, and changes it, and cleanses it with repentance." ^ Attrition is transformed into contrition by other means also, i. f., through , extreme unction (coelifod. T. 2 v), the eucharist (Z 6 v), the mass and preaching (Aa 3 r). The last-named especially confirms the pyschological interpretation of this Scotist formula (vid. supra, p. 138). Cf. also Tetzel's theses, n. 49: "attrite and through confession contrite" (Luther, opp. var. arg. i. 300). ^ So also Luther, Weim. ed. i. 99. 176 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. tions commensLirately imposed, nor when moderately imposed are they performed : therefore there is a much more necessary and copious use of indulgences, so that what is lacking through indolence (^acedia) may be supplemented through the prayers of others (Biel, expos, can. miss. lect. 57, fol. 154 v). It is doubt- less true that it was always presupposed, whether expressly so stated or not, that, in order to secure the benefit of the indul- gence, the purchaser must have experienced and confessed sorrow for sin : ** He who remains in sin, and is neither contrite nor attrite nor has confessed, can by no means secure indulgences (Paltz, Aa 3 r). Just as the sacrament of repentance has respect directly to sin (^culpa)j so the benefit of indulgence has respect to penalty," and that the temporal penalty (ib. X i r). This is true even of the so-called jubilee-indulgence, whether so stated in the bull proclaiming the latter or not (ib. Z 6 r). But, on the other hand, attention may be drawn to the formula employed in the proclamation of such indulgences : *' I absolve thee from punishment and from guilt" {a poena et a culpa). Paltz replies: ** But a jubilee is something more than a bare indul- gence, because it includes the authority of confessing and absolv- ing, and, with this, the indulgence of remitting penalty, and thus it includes the sacrament of repentance and, with this, indulgence properly so called. . . . Commonly, when the pope gives a jubilee, he gives not a bare indulgence, but he gives also authority of confessing and absolving from all sins, even so far as their guilt. And thus guilt is remitted by reason of the sacra- ment of repentance which is there introduced ; and penalty, by reason of the indulgence which is there employed " (ib. X i r). Paltz, therefore, understands the remission of sin as involved in the authority granted by the jubilee-indulgence to select for one's self a confessor, who shall be authorized to absolve in all cases not reserved to the pope himself (Aa 4 r). Even the latter cases were often included in the authority thus given. ^ The jubilee-indulgence thus indeed embraced in itself the sacra- ment of repentance. The sacrament must not of necessity be administered by the properly appointed confessor, but sacra- mental functions may also be discharged by the papal commis- sary. Thus the papal power intruded upon the province of the pastoral cure of souls, and thus, although the forgiveness of sins * E. g.^ Lea, Hist, of conf. and indulg., iii, 70 n. Cf. Hasack, p. 4S4 : "Indulgence from penalty and guilt . . . is to be thus understood : Indul- gence from penalty is a remitting of the penalty which one ought to suffer for his sin. Indulgence from guilt is complete authority to absolve and release from all sins, even those sins which are to be reserved for the holy Roman chair." CHURCH LIFE AND RELIGIOUS AGITATIONS. I 77 was not itself directly secured by the payment of money, yet the especial administration of the sacraments which carried with it the forgiveness of sins was thus purchased. Under these circum- stances, the popular perversions upon the subject may be easily understood. The above formula was in the highest degree open to misunderstanding.^ Popes expressly rejected it/ and theologians pronounced against it. Nevertheless, it was permitted still to play its part of deception and confusion of thought in the church (cf. Lea, hist, of conf. and indulg. iii., p. 57-78. Moll, ii. 728).^ Matters were made worse, as the theory of the validity of indulgences for the souls in purgatory {supra, p. 139) also found endorsement in praxis.* Cf. , e, g.j Paltz, Cc i r, Dd 5 v, etc.^ The idea that, " as soon as the money rings in the chest, the soul leaps out of purgatory," was only a perfectly intelligible inference.® Such was the course of penitential praxis at the close of the Middle Ages. The frightful danger attending it can be under- stood only when attrition and indulgences are viewed in their combination, and when the misleading glorification of the latter is considered.' A little ''gallows-penitence" and the confes- sional, and then a little money, and the sinner is freed from the fear of hell and purgatory, and even from the performance of works of penance. Money was immediately the means of re- leasing from purgatory, and mediately of securing the forgive- ness of sins. 1 Bratke prepared the way for this understanding of the jubilee-indul- gences. Brieger produced convincing evidence of it (Das Wesen des Ablasses (Leipzig, 1899). 2 Boniface IX., vid. Lea, 1. c, iii. 66 f. , the papal plan of reformation at Constance, vid. Hefele, vii. 341. Benedict XIV., vid. Wildt, Kirchenlex. i. ed. 2, 95. ^ Cf. already the complaints of Berthold of Regensburg, touching the "penny-preachers." When thou standest up and forgivest one all the sin which he has ever done for a single helbelinc or a few pennies, then he im- agines that he has atoned and at once refuses to atone any more. Thou mur- derer of God and the world and many Christian souls, which thou murderest with thy false comfort, so that he can never be saved (Fred. i. 117). He claims that he has power from the pope, to take from thee all thy sin for a few helbelincs or for a heller (ib. i. 208). The Reformat. Sigismunds, p. 163, edited by Boehm, also speaks of paying dearly for indulgence of sins, Cf. Wessel, De poenit., opp., p. 798 f. ^ According to Lea, iii. 345 ff., not before Sixtus IV., A. D. 1476. Vid. also BiEL, expos, can. miss. lect. 57 K. ^ Indulgences may bring even to the lost a mitigation of punishment, Paltz, Ff. 4 v. 6 Vid. Kawerau, Sobald das Geld, etc., 1889, p. 9, 11 f., 17 ff. "^ A contrite person may, even before confessing, receive an indulgence (Durand, sent. iv. d. 20, q. 4, a. 2. Paltz holds otherwise, Aa 3). How easily may he be deceived as to his condition, or postpone the subsequent confession ! 178 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. But along with this externalizing of religion — which the church herself promoted — were heard also some voices emphasizing the seriousness of repentance and its works. The whole Chris- tian life is a *' doing penance: " "That the whole life of a Christian man is nothing else than a cross" (Hasack, p. 443). But this thought is completed by the additional idea, that we " are obligated to the imitation of the crucified life ' ' of Christ, '* since the passion of Christ has not been an entire, but a partial, cause of our salvation " (ib.,alsop. 477). The " imitation of Christ " is, therefore, a supplementing of the redeeming work of Christ by effort upon our part ! 3. The so-called German Mysticism, dogmatically considered, furnishes scarcely anything further than a popular rendering of the scholastic, /". ^., Thomistic ideas. But these ideas are applied to the relation of the soul to God. The practical aspect of the way to God is the controlling one for these writers. The ideas of the dogmaticians become, under their hands, practical relig- ious truths, which were employed for edification by the wide- spread circles of the ** Friends of God. ' ' The use of the mother tongue deepened the experience and enriched the religious ap- prehension. Little as it belongs to the sphere of the History of Doctrines to follow the speculations of the Mystics, it is im- portant, in tracing the transition from the Middle Ages to the Reformation era, to understand the way of salvation as pursued by the pious at the close of the medieval period. In endeavor- ing to trace this briefly, we follow chiefly the following : Master Eckhart (f 1327, vid. Pfeiffer, Deutsche Mystiker, ii., 1857. Ex- cerpts from his Latin writings in Denifle, Archiv f. Litt. u. KG. d. MA. ii. 553 ff.), JoHANN Tauler (t 1361. Sermons, Basel, 1521), Heinrich Seuse (Suso, t 1366, ed. Denifle, MfJNCH., 1880), Johann von Ruusbroec (t 1381. WW. 6 vols., Gent, iSsSff.), the Theologia Deutsch (ed. Pfeiffer, reprint 3, 1875), the BucH von geistl. Armut (ed. Denifle, 1877), Thomas a Kempis, De imitatione Christi (ed. Hirsche, 1874). The spiritual life pursues the course : Purification, Illumina- tion, Unification (Theol. D., p. 50).^ '* A devoted man must be unfashioned from the creature, fashioned with Christ and re- fashioned in the divine nature" {entbildet^ gebildet, uberbildet^ Seuse, p. 248). He is first a servant, then a friend, and finally a son of God (Ruusbr. vi. 208 ff. ). (t?) The first step, there- fore, is to turn away from the creature and turn toward God. The sacrament and the word of God then exert an influence (Tauler, fol. 65 v); especially repentance and the Lord's Supper are recommended. These are re-enforced by prayer and the * Cf. Dionys. Areop., Hierarch. eccl. 6. 3. 5. CHURCH LIFE AND RELIGIOUS AGITATIONS. 1 79 contemplation of the love of God (Eckh., p. 557). Thus man feels himself impelled to a pious and virtuous life, to con- tinuous and earnest self-examination, and penitence. '* Purifi- cation belongs to the beginning or repenting man, and takes place in three ways, with sorrow and mourning on account of sin , with complete confession, and with perfect penitence " (Theol. ^•} P- 5°)* This is the first stage, repentance and its exercises ; the struggle for the overcoming of sensuality (^Sinnlichkeif) is its essential characteristic, (^b) In the second stage, the Imitatio Christi holds the place of prominence. ^*Thou must break through my suffering human nature, if thou art really to come to my unveiled divine nature" (Seuse, p. 52. Tauler, f. 117 v, i56r. Theol. D., p. 220).^ Here the principal thing is thorough- going meditations upon the passion of Christ : *'Not with a hasty going over it as one has time and place \ but it must be witha fervent love and with amournful review " (Seuse, p. 396). The life of Seuse testifies with what dramatic vividness and with what barbarous ascetic exercises these meditations were prac- ticed. The aim is sympathy and imitation.^ But, apart from these, God himself sends sufferings and crosses of various kinds upon man, in order to make him a true follower of Christ. '* The swiftest beast that bears you to perfection is suffering" (Eckh., p. 492). *' No one so cordially feels the passion of Christ as he to whom it happens to suffer similar things" (Thom. a Kemp, ii. 121). True, there is in these circles a deep conviction that Christ's passion is our '^ perfect righteousness'' (Seuse, p. 393). ** And thus has he redeemed us, not with our works but with his works, and with his merits has he made us free and redeemed us" (Ruusbr. iii. 140). ''All my comfort and my confidence rests wholly upon thy passion, thine atonement, and thy merits" (Seuse, p. 427f.).* But Seuse writes also: *'And yet every man draws to himself only so much of the atonement as he with sympathy makes himself like me," /. ^., Christ (Seuse, p. 398).'' What is this but saying, as this school bluntly puts it, that Christ is only the partial cause of ours alvation ? The Imitatio ChHsti (vid. Thom. aK. i. i. i ; 25. 3 ; ii. i. 2) is the religion of these mystics: **Give to me to imitate thee with contempt of the world" (ib. iii. 56. 2). They plunged into asceticism — which * Cf. Augustine, serm. 261. 7 : *' Through the man Christ thou attainest to the God Christ;" also the passages cited in Vol. I., p. 262. Already in Origan, c. Celsus, vi. 68. 2 Vid. Seuse, p. 52 ff., 321 ff., and Seeberg, Leben Seuse, p, 28 ff. ■^ Particularly the dying are often urged to pray: *' Upon thy mercy and goodness will I die, and not upon ray good works " (Hasack, p. 437). * Cf. Thom. in sentent. iii. d. 49, a. 2, 3). Thom. a Kemp. i. 24. I : satis factional and purifying sorrow {^dolo7' satisfactoriiis et purgativus^. too HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. they regarded as meritorious and entitling to reward (^lonbar^ Seuse, p. 385, 383), but they nevertheless kept alive a love for Jesus and appreciation of his life — as the counterpart to the view which regarded him as a stem celestial judge, before whom Mary and the saints must appear to intercede for us. * * As the lodestone draws to it the iron, so does Jesus draw to himself all hearts that are touched by him" (Tauler, f. 43 v). Though all this remains perfectly Catholic, yet these ideas just as truly be- token a '* pre-reformation " element.^ This is the way. Man must return to nothingness (^entwerden^ *^ unbecome "), for only out of a nothing {niht) does God make anit (^iht), (Eckh., p. 189. Taul. f. 146 v). ((:) The goal, finally, is unification with God in the depths of the soul ; and this, too, with God in the inner unity of his nature. ** The essence of the soul is united with Nothingness, and the powers of the soul with the works of Nothingness. ^ In this state of absolute passivity God causes his Son to be born in our soul '' a hundred thousand times more quickly than the twinkling of an eye " (Tauler, f. 60 r).^ This state can be experienced in two psychological forms : either in such a way that man in the intel- lectual process experiences the ''vision" (^Schauung) of the essence of God, or in such a way that ' ' the created will is merged into the eternal Will and therein dissolved and reduced to noth- ingness, so that the eternal Will alone here wills, acts, and fails to act " (Theol. D., p. 104). The former harmonizes with the Thomistic, the latter w'ith the Scotist theology (Ritchl, Gesch. d. Pietismus, i. 470), although the two forms*were not sharply discriminated.* The moments of extreme ecstatic exaltation were of brief duration. Lukewarmness and lassitude followed (Seuse, p. 360, 355, 358, 448). The words of the Scriptures — Christ's sweet love-letter, and his presence in the Lord's 1 But it must be ever borne in mind that this conception of the " Follow- ing of Christ," which maybe traced back to the Apostolic Fathers, is but a mutilated and dislocated presentation of bibUcal ideas. The following of Jesus means, in the Gospels, that he who attaches himself to Jesus walks with him and finds in him God and the Son of the living God, The result of fol- lowing him is announced in Matt. 16. 16 and Jn. 6. 67 f. 2 This is the Areopagite conception of the nature of the Godhead. Cf. my remarks, Thomas. DG. ii., ed. 2, p. 305, A. 2. ^ Cf. my exposition, Thomas. DG. ii., ed. 2, p. 307 ff- * Cf. my remarks, I.e., p. 310 f. Also Dante, Parad. 28. 109 ff.: "Through vision, therefore, is blessedness attained. Not through love, for this follows only when it has sprung from vision as its source." With Staupitz (ed. Knaake, i. 106), Luther accepted the latter form, vid. Glosses upon Tauler, Weim. ed. ix. 102 : "The whole of salvation is resignation of the will in all things." Also, Thorn. aK.,iii. 15. 2; 56. i. Goch, dialog. 9. 10 (Walch, Monim. Med. aev. i. 4, p. 129, 132). CHURCH LIFE AND RELIGIOUS AGITATIONS. l8l Supper — console the pious (ib. 355, 621 f., 450 f. Thorn, a Kemp, iv. II. 4). They should be always ready to turn aside from the highest religious transport to prepare a plate of soup for a pauper (Eckh., p. 553. Taul. f. i28r, 95 r, 121 r).^ ''He to whom inwardness becomes outwardness, to him the inwardness becomes more inward than to him to whom inwardness becomes inward- ness " (Seuse, p. 246). We cannot overlook the medieval mould — ascetism and ecstacy — in which the controlling ideas here are cast. But, inasmuch as the entire body of the traditional teaching and culture of the church is concentrated upon the religious life of the individual soul, which is to grow by the contemplation of Jesus and by that intercourse of the soul with him" in which blessedness consists/^ these men were, nevertheless, ** schoolmasters leading to Christ.""* Literature. Greith, Die deutsche Mystik im Predigerorden, 1861. BoHRiNGER, Die deutschen Mystiker, 1855. Preger, Gesch. d. deutschen Mystik, 3 vols., 1874, 1881, 1893 ; cf. Denifle, Hist, polit. Blatter, vol. 75, 679 ff., 771 ff., 903 ff., and Archiv f. Litt. u. KG. d. MA. ii. 417 ff. Denifle, Das geistl. Lebea, 3 A., 1880. Upon separate topics: Lasson, M. Eckh., 1868. R. Seeberg, Ein Kampf um jenseitiges Leben (Biogr. Senses), Dorpat, 1889. C. Schmidt, J. Tauler, 1841, and Denifle, Taul. Bekehrung, 1879. Upon the Buch v. geistl. Armut, Ritschl, Ztschr. f. KG. iv. 337 ff. Strauch, Marg. Ebner u. Heinr, v. Nordl., 1882, and " Offenbarungen d. Adelheid Langmann," 1875. Upon the Brethren of the Common Life, Hirsche, PRE. ii. 678-760. Particularly Seeberg in Thomas. DG. ii., ed. 2, 290-315. 4. Not least among the influences leading to the crisis at the close of the Middle Ages was the change in the conditions of the business world. (Cf Inama-Sternegg, Deutsche Wirt- schaftsgesch. iii. 2, 1901.) The traffic in money emphasized the contrast between the rich and the poor. In the cities there was an accumulation of capital in the hands of indi- viduals, which proved in the highest degree detrimental to the general social advancement, as both the nobles and the peasants realized in sad experience. The Romish canon law was rigidly enforced, and proved, as always, the ally of the financially stronger party. The heaviest burden fell, in the last instance, ^ Cf. Thom. summ. ii. ii. q. 182, a. i, ad 3. ^ Thom. a Kemp. ii. 8. I : " It is a great art to know how to walk (^con- versari) with Jesus." ^ Ib. iii. 59- i • "Where thou, there heaven," ii. 12. 3: *'Thou hast found paradise on earth." * Note also the value attached to practical deeds of love. The monastic idea of forsaking the world is often painfully prominent [e. g.^ Thom. a K. i. 10. I ; 20. i); but see also the splendid sermons of Tauler upon the earthly callingr (fol. 117 r f., fol. 94 v f.). Cf. Uhlhorn, Die christl. Liebestatig- keit, ii. (1884), p, 350 ff. 162 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. upon the peasantry. The impoverishment of the latter, the de- velopment of the feudal system, and the pressure exerted by the nobles, gave birth to the " social question " of the fifteenth cen- tury. As the only social power of the Middle Ages was the church, it was inevitable that these social problems should assume a religious form. The ethics of the medieval church had not risen to the demands of the new economic conditions. The friendly interest with which the most truly religious spirits of the day regarded the suffering peasants did not alleviate their misery. The terrible strain of mind found vent in forecasts and prophe- cies. Not only the hierarchy, which had become utterly secu- larized and was ever thirsting for gold, but all the high and mighty of the world as well, were to be destroyed. All secular ordinances and laws were declared null and void, and only the divine law must rule. The pious shall conquer. Wealth will cease to be ; evangelical poverty will become universal, and with it communism will prevail. All are to be equal, made free by ''evangelical liberty." God will bring it to pass. The time would soon be ripe, it was thought, to lay hand to the work. This was the Christian Socialisin of the day, which, in league with ''evangelical liberty," pressed on to revolution.' Far beyond the circles of those actually engaged in these movements extended the stimulating and disturbing influence of these ideas. What strange contrasts are here blended— ideas as full of contra- ^ Vid. especially *'The Vision and Creed of Piers Ploughman" (ed, Wright, Lond., 1856). Die Reformation Sigismunds (ed. Bohm, 1875). Cf. Gesch. des Hans Boheim (Barack, Arch, d, hist. Vereins f. Unter- franken, xiv. 3, pp. 1-8). The '*new" or** divine" order which the Refor- mation of Sigismund had in view (p. 241, 242, 170) embraces, in addition to all manner of ecclesiastical and social improvements, the demand of ** liberty." The latter is deduced, however, from the redemption achieved by Christ: '* Christ suffered for us " that he might free us and release us from all bonds, and herein no one is exalted above the other, for we are in the same condition in redemption and liberty, whether noble or peasant, rich or poor, great or small (p. 221, 214, 245, 246 f.). In the name of this liberty, feudal serfdom is to be abolished, and woods, pasture, and water (Wald, Weide, Wasser) are to be free to all (p. 222 f. ). The imperial and papal codes of law are slumber- ing, but the "Little Ones" are wakeful (p. 225). This liberty which Christ is said to have brought, constitutes one root of the conception of " evan- gelical liberty." The other is found in the (evangelical) idea of natural law, i. e., that by nature all are free, and all things common to all (vid. sub). To this must be added the great emphasis laid upon evangelical liberty and the evangelical law in pre-reformation circles (vid. especially Goch, dialog, c. 7, 18, 19). I would thus answer the inquiry raised by Von Nathusius (diechristl. soz. Ideen d. Ref.-zeit u. ihre Herkunft, 1897, p. 48 ff.), but, in my judg- ment, not satisfactorily answered by him, as to the medieval origin of the con- ception under discussion. As to the eschatological framing of these ideas, vid. Wadstein, Dieeschat. Ideengruppe, 1896, p. 183 ff., 171 ff. Kropat- SCHECK, Das Schriftprincip der luth. Kirche, i. 247 ff. CHURCH LIFE AND RELIGIOUS AGITATIONS. 183 dictions as M-'as the closing period of the Middle Ages itself! Hatred of the church and love for evangelical law, longing toi more secure possession of property and enthusiasm for holy pov- erty, individualistic and socialistic tendencies, practical demands of the present age and lofty apocalyptic expectations (cf. Joachim V. Floris), the gospel and natural law, — here meet. The result was in keeping with it all— ^revolution in the name of the gospel. But even here it was theological ideas which lay in the back- ground, /. e.^ the evangelical, or natural, law as the criterion for criticism of all existing institutions, and the perfect life to be found in the observance of this law. But by natural or divine law was understood : ''all possession of all things in common, and there is one liberty of all " (Occam, dial., p. 932. Cf. op. 90, dier. p. 1143).^ But above all influential here were the ideas of the great Hussite-Wickliffe movement, or the views of WiCKLiFFE (f 1384), whom Huss and his adherents interpreted for their countrymen.^ Wickliffe's work, De civili domiiiio (i., ed. Poole, 1885), demands attention.^ All human rights, it claims, must rest upon divine right. Accordingly, the unpardoned sin- ner holds unrightfully what he possesses (i., p. 2 f., 28, 8). In the sight of God his possessions would belong to the righteous, and he, therefore, steals them (p. 34): ** for by the very fact that anyone takes another's goods unjustly, their owner being un- willing or ignorant (of the act), he commits theft or robbery. Since, therefore, every unrighteous man unjustly takes the goods of his body and goods of fortune, which all belong to every righteous person, . . . he in this way seizes or. steals whatever goods (he possesses).'* But the righteous are, in Wickliffe's view, the predestinated (vid. sub). These, accordingly, as the adopted sons of God, have rightful claims to dominion over the whole world: "he has a right to the whole kingdom, . . . therefore everyone thus righteous rules the whole visible world '* (p. 47 f.). They are, therefore, kings, like Christ; but also bishops, since they must proclaim the holy doctrine.* It is, of ^ Occam borrows this verbally from Isidor, Etymol. v. 4. Gratian also ac- cepts Communism as guaranteed by natural law, with appeal to Acts iv, 32, Plato and Augustine (Deer, pars i., dist. 8). Roman law allows, as included in natural rights, only the union of man and wife, the education of children, and the liberty of all. Vid., e. g.. Digest, i. i. 2 As to the relation of Huss to Wickliffe, and the controlling influence of the latter upon the Bohemian agitation, vid. Loserth, H. u. W., 1884. The in- fluence of this English theologian upon the continent may, perhaps, be in this respect compared with that of Carlyle in the nineteenth century. ^ It was widely read in Bohemia. LOSERTH, pp. 242, III. * How similar is this to Luther's '< Liberty of a Christian Man," and yet how different ! 184 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. course, not meant by this that the righteous are at once to appro- priate to themselves the possessions which others have wrong- fully seized. On the contrary, the positive duties of life are contained in the *' evangelical law," which term best expresses comprehensively the practical reformatory demands of Wickliffe. The Holy Scriptures, or the 'Maw of Christ" (p. 397), is in and of itself sufficient for the regulation of the entire life of the Christian world (^Ipsa pure per se siifficit regere totiim populiwi chrisliannni, p. 395)/ There is really no need of any law be- yond the Scriptures for the Christian world (opus evangelic, i., p. 200, ed. Loserth). Civillaws are righteous only insofar as they have the Biblical spirit (civ. dom., p. 400, 139). Only in so far can they claim acknowledgment at the hand of believers (op. ev. i. 367). But the requirements of the evangelical law are met by humility, love, and poverty in the imitation of Jesus : *'But humility, love, and poverty are the doctrine of Christ. Therefore, whoever shall not hate those things by imitating Christ as an eagle, knows that he is not of his church ' ' (de eccl. , p. 6^y ed. Loserth). The life of Christ is the commentary upon his law (trialog. , p. 300, ed. Lechler). Ascetic imitation oi Christ is, therefore, in the true Franciscan fashion, depicted as the duty of the Christian. *' It behooves everyone who is to be saved to follow him either in suffering or in mode of life ' ' {inori- bus) (sermones ii., p. 15, ed. Loserth; also iii. 491 f.; op. evang. i., p. 105}. '* We ought to imitate the life of Christ and his apostles as far as we are able " (trialog., p. 456 ; op. ev. i. 469 f.; ii. 140). These are the ideas found in Wickliffe. The predestinated and the pious are the lords of the world, the prop- erty of the wicked being robbery and their codes of justice injus- tice. But, on the other hand, they ought to be imitators of Christ, poor, humble servants of the divine law. These ideas stand side by side. Either of them alone, or both combined, may be capable of arousing a storm of criticism that may shake the world. Either the evangelical law or the rights of nature may be in- voked in deadly assault upon all property and law, upon every rank and every ordinance of society.^ The pious may assert their rights against the ungodly in the name of the gospel. The rights of nature and the imitation of Christ are woven together, 1 Evangelical law and natural law fall naturally into one, since both are in- spired by God, ^.^., De civ. domin., p. i, 22, 37, 28; p. 125: "Divine created right is divinely inspired right ; human right is right devised by occa- sion of the sin of humanity." 2 Wickliffe feels this when he restricts the thought, that civil laws are valid only in so far as they agree with God's law, by the caution : ** Therefore the things thus said here are not to be proclaimed too freely to the whole populace " (opp. ev. i. 367). THEOLOGY IN FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH CENTURIES. 185 and the resultant is the holy revolution. Hussitisra first put the ideas into practical execution. Cf. WiEGAND, De eccl. notione quid Wicl. docuerit, Lips., 1S91, p. 58 ff. Von Bezold, Zur Gesch. d. Husitentums, 1874; ib. Die '* armen Leute," Hist. Ztschr., 1879, i ff. § 62. Review of History of Theology in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries. Nominalism and Augustinianism. Literature. Werner, Dienachscot. Scholastik, 1883 ; Der Augustinism. jnd. Sciiol. d. spat. MA., 1883 ; Der Endausgang dermittelalt. Schol., 1887. RiTTER, Gesch. d. Philos. viii. ( 1 845 ) , p. 547 ff. Prantl, Gesch. d. Logik, iii. {1867), p. 327 ff. SiEEECK, Occ. Erk.-lehre, Archiv f. Gesch. d. Philos., '897, p. 317 ff. Ullman, Reformatoren vor der Ref., 1841-42. Ritschl, Rechtf. u. Vers, i., ed. 2, 129 ff. Kolde, Diedeutsche Augustinercongregat. u. Staupitz, 1879. Clemen, Joh. Pupper v. Goch, 1896. Kropatscheck, Der Schriftprincip der luth. Kirche, i., 1904. I. As at the beginning of the twelfth century a keen critical mind furnished the occasion, both positively and negatively, for the great theological agitation of the twelfth and thirteenth cen- turies, so again, at the beginning of the fourteenth century, a critical thinker directed theological ideas into new paths. The former movement conducted to the culminating point of Schol- asticism ; the latter, to its fall. Thus far we may find a parallel between Abelard and Duns Scotus. The method of Duns con- trols his opponents as well as his adherents. Nothing is too lofty nor too sacred, too firmly settled nor too well attested, to be called in question. This method, which stands in intimate rela- tion with the conception of God as the absolute, unregulated Will, became the lever for the critical unsettling of dogma, em- ployed particularly and in a far-reaching way by the so-called Nominalists. The Lombard brought the materials together ; Thomas framed definitions ; Duns built up and demolished arguments ; Occam advocated the positively valid, though not without robbing it of the nimbus of rationality. (a) Although Duns was not yet a Nominalist, the way was prepared for the transition to Nominalism by his emphasizing of the singular and the individual (p. 147). The work was com- pleted by his greatest pupil, William of Occam (f ca. 1350). Vid. esp. super quatuor libr. sent, and Centilogium theologic, Lyon, 1495. Quodlibeta, Strassburg, 149 1. De sacr. altaris, Strassburg, 1491. Summ. totius logicae, Bologna, 1498. Major summ. log., Venet. 1508. Exposit. aurea super totam artem veterem, Bol. 1496. The writings upon church polity, vid. supra, p. 167. In these and the following citations of lit- erature, I have been guided by no bibliographical interest (for which see Werner), but merely cite the editions which I have used. Following Abelard, Thomas and Duns, Occam is the fourth lS6 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. typical figure among the Scholastics. An intellectual acumen that moved with ease amid the finest subtleties of thought, a devotion to abstraction and rational criticism of the strictest type, are his striking characteristics. He is keenly interested in politics; but in politics, as in theology, he is a fanatical champion of logic. One looks to him in vain for warmth of feeling or devotional language. His logic is keen, but its edge is turned when it meets the authority of the Romish church. The reader cannot escape a painful impression, when the talented author apologizes for his bold conclusions as harmless intellectual exer- cises, or quotes a large number of opinions without stating clearly which of them accords with his own judgment (octo quaest., p. 391, 398; dial., p. 504, 546, 771; de sacr. alt. c. 6, fin.)! His Nominalistic theory of knowledge (vid. sub) as well as his critical skepticism (upon both, vid. sub, 2 and 3) spread rapidly in all directions (esp. Adam Goddam, Robert Holkot, JoH. Buridan, Marsilius of Inghen", Peter D'Ailli. Quaes- tiones super libr. sent., Strassburg, 1490). But it is scarcely correct to consider his theological standpoint as merely a conse- quence of his Nominalism.^ His critical radicalism is rather to be explained as, on the one hand, a direct application of the Scotist method ; and this method led him, on the other hand, to the position of external ecclesiastical positivism. The last important representative of this tendency was Gabriel Biel (f 1495, vid. CoUectorium sive epitoma in Sentent. 11. iv. Tiib., 1 50 1, with the Expositio canonis missae, Basel, 15 10. Cf. also Sermones de tempore u. de festivitatibus, Hagenau, 151 5. Cf. LiNSENMANN, Theol. Quartalschrift, 1865, 195 ff. , 449 if., 601 ff. Werner, Endausgang, p. 262 ff. ). At the same time, however, pure Scotism still found adherents (f. ^. , Vorillon and Franz Lychetus, who wrote a commentary upon the Opus Oxoniense). {b) Parallel with the Nominalist tendency, was still preserved a line of Thomist theologians (i'. ^i^., Hervaeus Natalis, f 1323 ; cf. Seeberg, PRE. vii,, ed. 3, 771 ff. Petrus de Palude, t 1342); but even such Dominicans as Durandus de St. Portiano (t 1334, vid. in iv. libros mag. sentent., Paris, 1508 et pas.) departed from the doctrine of the great teacher of their order. The most energetic defender of Thomism against the Scotist theology was the General of the Thomists, Joh. Cap- REOLUS (f 1444. Defensionum theologiae divi doctoris Thomae, 11. iv., Venet. 1483. Cf. Werner, D. h. Thom. v. Aq. iii. 151 I E. iT., Baur, Dreieiniffkeit ii. 872 f. Thomas, ii., ed. 2, 92 f. Wagen- MANN', PRE. X., ed. 2, 691. THEOLOGY IN FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH CENTURIES. 187 ff.). DiONYSius RiCKEL (Carthusianus) (f 147 1, vid. in sent. Venet. 1584) deserves mention in this connection, as he attached himself in essential points to Thomas, although giving, in his eclectic fashion, an excellent summary of the theories of the various scholastic teachers (cf. AVerner, Endausgang, p. 134 ff,, 206 ff. ). The commentaries written by Thomas sel Vio (Cajetan) upon the Summa of Thomas and by Sylvester Fer- rariensis upon the Summa contra gentiles (cf. Werner, 1. c, p. 305 ff. ) extend into the Reformation period. (;:) Side by side with these two tendencies, we note a third, which sought to combine certain mystical notions with Averroistic ideas. ^ Its prominent representatives are Petrus Aureolus ( f ca. 1345, Sentence-comm. and Quodlibet, Rome, 1596), Joh. v. Baconthorp (f 1346, Quaest. in iv. libros sent, and Quodlibet, Cremona, 1618), and Joh. de Janduno (ca. 1320). The last- named especially maintained that the Averroistic ideas of the eternal world and of the one intellect common to all men are rationally necessary truths, i. e. , he did not adopt the Thomistic interpretation of Aristotle, but held that of Averroes as the more correct because it made a fundamental distinction between theo- logy and secular philosophy. But, since the Christian concep- tion of salvation can be maintained intact only on the basis of the faith of the church, it was necessary to cling to the ecclesi- astical dogmas (Werner, Nachscot. Theol. , p. 5 f. ) . This tendency, with its extreme Realism, was dominant in the theo- logical school of Padua {e. g., Urban of Bologna, f 1403 ; Paul of Venice, f 1429; Augustin Niphus of Suessa, f ca. 1550, etc. Vid. Werner, Endausgang, p. 142 ff. ). This view, which prevailed in northern Italy, and outlasted Nominalism by about a hundred years, requires no further notice in the History of Doctrines. {d) Neither can the school of Augustinian Eremites be compared in importance or completeness of thought with the two tendencies first named. At their head stood Aegidius of Colonna (also called Romanus, f 1316. The best edition of his Comm. upon the first three books of the Sentences, Cordova, 1707, Kirchenlex. iii. 669). Among his adherents were Jacob Capocci, f 1308 ; Gerhard of Siena, Prosper of Reggio, Albert of Padua, Simon Baringundus, Thomas of Strassburg (f 1357, vid. 11. iv. in mag. sentent., Strassburg, 1490 and passim). But despite the aim of this school to main- tain Augustinianism, their theory of sin and grace is by no means 1 Cf. Renan, Averroes et I'Averroisme, 3 A. 1866 ; and briefly, Erdmann, Gesch, d. Philos. i., ed. 4, 339 ff. t88 history of doctrines. that of Augustine (vid. Werner, Der Augustinismus, p. 171 ff., 1 8 1 ff. ) . The resolution adopted A. D. 1 2 8 7 , to make the theology of Aegidius the doctrine of the order (vid. Ossinger, Bibl. Augustiniana, 1786, p. 237), had comparatively slight effect. Gregory of Rimini (f 1358, Lectura in 1. i. and ii. Sent., Paris, 1482) advocated variant views, accepting Nominalism, on the one hand, .and then demanding strict adherence to Augustinianism, which he held is to be freed from the wrappings of Peripateticism. He was therefore honored with the title, Doctor Authenticus. He strongly insisted that man was created in a state of grace, and that concupiscence is the material of original sin. Sin is transmitted through the sensuous concupis- cence of the generating act.^ That in other points the popular theology of the Augustinians before the Reformation did not overstep the bounds of the common Catholicism, may be seen, e. g., in the Coelifodina of Johann of Paltz (supra, p. 175). (^) The tendency which crops out in men like Gregory had from the middle of the fourteenth century been influencing the minds of many theologians, i. e.y the desire for a return to the genuine Augustine, or to the simple teaching of the ancient church. In A. D. 1400 JoH. Gerson wrote : ^' A reformation seems to be necessary in the faculty of theology. . . . First, that useless doctrines without fruit or solidity may not be so commonly discussed, since through these the doctrines necessary to salvation and useful are deserted. . . . Second, that those who are (not) scholars are misled through these (teachings), because they think that those persons are chiefly to be regarded as scholars who give themselves to such things, despising the Bible and the doctors. . . . Through these teachings, theolo- gians are ridiculed by the other faculties : for they are, on this account, called Phantastics, and are said to know nothing con- cerning solid truth and morals and books. . . . Through these (teachings) the church and the faith are edified neither internally nor externally.'"' A remedy is to be found by lecturing not only, as was customary, upon the first book of the Sentences, but upon the last three, and lectures should be presented in a simple way, and with practical reference to the religious and moral conditions of the age (Gers. opp. ed. Dupin ^ Both Aegidius and Gregory taught the maculate conception of Mary. Tko?fias of Strassburg championed the immaculate conception. Werner, p. 176 f. '*■ In the later commentaries upon the Sentences (already in Hervaeus, and especially since Occam), the metaphysical questions of the First Book really claim the first place in importance and in the space devoted to them. Theology is lost in metaphysics or canonical casuistry. THEOLOGY IN FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH CENTURIES. 1 89 i. 122 ff. ). The faults here noted are manifest in the scholastic literature of the age. When criticism found itself limited by the dogmas of the church, it became empty and fruitless. And a theology which created a thousand difficulties and suggested a thousand possibilities, only to return at last to the formulas so laboriously criticized, became, together with its advocates, ridiculous. Demand was made for a practical and churchly theology, and gradually the beginnings of such a theology began to appear. Side by side with the commentaries upon the Sen- tences, we find treatises and brochures upon popular theology, expositions of the Creed, directions for confessing, '* patterns of virtue," etc.^ A simple outline of dogmatics is presented, e. g., in the Compendium theologiae found imong the works of Gerson.^ If works of this character led back to the simple forms of the earlier theology, there was at the same time a return to Augus- tine. Many influences contributed to this movement. Against the rising tide of Pelagianism, Thomas of Bradwardina (t 1349) lifted the standard of Augustinian doctrine, not how- ever without first refining it into a system of Determinism (vid. De causa dei c. Pelagium et de virtute causarum, London, 1618. Cf. R. Seeberg, PRE. iii., ed. 3, 350 ff.). In the mind of Wickliffe the conception of the Supreme will of God was asso- ciated inseparably with that of predestination, and thus became a critical weapon against the church and the clergy. His chief opponent, Thomas Netter (f 1431. Doctrinale antiquitatum fid. cath. ), endeavored to expound the Catholic doctrine from the Scriptures as in opposition to the views of Wickliffe, and with an avoidance of the scholastic forms. He thus helped to prepare the way for the final statement of the church's doctrine in the Confession of Trent (vid. Seeberg, PRE. xiii., ed. 3, 749 ff. ). The more profound piety of the Mystics produced a certain con- geniality in temper and thought with Augustine. And wherever the deeper religious needs came into collision with the external- ized church, they found in him both religious nutriment and ^ The libraries furnish a mass of such material in manuscript. These docu- ments are partly in refutation of the charges ventilated at the Reform Councils. But cf. in connection with them the mystical tractates, which also present out- lines of popular theology. Wickliffe as a theologian followed strictly the scholastic method ; but, as he always contrived to give to his monographs a practical and reformatory bearing, even he strengthened the union of theology and the church. ^ This book first expounds the Creed ; then the Decalogue. It then treats of the seven sacraments, of the three theological and the four cardinal virtues, of the seven gifts of the Spirit, of the eight Beatitudes, of the various sins — and, finally, the definitions of pyschology are discussed, with constant refer- ence to sin. As to the question of its authorship, see Schwab, Gerson, p. 780. 190 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. weapons for the conflict. This is true of all the men who are commonly spoken of as the Forerunners of the Reformation, such as JoH. PuppER OF GocH (f after 1475), J*^^- Ruchrath OF Wesel (f 1481), JoH. Wessel (f 1489). But Augustine could give to no one more than he possessed himself ; and hence these men, in the decisive question concerning grace and justifi- cation, still held to the Catholic conception of infused grace (vid. sub). They had no more real grasp than the later Scholastics upon the principle of the sole authority of Scripture in matters of faith. It follows, that the term *' Forerunners of the Reformation " is a misleading one^ (vid. Ritschl, Rechtf. u. Vers, i., ed. 2, 129 ff. ). This hasty review is sufficient to reveal the activity and versatility of the intellectual life of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.^ But the progressive impulse in this play of forces came practically from the Nominalistic and Augustinian circles, and to them we must now turn our attention. 2. We first view the positions of Nominalism, as presented in Occam (cf. Seererg, PRE. xiv. , ed. 3). Man's knowledge has to do with propositions, not with things. Nature produces only the individual object (sent. i. d. 2, q. 4 X). The Universal does not objectively exist, but only in the subjective understand- ing (ib. q. 8 E). In order that knowledge may come into existence, there is needed only the intellect {inteliectus) and the \h\ng^QrctivQ6.{res cognita)'^ the mediating intelligible forms (j/^- cies sensibiles et intelligibiles') are superfluous (contrary to Duns, supra, p. 147), ''because in vain is that accomplished through more stages, which can be accomplished through fewer "^ (sent. ii. q. 15 O). Objects beget in us a sensuous impression. From this, the intellect is able to beget in the mind a picture (^fictum), a copy (^simulacra, idola, phaiitasmata, imagines^, of the actual object (ib. q. 17 S, i. d. 13, q. i J), which is of course only a representatively (^objectively), and not a really (^subjectively) existent copy (ii. q. 15 SS). "■ The intellect, seeing anything outside of the soul, constructs a corresponding thing in the 1 This is notably true of Savonarola (-f 1498), who was in theology a Thomist, and whose reformatory labors pursued strictly the line of the medieval conception of the relations of church and state, and the ascetic ideal of Christian life. ^ Regarded separately, with almost every name mentioned in the above review is associated a wealth of historical questions of biographical, hterary, dogmatic, and philosophic interest. Protestant theology will find it increas- ingly necessary to devote far more attention and industry to this field of investi- gation than has been customary. 3 A favorite principle with Occam, as it had been with Duns, derived originally from Aristotle. THEOLOGY IN FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH CENTURIES. I9I mind" (ib. i. q. 8 E). This copy corresponds exactly with the object copied. Over against these results of first intention {termini primae intentionis^ originating directly from the actual individual object, stand the results of second intention {termini secumiae intenticnes) , whicha.reBa.tu.ra\ly {naturalitur^ constructed by the thought from the former.^ These are the abstract con- ceptions, which assert something as common to the separate objects, /'. ^., the Universals (ib. ii. q. 25 O). There is no objective existence corresponding to them. They are simply a result of the inability of the human mind to apprehend a single object without at the same time thinking of it as having a general character. For example, when one sees a white object, or several white objects, he is compelled to think of the abstract property of whiteness — or, we cannot look upon a thing as hav- ing bulk, or as related to other things, or as continuing to exist, without thinking of quantity, or relation, or duration. It is easy to see from this why knowledge, or science, should be concerned only with conceptions and definitions, not with real objects. But according to Occam, conceptions of both the classes named are truly real entities {vere entia realia), i. e.y as *' qualities sub- jectively existing in the mind" (quodlib. iv. 19 ; v. 13), and they correspond to existing reality. It is utterly unjust to accuse Occam of robbing concepts of their content and see- ing in them only figments of the imagination. He writes: ** The universal is not such a figment, to which nothing similar in the subjective^ being corresponds, as if it were only imagined to be in the objective being (sent. ii. q. 8 H). Intoning, as he does so strongly, the activity of the soul in the act of per- ception, and shattering so completely the illusive dreams of Realism, Occam is the real originator of the modern theory of knowledge. 3. This more precise theory as to the nature of perceptions was enlisted in the service of the critical assaults upon the tradi- tional dogmatics. (^) Dogma, it was held, cannot be scientifi- cally proved. With equal right entirely other views might then be advocated. In his Centiiogium, Occam presents a number of examples : If God assumes any other nature than his own, the propositions : '* God is an ass, God is a stone," are also possi- ble (concl. 7). If the Son became the son of Mary, so might ^ Here belong also intelligible processes, such as acts of the thought or will, desire, sorrow, etc., which man experiences within himself and which can become the direct objects of thought, i, e.y which furnish an intentio prijua, or a directly-formed conception (sent. i. prol. q. I HH). ^ Subjective — substantively, or objectively : objective — imaginatively. The meaning of the terms is now just the reverse. 19- HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. also the Father (8) or the Holy Ghost (9). From the doctrine of the communicatio idioviatiun might be drawn such prop- ositions as, **God is the foot of Christ," or, ''the foot is the hand" (13)- The Trinity is undemonstrable, and can be known only through infused faith (^fides infusa) (55). Differ- ences of ethical merit cannot lead to corresponding differences of reward, since the latter is infinite (92). In a similar way, transubstantiation is criticized ; the proofs for the unity of God surrendered (Biel, sent, i, d. 2, q. 10); it is declared probable that God created the world in eternity (ib. ii. d. i, q. 3 A); or taught that God could have forgiven sin without the repentance of the sinner (Occ. sent. iv. q. 8 M); or, that God might have just as well have commanded as prohibited hatred against him- self, theft, murder, etc. (sent. ii. q. 19). {b') But it by no means follows that the dogmas of the church are to be surren- dered, nor their acceptance made a matter of indifference. On the contrary, it is declared : ''This is my faith, since it is the Catholic faith ; for whatever the Roman church believes, this alone and not anything else do I believe, either explictly or im- plicitly " (Occ. desacr. alt. i. 16; quodlib. iv. 35). The author- ity of the church's doctrine is supported by that of the Scrip- tures. But this is done — theoretically at least — in a different way from that adopted by Thomas or Duns (supra, p. loi f., 149). Only those truths are Catholic which the Holy Scriptures teach : "Therefore the Christian is not by the necessity of salvation bound to believe ; nor is he to believe what is neither contained in the Bible, nor can be inferred by necessary and manifest con- sequence alone from the things contained in the Bible " (Occ. dial., p. 411, 769 f., Goldast). "An assertion of the canonical Scripture is of greater authority than an assertion of the Christian church " (D'Ailli in Tschackert, Petr. v. Ailli, append., p. 10) ". But these doctrines are true because inspired by God, whether as natural and innate in all men, or as revealed for recording in Scripture. The pope or the church can by their declarations alter absolutely nothing in these truths (Occ. ib., p. 419)- " Human authority is by no means to be relied upon in those things which pertain to the faith, because our faith is above the human intellect " (p. 432). The truths of the faith are binding .simply on account of their conformity to the Scriptures (Biel, sent. iii. d. 25, q. un. dub. 3 ; d. 24, q. un. dub. 3). The cred- ibility of the Scriptures is acknowledged "because there it has been written and asserted by suggestion (Jnstinctit) of the Holy Spirit (Occ, p. 822, 834). God immediately infused the knowl- edge here contained into the minds of the Biblical writers as the most perfect certainty or evidence (Biel, iii. d. 24, q. un. concl. THEOLOGY IN FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH CENTURIES. I93 7).^ Should anyone, therefore, call the Scriptures in question he would have to be regarded as a heretic : *^ Whoever says that any part of the New or of the Old Testament asserts anything .false, or is not to be received by Catholics, is to be regarded as heretical and stubborn " (Occ. ib., p. 449). D'Ailli, indeed, placed the authority of the New Testament above that of the Old, and could even ascribe to some of the writings of the New Testament an '* authority greater" than that of others (Tschackert, append., p. 9); but this had no practical signifi- cance. As, now, *'all things to be believedare contained in the canonical Scriptures, ' ' there can be no quantitative enlargement of the body of truth. The three ancient symbols merely sum- marize the biblical ideas, or explain them as against the heresies which have arisen (Biel, iii. d. 25, q. un., a. i ; a. 3, dub. 2. Durand. iii. d. 26, q. 2, a. 2). **It is evident that the church, or the pope, by ordaining or making a new symbol, , . . does not make new Catholic truths or articles, but declares anew that certain truths have been and are Catholic " (Biel, ib. a. 3, dub. 3 fin.; cf. expos, can. miss. lect. 41 L). But, plainly as the prin- ciple of the exclusive authority of the Scriptures is here theoret- ically expressed, our authors did not undertake to make practical application of it. The teachings of the Scriptures and of the church are unconsciously placed upon the same level {e. ^., Occ. 1. c, p. 434, 459, 475 ; sent. i. d. 2, q. i F).^ Occam, e. g., declares that he will hold to transubstantiation on account of the authority of the Romish church, although he knows of another view which explains everything better and is not con- trary to the Bible, which does not expressly teach transubstantia- tion (quodlib. iv. 35 ; desacr. alt. 3). He would not support the usual theory of original sin, unless there were '* authorities of the saints " in its favor (sent. ii. d. 26 U). It appears to be safer to submit to ancient authority.^ ''To the apostolic .sanctions ^ Biel says (sermon, de temp. fol. 157 r): *'But the canonical Scriptures of both Testaments are believed to have been written, the Holy Spirit dictating and inspiring." Paul is the " celestial secretary*' (D'Ailli, sermones, Strassb. 1490, form Y 5 v). Durand. sent. prol. q. I L : '* We assent to them (the articles of faith) alone or chiefly upon the authority of the Scriptures, which we believe to be inspired by God." D'Ailli : *' All the canonical Scriptures have been revealed by the same infallible author," z. ^., God (Tschackert, Petr. V. Ailli, append., p. 9). Vid. also Duns, sent. iv. d. 14, q. 3. 5. Wickliffe, de civil, dom. i. p. 418, 439: ** Scripture divinely inspired." Other citations may be found in Holzhey, Die Inspirat. d. h. Schr., 1895, PP- 94-119. ^ Occam (de sacr. alt. 3) even says : *' This (transubstantiation) is believed to have been divinely revealed to the holy fathers. ' ' ^ Ritschl's comments upon Occam (Fides implicit^, 1890, p. 28 ff . ) are un- reliable, as he was unacquainted with the thorough discussion of the questions 194 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. and decrees which are not certainly contrary to the divine and natural law of Holy Scripture, although there should be some doubt of this, assent and obedience are to be rendered" (Biel, serm. de temp. fol. 157 r).^ It is remarkable that the same men who apply reason so sharply in criticism of the dogmas of the church and subordinate them to the sole authority of the Scriptures, are yet always ready in any given instance to submit to the ' ' Romish ' ' doctrine. But we should not on this account wonder at their studied irony, nor doubt either their honesty or their courage. If I understand the matter rightly, this wavering stands in inti- mate connection with the juristic conception of the church. Just as in civil life the law of nature holds primacy and yet finds application only in a form adapted to the precepts of positive law (supra, p. 171 f. ), soitisalso in the church. Here, the ac- cepted dogma, or the Roman doctrine, is the positive law ; the Scriptures (and reason) correspond to the law of nature (supra, p . 171 f . ) . '^ The application of the latter criterion produces a rad- ical criticism of dogma and church ; but this criticism is shat- tered — very much as in the political world — upon actual concrete conditions — upon the positive legal status of the Romish church. Neither in church nor in state has the criticism based on the law of nature abolished the existing positive law, although logical consistency might require that it should do so. But, since all at- tempt to prove the teachings of the church to be conformed to reason has been abandoned upon principle, ecclesiastical positiv- ism asserts itself in the naked form : I believe what the Romish church believes ! This position could, of course, not be perma- nently maintained. The longer criticism pursued its way, the more intolerable became the positivism of the church, and the longer the latter held sway in the church, the more improper must the bold criticisms appear.^ at issue in Occam's writings upon church polity. On p. 30, the Dialog, is re- ferred to as "not printed," but see G. Hoffmann, Die Lehre der fides impli- cita, 1903, p. 153 ff. ^ ^ Such a man as D'Ailli could, upon occasion, write of the books of the Bible : " We thus receive the canonical or divine Scriptures on account of the authority of the Catholic church, vi^hich so receives and approves them" (Tschackert, append. , p. 11). 2 It is, of course, not implied that the entire contents of the Scriptures fall under the heading of the law of nature ; but, regarded as a whole, they claim the same primacy over the positive ecclesiastical principles devised by man, as the law of nature given to man by God holds over positive human laws. ^ These theologians, on the one hand, identified the law of reason with the teachings of the Scriptures, and, on the other, regarded the latter as in con- formity with the teachings of the church. Both ideas are equally perverted, and both errors combined in preventing them from seriously applying their view of the authority of the Bible. Hence, they never established the authority of THEOLOGY IN FOURTEENTH AND FIFTEENTH CENTURIES. I95 4. The truths of Scripture are apprehended in Faith. (^) "Faith is a certain adherent {adhaesixa) and firm knowledge (jiotitia) of truth pertaining to religion, received through reve- lation " (Biel, iii. d. 23, q, 2, a. i D). In its essential nature, faith is intellectual assent (^assensus) : '* To believe is an act of the intellect assenting to the truth, proceeding from a command of the will ' ' (ib. C ) . But revelation embraces only to a small extent truths which are necessary, or evident to reason ; the majority of its teachings are contingent truths, for which it would be impossible to present a scientific demonstration (Occ, sent. prol. q. i N ; q. 7 ; quodlib. ii. 3. Biel, iii. d. 25, q. un., a. I, n. 3), or which may even directly contradict reason. ''Whoever is a Catholic and believing Christian can easily believe anything to which he could by no means by his natural powers assent." Here God comes to his aid: '*God, out of his grace, infuses into him a habitus, through the medium of which (^quo inediante) he is able to assent to any article of faith whatsoever" (Occ, centilog. 60). This is t\\Q Jides infusa, without which no act of faith would be possible.^ It is a '* quality {qualitas) produced by God in the soul," which in- clines the understanding to the act of faith." This habitus is infused in baptism (Biel, iii. d. 23, q. 2, a. i G. Occ, quodlib. iii. 7). But, in order that acts of faith may be actually performed, there is always further needed an acquired faith {^fides acquisita). No child can come to faith, despite the faith infused into it, unless it secure also, through instruction or the reading of the Bible, the concrete faith directed upon particular, separate truths (Occ, sent. iii. q. 8 LM). (b^ However untenable the conception of the '* infused faith" may be, yet our Dogmati- cians, in employing it, are guided by a certain presentiment of a real truth. It was their great aim to gain a special sphere for the religious life. The pious reader of the Bible, Biel explains, en- larges not so much his knowledge as his faith, since he is through the infused faith inwardly bound to the authority of Scripture (iii. d. 24, q. un., a. 2, concl. 5). But again, in so far as the material furnished by revelation for faith is not accessible to reason as such, theology is not in the usual sense of the term a science (Occ, sent. prol. q. i. Biel, sent. prol. q. 7). {c') Occam thus defines the fides implicita . ' * To believe implicitly the Scriptures upon any secure basis. It was not establishing it to take from the pope his infallible authority and transfer it to the Bible ! But this is the basis of Occam' s regard for the Bible. Vid. supra, p. 169, 11. 2. ^ But Occam in Quodlib., iii. 7, has introduced this conception as required neither by reason nor by experience . . . nor by inference but solely by authority. Cf. Duns, supra, p. 150. 196 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. is to firmly assent to some Universal from which many things follow, and not to pertinaciously cling to anything contrary to it" (dial., p. 434). Faith in the doctrine of the Scriptures is thus also included in the category of implicit faith. It is the idea, already familiar to us (supra, p. 103), that we accept everything taught by the Scriptures, i, e., by the church, as taught by these authorities: ''Everything contained in the canonical Scriptures is true" (Biel, iii. d. 25, q. i, a. i, n. 2 ; expos, can. miss. lect. 12 B: *'I believe as the church be- lieves " ) . The technical formulas of the doctrine of the Trinity and of Christology fall, for the laity, under the ' ' implicit faith"* (ib. a. 2, concl. 5), as well as the facts of biblical history, which cannot be experienced (ib. a. i, n. 2). Even if a layman, in thus obeying his prelate, should believe what is false, *' such a one would not only not sin, but he would even, by thus believing what is false, merit" (words of Innocent III. in Biel, 1. c, a. i, n. 2). But every believer must unconditionally possess explicit faith in Christ as the Redeemer (ib. a. 2, concl. 3 ; further, concl. 5). It is therefore the specific Catholic con- ception of faith which here again meets us. Faith is knowledge, (^noiitia) and assent (^assensus) in regard to the biblical revela- tion. Faith is the same in all persons ; but some believe ex- plicitly, others implicitly (ib. concl. 4). 5. Such are the principles of Nominalistic Scholasticism. Within the old forms a new ferment is stirring ; but the new wine has not yet burst the old bottles. The Scriptures are the sole authority in the church. It is felt that they constitute a canon of criticism ; but yet no dogma is overthrown, nor is any right of the hierarchy molested. Reason calls in question the bold systems of the past. Theologians surrender the sys- teois, but allow the definitions to stand. Or, they doubt the separate doctrines, but believe the whole. Skepticism forms a league with the positivism of the church — doubt with implicit faith — and they counterbalance each other. There is an unde- fined sense of a really positive theology within reach ; but what is actually cultivated is a fruitless criticism, a *' negative theo- logy." But, amidst all the murkiness of thought, two ideas are never lost sight of, i. e. , the authority of the Scriptures as over against the church and her dogmas, and the feeling that the Christian religion is no ordinary human system of religious philosophy, but a special, positive, and clearly marked whole — the historical revelation given by God, which only faith can ^ But Occam claimed also for himself the right of cherishing implicit faith in the doctrine of transubstantiation (!) ( De sacr. alt. i, supra, p. 192). Cf. also account in Moll, KG. d. Niederl. ii. 562. SF.PARATE DOCTRINES IN LATER MIDDLE AGES. I97 apprehend. The league between the gospel and speculative thought, which held sway in the church from the days of Origen, was glorified by the Scholastics also ; but it was finally shattered, too, at their hands. Duns and the Nominalists proved it unten- able. It is this service chiefly which establishes their position among the forces preparing the way for the coming Reformation. It would be a serious error to criticize their separate teaching." and ignore the chief service rendered by them. The separate doctrines are here of interest to us only because of their significance in the historical development. In the closing period of Scholasticism, as we have already treated of the sacraments in § 58, and of repentance in particular in § 61, 2, we shall need to examine only the views held upon sin, redemp- tion, grace, and the appropriation of salvation, together with the modifications in the doctrine of the Lord's Supper. We have, likewise, no occasion to attempt a presentation of the Augustinian tendency in all its details ;^ and shall therefore con- fine ourselves to a few remarks touching the doctrine of grace and to criticism of the conception of the church and of the theory of indulgences. § 6^. Labors of the Later Middle Ages Upon Separate Dogmas and Doctrines. I. As the conception of God held by Duns regulated the theistic speculations of the Nominalists, so in nearly all doctrines they attached themselves more or less closely to the Doctof Subtilis. This is evident in their views of Sin and Liberty. The rebellion of the sensuous nature against the spirit is natural. The donwn superadditu??i removed it, and in consequence merits became possible (Biel, ii. d. 30, q. i, a. 1-3). Original sin *' consists in a privation of the original righteousness owed" (Biel, ib. q. 2, a. 2, concl. 3. Occ, sent. ii. q. 26 U; cf. Durand, ii. d. 30, q. 3). Yet an infection of children through the generating act is also maintained (Biel, ib. q. 2, a. i, concl. I. Duns differs, supra, p. 153). But, despite sin, the natural freedom of the will remains perfectly intact. *'The integrity of his natural will, /. e., its freedom, iS not corrupted by sin; for that is really the will itself, and not separable from it" (Biel, ii. d. 30, q. I, a. 3, dub. 4). ''Through mortal sin nothing is corrupted nor destroyed in the soul " (Occ, sent. iv. q. Sand 9 D). That these assertions are irreconcilable with the Augus- ^ Of how little interest for the History of Doctrines such a discussion would be may be seen in Clemen's work upon Goch. 198 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. tinian doctrine of original sin is very evident.^ Vid. also Biel, De festivit. serm. 33. 2. The doctrine of the Atonement and Redemption is treated entirely in the spirit of Thomas and Duns. The subjective as- pect is the more prominent, but the objective is not wanting. The relation of the two to one another remains, as heretofore, without clear definition. (a) AuREOLUS, Baconthorp, Durandus, and Capreolus fol- low in the tracks of Thomas. The merit of Christ is of infinite value, and is capable of affecting atonement for all (Aur. iii. d. 20, q. I, a. I. Bac. iii. d. 32, a. i. Capr. iii. d. 18, a. 3. Dur. iii. d. 19, q. i, a. 2: ** The passion of Christ was a sufficient and superabundant satisfaction for the sin of the whole human race. . . . Christ, by suffering out of love and obedience, offered to God something more acceptable than the recompens- ing of the sin of the whole human race required "). Anselm's idea of the necessity of satisfaction is rejected (Aur. 1. c, q. 2. Dur. d. 20, q. i). But redemption through the passion of Christ is, nevertheless, the most suitable way, since man is in this way assured of the magnitude of the divine love and incited to a responsive affection, and receives also the example of Christ to stimulate him to the practice of every virtue (Dur. ib.). The redemption wrought by Christ is realized only in the case of those *'who are joined to him as members to the Head," or ** through real imitation, /. e.j when we suffer after the similitude of Christ*' (Dur. d. 19, q. i, a. 2).^ (^) Gabriel Biel, on the other hand, follows Duns more closely. Christ, from the time of his conception onward, by his obedience merited for us grace and glory : ** for he was in the very moment of his conception a man perfect in every grace and virtue and meritorious work " (iii. d. 18, a. 2, concl. 2). This merit be- comes efficacious through the acceptio divina (d. 19, a. 2, concl. i), but only for the predestinated : ** Only for the predestinated did he merit final grace and glory," for '* no one finally obtains salvation unless he was predestinated from eternity. ' * Here also Biel follows Duns (supra, p. 152).^ Salvation rests upon the divine 1 As to the views of this period upon the immaculate conception of Mary, see Esp. Occam, quodlib. iii. 9. 10, and cf. Werner, Nachscot. Scholast., P- 347- 2 Wicliffe argues the necessity of a satisfaction upon the ground that man must perform an act of humility, which, in contrast with Adam's presumption, shall lower him beneath himself (trialog., p. 215 f., ed. Lechler). * The idea of predestination occurs very frequently in his writings. The eucharistic sacrifice brings ** remission of sin; not, indeed, to all, but to the predestinated" (Biel, sermon, defestiv. fol. 279 r). The church is the "mul- titude of the predestinated " (expos, can. miss. lect. 22 E. ; vid, also sent. d. SEPARA'JE DOCTRINES IN LATER MIDDLE AGES. 1 99 predestination, and the passion of Christ is only a means for its reahzation : '* If Christ had not suffered, the elect would never- theless have been saved, because before the passion of Christ God foresaw that the elect would be saved " (ib. concl. 4). By the side of this conclusion stands the other, that, although the pas- sion of Christ primarily {frincipaliter) secures salvation for us, yet our own working {operatio') cooperates. For, when anyone becomes a recipient of grace, he needs, upon his part, a certain disposition of the will, such as attritio ; and this implies a merit of fitness {^de congruo'). In the case of the baptized child, a sub- stitute for this is found in the merit of the sponsors. The per- son thus equipped with grace performs works having merit of worthiness {decondigno)j and these become a ground for the in- crease of grace. It is concluded therefore: *' That, granting that the passion of Christ is the principal merit on account of which are conferred grace, the opening of the kingdom and glory, yet it is never the sole and entire meritorious cause. This is evident, because with the merit of Christ always concurs some work, such as the merit of fitness or of worthiness of the one re- ceiving the grace or glory " (concl. 5). Thus the merit of Christ finds its necessary complement in our merit. This final conclu- sion is hfere — not illogically — derived from the idea of merit ; but it is essentially an outgrowth of the Thomistic idea, that we became partakers of the results of the work of Christ only in so far as we are in life conformed to his image (supra, p. 178 f , i79f, n. 4).^ This merit of the obedience of Christ, as thus more sharply defined, God accepts as a satisfaction for the sins of all who believe on Christ (d. 20, a. 3, dub. i). This course of divine dealing cannot, of course, be described as necessary (ib. a. 2, concl, i); and Anseim is thus refuted with the weapons of Duns (ib. a. i).^ On the other hand, the plan of salvation may be shown to be most admirably adapted to the end in view, since it binds us to God and stimulates us to love him 27, a. 3, dub. 4). Werner ( Endausgang, p. 285) interprets the above-cited passage from the Sentences as teaching "the universal efficacy of Christ's redemptive act for all the descendants of Adam." ^ This relationship between Biel and Thomas is, with justice, maintained by an ascetic document dating from the beginning of the sixteenth century, which reproduces the thoughts of Biel (in Hasack, p. 477), where we find also the declaration (p. 443): '* Since the passion of Christ was not an entire, but a partial, cause of our salvation." In general, this formula represents ad- mirably the religious conception of the day. But we find, on the contrary, in Duns, iii. d. 19, § 8 : '* Christ, as the entire cause [totalis causa), merited for us the opening of the gates of paradise." ^ Yet Biel, like Duns (supra, p. 157), is not indisposed to accept the argu- ments as valid, " divine ordination being presupposed " (q. 20, ii.. I, ii. I B). 200 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES, in return (ib. a. 3, dub. 2), and also because God chose this plan and no other (ib. a. 2, concl. 2). (<:) It is not correct to say that *' the fundamental ideas of Anselm's theory were nevertheless generally accepted" (Thoma- sius, Christi Person u. Werk, ii., ed. 3, 165). Anselm's theory is accepted by no one. On the contrary, we constantly meet the fundamental ideas of Abelard, almost always indeed combined with the older thought of the merit of Christ which avails before God as the ground of divine grace. This combination appears also in the popular treatises of the day, particularly in the mys- tical literature.^ The passion of Christ is here treated in the spirit, and often in the very language, of Bernard. Its purpose is to re- veal to us God's love and inciteus to responsive love and imitation.^ On the other hand, salvation and eternal blessedness are Avith the greatest earnestness made dependent upon the objective merit of Christ and the satisfaction rendered by him, the contempla- tion of which is especially commended to the dying. ^ It is a favorite thought (Anselm, supra, p. 70) that in the redemptive work of God justice and mercy concur (^. g., Biel, sermon, de festiv. fol. 225 V). Exceedingly instructive is a sermon by Biel (De circumcis. domini). Here Anselm's doctrine is first pre- sented in bold outlines, and from it deduced the concurrence of the justice and mercy of God (1. c, fol. 197 v). But this work of Christ has for its purpose the efficacy of the sacraments : *' The sacraments . . . by which man is directly disposed to the reception of grace, which is the health and life of the soul ; for these he merited efficacy by the shedding of his blood " (fol. 198 r). ** Christ, as true God and man, instituted the sacra- ments, primarily {^principaliter) according to his divine nature, meritoriously according to his human nature" (ib.). This medicine gives grace, ** by which they are able to merit eternal blessedness " (199 v). But even this institution of the sacra- ments is a work of the grace which grants the means of salvation ^ The numerous sermons and meditations upon the Passion in the Incuna- bula-literature of before and after A. D. 1 500 are especially instructive. Space forbids the citation of these separately. See both views also in Wessel, De causis incarnat. 6 (opp. p. 424^), and GOCH, vid. Clemen, Goch, p. 131 ff). 2 E. g., Wessel, De caus. incarn. i, p. 414 : " Nothing is so effectual for turning the minds of men to good as pious exercise in the life and passion of the Lord." G. Biel, passionis dominie, serm. (Hagenau, 1515), form A 3 ; expos, can. miss. lect. 85 XY. ^ Cf. supra, p. 179, n. 3. Upon Christ as atoning sacrifice, e. g.^ in Wessel, De caus. incarn. 19, p. 455 ; de magnitud. passion, 39, p. 539 ; 40, p. 541 ; 44, p. 549. Cf. in Hasack, p. 155 f., 143: "Thou wilt to-day interpose between thy wrath and my transgression the most dear and accept- able sacrifice, Christ." Vid. also Moll, KG. d. Niederl. ii. 657 f. SEPARATE DOCTRINES IN LATER MIDDLE AGES. 20l to its enemy, as well as of the justice which rewards in accord- ance with the work of Christ, /'. ■?., through the institution of the sacraments (sent. iv. d. 2, q. 1, a. 3, dub. i ; cf. Duns, iv. d. 2, q. 2. 8). The so-called objective aspect of salvation may, accordingly, be reduced to the proposition, that Christ has secured for us the medicine of the sacraments (cf. Duns Scotus). 3. It has already been remarked (p. 174), that the religious life is moulded under the influence of the sacrament of repent- ance. It is accordingly under this heading that the develop- ment of personal piety is treated.^ The problem is the con- version of the sinner, (tz) It is for the sinner — as is repeated until it becomes wearisome — to do what in him lies (^quod in se est), and God will then not suffer grace to be lacking (^. g., Biel, sent. ii. d. 27, q. un.). The sinner acts from himself up to the point of attrition. But, according to Paltz, even this is to be traced back to the influence of a grace gratuitiously given (suppl. R 2 r ; 4 r). ** Nevertheless, if we do what is in us, so that we have attrition, he changes for us that attrition into contrition — sometimes of his own motion (^per se) before the reception of the sacraments, sometimes in the reception of the sacraments, which is more certain" (ib.). The sacraments, and even divine worship before their reception, effect this transformation (see citation, p. 175), in connection with which man receives simultaneously the peculiar grace ( gratia gratiim faciens) infused by the sacraments. By contrition mortal sin in him is destroyed, and by the sacrament the power of doing good is infused. (J?) This is the Justification of the sinner. The ultimate disposition being fixed by an act of the free will, grace, which is the form of justification, is immediately infused by God (Durand, iv. d. 17, q. i, a. 3). There is need of faith in con- nection with this process only in so far as the disposition to accept the grace which is the prerequisite of the process, /. aranda) that it may proceed, not so much from hatred as from love " (i. 446). But neither the completeness of this contrition nor confession following it imparts the certainty of forgiveness, which comes to us only through /a///; .- " Simply believe the word which the priest utters in absolution, that the absolution may be based upon neither his merit nor thine own " (i. 131). The true satisfaction is that required in Lk. 3. 8: it is a "service of the whole Christian life." Where private confession and satisfaction are taught in the Bible, Luther does not know (i. 98 J. Through them we cannot secure any righteousness, but only through faith fi. 102). He regards indulgences with suspicion. If no one can be sure of the contrition of another person, it is mere trifling to main- tain that a soul escapes from purgatory through indulgences ; for if the individual concerned had not true contrition, the indul- gence would not secure his pardon (i. 66). Moreover, the grace imparted impels us to perseverance in the self-mortifica- tions of repentance, so that the true Christian does not desire any indulgence (i. 68), 6. It is to be observed, finally, that upon other points Luther is during this period very conservative. The worship REPENTANCE, FAITH, SIN, GRACE, ATONEMENT. 235 of Mary and the saints,^ the seven sacraments, transub- stantiation, the mass, and the infaUibility of the church are still maintained. He has no idea of assailing them (vid. Kost- lin, L. Theol. i. 221 ff., Engl, transl. i. 200 f . ) ; but it may be observed that the elements of his later conception of the church may be found already in his writings. The church is the City of God. ** It is built, not by human teachings or works, but by the word and grace of God alone" (i. 202 ; 4. 400). It is the summary of the works of God, or the new creation (3. 154).^ But since the church is thus the work of God, or of his word, its essence is invisible and perceptible only by faith : ** Because the church is a labor and construction {opera et factura) of Christ, it does not outwardly appear to be anything, but its whole structure is internal, invisible before God ; and thus they are known, not to the carnal eyes, but to the spiritual in the mind and in faith " (4. 81 ; 3. 154, 367). 7. Everywhere, beneath the old forms the new life was swell- ing. Let us once more recall the leading features of the latter : The recognition of man's moral oondage ; the new apprehension of the humanity of Jesus as the absolute revelation of God ; the conception of faith as a laying hold upon Christ, together wath trust in God ; the thought of Christ working in us ; the idea of the righteousness of Christ and the forgiveness of sins graciously attributed to us. It is a new understanding of religion which finds expression in these views, however all the elements of the past — the ancient dogmas, the Augustinian apprehension of sin and grace, the criticism of the scholastic and pre-reformation eras, the mystic attempts to mount from the man Jesus to God, with their doctrine of the indwelling of Christ — may have pre- pared the way before it. § 67. Criticism of the Sacrament of Repentance and Exposition of Evangelical Repentance, Eaith, Sin^ Grace, Jtcstifica- tion. Atonement. I. **The right way and the proper manner, than which no other is to be found, is the most worthy, gracious, holy sacrament of repentance" (W. 2. 715). ''But I, a poor brother, have kindled a new fire, and have bitten a great hole in the pope's pocket, by attacking confession" (W. 8. 340). The central point in ]^uther's work lay in the abolition of the sacrament of re- ^ £. g-, 4. 694 : ** And thus the divine Virgin holds the medium between Christ and other men," with reference to her conception. ^ The communio sanctorum et bonorum (4. 401) is to be interpreted in the neuter gender. 236 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. pentance and the substitution for it of the new conception of faith and justification. This must also be our starting-point. In the 95 Theses (A.D. 151 7) we find the traditional view of the sacrament of repentance, as well as some echo of the criticism of the preced- ing period and of Luther's own evangelical views, (a) Luther does not here assail indulgences as such. They are to be highly esteemed (Th. 69, 38, 7, 71), and he proposes to combat only the abuses connected with them (72). The pardoning power of the pope can extend only to the canonical penalties imposed by himself, and not to every penalty (5, 20, 21, 34). As regards the dead, they are valid only in the way of supplication (26). The forgiveness of sins has in his view only a declarative force (38, 76, 6). The thesaurus of the church is not to be found in the merits of Christ and of the saints, as these are effectual with- out the pope (58); but ' ' the keys of the church bestowed through the merit of Christ" constitute it. (^) But this is not in the present day the character of indulgences. The indulgence- preachers are in many ways responsible for the abuses, as if souls were freed from purgatory as soon as the money rattles in the chest (27, 28, 86), and as though the certainty of salvation may be purchased (52, 30-32). Good works appear to be no longer necessary. It might be asked why the pope does not employ his power to empty purgatory (82, 84), and why he does not spend his own money to build St. Peter's (86). The church is being exposed to ridicule (90). (r) Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, by saying : Repent, intended that the whole life of believers should be repentance (i). This is not said, of course, with reference to the sacramental acts, but to the mortifications of the flesh and the hatred of self (2-4). In this sense, the penalty (^ poena) of sin remains as long as we live on earth (4). But if this self-mortification is a duty, then the true penitent will prefer the penalties, /. tf. , the works of love, to indulgences (40, 41, 43, 44). But he cannot by these means gain a consciousness of forgiveness. *^ Every truly contrite Christian has plenary remission of penalty and guilt due him, even without letters of pardon {2>^)y and he has this through his participation in Christ and the treasurers of the church (37)- The hierarchy cannot pardon the least sin as to its guilt (76); there belongs to it only the declaration of that which God does (38). Therefore, God alone forgives the guilt of sin ; but the penitent exercises himself in good works. Indulgences are not necessary. They are indeed dangerous, in so far as they may by outward means make the sinner feel secure, and in so far as they give to him something which is altogether uncertain. If scarcely anyone is certain of his contritio^ how much less of the attain- REPENTANCE, FAITH, SIN, GRACE, ATONEMENT. 237 ment oi plenaria remissio? (30-32). He who has not money in superabundance need pay out nothing for indulgences (46). Such are the Theses. They are less energetic than many criti- cisms of earlier date (supra, p. 210). But yet — carried to their logical conclusions — they leave very little remaining of the sac- rament of repentance. The contrite sinner secures forgiveness — it is taught with Augustine — to what end does he then need confession and absolution ? Works are moral exercises : then indulgences, and works of satisfaction as well, have no ground to stand upon. As indicated in the first Thesis, the repentance which fills the whole life occupies for Luther the central place, and no longer the sacrament of repentance.^ Cf. Dieckhoff, Der Ablass-streit, 1886. Bratke, L.'s95 Thesen, 1884- Brie- GER, Das Wesen d. Ablasses . . . mit RiicksichtaufL.'s Thesen (Lpz. Progr. 1897). 2. Luther's utterances in the" following years develop these ideas in both their positive and their negative aspects. The essence of repentance consists in Contritio. (a) But true con- trition is secured by the contemplation of righteousness, which begets in us love for the good, and, through this, sorrow for our sins (W. I. 319). *' But this contrition is to be produced in such a way that it may proceed, not so much from hatred as from love. But it proceeds from love, . . . if a man reflects with himself upon the benefits of God conferred upon him throughout his whole life. . . All these things, reflected upon and compared with our own sins, wonderfully stir up hatred and detestation of ourselves, but love and praise of God " (W. i. 466). The op- posite course is most vigorously rejected. He who determines to attain sorrow for sin simply by the contemplation of it, becomes a hypocrite, and is sorry only from fear of punishment. He really gets no further than attrition (ib. 319, also W. 2. 160 f., 421, 363, 368; 6. 160, 610. Cf. E. 31. 182, 183; 18. 6).^ An actual penitent frame of mind can thus, according to Luther, be induced only upon the basis of positive love for the good, ^ In this consists the historical significance of the first Thesis : all depends, not upon the sacramental acts, but upon the penitent disposition of the heart. This introduction follows the example of the medieval discussions of the sub- ject, which open with a presentation of the virtue of repentance. Particularly in Duns, the sacramental acts are really only means for promoting repentance as a self-mortification dominating the whole Christian life. Vid. my discussion of Duns' doctrine of repentance in Abhandl. f, Alex. v. Oettingen, p. 172 ff. 2 The last two passages prove that Luther in writings of the years 1530 and 1537 could advocate exactly the same views as in his tract, De poenitentia, of the year 1518. But it is of the greatest importance, that he here denies entirely the possibility of begetting contrition before the reception of grace. His own conflicts in the cloister therefore fall under the head of attrition. 23S HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. which measures its own conduct by the good, and not by the pre- sentation of duties and penalties. But it is important to scruti- nize the theological connection of this thought. It was clearly expressed by Luther at the Leipzig disputation (15 19): All the Scholastics, he maintains, agree with him, *' since they all agree that contrition ought to be produced {fieri) in love, . . . that contrition is produced, love impelling and enjoining" (W. 2. 263, 364, 371, 422).^ This is, in fact, correct, for contrition is an act *' formed " by love (p. 135).^ But it must be said at the same time : ( 1 ) That this love presupposes faith — for such is the traditional relation — and (2) That Luther is not here thinking primarily of the empirical beginning of conversion. It is not to be denied, however, that Luther, during the years of the indulgence controversy, not infrequently made even the initial penitence of the Christian life dependent upon faith and love : ''The great thing is a heart contrite from nothing else than faith ardently re- garding the divine promise and threatening, which, beholding the immutable truth of God, alarms, terrifies, and thus makes contrite the conscience — again exalts and consoles and keeps it contrite, so that the truth of the threatening is the cause of the contrition, and the truth of the promise the cause of the conso- lation if it is believed, and by this faith man merits the forgive- ness of sins" (W. 6. 545 ; i, 542, 364). Thus faith produces contrition and maintains it. Not fear, but the gentle goodness of God allures the sinner to repentance (W. 2. 362, t^^'^^ 37o)- In the moment when we hear that Christ suffered for us, faith and love arise (W. i. 399). Contemplation of the sufferings of Christ transforms man, and in them we recognize the magnitude of our sin (W. i. 137): ''This contemplating essentially trans- forms man and, very nearly like baptism, regenerates him " (ib. 139). " This faith justifies thee, will make Christ to dwell, live, and reign in thee" (ib. 458). Thus as we contemplate the goodness of God in Christ, true contrition appears, while at the same time man is preserved from despair." "When true con- trition is about to arise from the goodness and benefits of God, especially from the wounds of Christ, so that man first comes to (a sense of) his ingratitude from the contemplation of the divine goodness, and from that to hatred of himself and love of the ^ Eck acknowledged that this is the higher position, but that it is one which, on account of frailty, cannot be attained (W. 2. 361). Luther was brought to his view through Staupitz, De W. i. 116. 2 If, then, grace produces this condition, Luther has a right to say ': " It is, therefore, expressly Pelagian heresy to say that repentance beg^ins before love of righteousness ; but love of righteousness is from God, and not from nature " (W. 2. 421, 362). REPENTANCE, FAITH, SIN, GRACE, ATONEMENT. 239 goodness of God, then tears flow, and he will heartily hate him- self, but without despair, since he will hate his sin, not on ac- count of its penalty, but on account of his view of the goodness of God which, being beheld, preserves him that he may not de- spair, and may hate himself ardently, even with delight" (i. 576).^ Thus God crushes the sinner's heart by showing him favor. ^ But in that perturbation {conturbatione) begins salva- tion (540). But ''the grace of contrition is given to no one, but at the same time the merits of Christ are given to him " (612). This great unrest is the beginning of grace (595)- Contrition lasts — as habitualis poenitentia — through the whole life (322, 652), being experienced daily (W. 2. 160, 408, 409 f. E. 29. 357). Repentance in this sense can certainly not be identified with the temporal acts of the sacrament of repentance (W. I. 531 ; 8. 109). ''Because this is at length to exercise living and true repentance, to separate the heart from vices for God's sake, and to keep it separated and to separate it the more. But thou who dost practice only that sacramental repentance and initial repentance before theeyesof men, whose fervor and tumult cannot last without a miracle, thou hast devised an impossibility ' ' ( 1 . 649 f. ) . The meaning is here, that love of the good springs up simultaneously with faith in the heart. The divine benefits, together with the good now ardently desired, beget in us shame and grief on account of the sins yet clinging to us. To this is now added the law, which, as the standard of the good, " co- operates in giving a knowledge of sin, but in no way effects pen- itence." " I concede that the law, the recounting of sins, the contemplation of penalties, can terrify the sinner ; but they never make him penitent " (W. 2. 362). The Commentary on Gala- tians already lays very great stress upon this influence of the law. It is said to teach man to know his weakness and his wrong, to show us the good. It can, indeed, never awaken in us a desire for the good, but only increase the desire for evil (2. 526 f.); but it even in this way drives us to Christ (528).^ This is the 1 The endurance of the pains of hell (W. i. 557. Cf. E. 12. 387 ; De W. 2. 125) is thus excluded as an abnormal experience; cf. Gottschick, Ztschr. f. Theol. u. K., 1891, 255 ff. 2 lb. "But then (at the infusion of grace) the man is so ignorant of his justification that he thinks himself to be very near to damnation, and does not think this to be an infusion of grace, but an infusion of wrath. ' ' ^ Hence the law makes no one pious, but teaches only the outward piety of hypocrisy, W. 6. 353 f. W. 2. 720 suggests a further use of the law : ** Bufr the hard-hearted, who do not yet desire comfort of the conscience, and who have not experienced the same torture, to them the sacrament (of repentance) is of no benefit. They must first be made tender and timid, that they may also long for and seek this comfort of the sacrament." The method of threatening must thus, after all, be employed in dealing with such as are still impenitent. 240 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. true childlike fear of God, even though something of servile fear {timor servilis') may yet ever cleave to it throughout life on earth (\V. i. 321 f. ). ** Love being possessed, man is at the same time moved to the fear of God, and thus repentance begins from fear in love'* (W. 2. 364, 369, 396). There thus arises an ex- ultant hatred of sin (i. 543), faith meanwhile restraining from despair (632). Thus repentance, both as a state of life and as the beginning of life, is a fruit of faith and love, however much the law may contribute to its production. This repentance now begets in the heart a positive desire to perform good works. The man is willing to bear the penalties (W. I. 597); impelled by the Spirit and the Christ dwelling within, he brings forth fruits of repentance (i. 532, 649, 364; 2. 424).* (^) Luther at an early period recognized the im- possibility of confessing all mortal sins (W. i. 322 ; 2. 60; 6. 162, 545). The thought then soon occurred to him, that we are really under obligation to confess our sins only to God (W. 6. 158 f. ), and that the confession required by the church is only a human ordinance (8. 152 f.). Hence we can confess to whom- soever we will \ we are even free to omit confession to man al- together, if we but confess to God (8. 161, 182, 175, 181. E, 28. 248, 308; 29. 353; 10. 401 ; 23. %(> f.). From this posi- tion Luther never wavered, although he always warmly com- mended voluntary private confession (8. 168, 173, 176, 178; 6. 546. E. 23. 26 f.; 28. 249, 250, 308)/ Absolution is to be received in faith. In so far as we, in receiving it, believe the divine promise, it is effectual (W. i. 595). **Thy sins are forgiven, if thou believest them forgiven '* (ib. 631, 542). It IS faith in the institution of absolution by Christ which is here meant (W. 2. 14, 59). Everything depends upon this faith : *' It depends not upon the priest, not on thy doing, but entirely upon thy faith ; as much as thou believesL, so much thou hast " (2. 719, 715). Luther still, indeed, at first understands this in the Catholic way: Grace and faith are infused (i. 364), and forgiveness results from the infusion : *' Remission of guilt occurs through the infusion of grace before the remission of the priest" (i. 541)/ But the essential thing is, after all, only that ^ In view of this connection, Luther laments that works no longer, as of old, precede absolution, since the sincerity of the contrition would thus be tested, W. I. 551, 66r. ■^ 'In A. D. 1519 be demands that, together with the ^'testing" of the penitence, faith be also tested (W. 2. 720 ; cf. the severe arraignment of the confessional manuals, 6. 163, and E. 15. 469 f. ; 22. 3), and similarly in 1526 (E. 29. 358 ; cf II. 185. Conf. Aug. 24. 6: " But none are admitted unless they have previously been examined "). ^ Cf. W. I. 542 : Remission effects [operatur) the grace of God ; 543 : REPENTANCE, FAITH, SIN, GRACE, ATONEMENT. 24 1 the word be believed ; and to this end there is no need of the ecclesiastical machinery. (c) Satisfaction cannot be shown to be commanded by God (W. I. 324, 383 ; 6. 610), The same is to be said of Indul- gences (i. 384 ff.).^ The thesaurus indulge ntiarum is rejected (2. 161). Luther for a time adheres to the idea of Purgatory, despite some suspicions (i. 555, 563 \ 2. 161, 423, 323 f., 332, 324 f.; 2. 70 ; 6. 17, 370), but at a later period recognizes it as an invention (^. g., 11, 362). Of the penalties of '* satis- faction * ' there yet remain only moral works and readiness to bear the cross. *'God changes eternal into temporal penalty, viz., that of cross-bearing " (W. 2. 161). Luther appears to have preserved almost the entire structure of the sacrament of repentance. But this is only in appearance. Every separate part of it is recast and the structure as a whole demolished. Into the place of attrition, or contrition, has come that repentance which has not to do '* piece-meal" with some particular works, but extends '* over the whole person with all its life and conduct" (E. 11. 282), and which springs, not from slavish fear, but from love. Instead of the sacramental con- fession, it is required : *^ This confession is now so highly neces- sary, that it should not be omitted for a moment, but should be precisely the whole life of a Christian " (E. 11. 154). Accord- ingly, every sermon becomes an absolution (11, 267). But by the side of repentance stands Faith. This element is now woven into the penitential process by Luther.^ Satisfaction was replaced by the good works which spring from faith. The sacrament of repentance as a whole is therefore disintegrated. It is only ''invented folly" (E. 9. 299; 279 f.; smalc. art. iii., 3. 313 ff. ). Into its place comes the moral and religious state of evangelical repentance, consisting of penitence, faith, and good works (E. 10. 401),^ and embracing justification and the forgiveness of sins. Luther began with criticism of the sacra- ** Remission of sin and donation of grace, to justify and to heal;" 428 : '*God showing mercy and infusing." ^ Luther often ( W. 1 . 587 f. ) declared, according to the popular understanding of the matter, "that they sold indulgences for the divine grace which forgives sin" (K. 24. 337; 26. 18). Theologically, he thus expresses himself : "In all indulgence bulls he (the pope) promises forgiveness of the sins of all who have mourned [bereuet^ and confessed i^gebeichtety (E. 28. 175; 31. 141), who have " mourned and confessed and give money " (25. 132). Eck well expresses the doctrine as understood by the masses (W. 2. 352 f., 359). ^ A partial anticipation of this is seen in the testing of faith at the confes- sional toward the close of the Middle Ages. Supra, p. 174. ^ Only penitence and faith are commonly spoken of as elements of repent- ance (d-. ^.,E. 6. 340; 3. 76 f.; II. 293, 296; 17. 125 ; 19.64; 23. 39), but it is clear that works fall under the same heading. 16 24^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. ment of repentance, and he substituted for it evangelical repent- ance. Of a change in his views concerning the initial penitence, we shall speak in another connection. We have thus outlined the views of Luther at this period upon the topics of repentance, faith, works, and the pardon of sin. We have yet to trace his teachings concerning sin, the relation of law and gospel, and the work of Christ. 3. In regard to Sin and the moral Bondage of the Will, he main- tained the same positions which he had taken in the earliest period (supra, p. 229). (a) Before the fall, Adam was inclined only to good (E. 15. 46). Since the fall, he and all his descendants are subject to sin. The human race is a massa perditionis (W. I. 427; 2. 526. E. 28. 206). Every individual of the race is full of sins (W. I. 427), his nature full of lust (W. 2. 412 f.). Human works may appear outwardly beautiful, and yet be mortal sins (W. I. 353). Every sin is a mortal sin (W. 2. 416, 419). ''And there is therefore included briefly and barely in this word, Sin, what one lives and does without and outside of faith in Christ" (E. 12. in). Sin constitutes a kingdom of the devil (W. 2. 96). Especial emphasis is laid by Luther upon original sin.^ He proposes to defend Augustine's conception of it against the Pelagianism of Rome (W, i. 272, 649. E. 11. 281). The Scholastics of all schools, with the single exception of Gregory of Rimini (supra, p. 188), were Pelagians (W. 2. 295 f., 303, 394 f., 308).^ The danger of that tendency lies in the fact that it leads to work righteousness (E. 14. 245 ; 30. 365). This opposition forms the central nerve in Luther's presentation of the subject. Through the act of generation, which is performed in evil lust, sin passes from parents to their children. It is inherited sin, ornature-sin (E. 19. 15), as being the real chief sin (10. 305; 15. 49). As the formative material in father and mother is corrupt, it remains so in the children (E. 11. 246; 19. 15. W. 2. 167). From Adam down, the nature and essence of man is corrupt (E. 10. 304 ; 46. 67). Human nature is "an evilly disposed nature" (E. 7. 289), a "corrupted nature " (E. 9. 234; 15. 187; 20. 155), a flesh poisoned by sin (15. 47 ; 20. 157, 297), in which evil lust reigns (15. 48; 18. 73). In his doctrine of the "old man," Luther however strongly emphasizes the spiritual, moral 1 The Scotist definition : Want of original righteousness ( E. 15. 46) does not influence his conception. The contrast to original sin is the wirkliche S'linde (E. 10. 306), which is simply a translation ^{ peccatum actuate. Vid. also W. 9. 73, 74 f., 78. 2 But Pelagianism is the '* chief heresy," E. 19, 184. Upon Gregory, see Stange, NeuekirchlicheZtschr., 1900, 574 ff.; 1902, 721 ff. REPENTANCE, FAITH, SIN, GRACE, ATONEMENT. 243 side of sin. Its essence consists in ' * blindness and ^vickedness (9. 2 88 J, *^ the despising of God, inborn inward impurity of heart, the disobeying of God's will" (12. iii), '^ unbelief, the despising of God, disobedience" (9. 15), but, above all, in imbeliefi as the '*real chief sin" (12. no; 50. 57; ^2>' ^^) and *^ cause of all sin and crime " (13. 158; 47. 54). ''The chief righteousness is faith ; again, the chief wickedness is unbelief" (12. 178).^ It is just the distinguishing feature of the ''natural man," that he has not the Spirit. Strongly as Luther emphasizes the natural depravity of man, he just as positively recognizes also the ability of the natural man. '^ The natural light" sustains the striving after good, without indeed knowing the good (10. 182; 35. dZ^. It may protect against the lusts, but not against lust (14. 151). In secular affairs, in law and order, reason judges very correctly (12. 90 f., 109)/ although in spiritual matters it appears as the *' devil's strumpet" (29. 241). {b) The consequence of natural depravity is the Bondage of the Will. Free-will is for the non-Christian only a word (W. i. 354. E. 29. 353).^ His will is free only to do evil, but not to repent (W. I. 359 ; 2. 362, 702. E. 7. 239, 302). But it is main- tained, on the other hand, that no compulsion to either good or evil is exerted upon the will (W. i. 365 ; 2. 370). The sig- nificance which the absolute bondage of the sinner holds in Luther's circle of thought from the beginning explains his bitter assault upon the De libera arbitrio of Erasmus. Luther's work, De servo arbitrio (1525, opp. var. arg. 7), reveals a fundamen- tal difference from the Semipelagianism of the cultured circles of his day.* This is not saying, however, that his theoretical sys- tem was an expression of his fundamental religious position. To * E. 9. 313 gives a classification of sins: If we gather all sins upon one heap, they fall into two classes, which are the devil's own work, namely, lies and murder. ^ The term Conscience [Gewissen) is very often used by Luther in the general sense of the moral consciousness. As to its nature, see W. 8. 606 : *' For conscience is not a power (virtus) of working, but a power of judging, which judges concerning works. Its proper work is to accuse or excuse, to make either guilty or acquitted, fearful or secure. Wherefore its office is not to do, but to dictate concerning things done and to be done, which make either guilty or saved, in the sight of God." Similarly in E. 47. 23, 59 ; 18. 58, 22 : *' If we sin greatly, our conscience gnaws us, leaves us no rest; my heart passes the judgment : I shall be punished for this." The medieval conception is reproduced in E. 29. 156: "The natural law, written upon every man's heart." Cf. supra, p. 171. ^ But see W. 6. 27 : " wounded in (his) free will." * But Erasmus' statement of the question: "Either freewill or physical unfreedom " had an undue influence upon Luther. 244 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. the theory of man as free and determining his own destiny he opposes the ahiiighty, all-working will of God. He, not man himself, effects salvation. But this thought is enlarged to a met- aphysical determinism: ** That God works all things in all things."* Hence everything that happens, happens by absolute necessity. This thought is, however, combined with the Scotist idea of the absolute independence of God's will and appoint- ments : *' Because he wills, therefore what happens must be right *' (p. 260). God is also working in the wicked, but it is their fault that they do evil. It is as when a carpenter cuts badly with a sharp hatchet (p. 255f. ). Everything is the work of God, evera the fall of Cain, although Luther does not enter upon the question of the genesis of evil in the world. From this follows, as a logical consequence, the absolute double Jfredestmafwn and the subjugation of the free will : ** With this thunderbolt he hurls down and crushes the free will to its foundations * ' {penitus, p. 132). What we so name is in reality only the particular form of man's activity, which requires a peculiar divine energy operating upon him. The will is not coerced, but acts accord- ing to its own inclination and desire \ but it attains to the doing of good only through the divine action upon it. Man is passive in his relation to God; God alone has a free will (p. 158). Man is, as Luther, adopting an old metaphor, says, like a sleed. He wills what God or the devil wills, just in so far as he is guided by God or the devil (157). But why God converts some and leaves others to destruction we do not know. That is a matter of his secret will, in regard to which we dare ask no questions. It is for us to be guided by his revealed will. In this way Luther attained the end which he had in view, /. ^., he proved that free will was inconceivable, and that grace was the sole agency in conversion. This was the essential thing for Luther. The Scotist and Deterministic^ ideas were only means for reaching this end. We can understand, therefore, why he did not employ them more frequently, but, on the contrary, with all his emphasizing of the moral bondage of the natural man, appealed constantly to God's earnest will, revealed in the word, to save all men (E. 54. 22 ; 55. 162 ; opp. lat. 2. 170). Christ ^ Cf.,c.,^.,E. II. no: '* All created things are masks and disguises of God, which he chooses to permit to work with him and help him do all manner of things;" or 35. 252, according to which praying and working "are merely a pure sham-battle." But, on the other hand, we find the queries: ** Who can coerce the will of a man ? " (E. 24. 310). " Who can control his heart ? " (ib. 311). ^ This is the conception of predestination found in Bradwardina and Wick- lifife. Luther appears to derive it directly from Augustine. See also LooFS, DG. 376 n. REPENTANCE, FAITH, SIN, GRACE, ATONEMENT. 245 bore the sins of a// men ; if all believed, all — and not alone the predestinated — would be saved (46. loyf. ). The method of the De servo arbitrio presents therefore nothing more than theoreti- cal lines of thought employed as auxiliary to the main purpose. But, as is well known, Luther always maintained the correctness of the conclusions here drawn; vid. Comm. in Gen. Cf. LuTHARDT, Lehrev. freien Willen, p. 91 ff. Lutkens, L. Prae- dest.-lehre, Dorpat, 1858. Kattenbusch, L.'s Lehre v. unfr. Willen, Gott., 1875. (i:) Luther's views concerning the Wrath of God must be con- sidered in this connection. Upon the sinner is visited the wrath of God, which ** condemns (him) in advance to death, that we must be eternally separated from God " (14. 117). '' God can- not deny his nature, /. Luther has fallen back upon the Augustinian conception. The sacrament is a symbolic transaction, which brings to the believer that which it outwardly signifies. This idea meets us also later, but with the modifications, that the sacrament gives something also to the unbeliever, and that great stress is laid upon the fact that there is a real influence exerted. But, in and of itself, it is, even at later periods, spoken of as an *' outward sign," as a "seal or signet ring" (E. 12. 178 f. ; 16. 48, 50, 52). In the tract, De captivitate Babylonica (A. D. 1520), Luther sharply criticises the Romish doctrine of the sacraments. Of four of the seven sacraments, he asserts that the Scriptures know nothing at all. There remain only three (baptism, the Lord's Supper, and repentance), although, strictly speaking, even repentance dare not be described as a sacrament (W. 6. 549, 572).^ It therefore gradually became customary — repentance having now entirely lost its sacramental ^ The " Word of God " is for Luther primarily the oral proclamation, since through this God operates upon the heart. But this operation occurs only when such proclamation is in content a presentation of the biblical revelation ; ^. ,-, W. I. 391. E. 9. 230; 36. 197; 46. 240; 65. 170; 3. 347. 2 Due attention should be given at this point to the ideas formulated at about this time ; that the reformation is to be effected not by violent means, but through the proclamation of the word (E. 28. 217 f., 219, 221, 227 f., 308, 310); that outward customs may be retained {28. 237); and that in such matters the rabble (Pofel) is not to have the deciding voice (29. 160, 162 f., 166 f., 206, 226). ^ In A. D. 15 19, he already calls them the two chief {^ furiiei7iliche) sacra- ments, W. 2. 754. WORD AND SACRAMENT. 283 character — to count only two sacraments (E. 28. 418; 29. 20S ; 12. 179). But the general definition is here of little importance. As, from the time of Duns, the theory of the Lord's Supper did not fit into the general definition of a sacrament, but was carried along independently (supra, p. 131 n.), so was it likewise with Luther, particularly in the case of the Lord's Supper, but also noticeably in the case of baptism. We must therefore treat directly of the two sacraments in turn. 4. Luther presents a connected view of his theory of baptism in the Sennon von dem heiligen, hochwiirdigen Sakrament dei' Taufe (A. D. 15 19). The sign is to be distinguished from the signifi- cation {Bedeutung) of baptism. The latter consists in ( i ) The duty of dying to sin ; for by baptism a sentence of death is pro- nounced upon the natural man : '* Therefore drown thyself in the name of God." Thus a blessed dying begins wdth baptism (W. 2. 728). (2) The ^* spiritual birth." This, like the ** increase of grace and righteousness," "begins in baptism, but continues also until death ' ' (ib. ) — on the ground that God through baptism contracts a covenant with man, from which result both regeneration and the forgiveness of sins, so that both are contin- uous : ' ^ and begins from that hour to renew thee, pours into thee his grace and Holy Spirit, who begins to crucify the nature and sin" (730).. Sin yet remains in man (728) ; but, since God considers it as in principle shattered, he does not thereafter im- pute it to the sinner : ** will not look upon it nor condemn thee for it, is satisfied in regard to it, and is pleased that thou art thy- self continually desiring and attempting to slay it " (731). In this fact, that God has '* bound" himself no longer to impute sin to the baptized, lies the peculiar consolation of baptism (732, 733). It is here evident that the theory of baptism harmon- izes precisely with the original view of justification through the word : regeneration and, in connection with it, the forgiveness of sins (cf. p. 26of. ). This remained essentially the view of Luther, except that, at a later period, just as in the case of justification, forgiveness is no longer so closely associated with the — divinely wrought — re- newal. In baptism, the triune God is present ; the Holy Spirit being particularly operative (E. 19. 76). The word and will of God make it what it is, so that it is not merely a **sign" (Large Catechism, Miiller, Symb. Bb. 495, 487 f. , 489. " Bap- tism is united with and confirmed by the divine word and ap- pointment)." ^ It thus secures an '* admission to all divine blessings" (E. 22. 165. W. 2. 746). ^ But, on the other hand, baptism, is still '* nothing more than an outward 284 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. This involves two things. (y him in his own way. 2 In the sense of Occam or Biel, Luther's position is simply he7-etical, since the Christian is under obligation to accept all the books of the Bible and believe everything found in them (supra, p. 192). It is very remarkable that the op- ponents'of Luther did not make more capital out of his bold utterances in this direction. It is true, indeed, that similar views were held by such men as Erasmus and Cajetan (of. KuNZE, Glaubensregel, heil. Schrift u. Taufbe- kenntniss, 1899, p. 516 ff. ). ^ D'Ailli still taught differently, supra, p. 191, n. I. 30 2 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Testaments, is Christ, with his office and kingdom. It is this con- tent in which faith is interested, and which faith verifies by inner experience. This is therefore the important thing in the Scrip- tures. It must accordingly be the impelling motive in the special divine agency which gave the Scriptures their peculiar character. In other words, the testimony of the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures is thetestimony tothe great facts of salvation andredemption. This is the purpose of their inspiration, and in proportion as they ful- fill it do they substantiate their claim to be regarded as an au- thority in matters of religion.^ This makes them the criterion and touch-stone, by which all the teaching of the church must be attested as evangelical truth (e. ^i,--. , E. 9. 207, 372 ; 12. 289 ; 13. 208; 15. 144; 18. 23; 48. 69, 92 ; 46. 231, 240). This places the above-cited passages touching the authority of the Scriptures in a new light. The Scriptures were for Luther an absolute authority. But although he could in controversy em- ploy them as "divine law" in contrast with '* ecclesiastical law," yet they were an actual authority for him only as the primitive and original testimony to Christ and his salvation. This determines their nature and their form." But, when thus regarded, the Scriptures dare not be co-ordi- nated with justifying faith as the second principle of Protestant- ism. The controlling principle is faith ; and, since only the be- liever can understand the Scriptures, and they exist only to min- ister to faith, they are subordinate to it. This view produced a new and profoander conception of the authority of the Scriptures. The ancient problems : wherein the authority of the Scrip- tures really consists, how is it to be proved, and what its relation to that of other writings — were fundamentally solved by Luther, since he recognized this authority as based upon religious grounds — a statement which is not invalidated by the fact that Luther did not always in praxis adhere strictly to his own principle. 3. We are now in position to understand Luther's attitude toward the Dogmas of the Ancient Church. We have seen that ^ Cf. the remarkably characteristic declaration, E. Ii. 248: **Tl-ius I would take Moses, the Psalter, Isaiah, and also the same Spirit, and make just as good a New Testament as the apostles wrote ; but since we do not have the Spirit so fully and powerfully, we must learn from them and drink out of their well." ^ The doctrine of the Scriptures in the dogmatic system of the present day must be framed with due regard to the principles of Luther as above deduced, although the latter were not reduced by the Reformer himself to a complete doctrinal form. How, for instance, could a verbal inspiration be sustained in view. of Luther's derogatory remarks upon particular passages in the canon- ical books, his recognition of redactors, who have collected the materials of many of the books, and his acknowledgment of errors? LUTHER AND TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE. 303 he rejected as unbiblical the medieval doctrine of the sacraments, and denied the infallibility of the pope and the councils. But what was his attitude toward the ancient dogmas? (cf. esp. his tract, Von den Conciliis und Kirchen^ i539> ^^^ three Symbols of 1538, andtheother symbolical writings). It is very clear, in the first place, that Luther acknowledged and frequently reproduced the Nicene doctrine of the Trinity and the Chalcedonian Christol- ogy . Also, that he treated the symbols of the ancient church with great respect, especially the Apostles' Creed, which, he declared, contains all the principal articles of faith (28. 413 f., 346 f.; 9. 29 ff.; 13. 221 f.; 20. 297 f.).^ But this is not to be under- stood as implying that he believes these symbols or councils as such, and thus subjects himself to an earthly authority. His liberty in this respect is manifest from his criticism of the ancient terminology. ** That if my soul loathes the word, homousio^i, and I am unwilling to use it, I am not a heretic ; for who will com- pel me to use it, provided I hold the thing which is defined from the Scriptures by the council " (W. 8. iiyf. )." He objected to the word ' ' 7>'//;//y " (E. 6. 230), declaring that it ''sounds cold," and was * 'discovered and invented " by men (E. 12. 378); although neafterward admitted that the form of expression is not important, as "original sin," for example, is not found in the Scriptures (E. 25. 291 f.; 28. 382 ; 29. 183 f.). And in his tract. Von den Conciliis^ etc., he " with masterly historical crit- cism " ^ denies all binding authority to the ancient councils. The highest council was that of the apostles, and it enjoined re- fraining from blood, an injunction which no one now observes. " If we want to be guided by councils, we must recognize this one above all others ; if we do not, then we need not recognize any of the other councils, and are therefore free fro?n all councils ' ' (25. 240). Just as little are all the decrees of Nice observed ('244, 251 f.). And no council has set forth " the whole Chris- tian doctrine" (261). The decrees of councils are not on their own account true, but because they repeat the old truth, as given to the apostles by the Holy Spirit (266 f., 295, 328, 331). Councils likewise have " no power to form new articles of faith, but should indeed smother and condemn new articles, in accord- ^ E. 20. 155: *' I have a little book which is called the Credo. . . This is my Bible, which has stood so long and still stands unshaken, to this I hold fast, to this I was baptized, upon this I live and die." E. 9. 29 : "Thus this Symbol has been excellently and briefly composed out of the books of the holy prophets and apostles for children and plain Christians, so that it is fitly called the Apostles' creed, or faith." 2 Eck, on the other hand, at Leipzig highly lauded the ecclesiastical defini- tion of the homousia. W. 2.335. Erasmus already criticises it. Opp. \. 1090. ^ K. g.j his investigations concerning Nestorius, 25. 304 ff. 304 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. ance with the Holy Scripture and the ancient faith. ' ' Thus, at Nice, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon, the '* new arti- cles " of Arius, Macedonius, Nestorius, and'Eutyches were re- jected (333, 345)- Luther's idea is, that thedogmasare true only in so far as they agree with the Scriptures ; they have no au- thority in themselves. But the truth of the Scriptures is inwardly attested. Hence it may be said, in harmony with Luther's idea, that the Holy Spirit begets in us an experience of the truth of the doctrine (of the Creed) (E. 23, 249, 267 ; 20. 148); for in no other way can we be led to faith than by being practically and inwardly convinced of that which has been taught (20. 141, 136, 144 f; 22. 15 f).^ The doctrine of the two natures in Christ is in itself of no interest to the Christian ; it is only from the work of Christ that he learns to understand it (35. 208). We have thus before us the criteria and rules which Luther applied in the criticism of religious utterances of all kinds."^ A thing is true, if it is attested by faith, by his own experience, and by the Scriptures] The outward and legalistic testing of religious views by the Aandard of the ancient dogmas has been abolished ; the ancient canon of Vincent of Lerius shattered. But, beyond this, the legalistic use of the Scriptures is itself upon principle abandoned. Luther's attitude toward the Bible was thus very different from that of Occam. The problems which in every age arise in this field of study, in consequence of advanc- ing historical knowledge, may all be adjusted to the principles of Luther and thus find their solution. That his praxis was not always consistent or worthy of imitation can be here merely suggested. 4. In conclusion, we may at least touch upon a further ques- tion : Was not Luther's peculiar apprehension of religious truth limited or restrained by the recognition and acceptance of the Trinitarian and Christological dogmas ? The reader of his dis- cussions of the knowledge of God in Christ (supra, p. 252 f ) re- ceives at first the impression that the Father was revealed in the words and works of Jesus, and that a separate divinity of the Son is therefore not in the author's mind. But, on the other hand, Luther emphasizes most vigorously the idea that the divinity of the Son is revealed in his own life. He is true God and true 1 Hence the papists have, in Luther's opinion, the whole second article of the Creed only "with the mouth" — "in the heart they deny it," since they hold that "man is not so utterly lost," and credit him with "free will " (E. 20. 142 ; 46. 87 ; 6;^. 154). It is evident that everything is made todepend, not upon the acceptance of the traditional formula, but upon a practical ex- perience, upon the basis of which alone can the formula be really comprehended. Critical objections to any one of the facts asserted in the Creed had never fallen under Luther's observation. LUTHER AND TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE. 305 man, two natures and one person (E. 7. 185 f., 196). His human life, with its deprivations, sufferings, and temptations, is depicted in the most animated and vivid way (E. 13. 307 ; 10. 131 f., 299 ff. ) This man was entirely under the guidance of the divine nature. It was ''personally present" in him (7. 185). His human nature does not see and feel everything, but what the divine nature permits it to feel and know — hence Jesus does not know when the day of judgment shall be (ib. ). Thus it becomes, since the Spirit more and more profoundly and con- stantly controls it, the *^ instrument and dwelling place of the divine nature " (10. 300). Yet, in his passion and death, the divine nature *' lay entirely hidden and quiet within him, and did not assert itself nor shine forth" (3. 302; 39. 47 f., supra, § 66, 3), as, upon the other hand, Jesus restrained his omnipotence and, as it were, concealed it (37, ;^^ ; 39. 55; 40. 49). The intimate conjoining of the divine and human natures, as the emphasis laid upon the reality and genuineness of the human life of Jesus, is by no means a product of the sacra- mental controversy, but is closely connected with the most pro- found tendencies of Luther's thought : in the words and works of Jesus, God is revealed. But, in the first line of thought, it seemed necessary to think of the Father ; in the latter, only directly of the Son (cf. 8. 156 ff.; 40. io9j.^ The difficulty cannot be overcome by assuming a Modalistic conception of the Trinity,^ for Luther reproduces the orthodox doctrine in its regular form (/. g.y Smalc. Art., Miiller, 299; 9. 2 ff. 22, 32, 116, 231; 10. 166, 171 f,; 12. 378 ff.; 16. 79, 108 f.; 18. 23 ; 30. 363 f. ; 45. 294 f. ; 308 f. ).^ It is true, that even in so doing he manifested a Western feeling. The term ' ' Trinity ' ' (^Dreifaltigkeit, three-foldness) does not please him, because ^ Upon the Christology of Luther, cf. Th. Harnack, L.'s Theol. ii. 126 ff. ThOiMASIUS, DG. ii., ed. 2, 573 ff. H. Schultz, Gotth. Christi, 182 ff. Lezius, Die Anbetung Jesu'neben d. Vater, Dorpat, 1892. ^ Cf. Loops, DG. 358. A. Harnack, DG. iii., ed. 3, 752 f. This position is not justified, but it is true that Luther had a strong consciousness of the one personal God. ^ Cf. 28. 136 : God is " not only one person ; " but, on the other hand, see 30. 227, 217. Christ is "one undivided person with God ; " cf. also the re- mark, 7. 189 : *' The Holy Spirit is easily believed," " if a man is brought so far as to regard two persons as One God." The Holy Spirit is a separate person (49. 149); his divine nature is recognized in his working (49. 391); in vi^ordand sacrament he works (49. 220 ; 50. 75, etc.) faith and everything good in man. He is a comfort against the Evil Spirit in the world (49. 382 ). The place in which he is revealed is the church : "Learn . . how and where thou shouldst seek the Spirit : not up above the clouds . . . but here on earth below is he, just as the church is on earth ... so that we may draw him into the ofifice and government of the church, the word and sacrament" (49. 223 f.). 20 306 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. God is ''the supreme Unity." Simply Dreiheit (threeness) "sounds entirely too ironical." The comparison with three angels or men will not do, for there are not " three Gods." ''There is indeed in the Godhead ein Gedrittes (a tripartate reality) but this same Gedrittes consists of persons of the One only Godhead (6. 230).^ Luther was therefore not a Monarch- ian. But he had a vigorous consciousness of the absolute unity of God, and this enabled him to see in each trinitarian person the entire Godhead. God is therefore fully revealed through Christ (30. 62 ; 45.295; 47.180; 49. 93), just as through the Holy Spirit, with his sway in the hearts of men (16. 214J. Father and Son are "one nature, one will," "one heart and will" (47. 305 f.; 49. 144). Where one part is, "there is certainly the entire Godhead " (50. 94). There is therefore no contradiction between the expressions referred to and Luther's consciousness of the Trinity — all the less since Luther did not con- ceive the nature of the Godhead as " Subsistence," but as om- nipotent Loving-will. He was able to combine this idea in his own mind with the traditional content of the doctrine concern- ing God. The theoretical problems w^hich arise in this connec- tion never presented themselves to his mind.^ CHAPTER n. DOCTRINE OF ZWINGLI. OPPOSITION OF LUTHER AND ZWINGLI UPON THE DOCTRINE OF THE LORD's SUPPER. j5 72. The Refo7'matory Principles of Zwingli. Sources. Zwingli's Works, edited by Schuler and Schulthess, 8 vols., 1828 ff. Among the writings of Z., the following are the most important for our purpose : Von klarheit und gewiisse des worts gottes, 1522 ; Uslegen und ^ Cf. Augustine: dens ter^ not dii tres. Vol. I., p. 240. " If the divine nature is to be conceived as Loving-will, how must we then represent to our thought the trinitarian life of the Godhead, particularly the divinity of Christ? The divinity of Christ consists chiefly in this, '* that the Father has just the will which I have" (47. 306, 308, ^iS)- "This will of the Father thou canst not miss, if thou keepest thyself to the man Christ, but meetest him in this man " (ib. 318 ; 48. 142). Luther represents to himself the trinitarian life as a conversation in God (45. 300 ff. ; 50. 82). These are problems which Luther has left to Protestant dogmatic theology. DiLTHEY also recognizes that Luther's faith does not touch " the material of the ancient Christian dogma"— Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos. v. 358 ff. REFORMATORY PRINCIPLES OF ZWINGLI. 307 grund der schlussreden, 1523; Vnleitung, 1525 ; Von gottl. und menschl. gerechtigkeit, 1523 (vol. i.). Archeteles, 1522; De vera et falsa relig., 1525 (vol. iii.). De provident., 1530; fidei ratio, 1530; fid. exposit., 1531 (vol. iv.). Cf. MoRlKOFER, Huldr. Zw., 2 vols., 1S67-9. R. Stahelin, Huldr. Zw., 2 vols., 1895-7, cf. PRE. xvii. 5S4 ft'. Hundeshagen, Beitrage zur Kirchenverfassungsgesch., etc., i. 1864, 136 ff. Moller-Kawerau, KG. iii. 44 AT. Zeller, Dastheol. Syst. Zw., 1853. Sigwart, U. Zw., 1855. Sporri, Zwinglistudien, 1866. A. Baur, Zw. Theol., 2 vols., 1885-9. USTERI, InitiaZwinglii, Stud. u. Krit., 1885, 607 ff., 1886, 95 ff. Ritschl, Rechtf. u. Vers. i. 165 ff. Seeeerg, Zur Charakteristik der ref. Grundge- danken Zw. in Mitteilgn. u. Nachr., etc., 1889, I ft'., and Thomasius, DG. ii., ed. 2, 395 ff. LOOFS, DG., ed. 3, 381 ff. Nagel, Zw. Stellung z. Schrift, 1896. I. At the close of A. D. 1506, while lAither was seeking *'a gracious God" in the cloister, Ulrich Zwingli (b. A. D. 1484), became pastor at Glarus. His pastorate was a stormy and eventful one. When Luther in 1517 began the great con- flict, Zwingli was at *' Einsiedeln in the Dark Forest/' searching in the Scriptures for the true ''philosophy of Christ." The former stepped forth from the lonehness of inner struggles into the great conflict of the church ; the latter had learned to know men and human life before devoting himself in solitude to his studies. Luther was impelled by the religious needs of his own heart, the personal experience of faith making him a reformer. Zwingli followed the counsel of Erasmus and the humanistic ten- dency of the age, in turning to the '* very purest sources." His point of departure was different from that of Luther, z. e.^ the humanistic, critical temper of the age, as differentiated from the church and its teachings — a return to the sources, or the con- viction that only the doctrine of the Bible is the truth. These were ideas which Erasmus advocated, and which the majority of the cultured classes applauded. It was under these circumstances that Zwingli began his study of the Scriptures. The scope of his reformatory activity was in consequence, from the first, wider than that of Luther, and he was more conscious of a definite pur- pose. The idea of a reformation, which only gradually dawned upon Luther, was the controlling motive with Zwingli from the beginning. From A. D. 1 519 he labored in Zurich, preaching the Scriptures, taking up one book after another. Reformatory ideas, in the proper sense of the term, were at first foreign to him (UsTERi, Stud. u. Krit., 1886, 122 ff".). As the religious lever of his work as a reformer was undoubtedly found in the idea of justification through Christ and by faith, it is natural to inquire from what source he derived this idea; and there can be no doubt that he derived it, as well as his fundamental reformatory views, from Luther. This is manifest, not only in view of his known acquaintance with the Avritings of Luther (UsTERi, 1. c, 141 ff.), but as well from the form of his doctrinal 3o8 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. writings, as they are found in his '* Schlussreden " and '' Usle- gung. " ^ Zwingli started with the Erasmian ideas of a reforma- tion. This led him to the Scriptures ; but it was Luther's range of ideas that continually guided him in their interpretation. At the central point of his apprehension of religious truth, Zwingli is dependent upon Luther. But, as the more comprehensive aims of the school from which he sprung fitted him, on the one hand, for more varied application and a more speedy realization of the reformatory ideas ; so, on the other hand, he retained some ele- ments which were not up to the evangelical standard, and which betray their origin from the medieval conceptions of the humanistic party. ^ This explains his agreement with Luther in the central doctrines, as well as the divergence of their theological and ecclesiastical views. 2- In endeavoring to depict the reformatory ideas of Zwingli, we must begin with the emphasis laid by him upon the Authority of the Holy Scriptures. Here the will of God is revealed to us (i. 54. 207), and here the Holy Spirit teaches us *^all that we should know of God " C^y^)- All doctrine is to be based upon the inspired word (i. 81. 177; iii. 51. 359). The proclama- tion of the latter and obedience to it are the essential tasks of the Reformation (i. 36. 38; iii. 70), This was the point of departure which regulated all his thinking : *' Is it proper to conform to (yobtempe^'are) divine things or human?" (iii. 67). This went, indeed, beyond the attitude of the medieval reformers toward the Scriptures ; for with Zwingli they were more than a book of external laws. His obedience to them was a result of inner religious experience (i. 79). But he never attained in ' Zwingli' s dependence upon Luther may without hesitation be asserted as a settled historical fact. UsTERi, 1. c, and Stahelin, Zw. i. 164 ff., 175 f., furnish the material to substantiate this, although their own judgment upon it is hmited to a "perhaps." We can understand their hesitancy from the fact that Zwingli himself denies all such dependence (i. 253 ff". ; iii. 489, 543 ; vii. 144; ii. 2. 20 ff.). But we can understand also the sad self-deception to which he has here fallen a victim. The study of the Scriptures was and remained for him the source of his doctrinal views; and he found Luther's ideas in the Scriptures — after he had learned them from Luther. It is some- what similar to this, when he disputes Luther's claim to having brought forth the Scriptures from their obscurity by pointing to Erasmus and Reuchlin (ii. 2. 21). Cf. also Kawerau (Moller, KG. iii. 46). ^ In Luther, the general demands for reformation, in so far as he joined in them, were thoroughly subordinated to the religious principle ; for it was not those demands which had awakened his energy and directed his course. With Zwingli, they occupied an independent position side by side with the religious principle ; or, rather, the latter stood related to them as means to an end. Those who embraced the Erasmian conception of reform, unless they gained also the religious experience of Luther, found what they sought in Zwingli rather than in Luther. Of this, history furnishes many illustrations. REFORMATORY PRINXIPLES OF ZWINGLI. 309 his relation to them the lofty religious freedom of Luther.^ Zwingli holds the humanistic view, that the Scriptures are the original source of primitive Christianity ; yet he also applies the medieval, juristic conception, that they constitute the divine law which is to regulate public life. 3. In order to understand Zwingli's conception of Justification, we must familiarize ourselves with his doctrine of Sin. Adam was created free, but died through his sin, and with him the whole human race. '* There he and all his race in him died as dead as stone" (i. 183, 196). Sin, as original sin, is '' the in- firmity and defect {Bresten und Mangel) of shattered nature." In this invalided nature, the flesh is more powerful than the spirit. From this disease of original sin grow individual sins like branches from a tree (i. 190, 264, 60; iii. 203). *'Sin, then, is when, the law of the Creator being neglected, man prefers to follow himself rather than the banners of his leader and Lord ' ' (iii. 169). Sin is disobedience toward God. The sinner cannot obey the law of God (i. 184 f.), because his nature has been ** shattered" {zerbrochen). But original sin in itself is only * ' a defect which one derives from birth without his own fault" (ii. I. 287; i. 309; iii. 203f. ). The longing for eternal life is likewise innate (i. 59, 58), since the *' natural law," or an internal illuminating and drawing agency of the Spirit of God, still remains to all men, even the heathen : *' although I think that few of them have understood it " (i. 326, 360 f. ). Accordingly, all truth in the natural man is inspired by God (iv. 2,6, 93, 95 ; iii. 156). But, however this may be, for practical purposes we must regard sin as a shattering force which excludes all possibility of self-deliverance. 4. Christ is the Deliverer. In the work of deliverance (sal- vation), the divine Mercy finds exercise, and at the same time satisfaction is rendered to the divine Justice (i. 186; iii. 180; iv. 475). (^) Christ has by his innocent sufferings made pay- ment to the divine justice (i. 186, 387 ; ii. 2. 7 ; iii. 194, 187, 198, 498). He suffered for us, bought us, reconciled us with God {ut i7'atus placetur, iii. 181), became a sacrifice for us, and delivered us (i. 76, 179, 233 f., 236 ; iii. 189, 197, 209, 194). There is therefore no need of the sacrifice of the mass (i. 237), nor of other mediators, such as the saints (i. 268 ff.). His payment of the debt covers not only original sin, but all sins (i. 264; ii. 198; supra, p. 203, n. i). He, the Innocent and Just, fulfilled the law for us (i. 213, 263, 309). The latter he ^ Zwingli holds the Humanistic view, that the Scriptures are the original source of primitive Christianity ; yet he also applies the medieval, juristic con- ception, that they constitute the divine law which is to regulate public life. 3IO HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. did as God, since his will was the divine will ; the former, as a pure man, w^ho could render a spotless sacrifice (i. 264). By thus effecting our deliverance, God ** by this example of justice removed from us our languor and torpor and displayed himself to us as he was — just, good, and merciful " (iii. 180).^ (l?) This last idea leads further. Christ is also by his works the Revealer of God. He has made known to us the will of God (i. 179). This, strictly speaking, carries beyond the mere fact of deliverance: "is come not alone to deliver us, but also to teach true love of God and works which God requires of us" (180). He thus becomes our leader (195) and pattern {"313), whom we should follow (iii, 194, 211). Thus the agency of Christ is two-fold: "For Christ everywhere in- culcates these two things, viz. : redemption through him, and that those who have been redeemed by him ought now to live according to his example " (iii. 324). (r) Christ's redemptive act now becomes ours through his relation to us as our Head, and in the way appointed, z. e., through our believing in him. "But Christ is righteous and our Head, and we are his mem- bers ; therefore we the members come to God through the righteousness of the Head " (i. 310), and : " If we believe upon the Lord Christ Jesus, that he is our propitiation, etc., then is he our entire perfection before God, our salvation, our payment and atonement " (i. 186). He who believes on Christ is counted by God as righteous (iii. 164J and has the forgiveness of sins (i. 296, 393; iii. 230); so far, that is, as he follows Christ. " Whence also his righteousness is our righteousness, if only we walk, not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit" (iii. 209 f. ). These are clear and thoroughly evangelical ideas. Christ has endured for us the penalty of unrighteousness and per- formed the works of righteousness. Because we believe on him and hold to him, God for his sake regards us as righteous. 5. Here arises the further question : How about Faith and its origin? The revelation of the love of God in Christ overcomes us: "So that ... at length the great humility of his mind and his deeds of mercy . compel us to hold him in love and to anticipate all good things from him " (i, 186, 311 ; iii. 205). Faith is thus confidence in the grace of God. " For faith is that by which we rest immovably, firmly, and undistractedly upon the mercy of God " (iii. 231 J. But it is not to be under- stood in the sense of the^V^j- acquisita{\\\. 174. Cf. Luther, supra, p. 254, n. i), but it is wrought by the Spirit of God (iii. 223"). 1 But Zwingli adds: '* or, that we may not presume to say too little about his counsels, because it thus pleased him." Cf. Luther, supra, p. 271. REFORMATORY PRINCIPLES OF ZWINGLI. 3II The Spirit makes man's spirit {GemNt/i) ''to understand his word " (i. 389) and gives man's spirit to understand that the word ''comes from God" (i. 8i). As one reads the Scrip- tures, comes the consciousness: "I have experienced that" (79). Hence, because the Spirit of God incites, we under- stand and comprehend the teachings of the Scriptures as the word of God. Thereby we are overpowered with a sense of satisfaction and inward health: "For Christian faith is some- thing which is felt in the soul of believers, as health in the body " (iii. 198). To state the matter briefly in the sense of Zwingli, we may say : The Holy Spirit so moves man, that he feels the Scriptures to be the truth, and thereby attains confidence in the grace of God. This is faith. The Scriptures, as doctrine, have thus for him a significance different from that which they have for Luther, whose faith arose directly from the experience of the efficacious working of Christ (supra, p. 252 f.). 6. The movement begun in us by the Holy Spirit continues in such a way that good works follow faith (i. 278, 311). Since God thus works in us, we are his " fellow- workmen," /. e., "tools in his hand" (406). Although the "infirmity" (^Bresten) still clings to us and we sin in many ways, yet God continually " moves" us again, so that we return to him. And thusour very sin compels us to take refuge anewin God (i. 191 f. ). Since now the Spirit of God works in believers that which is good, they no longer really need the law, " for the Spirit is above the law ; and where it is, there one no longer needs the law" (i. 212, 214).^ The example of Christ takes the place of the law. "Therefore there is need of no law, for Christ is his law ; upon him alone he looks, yea, Christ guides and leads him alone, so that he needs no other leader, for Christ is the end of the law " (i. 213). As the example of Christ here replaces the old law as an outward rule of conduct, it may also be said that all who are born of God obey his word (11 1. 178). In this sense, the law remains, and is even a part of the gospel. "The gospel thus understood, namely as the will of God revealed to men and required of them, contains in itself . commandment, prohibition, precept, and obedience ; so that all commandment and prohibition of God must remain in force forever" (i. 209 ff., 308)/ The believer is to fulfill his com- mandments, except the tinsel-work of the ceremonial law Ti. ^ Cf. also the freedom from the law of Sabbath-observance, which recalls Luther's position, i. 317. ^ Cf. also in i. 308, 554* the complaint concerning those who speak insolently i^unbescheidenlich) of the law, representing that it makes us despair and hate God (referring to Luther). 312 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. 311, 586), i. e., the commandments, in so far as they coincide with the '' law of nature " (i. 359, 361). The law is therefore the permanent moral rule of conduct (i. 359, 325 ; iv. 102). But it can be fulfilled only as God works in us the necessary power. " The believer does it not of his own power, but God works in him the love, the counsel, and the work, as much as he does" (i. 311). But when we, warmed by the fire of love within us, fulfill the law, we do it freely, not under compulsion (in. 205). Herein is a further modification as compared with Luther — Zwingli does not realize that ''the law" is the expression of an entirely different conception of life, and he uncon- sciously makes the gospel a '* new law" (i. 311J. God impels us, but he impels us to the fulfilling of his command- ments. Luther laid more stress upon the negative than upon the positive character of the law ; Zwingli, on the contrary, put the chief emphasis upon the latter. 7. In seeking to discover Zwingli's Ideal of the Christian Life, we shall find especially instructive his tract entitled : Quo pacta ingenui ddolescentes formandi sint (iv. 149 ff. ) . Faith here stands first. Christ is our attorney, surety, and advocate ; he has opened for us the way to the Father. He who believes on him, to him are his sins forgiven. But faith is also the principle of a life of ceaseless striving after the good: ** Only believers experience how Christ gives them no ease and how cheerfully and joyfully they address themselves to his business " (p. 152). Among the means of preserving the spirit in this exalted state, the study of the word stands first, but the example of Christ is also particularly mentioned. As Christ gave himself for us, so should we also not live unto ourselves, but seek to become all things to all (155 f.). At the same time, we should be always humble as was Christ. '' He will therefore be perfect {adsoIutNs) who resolves to emulate Christ alone" (157). A life in the assurance of faith and in the steadfastness of love in the imitation of Christ — this is the ideal. The Christianity of Zwingli is thoroughly practical. '' It is the duty of a Christian man, not to talk magnificently about doctrines, but to be always doing great and difficult things with God " (158). Only when life is conducted in obedience to God and his word, in true doctrine and right living, is justice done to the glory of God {e. g., i. 237, 322, 392, 39^- Cf iii. 165, 132, 48 f.).^ 8. These are the fundamental reformatory principles of Zwingli. Their essential agreement with Luther's ideas must be evident to all. With these fundamental ideas were, however, combined a 1 C(. also the discourse of Schmidt of Kiissnacht, i. 536 f. REFORMATORY PRINCIPLES OF ZWINGLI. 313 number of subordinate convictions which help to explain the new form assumed by his teaching in opposition to the medieval views. In opposition to the Romish doctrine of ?;^m/ and works, he developed his theory of predestination. God is * * an eternally existent AVorking and Knowing" (i. 276); *' the eternal Power of all good, and an unchangeable Working" (277) ; and ''the first moving Cause " (278J. Yea, he is, properly speak- ing, Causality itself, since all second causes are only figuratively speaking causes (iv. 96). God rules in the world, as the soul in the body. Nothing can transpire which is contrary to his will (iii. 283). Everything which occurs maybe traced back to his power. The believer recognizes that his works are really works of God, and that he *' is only an instrument and tool by which God works" (i. 276). This is divine providence. '' Providence is the perpetual and immutable government and administration of the affairs of the universe" (iv. 84). This leads to the denial of all accidental occurrences as well as of all free actions (iv. 93). Everything, even evil, is based upon the will of God (iv. 112 ff. ). This determinism involves the doc- trine of Predestination (iii. 283) : '* He elects one, to be fitted for his work and use ; another, he doesnot desire" (i. 276). *'So that thus election is attributed only to those who are to be saved ; but those who are to be lost are not said to be elected, although the divine will has determined also concerning them, but for the repelling, rejecting, and repudiating of them, by which they may become examples of justice " (iv. 115). It is in accord- ance with the sole agency of God, that when some are saved and others lost, the fate of both is ascribed to the divine will. Every- thing depends upon the eternal election of God. Only in the elect is faith wrought ; it follows election, and is a sign of its presence (iv. 121 ; vi. i. 215, 340 ; vi. 2. 106, 105, 155). He who believes is elect. But even the elect who die before attain- ing faith will be saved. '' For it is election which saves {beatos facity (iv. 122, 123). Only in a figurative sense can faith be traced to the preaching of the word. God uses the latter only as an instrument: ** He implants faith, as with an instrument, but his own hand being also very near. This inward dra\Ying is (the work) of the Spirit directly operating" (iv, 125). Election alone saves ; it works everything .good in man. Only upon the ground of fixed election can man be sure of salvation (iv. 140). One thing is clear — and this was what concerned Zwingli — that this doctrine excludes all insistence upon works and merits. '* By the providence of God therefore are abolished at once both free will and merit, for since it deter- mines all these things, what are our parts, that we should be able 314 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. to think anything done by ourselves ? But since all works are from him, how shall we merit anything? " (iii. 283 ; iv. 116; i. 375f., 27S). The Synergism of the Middle Ages is thus shat- tered by the doctrine of the sole agency of grace. Zwingli in this entered upon the path pursued by Luther in his De servo arbitrio. But there is still an essential difference between the two. While Luther never allowed his speculative determinism to effect his Soteriology, it assumed great importance in Zwingli's religious thought. He constantly recurs to it. While Luther once broaches the idea, Zwingli lays a constantly-increasing stress upon it, particularly in the controversy with Anabaptism. His ideas were doubtless moulded by Thomas of Aquino and the Stoic conception of God. ^ In fact, the parallel to Thomas' doc- trine of grace is very striking. As the latter, for example, re- duces grace finally to the idea of the Prime Mover (p. 118), so also does Zwingli (vid. supra). Whereas lAither conceived of God as Almighty Love revealed in Christ, Zwingli did not make this positive limitation of the earlier conception. God is to be known before Christ : *' The knowledge of God by its very nature precedes the knowledge of Christ " (iii. 180).' It is certainly a perversion to describe the determinism of Zwingli as the ** funda- mental principle " of his theology, since his doctrine of justifica- tion had other sources and motives. But neither is it correct to regard it as a passing episode. It is a foreign, but permanent, intrusion — otherwise than in the case of Luther — into the warp and woof of his religious thought.^ This foreign element robs ^ IV. 139 : " To be of the universe is therefore to be of God ; " cf. 90 : " What he (Pliny) calls nature, we call God." Seneca, p. 95, 93, the doc- trine of ideas : *' These patterns of all things God has within himself." He studied Thomas, iv. 113, And shall we see no connection between the divis- ion of his material in the Comni. de ver. et fals. religione (God, to whom re- ligion tends, and man, who by religion tends to God) and the arrangement in the SiDinna of Thomas? (cf. supra, p. 98). ^ The whole passage — which cora;bats a fundamental thought of Luther's — reads: " That therefore our rivals shall here say, that we have hitherto dis- coursed of piety in such a way as to have made no mention of salvation through Christ and of grace, they caw in vain : first, because whatever we have said concerning the fellowship of the soul and God has been thus said also of Christ just as of God fforChristis Godandman) ; second, because the knowl- edge of God by its very nature precedes the knowledge of Christ." ■* I cannot therefore agree with K. MOller (Symbolik, 450), when he pro- nounces it just as improper to bring the charge of a metaphysical determinism against Zwingli as against Luther. He has failed to take account of the increas- ing^ significance of the theory for Zwingli. Cf. also Dilthey's opinion as to the *' pantheism" of Zwingli (Archiv. f. Gesch. d. Philos. v. 370). The close- drawn lines of the whole document, De providentiadei^ attest both the human- istic and philosophical trend of Zwingli and the lingering influence of Thoinistic metaphysics upon him. REFORMATORY PRINCIPLES OF ZWINGLI. 315 man indeed of the freedom of the will, but it also inspires his will — as an instrument of the almighty divine agency — to the most strenuous activity. ^^A long list of stern, heroic spirits down to Cromwell stands beneath the influence of this attitude of will (DiLTHEV, Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos. v. 369). 9. Another consequent of Zwingli's reformatory views is seen in his conception of the Church. The hierarchical view disap- pears entirely. Christ alone is the foundation of the church. All disciples, '* all believers and teachers," receive the keys, /. e., the authority to preach the gospel (i. 386, 3S7 f., iii. 215, 221). The prelates are not the church, but it is ''the entire congregation of all those who are founded and built up in one faith upon the Lord Jesus Christ." \Mth this congregation at large is contrasted the individual congregation, or kilchhore (i. 197 ff., 656; iii. 125 ff.). The church, as the communion of saints, that is, of all believers (iii. 131 ), is not visible, since its members are scattered throughout the whole world (i. 201 ). It is composed of believers, who place their confidence in Christ alone, and obey, not human ordinances, but the authority of the divine word (i. 201 f. ). That is the true church, which never errs, which clings to the word of God, and follows only the shepherds who bring that word (iii. 129). These simple conceptions were afterward modified by the introduction of the idea of predestina- tion. The invisible church now becomes the totality of the elect and believing of all ages (vi. i. 337, 447J). Whereas, in the earlier writings of Zwingli, the conceptions of the true church universal and the comniunio sanctorum are not kept distinctly sep- arate, this is now done. The separate congregations, or Kilch- horen, form in combination the universal ecclesia senszdiiis, or visibilis (iii. 574, 576 ff., 580, 586; vi. 432; viii. 380), in which the ecclesia spiritualis invisibiliSy or electa is contained (iv. 8 f., 58). The source of the latter' s existence is to be found solely in predestination. Therefore may children, even though baptism effects no real change in them, be fully qualified mem- bers of the church. It was, in part, the effort to maintain his theory of baptism against the Anabaptists and yet preserve the membership of children in the church, which led to this applica- tion of predestination to the conception of the church (cf. Gott- SCHICK, Ztschr. f. KG. viii. 604 ff.). But the church thus falls asunder into two unconnected parts : the elect of all ages and places, including noble heathen whom we shall meet in heaven — ^ in short, all whom the Spirit shall have transformed by the exer- ^ E. ,f., Hercules, Theseus, Socrates, Aristides, Antigonus, Numa, Camil- lus, the Catos and Scipios, iv. 65 ; vi. I. 242 ; ^. 69 ; viii. 179 ; vii. 550. 3l6 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. tion of his omnipotence — -and the historical fellowship of believers in Christ. There exists no necessary connection between the two, for ''a. conductor {liux) or vehicle of the Spirit is not necessary" (iv. lo). See Seeberg, Begr. d. Kirche, i. 78 ii. 10. This brings us to the conception of the Sacraments. Zwingli here adopts the Augustinian, purely symbolical view, which was also advocated by Erasmus. The sacraments are nothing more than ** a sure sign, or seal " (i. 239). They, on the one hand, remind the believer in a symbolic form of salva- tion and its blessings, and are, on the other hand, a means by which he testifies his membership in the church of Christ. There resides in them no kind of purifying or sanctifying power ; they are simply signs in the sense indicated (iii. 229, 231 ; iv. 117). We dare not attribute to the symbols the ** things which belong to the divine power alone " (iv. 119). Only two signs of this kind were instituted by Christ ; the other five sacraments are to be abolished as not being commanded by him. ^ Baptism also falls under this symbolical point of view. Through it we engage ourselves to Christ (is ''either a candidate or a soldier of Christ " ), and we receive a symbol, " that we are to conform our life to the rule of Christ " (iii. 231, 643). It is an ** initiative sign, ' ' an engagement, as when a member of a confederacy wears a white cross as a badge of his membership (ii. i. 242, 249). If Zwingli himself at first entertained doubts as to the propriety of infant baptism (ii. i. 245 ; vii. 365), he distinctly advocated it after the Anabaptists began to make it a prominent object of their assaults (A. D. 1525. See esp. Von Tauf, Von Wieder- tauf, and Von Kindertauf). But while Luther in these conflicts was led to value more highly the historical and positive ordinances, Zwingli thought that he could best sweep away the foundations of the Anabaptist party by making baptism a bare symbol, and, particularly, by insisting upon it as an obligatory symbol. By the greater stress laid upon predestination and the purely ex- ternal character of baptism, it appeared that the great importance attached to baptism by the opposing party might be best shown to be unjustifiable ; while by insisting upon the obligatory char- acter of the ordinance its administration to children was made to appear necessary. It was in combating the Anabaptists that the speculative and philosophical element became more promi- ^ See criticisms in the ^^Wslegm,^^ etc.: confirmation, i. 240 f . ; unction, 241 ; against confession to men [lyselbic/it), with slight criticisms of Luther, 393 f-» 40O) cf. iii. 543, 562 ; ii. 2. 22 ; confession to be made only to Christ, 396 f. ; the priest is only to be asked for advice, 394 ; works of penance, 397 ; indulgences, 398 ff, ; purgatory, 402 ff. Against the priestly character of the clergy — the priesthood an *' office," not a rank, 414 f. REFORMATORY PRINCIPLES OF ZWINGLI. 317 nent in Zwingli's teaching. His determinism, having served him as a weapon against the Romish work-righteousness, was turned also against the mystical dreams of a visible congregation of saints. Upon Zwingli's doctrine of the Lord's Supper, see § 73. Cf. Stahelin, i. 484 ff. UsTERi, Darstellung d. Tauf- lehre Zw., in Stud. u. Krit., 1882, 205 ff. 1 1 . Zwingli proclaimed the truth of the gospel, and drew the doctrinal inferences which seemed involved in it. The source upon which he depended was primarily the Holy Scriptures. But he felt himself also in full accord with the doctrine of God and the Christology found in the ancient symbols (i. 57 ; iv. 3 ff. ). He presented no original ideas in these connections. He conceived of God as the all-working Power, and at the same time accepted the orthodox formulas, without attempting to har- monize the two conceptions. His Christology has the Nestorian tendency of the Scholastics (see below). His interpretation of original sin harmonizes with that of the later Middle Ages. His theory of the sacraments follows the symbolic view not infre- quently held in the Middle Ages. He mingles philosophical theories with his presentations of the gospel, lacking Luther's sense of the positive character of revelation — Duns and the Nomi- nalists having here prepared the way. Thus Christianity became a kind of philosophy deduced from the Bible. In view of these characteristics of his teaching, it may be said that the undeniable difference between Zwingli and Luther — despite their common understanding of the gospel — is to be explained by the fact, that Zwingli received his impulse originally from the Erasmian illu- ministic tendency, and that, in consequence, the medieval ideas continued to exert a greater influence upon him than upon Luther. As in the particulars already noted, so also in his practical operations in the church, Zwingli betrays his dependence upon the medieval ideals. But the theocratic ideal which he pursued allows to neither church nor state its proper position. On the one hand, the secular governinent conducts the discipline of the church in such a way that the doctrine of the latter becomes di- rectly the law of the state ; while, on the other hand, the secular government is absolutely subject to the authority of the Scriptures, its laws and ordinances being valid only in so far as they are scrip- tural. If the government acts in a way contrary to the Scriptures, it is to be abrogated. The subjection of the church to the state is only apparent, for the laws of the state are, after all, valid only in so far as they conform to the law of the church, or the Bible. This is a genuinely medieval idea.^ The carrying out of his re- ^ Supra (p. 172, 183 f. ). Cf. Zw. i. 524 : ** My lords should also prescribe no law otherwise than out of the holy undeceptive Scripture of God. If they 31 S HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. formatory work embraced both a new system of doctrine and a new order of social and practical life, which must be enforced by the agency of the state. Christianity is an affair of the state, but the state is the organ of the church. Like Savona- rola, Zwingli sought to reform his city according to the divine law of the Bible, with the help of the secular power. It was also in accord with the example of Savonarola, that Zwingh's political ambition was not satisfied with the direction of his native city, but associated his direct reformatory labors with political combinations of the widest and most daring character (cf Lenz, Zw. u. Landgraf Philipp, in Ztschr. f. KG. iii, 28 ff., 220 ff., 429 ff.). Thus, in every sphere of his doctrinal and practical activity, we are impressed with the medieval and humanistic limitations of Zwingli, and that, too, in such forms as to emphasize the contrast between his ideas and those of Luther.^ § 73. The Controller sy Upon the Lord's Supper. Literature. Dieckhoff, Die ev. Abendmalsl. im Ref.-ztalter, i. 1S54. Thomasius-Seeeerg, DG., ii. 522 ff., 571 ff. Baur, Zw'sTheol. ii. 292 ff. Stahelin, Zwingli, ii. 213 ff. Kr)STLiN, Luther, ii., ed. 4, 66 ff. W. AValther, Reformirte Taktik ira Sakr.-streit der Ref., in Neue kirchl. Ztschr., 1896,794 ff., 917 ff. Kawerau (Moller, KG. iii.), 74 ff. KCbel, PRE. xvi., ed. 2, 121 ff. Jager, Luthers relig. Interesse an der Lehre von der Realprasenz, 1900. I. The difference in the views of Zwingli and Luther found expression in the controversy upon the Lord's Supper. But Zwingli had already, before the outbreak of the controversy, developed his view of the Lord's Supper to a certain degree of maturity. The theory of transubstantiation he had from the beginning regarded with suspicion (WW. vii. 391). He received the impulse to the construction of a positive theory, as he reported to Melanchthon, from Erasmus (C. R. iv. 970). The purely symbolical view was in harmony, as well with the critical humanistic school of thought, to which he originally belonged, as with his general conception of the sacraments and the sepa- ration of the immediate divine operations from all earthly media, should become negligent at this point and recognize anything else, as I hope (they may) not, I would none the less stiffly preach against them with the word of God." See also " Schlussreden," 42 : " But should they (the gov- ernment) become untrustworthy and act beyond the rule of Christ, may they be deposed by God." Zwingli here has in mind by no means simply the form of the republican constitution. On the basis of his conception of popular sov- ereignty, it is his view that '* the mass of the people," or the ** greater part," are authorized to "cast out" ungodly kings (see Vol. I., p. 31S). ^ I do not, of course, forget that I.uther aho had medieval limitations. CONTROVERSY UPON THE LORD S SUPPER. 3I9 to which he advanced. It therefore fits logically into the frame- work of his theological ideas, although it cannot be regarded as a criterion of his fundamental reformatory principles. For as, one the one hand, he derived his ideas upon the subject from a foreign source, so also in the illuminated circles of the day the symbolical theory was in the very air. His ideas were brought to a definite conclusion only in consequence of the correspondence of Honius with Luther (p. 288), in which the former interpreted the es^ SiS equivalent to significat} The publication of Zwingli upon the subject seems not to have become known until the latter part of A. D. 1523 (Loops, DG. 387 n.). Thenceforth he is clear in his mind. Basing his argument upon Jn. 6 (" the flesh profiteth nothing"), he, in harmony with Augustine and the older Scholastics (Vol. L, p. 323 ; supra, p. 133 f.), con- ceives of the existence of the body of Christ in heaven as local, and accordingly rejects the presence of the body in the Lord's Supper, being thus, of course, compelled to interpret the words of institution in a purely symbolical way. He was from the first conscious of the deviation of his ideas from those of Luther, which explains in part the zealous assertions of his (supposed) independence of the Saxon reformer (supra, p. 308). If he at first, indeed, represented this difference as a merely formal one, though emphasizing the idea of a repeated memorial (Wieder- gedachtniss, i. 257), yet he very soon resolved to assail the theory of Luther, and from the year 1525 built up a carefully planned and vigorous propaganda for the purpose of winning the Southern Germans to his view, at first through the fictitious letter to Alberus (iii. 591 ff. J.^ Like-minded friends rallied around him with advice and aid (Oecolampadius,^ Bucer, Capito), and means of doubtful character were employed (the corruptions in Bugenhagen's commentary upon the Psahiis, and the notes in the translation of Luther's Church Postils). There was a feel- ing of strong confidence that Luther's view could be explained ^ The formula, significat^ has a point of attachment in the general sacra- mental theory of the later Middle Ages (supra, p. 127). What was relatively new was really only the application of the formula to the Lord's Supper, which held an exceptional position in relation to the medieval sacramentaj theory. But see already Wickliffe, supra, p. 206. 2 The following among Zwingli's writings have a bearing at this point : the Comm. de ver et fals. relig., 1525 (iii. 239 ff.); Subsidium sive coronis de eucharist, 1525 (iii. 326 ff. ) ; Ad lo. Bugenhagen, 1525 (iii. 604 fF.); Un- derrichtung vom Nachtmal, 1526 (ii. I, 426 ff. ) ; Amica exegesis, 1527 (iii. 459 *^-l; friindlich verglimpfung, 1527 (ii. 2. iff.); Dass dise worte Christi . . . ewiglich den alten einigen sinn haben werdend, 1527 (ii. 2. 16 ff. ); Uiber Luther's buch bekenntniss genannt, 1527 (ii. 2. 94 ff.). ^ Oecolampadius entered the controversy with his tract, De genuina ver- borum Christi . . expositione liber, 1525. 320 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. away as simply the product of hypocrisy and timidity (^. g., vii. 390 f. ). Zwingli and his friends were impatient in their desire to measure swords with Luther and undermine his authority, and counseled against the use of prudent or pious tactics in deal- ing with him. (See proofs adduced in Walther, 1. c. , p. 815 ff. , 916 ff. )^ And they actually succeeded in stirring up a serious agitation against Luther's doctrine in Southern Germany, although their efforts met with some determined opposition upon that territory (Osiander, Brenz, the Syngramma, Pirckheimer).^ These facts must be kept in view if we would understand the severity of Luther when he finally broke his silence and entered the fray.^ 2. Zwingli's theory is a simple one. Bread and wine are signs of the body and blood offered up in sacrifice for us. These signs signify the body and blood thus offered, and thus remind us of the redemptive act (e. g., iii. 599). The est of the words of institution is therefore equivalent to significat (ii. 2. 41 ff., 61 ; ii^- 257, 336, 553, 606). Only faith can apprehend and appro- priate salvation ; but faith has to do only with spiritual entities. Hence the eating of the body of Christ can signify only the be- lieving appropriation of the salvation secured for us by the sacrifice of that body. Christ is present in the Supper only '^ by the contemplation of faith'* {contemplatiojie fidei), but not '^in essence and really " {^pcr essentiani et realiter^. Faith in Christ ^ Bucer writes very characteristically to Zwingli: "O Flesh! O Satan! what work hast thou made for us ! It shall be destroyed by us for the pro- motion of the glory of God, and we shall see this arrogance vanish" (Zw. opp. vii. 521 ). Luther expresses his opinion of the conflict from the moral point of view with unsurpassable clearness (E. 30. 266): **My free, open, simple snapping at the devil is to my notion much better than their poisonous, plot- ting assassination, which they practice against the upright under the pretense of peace and love." As to the method of his opponents, see also 30, 24, 38, 61, 98, 139, 148 ff., 160, 205. It is more important to set forth clearly the spirit of these opponents and the historic basis of it, than to shudder at the thought of Luther's coarseness in dealing with them. ^ See Bilibaldi Pirckheimeri de vera Christi carne et vero ejus sanguine ad lo. Oecolarap. respons. Norimb. 1526, and B. Pirckh. de vera Chr., etc., respons. secunda, Norimb. 1527. The argumentation of these documents touches the positions of Luther at many points {c. g.^ the clearness of the words of institution — see the first response, form B, 7 r, E 4, and in the con- clusion, upon the definition of a tropus, E 5 v ; against the significat^ F. 2 r and the two resp. F. 8 r); even in the conception of the ubiquity: "And it would not indeed be impossible with God . . . that one body, most highly clarified, should be in many places" (istresp.F. 5 v). But Stahelin (Zw. ii. 269 f. ) is in error when he represents Pirckheimer as having " first " intro- duced the idea of the ubiquity into the controversy, as Luther had already done so in 1525 (E. 29. 288 f., 294). Pirckheimer had read Luther {^e. g.^ resp. i F. 3v, 6 v; H. I r, 2). " See Luther's writings during the controversy. Cf. supra, p. 227, n. 3. CONTROVERSY UPON THE LORD S SUPPER. 32 1 is really the eating of his body, *^ The body of Christ is then eaten, when his death {caesuin) for us is believed " (iii. 243 f., 595) Z'h^'^ iv* 53j 118). If we would take the eating of the body of Christ seriously, we would come into conflict, on the one hand, with the maxim, that the flesh profiteth nothing (Jn. 6. d^i f-J ii- 2. 85 ff., 184 ff.); and, on the other hand, collide with the limitation of Christ's body to locality (ii. 2. 81 ; iii. 332, 338, 512). Moreover, at the time of the institution of the Lord's Supper, the blood of Christ had not yet been shed (iii. The Christology of Zwingli is at this point called into service. While Luther interprets the traditional dogma from the view- point of personal unity, Zwingli always premises the abstract difference of the two natures. God ** assumed human nature " — the incarnation signifies nothing more than this (ii. 2. 69 f. ). As in the history of Christ's earthly life his two natures are to be carefully discriminated (so that, for example, he according to his human nature does not know the day of his second coming, yet according to his divine nature knows all things, iii. 537 i.\ ii. 2. 67), so also his divine nature fills heaven and earth, while at the same time his human nature is limited to a particular place in heaven (for, as created, it is " not infinite ") and is a type of our resurrection (ii. 2. 71, 72, 81 : *' willst also never be able to maintain that the human nature of Jesus Christ is in more than one place"). If now in the Scriptures that is ascribed to the one nature which belongs to the other, or attributes of the one nature are attributed to the entire person, this is to be ex- plained through the figure of speech known as Ailoeosis, or ' ' interchange, ' ' /. e. , it is a rhetorical ** exchange by which, when speaking of the one nature of Christ, we use the terms belonging to the other" (iii. 525; ii. 2. 68 f ). Thus, if it is said of Christ that he is at the right hand of God, this, strictly inter- preted, applies only to his divine nature (ii. 2. 71). Zwingli's ideas as to the divine and human natures of Christ and his per- sonal unity are here orthodox (^. g., ii. 2. 66 ff., 82 ; ii. i. 449). But for the great thought in Luther's theology — -that even the human words and works of Christ are a revelation of God — he has no comprehension. ^ His Christology remains absolutely upon the plane of the medieval conception. The divine and human natures are assigned to the opposite cate- gories of finite and infinite nature. The consequences of this * Stahelin is not entirely correct, when he (Zw. ii. 175) describes, as the reformatory factor, in Zwingli as in Luther, " the overwhelming impression of the vision of Christ upon the sensibilities of the soul burdened by sin." Cf. supra, p. 314, but also p. 310. 21 322 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. position came to light in the controversy upon the Lord's Supper. The Lord's Supper is thus, according to Zwingli, on the one hand, a memorial celebration designed to remind us of the re- demption wrought by the death of Christ ; and, on the other hand, a profession of adherence to Christ in the presence of the congregation, and thus the assuming of an obligation to lead a Christian life (iii. 60 1).^ 3. We found, as the result of our study of Luther's doctrine of the Lord's Supper (supra, p. 288), that he from the beginning taught the presence of the body of Christ in the Supper, and in such a way that the body, as a seal of the forgiveness of sins wrought by it and by the word appropriated by faith, strengthens and confirms the communicant in his faith. The theories of Carlstadt, who misinterpreted the rohro ; of Zwingli, who inter- preted the est as meaning significat ; of Oecolampadius, who ex- plained the aih^ia as a sign of the body, — all fell beyond the lines of his thought. It was just at this time, moreover, that Luther became thoroughly convinced of the indissoluble connection be- tween the empirical word and the exertion of the Spirit's agency. Here appeared to be another attempt, similar to that of the Anabaptists, to tear the two asunder (E. 30. 136, 353). Finally, he felt the new theory to be unspiritual and unchurchly, and he was convinced that it was unscriptural as well. The words of the institution appeared to him simple and plain. What need for interpretations of such plain terms as bread, wine, body, "blood, eat, drink, is (29. 329, 331; 30. 33 ff., 154, 293, 355)? And as the words point to reality, this is confirmed by the cir- cumstance that the traditional preservation of them is in all the sources in the same simple form (30. 311), and by the consider- ation that symbols are characteristic of the Old Testament, not of the New (ib. 338). Accordingly, he inferred that we truly eat the body of Christ in the Lord's Supper (29. 338; 30. 30, 103). '' But how this occurs, or how he is in the bread, we do not know, and are not to know. We should believe the word of God, and not dictate ways and means to him " (30. 30). The 1 Zwingli thus summarizes the errors of Luther: (l) That the body of Christ, naturally eaten in this sacrament, confirms faith. (2) That the body of Christ, naturally eaten, forgives sins. (3) Thatthebody of Christ is nat- urally brought in the vehicle of the words spoken. (4) "That when I offer the body of Christ to be naturally eaten, I bring the gospel very near to him to whom I offer this, and to whom I give the body and blood " (iii. 561). Also, ii. 2. 93 : " That the flesh of Christ is an entirely spiritual flesh ; that the body of Christ is, like the divine nature, omnipresent, . . that the body of Christ, bodily eaten, preserves our body for the resurrection, . . . gives and increases faith." CONTROVERSY UPON THE LORD S SUPPER. 323 exegetical difficulties of the words of institution never troubled Luther, and he denied the application of Jn. 6 to the Lord's Supper (30. 79 ff.). Nor did the manner of the union of the body and bread disturb him. There was another problem, however, which awakened his most profound concern. His op- ponents asserted the impossibility of the bodily presence at many places. If Luther meant to maintain his position, it was, there- fore, incumbent upon him to prove that the ubiquity of the body of Christ was conceivable (30. 49, 56, 58, 70, 201, 206, 282). 4. In order to follow the arguments employed by Luther in support of this position, we must bear two things constantly in mind. In the first place, for Luther, as a scholastically trained theologian, the problem was not an uncongenial one ;^ and, in the second place, his Christology furnished the materials to be used in its solution. He had from the beginning thought of the two natures of Christ as so united that the man Jesus was, in all his words and works, the expression and organ of his divine na- ture. He knew no God except the One revealed in the man Jesus. God '* is present and substantial ' ' (geo-enwdrtig und wes- enlicK) in all created things, but he ** dwells" in Christ bodily, so that one person is man and God (30. 63). When these ideas are considered in the light of the formula of the doctrine of the two natures, the inference is, that the two natures are ''one single person" (30. 63, 206 f., 211, 222), in abso- lutely inseparable union, so that where the one is the other must also be (2iif. ). There subsists between the two a re- lation like that between body and soul (204); and the flesh of Christ is, therefore, being permeated by God, ** nothing but spirit, nothing but holiness, nothing but purity " (231). It is '* a divine flesh, a spirit-flesh." *' It is in God and God in it " (30. 125; 48. 26, 58), God has become completely man, so that all human attributes, such as suffering and dying, have also become his (25. 310, 312, 314). '' Out of the infinite God has been made a finite and definable man " (47. 182). The commit- nicatio idiomaticm is thus taken in its full meaning (25. 309) . All the activity and suffering of the man is also the activity and suf- fering of God (30. 62, 67 ; 46. 332 f ). " Whatsoever I be- hold in Christ is at the sametimeboth human and divine" (47. 361 f. J. '* Wherever thou canst say, Here is God, there must thou also say, Therefore Christ the man is also here. And if thou shouldst point out a place where God was and not the man, ^ Supra, p. 133, 204. Luther had the feeling of superiority of a dogmati- cally (scholastically) trained theologian as compared with Zwingli. The latter was for him'* a self-grown doctor; they generally turn out so" (30. 267). 324 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. then would the person be already divided, since I might then say with truth, Here is God, who is not man, and never yet became man. But nothing of that God for me ! . . , Nay, friend, wherever thou placest God for me, there must thou also place for me the human nature. They cannot be separated and divided from each other. There has come to be One person" (30. 211).^ The divine nature gives its peculiarity (attributes) to the human nature, and the human nature also in return its pecu- liarity to the divine nature (30. 204 ;.47. 177). It is no more wonderful that God dies, than that he became man (25. 312). Hence Luther could see in the Alloeosis Qx\\y ** the devil's mask" (30. 203, 205, 225), for this separation of the works of the two natures no longer permits us to see in the human nature the full revelation of God. It misleads us, after the fashion of the Scholastics, to take refuge in the divine nature and cling to this, looking away from the man Jesus (47. 361 f.). It robs the atoning work of Christ of its specific divine value (25. 312 f.; 30. 203; 18. 225). It is, therefore, by no means a product of polemical necessity which we behold in Luther's Christology, as developed in the controversy with Zwingli. It is the same Christology which he had advocated from the beginning. And this doctrine marks an advance in the development of the traditional Christology — effected by evolution from within. The divine nature no longer swallows up the human nature, but the latter is the organ and bearer of the former. It is precisely the unqualified preser- vation of the human nature which makes Jesus capable of really becoming the God revealed among us. Luther's most profound ideas concerning the knowledge of God and faith may be under- stood in the light of these principles (supra, p. 252 f. ). But his- torical fidelity requires the recognition of the fact, that Luther in the controversy upon the Lord's Supper extended his Christology by including an inference not previously drawn. The practical identity of the divine and human natures in the earthly life of Jesus is deliberately transferred to the state of exaltation. If the words and deeds of Jesus on earth were the words and deeds of God, then are the works of the Lord in heaven also the works of the man Jesus. And this means that the man Jesus is at the same time the omnipotent and omnipresent Lord of the world. If he is present in the Lord's Supper, he is there also the man Jesus ; and since he arose from the dead bodily, his body is also present in the sacrament. Thus the theory of the Ubiquity is, ' Luther does not yet employ the term, Person, in the modern sense. It corresponds precisely with the ancient "Hypostasis," e.g., 30. 204: "Be- cause body and soul is one person." Luther elsewhere speaks of Christ as "one person" with God (30. 216, 227). CONTROVERSY UPON THE LORD S SUPPER. 325 in Luther's understanding of it, only a logical inference from his Christology.^ 5. Luther opens the discussion with a definition of the term : the Right Hand . of God. This cannot be conceived of as a *' golden chair" beside the Father (30. 56f. ). We must here recall Luther's conception of God as the ** omnipotent Power." If now God is the all -permeating and all-moving Will, then his Right Hand is simply everywhere. If God is "substantial and present at all places," in *' the smallest leaf upon the trees," in ' ' the most inward ' ' and ' * most outward ' ' things (58),^ then his Right Hand is also " everywhere in all things " (64). Accord- ingly, Christ is also omnipresent, and that, too, in his body, /. e., he reigns and has power over all things. "If he is to have power and reign, he must certainly also be there present and substantial" (65). This must, of course, be applicable in a general sense, even apart from all thought of the Lord's Supper.^ The body of Christ is in every stone, in fire and water. But we can really find and apprehend him only where he has in his word directed us to seek him (29. 338). " But he is then present for thee when he adds his word, and thereby binds himself, and says : Here shalt thou find me." He is omnipresent, but in his divine mode of presence incomprehensible : " He has now also become incomprehensible, and thou wilt not seize upon him, although he is in thy bread, unless it be that he may bind him- self to thee and assign thee to a particular table by a word, and point out to thee the very bread by his word " (30. 69 f. ). As the divine nature, so also is Christ in his body near to all, " and it is only a question of his revealing himself " (30. 67); butthis takes place in the words of institution, which instruct us to seek and find in a particular loaf him who is essentially present in ^ A peculiarity of Luther's Christology is the lack of a sharp discrimination between the states of humiliation and exaltation. This may be understood, when we remember that his practical religious mode of apprehension saw in the man Jesus the full and real revelation of God. If we recall his definition of the divinity of Christas the omnipotent Loving-will (p. 253), the question arises : How, in the light of this, shall the Ubiquity be conceived in harmony with Luther? We might, perhaps, reply : The omnipotent Redeeming-will, which became one with the man Jesus, is present with the man Jesus in the Lord's Supper, in order by this presence to assure us of the reality of redemp- tion. But Luther did not draw these inferences. ^ ' ' Therefore must he be himself present in every creature in its most inward and most outward (parts), around and about, through and through, beneath and above, before and behind, so that nothing can be more truly nor pro- foundly present in all creatures than God himself with his power." ^ Even the earthly body of Christ was "present everywhere," 30. 67 ; upon the glorification of his body Luther lays but little stress, 30. q8 ff. ; cf. Occam, supra, p. 205. 326 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES, every loaf. The presence of the glorified body is to be con- ceived of in the same manner as the divine presence in the world in general. God is not '* such an outspread, long, broad, thick, high, deep Being," filling the world as straw fills a sack (ib. 221); as though God were such a great outspread Object, reach- ing through and out beyond every created thing " (213, 216). We are not, therefore, to think of any local, sensible presence. There are, says Luther, *' three ways of being in a place : locally or circimiscriptively y definitively, and repletively (207). The first indicates a purely spacial relation, as of wine in a cask. Anything is definitively, or ^* incomprehensibly," at a place when it does not correspond with the portions of space in the latter; as an angel may be in a whole house, in one room, or even in a nut- shell (208). The mode of presence is repletive, or supernatural, * ' when anything is at the same time in its entirety at all places and fills all places, and is yet measured and contained by no place " ( 209 ) . ^ This repletive existence is now attributed also to the body of Christ (211). All things are * * as related to the body of Christ, present and penetrable'* (210, 216). His body was Y>restXiX. circumscriptive ly dnrmg his earthly life, ^' since it took and gave space according to its size " (216). Tht definitive form of presence is to be attributed to the body which passed out of the closed grave and through the locked doors, and to the body present in the bread (216). As the soul is present at the same time in the whole body just as in every separate part ; as vision or sound reaches over great distances ; as sound passes through air, water, boards, and walls, and enters many ears at once, in such a way are we to conceive also of Christ's presence in the Lord's Supper (29. 333 f.; 30. 216, 218 f.). We are, hence, to represent to ourselves the presence of Christ in the sense in which God as the Omnipotent Will dwells in all things, or in which the soul permeates the body, and not in the '' crude, fat, and thick ideas ' ' of the circumscriptive mode of existence (215). The word *' in " is not to be understood in the sense in which *^ straw is in a sack and bread in a basket" (223). Not in this external, local way is Christ's body in the Lord's Supper, but in some such way as color and light are in the eye {66. 189 f.)- A *' sacramental unity" {Einigkeit) exists between the body and the bread (297, 300). But the body, which is here spoken of, is the veritable body of Christ which was born of the Virgin If we compare with this Occam's doctrine of Ubiquity, p. ' This classification is of scholastic origin. The first two modes are de- rived from Occam (supra, p. 204). The three-fold classification (adding the repletive mode) was taken from Riel (Sent. i. d. 37 qu. ). CONTROVERSY UPON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 327 204 f. )/ it is clear that Luther was influenced by Occam. Both the classification of the modes of spacial existence, and the super- spacial existence of the body of Christ in the Lord's Supper and in all existing things, point unmistakably to that source. But a profound difference is here traceable. While Occam, in addi- tion to this bodily presence everywhere, thinks of the real body of Christ as in one place in heaven ; for Luther the body of Christ is, by virtue of the communicatio idiomatum, absolutely omnipresent. Occam appends to the current medieval doctrine a speculative inference, postulating a certain Something which may figure as the body of Christ in the Lord's Supper. Luther defends the religious idea, that, just as we apprehend Christ only in the positive forms of his human life, so he is present in the Holy Supper also as the man Jesus with the human nature (in- cluding his body) by which he effects our salvation. What he is most earnestly striving for will be evident if we compare his orig- inal conception of the Lord's Supper : *' The same Christ who has secured for us grace and the forgiveness of sins is present in the Lord's Supper in order to assure us of his redeeming act."^ Here lies the nerve of his opposition to Zwingli and Oecolampa- dius. The sacrament is not ' * a sign of a future or absent thing ; ' ' but a *'form of the thing present and yet invisible." Under the visible form of bread and wine are ''his invisible body and blood present " (105). The important thing, for which he con- tends, is that Christ, and Christ the historical Redeemer, is him- self present, and that we are not merely to think of him as present by an effort of our imagination. The scholastic mate- rial by which he seeks to establish this position is regarded as means to the end in view.* 6. With this view harmonize also the utterances of Luther concerning the Reception and Fruits of the Sacrament. We do really eat and chew the body of Christ, and the pope was there- fore justified in requiring this confession from Berenger (supra, p. 76). But the bread is the body, as the dove is the Holy Spirit ; for *'no one sees, grasps, eats, or chews the body of Christ, as we visibly see and chew other fiesh. For whatever we do to the bread is well and properly applied to the body of Christ, on account of the sacramental unity " (297, cf. 57. 75 f.). The bread is therefore really eaten, but with it at the same time the ^ See already Alger, supra, p. 77> ^^^ Gerhoh, p. 66, 2 Cf. 29. 348; 48. 23; 30. 85, 134, 137: "What is the difference now? Yea, how is it any better for them to eat fiesh and bone with the soul, than that we should eat it with the mouth ? " ^ Luther himself wished these explanations to be regarded only as possibil- ities, which do not exclude other explanations, 30. 200, 202, 210, 217. 328 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. spiritual body of Christ; bread and body are at the same time and together present (300). There results *'a substantial (^natilrlich) unification of the body of Christ with us, and not alone a spiritual, subsisting in the mind and will " (202). But despite this manducatio oralis, our reception of this gift must be spiritual, /. e. , the heart must believe the presence of Christ in the bread, which the word proclaims (90 f., 93, 185).^ Only faith apprehends life and salvation in the present body of the Lord (130). This is the spiritual eating, which must accompany the bodily eating (86, 185). The body of Christ is therefore present in the Lord's Supper, but only the believer understands and grasps this and has in consequence the blessing which the body brings : " That which is given therein and therewith, the body cannot grasp nor take to itself; but this is done by the faith of the heart which discerns this treasure and desires it " (Large Cat., Miiller, p. 504).^ From this we may understand Luther's view of the Benefit of the Sacrament. The body of Jesus, whose presence in the bread faith apprehends, strengthens faith (135) and gives to it the as- surance of the forgiveness of sins (136). The presence of the body and blood of Christ brings us the salvation which he has secured by means of this body and blood. The new testament is here and brings us *^the forgiveness of sins, the Spirit, grace, life, and all blessedness" (338J. Thus the word, combined with the Redeemer offered by it and bodily present in the sacra- ment, effects a strengthening of faith, the sense of forgiveness, life, and salvation.^ To this spiritual effect produced by the ^ But unbelievers also receive the body {?nanducatio injideliu7n)^ although to their own hurt, 29. 346 ; 30. 369, 86, 343). Cat. 509. But those who do not at all believe the words of institution, such as the Fanatics, receive nothing but bread and wine (30. 132. Cat. 504)- ■^ The presence of the body and blood, as Luther always maintained, in- volves the personal presence of Christ, by virtue of the personal unity (29. 295; 30. 130 ff,). On the other hand, the idea that the older German linguistic usage, in which Z^z-^ (body) is equivalent to ^'person" (^. ^., in Luther, 45. 13 f. : " In the German language we do not call a dead man a 'body,' but a living man who has body and soul" ), influenced Luther's con- ception of the **body " of Christ, is, so far as I can see, without any foundation. 3 30. 338 f. : " The words are the first thing, for without the words the cup and bread would be nothing. Further, without the bread and cup, there would be no body and blood of Christ. Without the body and blood of Christ, there would be no new testament. Without the new testament, there would be no forgiveness of sins. Without forgiveness of sins, there would be no life and salvation. Thus the words, in the first place, embrace the bread and the cup (to constitute) the sacrament. The bread and cup embrace the body and blood of Christ. The body and blood of Christ embrace the new testament. The new testament embraces the forgiveness of sins. The forgiveness of sins embraces eternal life and salvation. Behold, all this do the words of the Lord's Supper offer and give to us, and we grasp it by faith.' ' CONTROVERSY UPON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 329 Lord's Supper is added further, in harmony with the representa- tions of the ancient church (Irenaeus, ib. ii6 ff.), an effect upon the body of the recipient. The body of Christ is a pledge which gives to our body the assurance that it shall, by virtue of the ** eternal food" thus received by us, also live forever (72). This ''spiritual food" transforms the poor ''moth-sack," so "that it also becomes spiritual, that is, eternally alive and blessed" (loi f. 132, 135). But this second train of thought, which was of course particularly adapted for use against Zwingli, had but a secondary importance for Luther. He could omit it altogether in his exposition of the subject on the Large Cate- chism,^ where the whole benefit of the sacrament is made to con- sist in the strengthening of faith, or in the consciousness of the forgiveness of sins, and that, too, in a way thoroughly in keeping with Luther's original conceptions, viz.: The word proclaims forgiveness; the Christ present confirms and seals it, as it is he himself who secured it for us. " Therefore we come to the sac- rament in order that we may there receive such a treasure, through which and in which we obtain remission of sins. Wherefore this ? Because the words are here and give these things to us. If therefore I am commanded by Christ to eat and drink, in order that he may be mine and may confer a benefit upon me, it is, as it were, a certain pledge and surety, or rather the very thing itself which he has presented and pledged for my .sins, death, and all evils" (Mliller, 502).^ In view of this re- sultant, the divergence of I^uther's later from his earlier view of the Lord's Supper must not be overestimated. The bodily presence of the Saviour in the bread and wine for the sealing of the words of institution, for the strengthening of faith, and for giving assurance of the forgiveness of sins, was beyond question his leading thought. The only addition made to this was the adoption of certain definite ideas as to the mode of presence of the heavenly body, to which he was led by the course of contro- versy upon the subject. These were, in the first instance, only auxiliary ideas, but they gradually assumed the character of per- manent elements in the dogma of the Lord's Supper.^ * Or at least set it in new relations, p. 509 : The sacrament is '* nothing but a wholesome and comforting medicine, which may help thee and give thee life in both body and soul. For where the soul is restored, there help is given also to the body." ^ Cf. the discussions as to "worthy" and " unworthy " communicants (504 ff. ). Faith, together with the sense of unworthiness, makes worthy (504, 509 f. ). "Therefore we call those alone unworthy who do not feel their faults nor are willing to be (regarded as) sinners" (510), i.e., "who are insolent and wild," 5*^^ Under no conditions dare we think of the sacrament as "though it were a poison, in which we should eat death " (509). ^ Luther from this time most vigorously rejected the position of those who ^;^0 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. 7. The Colloquy at Marburg could not, under the circum- stances, lead to harmony, although Zwingli, impelled by political considerations ( '* Burgi'echt " )^ made as large concessions as pos- sible to the Lutherans. Agreement was indeed reached upon fourteen articles of faith, modeled upon formulas drawn by Luther (Trinity, Christ, original sin, faith, justification, word, baptism, works, civil government). In regard to the Lord's Supper, there was agreement in the demand for *' both forms ac- cording to the institution of Christ," in the condemnation of the mass, and in the assertion that */ the spiritual partaking of this body and blood " is '* especially necessary for every Christian." But there remained the difference that they ''have at this time not agreed whether the true body and blood of Christ are bodily in the bread and wine " (art. 15), Luther, although he had not hesitated to express to the Strassburgers his conviction that they had '' another spirit," yet hoped for a "good-natured friendly harmony, that they may in a friendly spirit seek among us for that which they lack " (E. 36. 322). Zwingli wrote : ** Luther, impudent and contumacious, was vanquished , . . although he meanwhile declared that he was unconquered " (opp. viii. 370). Upon the return journey to Wittenberg, the Saxon theologians drew up the Schwabach Articles, which assert of the Lord's Sup- per : * ' That in the bread and wine the true body and blood of Christ are truly present, according to the word of Christ" (art. 10). This doctrine belongs with others to the faith of the true* church : ** Such church is nothing else than believers in Christ, who believe and teach the above-named articles and parts" (art. 12). And they really reproduced the doctrine of the Luth- erans. The fault lay, not in this exaltation to the position of a " dogma," but in the fact that a peculiar theological method of establishing the doctrine very soon began to be included in the " pure doctrine " itself. Cf. KoLDE, Luther, ii. 308 ff., and Der Tag v. Schleiz, in Abh. f. Kostl., 1896, p. 94 ff. Stahelin, Zwingli, ii. 395 ff. The text of tlie Marburg and Schwabach Articles in Kolde, Die Augsb. Conf., 1896, p, 119 ff., 123 ff. held that there is here no article of faith, and we should therefore not quarrel about It, but each one should be allowed here to believe as he wishes (32. 406 ; 30. 43). This is the opinion of some laymen, such as Henry of Kron- berg : '* My understanding is not competent to reach an opinion " (see BoGLER, H. V. Kr., Schriften des Vereins f. Ref.-gesch., 57, p. 14). See also Luther's opinion upon Schwenkfeld's doctrine of the Lord's Supper, 30. 285 ff., 305, 354 ; 32. 397, 404 ff. Also Kadelbach, Ausfiirl. Gesch. K. v. Sch., i860, p. 104 ff. 1 Considerations of the same character — the possibility of reconciling the Emperor — influenced the opposition of Melanchthon, whom the Strassburgers regarded as their real and most dangerous opponent. CONTROVERSY UPON THE LORD'S SUPPER. 33I 8. Nor did the Wittenberg Concord (A. D. 1536) produce an actual and permanent agreement. From the time of the Diet of Augsburg, Bucer labored unweariedly to bring about an agree- ment between the Saxons and the theologians of Southern Germany. His formula was: ''That the true body and the true blood of Jesus Christ are truly present in the Lord's Supper and are offered with the words of the Lord and the sacrament. ' ' ^ Both Luther and Melanchthon hoped that an understanding might be reached upon this basis. ^ But Luther did not change his own opinion. Although he was willing to refrain from lay- ing special stress upon the assertion, that the body of Christ is present also for the unbelieving, yet the formula finally adopted expresses his view : *' that with the bread and wine are truly and substantially present, offered, and received (j^erc et substan- tialiter adesse, exhiberi et siuni) the body and blood of Christ. " Just on this account the Wittenberg Concord failed to attain the desired result. Cf. Kolde, PRE. xvii., ed. 2, 222 ff. Baum, Capito u. Butzer, i860, p. 498 ff. ^ As in general, so in the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, Bucer found his point of departure in Luther (see the summary of his preaching, Strassburg, 1523), form g 3 V. During the sacramental controversy, he was on Zwingli's side. His view at this time is given in Ennarrationum in evang. Matthaei, 1. ii. (Argentorati, 1527), p. 329 fF. : As food strengthens the body, so the recollection of the deliverance and forgiveness of sins wrought by Christ strengthens faith. Thus the body is truly eaten, p, 329 r. To this end Christ instituted the Supper, p. 330 r. The transition to his later position was made possible by the strongly emphasized assertion, that we at least with our spirit eat the body of Christ (p. 330 v, 336 v, 333 v), and through the misinterpre- tation of Luther's doctrine : " They contend that the body of Christ is really . transported into the bread by the word, i. e., that the body of Christ is really present in the bread " (p. 331 r, 338 r). But influential, above all, were political considerations and the feeling that *' what ought to be for us the symbol of the warmest love, some evilly disposed men have made the occasion of the most violent hatred and of the separation of brethren and of the rending of churches" (1. u., p. 329 V). ^ Cf. the formula of compromise agreed upon at about, this time between Blaurer and Schnepf for Wittenberg ; " That the body and blood of Christ are truly, i. e., substantially and essentially [substanzUch tmd zvese?iilich), but not quantitatively, nor qualitatively, nor locally, present and offered." 332 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. CHAPTER III. THE NEW DOGMA. § 74. Tlie Augsburg Confession. Literature. Plitt, Einleitung in d. Augustana, vol. ii. 1868. Putt, Die Apol. d. August., 1873. Zockler, Die Augsb. Conf., 1870, Koldk, Die Augsb. Conf, 1896 (together with the Marburg, Schwabach, and Torgau Articles, the Confutation, and the Augustana variata). Tschackekt, Die unanderte Augsb. Konf. nach den besten Handschriften, 1901. Picker, Die Confut. d. Augsb. Bek. in ihrer ersten Gestalt, 1891. Knaake, Luther's Anteil an der Augsb. Conf., 1863. Virck, Melanchthons polit. Stellung auf d. Reichstag zu Augsb. 1530, Ztschr. f. KG. ix. 67 ff. , 293 ft". Thomasius-Seeberg, DG. ii., ed. 2, 364 ff. Loops, DG. 397 ff. Moller- Kawerau, kg. iii. 94 fF. J. VV. Richard, Luther and the Augsburg Confes- sion, in the Lutheran Quarterly, 1899 and 1900. 1^^ In the references in this section, a. indicates an article in the Augsburg Confession; p. refers to a page in MUller's Symbolische Biicher ; the second figure following, to a paragraph upon the same page. The excellent English translation in Jacobs, Book of Concord, may be used, as MuIler's paging is there carried in the margin. I. The adherents of the Lutheran doctrine gave confessional expression to their religious convictions at Augsburg in 1530. It was not their aim to establish a *^ new dogma," but they on the contrary desired only, as they professed adherence to the ecumenical symbols, to furnish the proof that they really held the genuine old Catholic faith. But the doctrine which they presented in the Confession became nevertheless the fixed dogma of the new church. It formed originally the charterof the Smalcald League, and gradually became the recognized standard of pure doctrine for the universities as well as for the congregations (as proved in MoUer-Kawerau, iii. 98 f. ). The same may be said of the Apology. But it was the Religious Peace of Augsburg, A. D. 1555, which first officially and plainly designated the Augsburg Confession as the standard, by which new associations in the church were to be tested in order to secure recognition from the empire. While we must leave to Symbolics the more precise treatment of this subject, it is necessary for us to con- sider the question, in what forms the new doctrine attained recognition as the official teaching of the church. The dogmas of the ancient church received a canonical character from the fact that they were the decrees of general councils which were *' accepted " by the church at large. These decrees were recog- nized and given legal force by the state, or by an ecclesiastical authority — the Roman bishop — ^recognized by the state. The former was the case with the dogmas of the Greek church ; the THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 333 latter, with the decrees promulgated during the Pelagian and Semipelagian controversies. The council did not itself possess binding authority ; for when the acceptance, /". e. , the civil recog- nition, was withdrawn because another council had adopted new and contrary decrees, the decrees of the former were annulled. This is plainly illustrated in the conflicts within the Greek church. The medieval conception of the church changed the formal basis of accepted dogma and led to the establishment of the rule, that the decrees of ecumenical councils, or the doctrine of the Romish church, or the formal proclamation of a pope, received eo ipso dogmatic authority in the church. Dogma became simply the formal statement made by official teachers of the church. But the authority which these were supposed to possess was shattered in its very foundations by the Reformation. The congregations were looked to for the reformation of doctrine and life, as to them belonged the right of passing judgment upon doctrine (supra, p. 295 n.). Practically, however, the princes were regarded as the agency possessing the necessary power for the carrying out of reform. Luther had voiced this sentiment in his ** Address to the Nobility," and this led to the unique fiction of *' emergency bishops" {Notbischofe). The princes were utilized for these ecclesiastical purposes, not as being the bearers of the specific civil authority, but as representatives of '' Christianity," /. e., of the congregation at large, and particu- larly as ''prominent" (^praecipua) members of it (thus ex- pressed first by Melanchthon, Schmalk. Art., Miiller, p. 339, 54. C. R. iii. 244). When the new church fellowship had taken tangible shape through the carrying out of the ideas of the Reformation by the secular authorities, the princes and magis- trates were at once recognized as its official representatives. Negotiations were entered into with them, and they became the public defenders of the new doctrine. The theologians formu- lated the latter, but they attained a legal character only when adopted by the secular government ; and this applies to their inner contents as well as to the outward form. This principle was first openly recognized in the decree of the Diet of Spires in 1526, although indeed the real force of the latter was only the postponement of an imperial decision. It then became the guiding principle for the organization of the new church, and received the legal sanction of the empire through the Religious Peace of Augsburg. The teachings of the Evangelical church — in Reformed as well as in Lutheran districts — thus became the fixed doctrine of the church, or dogma, when the doctrinal statements formulated by the theologians were ''accepted" by the secular government in the name of the church. There was 334 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. in this a certain analogy with the genesis of the dogmas of the ancient church. As a result, the dogmas of the church were no longer, as in the Middle Ages, the creation of merely ecclesias- tical, /. e. , hierarchical procedure. Nor does there lie behind them the mystical authority of general councils. They are proposi- tions which the theologians hold to be biblical, and to which the church at large, /. e., the state, gives assent. But it is not, as in Greek Christianity, the civil authority as such which expresses this assent, but the state as the representative of the church at large. The latter idea is a genuinely medieval one. The state is not yet recognized as the organism of secular jurisprudence nor sharply discriminated from the church. From this com- bination resulted all the weaknesses of territorialism. But the latter were associated with the concrete application of the theory, and not with the principle itself. The principle is expressed in the simple axiom : The doctrine of the church, or dogma, is bib- lical truth, discovered by theologians, but recognized and accepted by the Christian congregation as such. This was Luther's mean- ing when he clearly and distinctly granted to the congregation the right to pass judgment upon doctrine.^ Cf. as to the bearings upon ecclesiastical jurisprudence, Sohm, Kirchenrecht, i. 322 ff., 330 ff., 560 ff., 658 f. 2. The Augsburg Confession was composed by Melanchthon, but it reproduces, though as a *' gentle-stepper " {Leiselre- terin), the thought of Luther.^ The '* timidity " and '* philos- ophy ' ' of Melanchthon, and his attempts to moderate and com- promise, do not belong to the History of Doctrines. But it is important to bear in mind the circumstances under which the Augsburg Confession was prepared. It was the Emperor's chief desire to discover whether the Protestant doctrine was in har- mony with the twelve articles of the Christian faith (Kawerau, Agricola, p. 100. C. R. ii. 179). Eck had in 404 theses charged almost all heresies upon the Protestants. These considerations required of the Reformers a distinct emphasizing of their agreement with the doctrine of the ancient church and a clear rejection of all heresies. It appeared to be important, likewise, to avoid all fel- lowship with Zwingli, whose political aims made him an object of suspicion (C. R. ii. 25 ; i. 1099, 1106). In all these particu- lars Melanchthon's personal inclinations were in accord with the 1 This does not exclude a recognition of the fact, that Luther always main- tained his demand for the general recognition of a harmonious pure doctrine, .-. ^., 32. 406. ^ Melanchthon had before him, when composing the Augsburg Confession- on the dogmatic side the»Schwabach Articles, and on the practical reformatory side the so-called Torgau Articles. Upon the latter, see Brieger in the Kirchen-fjeschichtl. Studien f. Reuter, 1888. THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 335 demands of ecclesiastical policy. But all this was only the out- ward framework for the real task, /. ^., to present the fundamen- tal ideas of the evangelical party, and to show clearly that they demolish the monastic ideal of life and the external legality of the Romish church, but that they have no connection with the revolutionary tendencies of the Anabaptists. The Confession, therefore, undertakes to present the evangelical doctrine as the genuine ancient doctrine, which is supported by the Scriptures as well as by the better Fathers, e. g. (p. 91 f., 29). *' Only those things are recited," it is said in the Epilogue, ^' which seemed to be necessary to be said, in order that it might be known that nothing is received among us in doctrine and ceremonies con- trary to the Scriptures or to the Catholic church ; because it is manifest that we have been most diligently on our guard lest any new and impious doctrines should creep into our churches. ' ' Not all evangelical convictions found expression under such a rule {e.g.^ C. R. ii. 184, 182 f. Luther, Briefe, De W. iv. no, 52); but, on the other hand, nothing was asserted which had not been included in the faith of the evangelical party. 3. Articles I. -III. reproduce the results of the dogmatic labors of the ancient church: **One divine essence . . three per- sons of the same essence and power" (a. i). Original sin consists in the inheritance of sin : *' Without the fear of God, without trust in him, and with concupiscence." This marks the connection of Luther's thought with that of Augustine (cf. ApoL, p. 79. 7 ff . ; 81. 23). The main practical point of the doctrine is seen in the condemnation of the idea, that a " man may by the powers of his own reason be justified before God " (a. 2 ; cf. a. 20. 9, 10 ; p. 88. 9 f. ). In respect to the power of *' working (^efficienda) the righteousness of God," man, without the influ- ence of the word or of the Spirit, is not free, although he has ''some power to work a civil righteousness and to choose the things subject to reason " (a. 18 and p. 219. 73). Sin is con- centrated in a historical kingdom of the Evil One. '* The his- tory of the world shows how great is the power of the devil." Hence, *' it will not be possible to recognize the benefits of Christ unless we understand our evils " (p. ^b. 50). This is the religious point of view from which sin is regarded. Of Christ it is said: *'t\vo natures, . . . inseparably joined together in unity of person." The object of his work was, '' that he might reconcile the Father to us and might be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for all actual sins of men."^ The result ^ Also, a. 24. 21, where the blotting out of daily sins is represented as wrought by the sacrifice of the mass. Cf. Zockler upon this passage, and supra, p. 203, n. i; also Zwingli, opp. iii. 198. 33^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. of his resurrection and ascension is his dominion over his follow- ers and their sanctification through the Holy Spirit (a. 3 ; of. p. 94. 40). Further, *' Christ does not cease to be Mediator, after we have been renewed." He remains such, *' in order that for his sake we may have a reconciled God, even though we are un- worthy." For his sake, who is always interceding for us before the Father, we have the forgiveness of sins (p. 116 f, 42, 44). These are the initial principles, which the new church held in common with the old. Yet they are not absolutely identical. The Confutators were, from their point of view, right in object- ing to the '* born without the fear of God, without trust in him," as a definition of original sin (Ficker, p. 8). They quote Luther's remark in regard to the homousios^ and call attention to the fact, that the trinitarian formulas as such are not found in the Scriptures (ib. p. 4f ). The deliberate hostility of the critics should not blind us to the fact, that a difference in point of view is here revealed. 4. Article V. marks the transition to the evangelical principle : *' Through the word and sacraments, as through instruments, is given the Holy Spirit, who worketh faith where and when it pleaseth God in those who hear the gospel, namely, that God, not for our merits' sake but for Christ's sake, justifieth^ those who believe that they are for Christ's sake received into favor." The word and the sacraments are the means through which the Spirit begets faith. But faith ''doth not only signify a knowledge of the history," . . . ''which believeth not only the history, but also the effect of the history, namely, this article, the remis- sion of sins " (a. 20. 23;p. 96. 51), " But this is to believe, to trust in the merits of Christ, that for his sake God wisheth to be reconciled to us" (p. 99. 69); "to desire and accept the offered promise of remission of sins and justification" (p. 95. 48; p. 94f.,44ff.; 139. 183). This is evangelical saving faith, as the trusting acceptance of the grace of forgiveness which has been revealed through the work of Christ. In this light maybe understood the central thought of Justification: "That men cannot be justified before God by their own powers, merits, or works ; but they are justified freely {^^ratis') for Christ's sake through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for the sake of Christ, who hath by his death made satisfaction for our sins. This faith doth God im- pute for righteousness before him ".(a. 4; cf. 24. 28; p. 123. 93; 105. 97). Here the whole Romish system is excluded : 1 The German translation of the Editio princeps is important: '*Are ac- counted righteous before God for Christ's sake." Cf. Kolde. Augsb. Conf., p. 28. THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 337 " they teach only that men treat with God through works and merits " (p. 97. 60). The relationship between God and man is not to be thought of in accordance with the scheme of merits : '*as though Christ had come for the purpose of delivering cer- tain laws, through which we might merit the remission of sins " (p. 89, 1 5 J. But neither is it as though the ** knowledge of the history concerning Christ, ' ' together with the infusion of a "habitus inclining us the more readily to love God," would suffice (p. 89. 15, 17). In all of this human merit still remains. Nor does the distinction drawn between the merits of fitness (^congrui) and of worthiness (^condigni') help matters ; for if God must of necessity reward the meritujn cofigriii by the bestowal of grace, it is in reality a meriUim condigni {^. 90. 19).^ Only faith justifies. It does this, however, not as being in itself a worthy work, nor as being the beginning and source of good works, but solely because it apprehends the grace revealed and promised in Christ, and applies and appropriates this to itself (p. 96. 56; 102. 84, 86; 100. 77; 113. 27; 115. 40; 99. 71). Man therefore becomes righteous through an ** imputation of another' s righteousness. ' * This is Christ's righteousness.^ But since faith is the only appropriate organ for the apprehension of this righteousness, it is our righteousness. " Faith is right- eousness in us imputatively, /. e., it is that by which we are made accepted before God on account of the imputation and or- dination of God " (p. 139. 186)^ The leading elements in the conception of justification are here brought into conjunction. The law terrifies the heart with the wrath of God ;* the gospel awakens in it trust in Christ, or the assurance that God for Christ's sake forgives us our sins and regards us as righteous (p. I o 1 . 7 9 ff . ) . Faith is thus represented as the reception of the grace revealed in Christ, and justification as the forensic declaration that the person involved is righteous. But faith is also at the same time the beginning of a new life. *' This faith, encouraging and consoling in these fears, receives the remission of sins, justifies and quickens ; for this consolation is a new and spiritual life." The Holy Spirit, who works faith through the word, works in and with faith a new life (p. 98, 6t, ff., p. 177, 60). Only it ^ These terms are here used in the sense attached to them from the time of Duns Scotus. Cf. supra, p. 161, 202. 2 And Christ alone, not " partly our works," p. 130. Cf. Biel, supra, p. 199)- ^ Cf. p. 99. 69 : " For how will Christ be Mediator if we do not believe [sentimus) that for his sake we are accounted righteous ? " p. 99. 62 : " this forgiveness, reconciliation, and righteousness are received through faith.'* * The same influence is also ascribed to the gospel, p. 98. 62. 22 33^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. must be borne in mind that justification in the above sense does not depend upon faith in so far as the latter is considered as the beginning of a new life. But faith is also the beginning of the regeneration of man, or of the process of making him actually righteous. Inasmuch as faith sets free from the sense of guilt, the heart becomes animated, peace and joy enter, and also eternal life *'\vhich begins here in this life" (p. 105. 100).^ The Holy Spirit has begotten faith, and faith brings with it the Spirit, thereby renewing the man (p. 108. 115). Hence we might more appropriately designate faith than love as the grace making SLCce-ptoble (graf/a gnitum facienSj p. 108. 116), But, as faith is a new life, it also produces '*new movements and works in man " (p. 130. 129). The Apology itself summarizes its view of justification as follows : ** Thus far we have shown with sufficient fullness and from testimonies of Scripture, that by faith alone we obtain the remission of sins for Christ's sake, and that by faith alone we are justified, /. e., from unrighteous men are made rightous, or regenerated " (p. 108. 117). Therefore, faith, which is begotten by the Holy Ghost, is (i) the organ for the appre- hension of grace, and (2) the beginning of a new life. In the former sense, it receives the imputed righteousness of Christ • in the latter, it is the beginning of ethical lightness in character and conduct. But the former is the fundamental element (p. 100. 75). From it, /. e. , from the sense of the forgiveness of sin, the Apology psychologically deduces the inward renewal ; for he who has be- come sure of the forgiveness of his sins, becomes at heart free and joyful (supra). ^ This portraiture of justification and sanctifica- tion in the Apology corresponds exactly with the conceptions of Luther, except that he laid still more stress upon the actual righteousness wrought by faith (supra, p. 260 ff.).^ Upon the doctrine of justification in the Apology, compare the treatment ^ Upon the idea of eternal life as begun by faith on earth, see also p. 215. 54 ; 287. 10 ; no. HI ; 216. 58 ; 146. 231. 2 Melanchthon, p. lOi. 79, assails the Scotist separation of forgiveness and infusion (Duns, iv. d. 16, q. 2. 6, cf. supra, p. 160). 3 The terminology of p. 100. 72 ff. presents difficulties : *' And because to be justified means from unrighteous men to be made righteous, or to be regen- erated, it signifies also to be pronounced or accounted righteous, for the Scrip- tures speak in both ways." That is, the general sense oi justificari includes "also" the particular form of justification indicated by the term jtisium pro^tuntiari. Upon the basis of this is constructed the following syllogism : I. Since the chief thing in justification is forgiveness, we may say : "To obtain remission of sins is to be justified, Ps. 32. I. 2. By faith alone, and not on account of love or works, we obtain remission of sins, although love follows faith. 3. Therefore, byfaith alone we are justified," andthatinthe sense that "from unrighteous men we are made righteous, or regenerated" (p. lOO. 75-78). The conclusiveness of this deduction may be doubted. THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 339 of the subject by Loofs, Stud. u. Krit., 1884, 613 ff. Eich- HORN, ib. 1887, 415 ff. Frank, Neue kirchl. Ztschr., 1892, 846 ff. Stange, ib., 1899, 169 ff. 5. Faith is followed by Good Works as its fruits. ''For good works are to be done on account of God's command ; like- wise, for the exercise of faith ; likewise, on account of confession and giving of thanks " (p. 120. 68, a. 6. i f.). They spring from the Holy Ghost, or from regeneration and justification (a. 20. 29, p. 109. 4)^ — both the "spiritual movements" and the *' external good works" (p. no. 15). But works are in no way the ground of justification (a. 20. 9, 27). Good works are accordingly such as spring from the agency of the Holy Spirit and the impulse of faith, and as are performed according to the will of God (a. 20. 27); and hence, such as are in accord with the commandments of God, and not with the self-made ideals of the Catholic church (a. 27. 57). By virtue of their origin in the inward man, these works are performed in Christian liberty (a. 28. 51). These four criteria determine the character of good works in the evangelical sense. Accordingly, all civil and secular occupations are, contrary to the view of the Anabaptists, good works (a, 16; a. 26. 10), Marriage likewise assumes a new dignity (a. 23). On the other hand, the works of monastic observances and of an external ecclesiasticism are not good works (a. 26. 8 ff. ). It follows, further, that ascetic exercises are not in themselves good works, but are undertaken for the purpose of preparing ourselves to do good works: *' Not in order that through this discipline he might merit remission of sins, but in order that he might have a body apt and fit for spiritual things and for doing his duty according to his calling" (a. 26. 38). Finally, this conception of good works gives birth to a new Ideal of Life. In contrast with the per- fection of the monastic vows, evangelical perfection embraces the Christian life in its religious central impulse, and, as well, in its discharge of the duties connected with the secular calling. ' ' Christian perfection is to reverently fear God, and again to con- ceive great faith and confidence that we have a reconciled God; to ask and certainly look for aid from God in doing all things in connection with our calling; and meanwhile outwardly to dili- gently perform good works and attend to our vocation " (a. 27. 49, cf. p. 216. 61 f . ; 281. 48 ff.). But this perfection exists only in the form of earnest effort: "For they ought to strive after perfection as long as this life endures, and always grow in ^ It is only upon the ground of the personal experience of the divine mercy that God becomes for us an object of affection {^objectum amabiie)^ p. no. 8, 340 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. the fear of God, in faith, in love toward their neighbor and the like spiritual gifts " (p. 279. 37). 6. Articles VII. and VIII. present the evangelical conception of the church. There will always be a holy church. *' But the church is the congregation of the saints, in which the gospel is rightly taught and the sacraments rightly administered " (a. 7). Since the word and the sacraments constitute the church, it may be said : '' And unto the true unity of the church it is sufficient to agree concerning the doctrine of the gospel and the adminis- tration of the sacraments," but it is not necessary that cere- monies and traditions be everywhere the same (ib., cf. Torgau Art., i. ). This church, which holds the pure doctrine and /« which the preaching is in harmony with this doctrine, cannot possibly, as is the common belief, be the church as an object of faith, or as the so-called ** invisible church." Melanchthon, on the contrary, in the note to Article XII. of the Schwabach Articles (supra, p. 294 f.; cf. Luther's conception ot the '*true, rechten^ church," supra, p. 294), expresses the opinion, that there has always been and alwa}'s will be a true church, i. e. , men who hold essentially the pure evangelical doctrine (cf. C. R. xii. 481 f. , 483, 433), and that this church requires for its continued existence only the word and the sacraments. Since in this con- gregation assembled around the word there will always be a '* fellowship of faith and of the Holy Spirit in the hearts " of men (p. 152 f., 5, 8), it is called congregatio sanctorum ;'^ but since it exists in an empirical earthly form, there are always '* many hypocrites and wicked men mingled in it" (a. 8, p. 157. 28). These ideas are in the end practically the same as Luther had expressed. But the definition of the church is constructed by Melanchthon from a somewhat different point of departure from that of Luther. Luther started with the idea, that the presence of the word guarantees to faith the existence of believing Christians, or the (invisible) church. The differ- ences in the proclamation of the word led him afterward to dis- criminate between the true and the false (visible) church. Melanchthon begins with the idea, that there has always been and always will be a true (visible) church, but shows, further, that it can never exist without a commixture of wicked men and hypocrites. In the church, which is in its essential nature the congregatio sanctorum, there are found a kingdom of Christ and a kingdom of the devil ; but only members of the former are really members of the church (p. 154 f., 16 ff.).'* There has 1 For the " saints," and they only, are properly the church. 2 This different point of departure explains also the later construction of Melanchthon* s definition of the church (vid. sub). He always starts THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 341 always been, Melanchthon means to say, a congregation (of professing Christians), which possessed the gospel, as did the association of evangelical believers existing at that time. In this congregation — not outwardly corresponding with it in dimensions — is the kingdom of Christ, /. %%'). As early as 1527, in his exposition of the Epistle to the Colos- sians, he recognizes human freedom in the sphere of the outward life, although no one can fear and love God except he be im- pelled by the Holy Spirit (cf. Luthardt, Die Lehre vom fr. Willen, p. 162 ff. ). Similarly, in the Unterricht der Visita- toren^ xxvi. 78. In the Augsburg Confession, he purposely avoids questions concerning predestination (ii. 547). And upon the occasion of a disputation at Wittenberg in 1534, he pointed out that neither religion nor morality could be harmonized with the Stoic doctrine of the necessity of all events (x. 70 f., 785 ff. ). Already in the Loci of 1535, Melanchthon attributed to the human will an active, although small, part in producing conver- sion. He there recognizes three causes of conversion : the word, the Holy Spirit, and the human will. He explains, further, that the will either determines to accept or determines not to accept the grace of God (xxi, 376 f., 332). He expresses himself most plainly upon this point in the third revision of the Loci (A. D. 1543). His inner motive is opposition to the Stoic dvdyxrj. Man yet retains freedom as a power of applying himself to grace {fc^c- iiltas applicandi se ad gratiaiii) (xxi. 652, 659f.). Accordingly, in conversion God stirstheheart through the word read or heard, and the heart then, by virtue of a certain freedom yet left to it, decides for or against God. ''God anticipates {^antevertif) us, calls, moves, aids ; but we must see to it that we do not resist " (658).^ ^ In order to rightly judge this view of Melanchthon' s, we must bear in mind (i) That he holds strictly to the doctrine of original sin, and therefore excludes every form of salvation by man's own efforts (xx. 1. 669), and {2) That he sought, in opposition to the doctrine of predestination, which he under- stood as magical, morally untenable, and deterministic, to retain the personal 350 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. 4. In a similar way, Melanchthon gradually lost confidence in Luther's doctrine of the Lord's Supper. He at first shared the symbolic conception of Augustine, as advocated by Erasmus. He then fully adopted the view of Luther {e. g.y C. R. i. 760, 823, 830, 1109 f.). Zwingli's theory appeared to him at this time and afterward as profane (ib. i. 1067, 1077). In Marburg, he assisted Luther in making a collection of citations from the Fathers in confirmation of the latter's position. With his grow- ing respect for the consensus of the ancient church, he was very profoundly impressed by the dialogue of Oecolampadius, which produced evidence that, in a closer study of the Church Fathers, the symbolical view might also be found in their writings. He con- fessed this to Luther (ii. 217); yet he still clung to the Lutheran conception (ii. 212, 222^,226; i. 1109^). This is also the posi- tion taken in the tenth article of the Augsburg Confession (ii. 142). The formula of Bucer (supra, p. 331), appeared to him to prepare the way for a union of the divergent parties (ii. 498 f. ). But he still distinctly maintains the bodily presence of Christ (ii. 311, 315, 787, 801). He was able, indeed, to accept the formula which Luther now framed, /. e.y that the body of Christ is *^ crushed with the teeth " (E. 55. 75 f-)> only as *' the spokes- man of another's opinion '* (^nuntius alienae sententiae, ii. 822). But, in view of the testimonies of the ancient church, he could find no rest. *'I affirm the true presence of Christ in the Sup- per. I am not willing to be the author nor defender of a new doctrine in the church " (ii. 824; cf. xxi. 479 ; ix. 785). At heart, he inclined more and more to the view of the theologians of Southern Germany (ii. 824, 837, 841 f.; iii. 292). Melanch- thon always held to the presence of the Lord in the Supper, but he became less and less satisfied with Luther's conception of that presence. At a later period, he never wearied — at least in his private correspondence — of inveighing against bread-worship (aproXarpeia), as against the '' Stoic necessity " (e.g., viii. 362, 791, 660). Hefellback whenever possible upon the thought, that there is in the Lord's Supper a "communion of the body and blood of Christ." He denied the bodily ubiquity of Christ (vii. 780, 884; viii. 385; ix. 387, 962, 963), and emphasized in contrast the spiritual presence of Christ : *'The Son of God lives and reigns, and wishes to be present in the sacrament in- stituted for this purpose, and joins us as members to himself" (xv. 1112).^ In this sense is the tenth article of the Augustana and moral element in conversion. But he did not succeed in the solution of the problem. 1 Cf. iii. 514 (A. D. 1538): ** Not to depart very far from the ancients, I have affirmed a sacramental presence in the celebration [in usu) and have said THEOLOGY OF MELANCHTHON. 35 I Variata (A. D. 1540) also to be understood : '* Concerning the Lord's Supper they teach, that with the bread and wine the body and blood of Christ are truly offered to those eating in the Lord's Supper.^ The *'damnant" is here also wanting. Cf. Herr- LiNGER, Theol. Mel., p. 124 ff. 5. The Loci oi Melanchthon, after the second revision, fell more and more into the track of the traditional doctrinal statements. Refraining from the attempt to trace the develop- ment of his theological views, we present a general summary of them based upon the third redaction of the Loci. The pedagog- ical character of the work has become increasingly prominent as it has been popularized in the manner so characteristic of the author.^ The simplicity of form and the desire to secure prac- tical usefulness exclude the discussion of the more profound prob- lems and extended logical proof of the positions taken. ^ Although, even in the last revision of the Loci, Melanchthon followed no me- thodical plan beyond the enumeration of the separate doctrines, yet the study of his later writings makes it manifest that the Reformer had at least grouped his theological ideas around certain definite fundamental principles. These were ( i ) the combination of ideas involved in justification and the new conception of repentance, and (2 J the conception of the church (cf. xxviii. 371 f. ). These ideas constantly recur. They lay nearer to his heart than all else. To make them plain to all, and to impress them upon all hearts, appeared to him his chief duty. They may be designated as the two focal points in the theology of Melanchthon. We take as our starting-point the question as to the Sources and Standards of Christian truth, which Melanchthon of course answers by pointing to the Holy Scriptures. Therefore let us regard it as a great blessing of God, that he has given and pre- that with these elements Christ is truly present and ejjicaciotis. This surely is enough. Nor have I added such an inclusion or conjunction by which the body would be joined to the bread. . . . Sacraments are pledges that some- thing else is present with the things received." ^ The formula of Bucer and the Wittenberg Concord (supra, p. 331) here exerted a controlling influence, but the possibility of an interpretation favoring transubstantiation is excluded. But it is significant that the^-^r^ et substantialiter adesse oi the Wittenberg formula is omitted. Luther himself originally in- tended to express himself in a way similar to this in the Sraalcald Articles : '* That under bread and wine the true body and blood are present," etc., but wrote instead : '* The bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are the true body and blood of Christ." (SeeKoLDE, Stud. u. Krit., 1893, p. 159.) However true it may be that the formula of the Augustana Variata may be interpreted in a Lutheran sense, it is equally true that it was in reality designed to favor the divergent conception of Melanchthon. 2 *' With every new issue, paper and tradition exerted greater influence" (DlLTHEY, 1. t;., vi. 230). ^ Cf. the remark of Erasmus, C. R. iii. 87. 35- HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. served to the church a certain book, and binds the church to it. That company of people alone is the church, which embraces this book, hears it, teaches it, and retains its true sense in the wor- ship of God and in the regulating of conduct (xxi. 8oi).' As no parallels can be found in the writings of Melanchthon to the free utterances often made by Luther in regard to the letter of the Scriptures (supra, p. 300 f. ), so also his conception of the author- ity of the Scriptures receives a different coloring from his en- dorsement of their teachings as being the same as embraced the three ancient symbols of the church (xii. 399, 568, 608; v. 582).^ Their doctrine he approves as being genuinely Catholic. ''This is a Catholic association (^coefus'), which embraces the common consensus of prophetic and apostolic doctrine, together with the belief (-r^;2/^/2//a), of the true church. Thusin our Con- fession we profess to embrace the whole doctrine of the word of God, to which the church bears testimony, and that in the sense which the symbols show" (xxiv. 398; xxi. 34-9)-^ He con- demns whatever varies from the symbola accepta (iii. 826, 985 ; ix. 366). He will not extend his hand to any '* new dogma" (i. 823, 901, 1048), nor alter anything in the ecclesiastical formulas, for '' often a change of words begets also new beliefs" (xxiv. 427). This high valuation of the ancient symbols is very different indeed from the attitude of Luther toward them. Whilst Luther most clearly declares that they have value for him only be- cause, and in so far as, they agree with the Scriptures (supra, p. 304), Melanchthon makes no express limitation of this kind in his endorsement of them. Thus again, the ideas of Luther are contracted and materialized. To the symbols of the ancient church was added, as we have seen, the Augustana. But this is not sufficiently explicit.* The genuine, true doctrine is that of Luther. Melanchthon was the first to understand the relation of Luther to the historical development of the world, and he ex- * Cf., e. g.j xxiv. 718 ; xii. 479, 646 f., 649, 698 ; xxiii. 603 ; xi. 42 ; v. 580 : "has revealed in certain testimonies, and given a particular doctrine and word." Here are the germs of the later theory of inspiration, ^ Osiander assailed the subscription of the three ancient symbols and the Augsburg Confession under oath, which was customary at Wittenberg (xii. 6, 7). Upon the daily devotional use of the Apostles' Creed, see xxv. 449 ; xxiv. 394, 581. ^ Cf. : " With true faith I embrace the whole doctrine handed down in the books of the prophets and apostles, and comprehended in the Apostolic, JSIi- cene, and Athanasian symbols" (Thesisof A. D. 1551, in Haussleiter, 1. c, P- 95)- ^ III. 286, 29S, 1000, 827, 929: ''Confessio u. Apologia," v. 581 ; ix. 386 ; viii. 284 ; xxxiii. p. xxxviii. names, besides the three ancient symbols, " Catechismus u. Bekenntnis Lutheri u. Confessio," ix. 319, 366, 618, 213 f. Also Smalcald Articles. THEOLOGY OF MELANCHTHON. 353 pressed it with classical lucidity. He counts him among the mighty heroes of the church and her faith : Isaiah, John the Baptist, Paul, Augustine, and Luther. *' Luther brought to light the true and necessary doctrine " (xi. 728; cf. vi. 57, 72, 73, 92; vii. 398; xi. 272). We must hold fast to the pure doctrine, namely, the confessio Liitheri (xi. 272 f. ; viii. 49).^ It is the doctrine of the Church and of the University of Wittenberg (xi. 327, 600 ; xxi. 602 ; iii. 1106). But the truth of the church's doctrine is attested also by the experience (^experientia) of the pious (xxi. 420; xii. 426; cf. Luther, supra, p. 256 ff.). 6. This, therefore, is the truth : The teachings of the Bible, as understood and summarized by the ancient doctrinal standards, Luther and the Wittenberg theology. To the understanding and presentation of this truth all other sciences minister as ** handmaids" of theology (xi. 394), not only by pedagogi- cally sharpening the intellect for the apprehension of Scrip- tural truth, but also by furnishing the necessary preliminary sci- entific knowledge. Without scientific education, the theologian could produce only unconnected and confused statements, which would beget innumerable errors and a '^cyclopian" monster (xi. 280). Hence the church needs, not only grammar and dialectics, but also physics and philosophy. *' Not only for the sake of method ... is philosophy necessary, but also many things must be taken (^assumenda) by the theologian from physics." Thus the theologian derives his physiological, psy- chological, and logical definitions from the sphere of the arts and sciences {^orbis artium') (ib. 281, 934). It is, in other words, the popularized philosophy of Aristotle, which theology requires as a prerequisite and support. To this naturally-acquired knowl- edge it adds that derived from the Scriptures. The light of reason (^lumen naturale^ xii. 514, 577, 648) furnishes every man with a number of innate moral and religious ideas. It plays as important a role in Melanchthon's line of thought as the '* law of nature ' ' in the later Middle Ages. In the application of this principle, he follows largely the example of Cicero. There is a natural religion, a natural morality, and a natural law. Although sin may have beclouded this light, it yet remains as an endowment of human nature. It cannot be denied that a dan- gerous tendency is thus inaugurated. Theology appears to be the product of a combination of the cosmology of the ancient world and the ''articles of faith" derivedfromthe Scriptures.^ Cf. Dilthey, ^ The co-ordination of '* Gottes Wort und Luther's Lehr" is perfectly in accord with Melanchthon's feeling. See already Anton Otto, C. R. viii. 460 : "the faith {sentenHa) of Luther, that is, of Christ." ^ This combination reminds us of Thomas (supra, p. 100 f. ), but DiLTHEY 23 354 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Archiv., etc., vi. 236 ff. TrOltsch, 1. c. Hartfelder, Mel., p. 161 f., 181 f., 240. 7. In this last period of Melanchthon's labors, he emphasizes with great energy the idea, that those who confess the correct faith are the true church — thus following Luther also in the conception oftheChurch (p. 294 f.). He recognizes the altered conditions — there being now an evangelical church organization, having as its distinguishing mark the possession of the true doctrine — in most clearly from this time onward designating the visible as- sembly of the called (^coetus vocatorujii) as the church. ** The visible church is the assembly of those embracing the gospel of Christ and rightly using the sacraments, in which God through the ministry of the gospel is efficacious and regenerates many to eternal life, in which assembly, nevertheless, are many unregen- erated, but assenting to the true doctrine " (xxi. 826, and con- stantly. See Neue kirchl. Ztschr., 1897, 154, n. i). This defi- nition and the connection of thought in which it is found very clearly reveal the general conception of Melanchthon. The true church under any circumstances exists only where the true doc- trine is found. Thus Zacharias, Anna, Elizabeth, the shepherds, etc., since they did not accept the official teaching of their age, but remained steadfast in the true doctrine, constituted the true church in that age. God provides that there shall always be some servants of his word, like Zacharias, as faithful representa- tives of this true doctrine. Only in this true church, in which are gathered the really called, may believers and the elect be found,^ as only there is the church, in which God is known, con- fessed and worshiped, as ** he has revealed himself" (xxi. 834).^ In the Middle Ages the church existed only where the doctrines of an Augustine and Bernard, a Tauler and Wessel, were taught (xxi. 837 ; xxiv. 309 ; xxv.862f.). They only, according to the Scriptures, are churches, *' which hold the pure doctrine and are in harmony with it'' {in ea cojisentiunt^ xi. 273). Only in tliis church are to be found the forgiveness of sins and justifica- (p. 238) very properly points out the difference — that Melanchthon does not, like Thomas, unite faith and philosophy in the construction of a system of meta- physics, but only makes the natural consciousness his point of departure. Nevertheless, this Melanchthonian combination led historically to the ortho- doxy of the seventeenth, as well as to the illumination of the eighteenth cen- tury. ^ This is the "church of the elect," xxi. 913 ; xii. 67S : the **church of the regenerate ; " xii. 589, 431 ; xxiii., p. xxxv.: the " eternal church ; " xi. 760 : the " elect ' ' alone in this " army of the called ; ' ' xii. 567. On the other hand, the term, true church (ecclesia vera), is used to designate the church which holds the true doctrine ; but only in this are the " true members of the church," ?". e., the '^saints" — .see xxiii. 599. '^ Cf. xi. 273 ; xii. 567 ; ix. 557 ; xxv. 220 f., 325, 640 ; xxiii. 597 f. THEOLOGY OF MELANCHTHON. 355 tion (xi. 400). But those who, like the Romish church, do not hold the central principle of the true doctrine, but persecute the real church, do not belong to the true church.^ Yet Melanch- thon also maintains the conception of the church as an object of faith ^ since it is only by faith that we can be assured that there is really in this visibly assembly (^coetus') a number of elect per- sons (xii, 368 f.; xxiv. 365, 368, 400, 405 ; xxv. 148 f., 221, 677 ; viii. 284). The marks which attest the existence of the *' true visible church," and at the same time assure to faith the presence of a '* church of the regenerate " within the former, are therefore the true evangelical doctrine and the proper admin- istration of the sacraments — to which Melanchthon afterward habitually added — reverence {j-everentia) , or obedience, to the ministry (^obedientia ministerii)} Such is the church. In it the divine purpose is being accom- plished in the world. It is the realization of the aim of the work of Christ.^ But this it is, because in it alone the truth of God is apprehended by men and becomes effectual through them. To maintain this doctrine in its simplicity and purity is the task of theology, as well as of every branch of science. This end is to be served by universities, princes, and states (xi. 272, 326 f.; iii. 198; viii. 401; vii. (i(>6, Hartfelder, p. 437). It may be said that the maintenance and spread of *'pure doctrine " is the great motive which inspired Melanchthon's life-work, as a Re- former of the church and of the universities, as a theologian, phil- ologian, and teacher.* This involved again, as compared with Luther, a narrowing of the horizon, resulting not merely from the great importance attached to the *' pure doctrine," but from the fact that the life-giving energy of the church was attributed ^ XII. 526, 628 ; xxiii.; p. xxxvii. ; xxiv. 78 1, 855 : " There is the church where are the fountains of Israel. . . The Turks are not the church, neither are the Papists." 2 XIL 599, 433, 602, 655 ; xxiv. 367,401, 502 ; xxv. 129, 685, etc. The peculiar importance attached to the clerical office (see also xxv, 692) marks one of the materializing features of Melanchthon's later writings. The church, he holds, is neither a tyranny nor a democracy, but an honoralile aristocracy [hones/a aristocratia), xii. 367, 496; cf. also ii. 274, 2S4, 334, 376; iii. 942. ^ XXI. 345 ; xxiv. 307 ; xii. 520 : ** To this end he established the human race, that there might be a. church obeying God and worshiping him," 566 ; xiii. 199 ; xxiii. 198 ; xii. 339, 539, 616, 634, etc. * This explains his severity toward heretics [e. ff., Servetus), ii. iS ; iii. I97f., 199, 241 f.; viii. 520 ff.; iv. 739; xii. 696; xxiv. 375, 501. On the other hand, we may thus also understand his fatal attitude toward the Interim, vii. 382 f. , 322 f., and toward Calvin and his party ; for, aside from the devi- ations which had separated himself as well from Luther, he believed himself to be in doctrinal accord with Calvin — and everything to his mind depended upon doctrine. 35^ HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. directly to the latter. It cannot be denied that in these views of Melanchthon are to be found the germs of the errors of the orthodoxy of the seventeenth century.^ Melanchthon even de- fined faith, aSj in the first instance, an ^'assent," with which in- tellectual act, the voluntary act of trust is necessarily associated (xxi. 790). But this is only a passing remark, trust still remain- ing for him the first and controlling element of faith. *'This consolation is trust, by which the will acquiesces in the promise of mercy granted for the sake of the Mediator. But trust in the mercy embraces also a knowledge of the history, because it looks upon Christ, whom it is necessary to know as the eternal Son, crucified, arisen, etc., for us. And the history must be brought into relation with the promise, or effect, which is presented in the article: *I believe in the forgiveness of sins ' " (ib. p. 743 ; vi. 910). None of these passages must, of course, be in- terpreted as making the salvation of the individual dependent upon the possession of the pure doctrine. *^ Although the true church . . . preserves the articles of faith, nevertheless that true church may itself hold the articles of faith with obscurity on account of erroneous conceptions of them." If very much in the teaching even of the Fathers is overlooked, if they have only held fast to the fundamental truth, how much more must be forgiven weakness and errors found among the laity (ib. p. 837 fij cf. xii. 433 fi; xxiii. 599, 601, 207). The important matter is only that the proper foundation be laid in the acceptance of the chief doctrine. He does not regard all separate doctrinal statements as of equal importance, but expressly recognizes a gradation of doctrines. ** But this faith embraces all the arti- cles of the Creed, and refers the others to this one : ' I believe in the forgiveness of sins ' " (xii. 406, 540 ; xxi. 422), There are chief articles, which are important above everything else. The chief article is that concerning the blessings of Christ, or justification.^ In this lies the whole practical comfort of the Christian religion, and it is in their relationship to it that all the 1 This remark is not a novel one. See G. Arnold, Kirchen u. Ketzer- historie, ii. Bk. 16, c. 9, 4 ff. Zierold, Einleitung zur Kirchenhistorie (Leipzig u. Stargard, 1700), i. 387 ff., 384; recently Ritschl, Die Entste- hung der luth. Kirche, in Ztschr. f. Kirchengesch. i. 2 Cf., e. g.j xxiii. 600, 280; v. 582 (original sin, grace, faith, works, sac- raments); vi. 116; vii. 117 f., 532,433; XXV. 863. Cf. also similar lists in Luther (supra, p. 297, n. 3). But note also, in a disputation held under Melanchthon, the remark in reference to the Athanasian Creed : " When they say, * This is the Catholic faith ' (/i/d-j), they do not mean this trust {fiducia). But nevertheless the principal good work and destruction of the kingdom of Satan is to think rightly {recte seniire) concerning God, to confess God," etc. (in Haussleiter, p. 51). THEOLOGY OF MELANCHTHON. 357 Other doctrines receive their position and significance. It may, perhaps, be correctly said, that Melanchthon in this really means to say no more than that spiritual life can be aroused and flourish only when the gospel is actually preached. But it would be an error, in view of such a remark concerning Melanchthon's personal sentiment in the matter, to minimize the historical re- sults traceable to the form in which he expressed that sentiment. And it will scarcely suffice to interpret him as holding merely that the church has in the pure doctrine a substantial means for the effectual proclamation of the gospel. This was certainly essentially what Melanchthon meant. ^ But he s a id more than this. Only they are members of the church who preserve '* the doctrine uncorrupted, " /. e.j the foundation, namely, a// the articles of faith and the teachings of the decalogue.^ And it is just in the uncompromising one-sidedness of this position that its power and significance lie. It was in the sphere of doctrine, as including the ideal of practical life, that the issue had been joined with Rome. Under the circumstances of the age, it could have occurred in no other sphere. The "= pure doctrine " was the only legal title to existence held by the youthful evangelical church. This was a controlling factor in her political fortunes ; it opened the nations to the new church. Hence the duty of pro- claiming the pure doctrine must be constantly impressed upon her preachers,^ for the age was full of echoes of the scholastic teachings and superstitions of the past. There was still a strong tendency to disputations upon doctrine and its forms, and it was needful to de- cline many a hand outstretched to the Reformers with proffers of assistance or of sworn alliance. The practical conditions of the 1 See the fundamental definition, supra, p. 354; ** those embracing the gospel" and the "true doctrine." We may, perhaps, say, that when Me- lanchthon speaks of the evangelical doctrine, he thinks primarily of saving truth in the narrower sense of the term (cf. xxiii. 600). As in his first edi- tion of the Loci, the Trinity and Christology were regarded rather as matters for reverent contemplation than for teaching, so it is known that shortly be- fore his death he still hoped to gain clear ideas in regard to these objects of faith only in a higher world. 2 XII. 433 : " It is necessary that those who receive the uncorrupted doc- trine of the gospel . . . retain the foundation, all the articles of faith, and the doctrine of the decalogue." The text of the C. R. places the " and," not after faith, but as follows: contrition. The latter, however, would but drive man to despair, if preaching of the law were not at once accompanied with the proclamation of the gospel. The gospel, as the announcement of the forgiveness of sins, teaches us to know Christ and the blessings which he bestows (xii. 605).'' ^ We cannot fail to note here a formal approach to the Romish model, es- pecially when we remember the importance again attaching to the confessional in the latter half of the century. Cf. Von Zezschwitz, Katechetik, i. 570: '* Thereby (/. e.y through the combination of private confession and examina- tion upon doctrinal points) the Lutheran Church substantially readopted the pedagogical system of the Middle Ages in a purified form. Cf. also Ritschl, Gesch. d. Pietismus, ii. 201 f., 539 f. ^ Parallel with this narrower definition of the Gospel, Melanchthon recog- THEOLOGY OF MELANCHTHON. 359 At this point the doctrine of the Atonement is considered. If we are to speak of mercy to the sinner who is alarmed at thought of the divine justice, so there must be some means of accounting for this change of the divine attitude toward him. This require- ment. Melanchthon meets by substantially reproducing the satis- faction theory of Anselm, to whom he expressly refers, thus ex- hibiting both the divine and the human natures of Christ in their connection with human salvation. In this alone lies the significance of Christ's redeeming work : '* Christ has a ministry of teaching, but this is not his principal office. He was sent chiefly to be the victim for the human race, to be their Redeemer, to free us from the curse of the law. "^ The tempering of justice with mercy was brought about by Christ's bearing the punishment for us, or bringing a sacrifice and an ** equivalent price," and thereby satisfying the justice of God. As such service could be rendered only by a man, so, on the other hand, only God could offer a ** price equivalent" for the *' infinite wickedness " of the race (xxiv. 78 f, 569, 579; xxv. 171, 776; xii. 577 593, 446 f.; 616,424,428; xxi. 733,743,904). The obedience of Christ was the price rendered for us (xii. 424, 607 ; xxiii. 451).^ Christ is now standing before the Father and interceding (^inter- pellirf) for us, for the whole church, as for everyone who prays to him. *' We are righteous on account of Christ, his righteous- ness which he discharged in doing and bearing being imputed to us " (xxiv. 216). His *' merit " and *' intercession " are the foundation of the Christian faith (xii. 426). The effect of this redeeming work is the forgiveness of sins and the imputa- tion of the righteousness of Christ, the impartation of the Holy Spirit of love and righteousness and of the new eternal life (xxiv. 80. 216, 654 f, 656, 748, 775, 798, 873, 864, 875; xxiii. 452 ; XV. 895)/ Faith lays hold upon the consolation which the gospel pro- nizes also a broader conception, according to which it is *'the preaching of repentance and the promise" {following Lk. 24. 47); xii. 589, 640 ; xxi. 732 f. ^ XXV. 171 f . ; xxiv. 78 : ' * The final cause of the incarnation of the Son is that he may be a victim, the placator of the wrath of God." But in xxiv. 694, the object of the sending of Christ is said to have been the gathering, preservation, andsanctification of the church. In xv. 133, teaching and atone- ment are co-ordinated. 2 According to xxiv. 242 ; xxv. 175, the fulfilling of the law by Christ had also a vicarious significance. ^ '* Eternal life," as Melanchthon often insists, begins in the present life, xxiv. 625 : **The beginning of eternal life is in this life, i, e., by faith to know this eternal God who has sent his Son, and it is to know him to be reconciled through the Son, and to call upon him, to ask and expect consolation in all tribulations. This faith and consolation in genuine griefs is a taste of eternal life." 360 HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. claims, /. n- 2, 403; as teacher, 53, 71, 72. Christ, body of, in Lord's Supper. In Later Middle Ages, 203 ff; Luther, 286 ff., 322 f ; Zwingli, 318 ff.; Augsburg Confession, 341, 35 1 ; Eucharistic controversy, 366 f.; Consensus Tigurinus, 417. Christ, indwelling of, 53, 230 f., 270, 370 f. Christ, intercession of. In Gregory, I9f. ; Thomas, 113; Luther, 269 ; Melanchthon, 359 ; Calvin, 400. Christ, merit of In Gregory, 20 ; Abelard, 71 ; Anselm, 72 ; Lom- bard, 73 f. ; Alexander, Bonaven- tura, 1 10, III; Thomas, 113; Duns, 154 f., 156 f., 199; Later Middle Ages, 198 ff.; Melanch- thon, 359 ; Formula of Concord, 384- Christ, active and passive obedience of. In Luther, 371 n.; Osiander, 371 n.; Menius, Flacius, 373 ; Calvin, 400. Christ, offices of, 399. Christ, omnipresence of, 66 (see Ubiquity). Christ, person of. In Gregory, 18, 19 ; Synod of Toledo, 28, n. i ; Roland, Omnebene, Lombard, 65, 74; Anselm, 57, 66 f.; Gerhoh, 66 ; thirteenth century, 109 ; Alex- ander, Bonaventura, 1 10 ; Thomas, iiof.; Duns, 154 f.; Bernard, 155 ; Luther, 229 f., 235, 253, 266, n. 3, 298, 304 f., 323, 324 n.: Zwingli, 321, 323 ; Augsburg Confession 335 ; Heidelberg the- ology, 374 ; Brenz, Krell, Eber, Major, 374 ; Chemnitz, 375 ; Formula of Concord, 387 ; Calvin, 399- Christ, states of, 325 n., 376 f , 377 f. Christ, sufferings of In Gregory, 19 ; Bernard, 53 ; Anselm, 69; Thomas, 112 f. ; Duns, 156 f . ; Luther, 266 f. (see Atonement, Work of Christ). Christ, work of In Gregory, 19 ff.; 472 INDEX. Gottschalk, 31 ; Anselm, 66 f.; Bonaventura, 72 f. ; St. Florian, Honorius, Hugo, Pullus, 73 ; Lombard, 73 f., 91 ; Alexander, Bonaventura, 1 10 ; Thomas, 1 1 1 f. ; Duns, 154 f.; Mystics, 179; Later Middle Ages, 198 ff.; Aureolus, 187, 198 ; Biel, 198 ; Capreolus, Baconthorp, Durand, 198 ; Luther, 230, 261, 266 ff.; Zwingli, 3095.; Melanchthon, 359 ; Augsburg Confession, 335 ; Osiander, 370 ; Eber, Stancar, 374 ; Formula of Concord, 384 ; Calvin, 399 ; Synod of Dort, 423 ; Council of Trent, 436. Christian Life, in Middle Ages, 16 ; Gregory, 24, 26 ; Later Middle Ages, 178 f. , 202; Luther, 256, 273> 275, 296; Zwingli, 312; Augsburg Confession, 339 ; Osian- der, 370 ; Formula of Concord, 386 ; Calvin, 403, 405 ; Reformed Theology, 415; Jesuits, 430 ; Council of Trent, 438. Chronicles, Luther on, 300. Church, The. In Gregory, 25 ; Au- gustine, Hugo, Pullus, John of Salisbury, Alanus, 85 f. ; Gregory VII., 50, 85, 86 ; Waldenses, 94 ; Thomas, 144 f.; Duns, 144 f., 149; Occam, 192 f.; Huss, 211, 290; Wicklifife, Wesel, Wessel, 211 ; Luther, 226, 235, 289 f., 291 ff.; Bucer, 392; Zwingh, 315; Augs- burg Confession, 340 ; Melanch- thon, 340, 351, 354 f., 362; Cal- vin, 408 ; Later Reformed Confes- sions, 419 ; Council of Trent, 446 ; Catechismus Romanus, 448 ; Ques- nel, 455 n, ; Vatican Council, 460 ; as kingdom of heaven, 25 ; as com- munion of saints, 25, 85, 144, 212, 291, 292, 315, 340, 455 n.; as as- sembly of the called, 354 ; as as- sembly of the predestinated, 211, 290, 408, 419 ; necessary to salva- tion, 26, 293, 362, 408 ; unworthy members of, 294, 354 ; authority of, 18, 149, 163, 170, 192 f., 211, 226, 235, 289 ; infallibility of, 50, 149, 192 ; rulers and subjects in, 26, 86, 145, 2H f. ; seculariza- tion of, 52, 97 ; visible and invisi- ble, 235, 291 f., 293 f., 315, 317, 340, 345, 3S5. 408, 419 ; marks of the true, 294, 340, 341, 352, 354, 355. 357, 408; and secular learning, 353, 362, 363. Church and State. In Gregory, 28 ; scholastic age, 50 f. ; John of Salis- bury, 86; Innocent III., 87 f. ; Louis of Bavaria, 165 ; Marsilius, Occam, 167, 170 ; Savonarola, 190 n., 318 ; Zwingli, 317 f. ; Reforma- tion era, 332 f.; Frankfort Recess, 379; Calvin, 410; Reformed the- ology, 415 ; Augsburg Confession, 341 ; Council of Trent, 446 ; Gal- lican Church, 457. Chytraeus, Lutheranism of, 381. Civil Life, 273 f. Classics, study of the, 213. Clement XI. and Jansenists, 454. Clermont, council at, 45. Clergy, orders of the, 141 ; and laity, 170. Cluny, reformatory ideas at, 49. Colet. On faith, justification, grace, 215, 216 n. Comester, on Lord's Supper, 77. Communicatio idiomatum. In Thomas, Bonaventura, no; Oc- cam, 192 ; Luther, 323 ; Cureus, 366 ; Brenz, Heidelberg theolo- gians, 374; Chemnitz, 375 ff.; Gnesio- Lutherans, 381. Communion with Christ. In Luther, 231 ; Calvin, 404 (see Mysticism, INDEX. 473 Imitation of Christ) ; of saints, 144 f., 212, 235, 286 f., 291 ff., 408. CommunisTn, 182 f. Conception, carnal, 2i f. ; immacu- late, 81, 91 n., 155, 188 n., 456. Concomitance. In sacraments, 127; in Lord's Supper, 132. Concord, attempts to secure, 380 ; Formula of, genesis of, 378 f. , 382 ; estimate of, 382, 3S9 ; on original sin, free-will, conversion, 383 ; faith, 383 n., 384, 3S5 ; synergism, justification, forgiveness, work and merit of Christ, 384 ; Holy Spirit, 383 f., 385 nn.; contrition, 384, n. l; renewal, 384, 423 n.; good works, 384 f. ; Christian life ; Lord's Supper, 386 ; person of Christ, 387 ; predestination, word, divine call, assurance, descent into hell, adiaphora, 388 ; Book of, 382 ; the Schwabian, 382 n. ; the Schwa- bian-Saxon, 382 n. ; the Witten- berg, 321, 386. Concordat of, A. D. 1801, 457. Concupiscence (see Sin, original). Confession. In Gregory, 24 ; Early Middle Ages, 43 f. ; Abelard, 81, 92 n. ; Hugo, 82, 92 ; PuUus, 83 ; Lombard, 83, 92 ; Gratian, 92 ; Innocent IIL, 93 ; Alexander, Albert, 130 ; Thomas, William of Paris, 137; Eugene IV., 140; Durand, 140 n.; Luther, 234, 240; Zwingli, 316 n.; Augsburg Con- fession, 342, 344 ; Council of Trent, 438, 442. Confession, private, 93, 174, 234, 240, 358 n. Confirmation. In Hugo, Roland, 81 ; Later Middle Ages, 130 ; Eugene IV., 131 ; Council of Trent, 439. Congregation, rights of the, 294, 3^^, 334. Conscience, 171 n., 243 n., 399 n. Consensus Genevensis, 421 ; Hel- vetica, 425 ; Tigurinus, 417. Conservatism. In Middle Ages, 15 f. Consistorium, 409. Constance, Council at, 166. Constantine, Donation of, 40, 213. Constantinople, councils at, 18, 29. Contarini, Cardinal, on justification, 434, "■ I. Contarini, Julian, evangelical views of, 434, 11. 2. Contemplation of Christ, 53, 54, 72, 124, 179 f. Contingency, 150. Contra -remonstrants. On predestina- tion, 422, Contrition, Gregory, 24 ; Early Middle Ages, 43 ; Abelard, Epitome, Roland, 81 ; Gratian, 92 ; Alexander, Thomas, Alanus, William of Paris, 136 f. ; Biel, 136 f., 201 ; Luther, 222, 234, 237 ff.; Augsburg Confession, 342 ; Melanchthon, 358, 361 ; Formula of Concord, 384, 385, n. I ; Calvin, 403 ; Council of Trent, 438, 442, 444. Conversion. In Melanchthon, 349 ; Synergistic controversy, 367 ff. ; Ambrose, Strigel, Flacius, 367 f. ; Formula of Concord, 383 ; Later Reformed Confessions, 419 ; Amy- raldus, 425. Co-operation. In divine nature, 375, 387 ; between God and man (see Synergism ) . Corpora doctrinae, 380. Corpus Christi, 134. Corpus Philippicum, 380, Council, at Nice (A. D. 325), 18; (A. D. 787), 29; Constantinople (A. D. 553), 18; (A. D. 754), 29; Ratisbon (A. D. 794), 29; Frank- fort (A. D. 794), 29 ; Aachen (A. D- 799), 29; (A. D. 809), 30; 474 INDEX. {A. D. 836), 84; Rome (A. D. 799), 29; (A. D. 1050, 1059, 1079), 76; Toledo (A. D. 444), 30; (A. D. 633, 638, 675), 28; Gentilly (A. D. 767), 30; Mayence (A. D. 848), 31 ; Chiersy (A. D. 849), 32; (A. D. 853), 33 i Valence (A. D. 853), 33; Toucy (A. D. 860), 33; Chalon (A. D. 813), 42 ; Tribur, (A. D. 895), 45; Clermont (A. ^' 1095 )» 45; Soissons (A. D. I121), 61 ; Sens (A. D. II41), 61 ; Fourth Lateran (A. D. 1215), 78, 93, 95, 108 ; Piacenza (A. D. 1095), 78; Treves (A. D. 1227), 92, 93; Narbonne (A. D. 1227), 93 ; Lauterberg (A. D. 1236), 93; Toulouse (A. D. 1229), 93; London (A. D. 1237), 125 ; Con- stance (A. D. 1414-17), 92, n. 3, 166, 290; Second Lyons (A. D. 1274), 146; Florence (A. D. 1439), 125 ; Third Lateran (A. D. 1 179), 125; Pisa (A. D. 1409), 166 ; Basel (A. D. 1431-47), 166 ; Trent (A. D. 1545-63), 431 ; Vat- ican (A. D. 1869-70), 460. Councils, authority of, 166, 289, 290 f., 293, 303, 457 ; the four pri- mary, 18. Counsels, evangelical, 124, 274. Counter-reformation, 428 ff. Creationism, 22, 117. Creed, Apostles'. In Thomas, Bona- ventura, 102 ; Later Middle Ages, 174; Luther, 303 f. Creed, Nicene, 102 n. Crisis, at close of Middle Ages, 173, 181, 213, 216, 221. Criticism, biblical, 300 f . ; of dogmas, 192 ff. Cross, sign of, 79. Crusades, 45. Crypto- Calvinism, 367, 381. Cup, withholding of, 132, 440. Cureus. In Eucharistic controversy, 366. D'Ailli, philosophy of, 186 ; on Scriptures, 192 f . ; Lord's Supper, 204. Dead, masses for the, 25, 441, 445. Decalogue, 174. Decretals, papal, 50, n. 2, 52, 290 ; Pseudo-Isidorean, 41. Descent into hell, 135, 377 n., 3S8. Devil, claim of, on man, 67,70 ; con- questof, 68, 74 ; outwitting of, 21, 74, 267, u. 2. Devils, faith in, 17, 173, 246 n. Dialectics. In Middle Ages, 60, 96. Dionysius, Areopagita. On God, 107. Discipline, church. In Calvin, 409 ; Later Reformed Confessions, 419. Doctrine, the pure, 295, 330, 351 ff., 396 ; and the Lutheran Church, 358, 379 ; Protestant construction of, 347 ff. Doctrines, gradation in, 356. Dogma. In ancient church, 332 ; in Middle Ages, 15, 17, 55, 332 ; in Reformation era, 333 f., 347 ff.; Luther, 302 ff. ; modern Roman Catholic church, 46 ; Protestant and Roman Catholic churches, 464 f. ; provisional, 347. Donation of Constantine, 40, 213. Donum superadditum. In Gregory, 21,11. I.; Henry, Thomas, Bona- ventura, 115; Duns, 153; Biel, 197 ; Council of Trent, 432 n.; Bajus, 450. Dort, Synod of, estimate of, 422 ; in- fluence of, 423, n. 3 ; and Calvin- ism, 424 ; on Arminianism, predes- tination, 421 ff. ; faith, grace, elec- tion, 422 ; will, 423, 425 n.; work of Christ, divine call, regeneration, INDEX. 475 perseverance, 423 ; justification, God, 424; assurance, 422, 435- DunsScotus, works of, 147 ; estimate of, 97, 106, 146, 162 f. ; influence of, 428 f., 431 ; philosophy of, 98, 147 ; on sacraments, 127 f., 161 ; indehble character, 128; baptism, 130 ; Lord's Supper, 131 f., 133, 150 ; confession, absolution, 137 f.; satisfaction, indulgences, pur- gatory, 139 ; extreme unction, 140; ordination, 141 ; marriage, 142 ; communion of saints, 144; church, 144 f., 149; will, 148 f.; blessed- ness, 148 ; faith, 150, 160; God, 150 f., 163 f.; predestination, 151, 156, 164 ; original state, 153 ; original sin, 153, 154 n., 163; person of Christ, 154 f. ; work of Christ, 156 f. ; merit of Christ, 154 f-> ^5^ f-» ^99; immaculate conception, 155 ; grace, 158 ; at- trition, justification, forgiveness, 160 f. Durand, philosophy of, 186; on Lord's Supper, 76 f., 203 ; public repentance, 93 ; confession, 140, 142 n.; work of Christ, 198 ; grace, 201 f. E. Eber. On person of Christ, 374. Ecclesiastes, Luther on, 300. Eck, theses of, 334. Eckhart, works of, 1 78 ; on imitation of Christ, 178 f. Ecstasy, 180 f. Eisenach, synod at, 365. Elipandus, works of, 27 ; inAdoption- ist controversy, 27. Episcopacy (see Bishops) vs. papacy, 457. Episcopus. On predestination, 421. Epitome, The, 382 n. ; on repentance, 81. Eremites, Augustinian, 187. Esther, Luther on, 300, Etherius. In Adoptionist contro- versy, 27. Eucharistic controversy, 366. Eugene IV. On sacraments, 125 ; indelible character, 128 ; baptism, 130; confirmation, 131; repent- ance, extreme unction, 140 ; ordi- nation, 142 ; marriage, 143. Ex opere operante, 129. Ex opere operato, 128, 343, 439. Excommunication, 168, 210, 21 1, 409. Exorcism, 130 n. Eybel, work of, 458, u. 2. F. Faber Stapulensis. On Lord's Sup- per, 205 n. Faith. In Gregory, 17, 22; Early Middle Ages, 15, 46, n. 3; Rad- bertus, 37 ; Anselm, 57 ; Abelard, 58; Innocent IV., 90; Thomas, 103, 120 f.; Lombard, 123 ii.; Duns, 150; Biel, Occam, 195 f . ; Erasmus, 215 n.; Colet, 216 n.; Innocent III., 196; Luther, 223, 225, 232 ff., 240, 241, 252 ff., 275 f., 296, 297 f , 302, 328 ; Cal- vin, 401 f., 405; Zwingli, 310 f., 313 ; Augsburg Confession, 336 ff,, 342 ; Reformed Confessions, 344 ; Melanchthon, 356, 360 f. ; Osian- der, 371 f. ; Formula of Concord, 383 n., 384, 385; Bucer, 392; Later Reformed Confessions, 419 ; Remonstrants, Synod of Dort, 422 ; Jesuits, 430 : Council of Trent, 433, 435. 436, 437, 440, 449; Quesnel, 455 n. ; Unigenitus, 455 ; Vatican Council, 460 ; as trust, 215 n., 233, 235, 254, 310, 356, 361, 365, 401, 419 ; as conviction, 476 INDEX, 402, 419 ; as disposition toward grace, 435 f. ; implicit and explicit, 90, 103, 104, 150, 170, 195 f., 255, 402, 429; infused, 103, 150, 195, 254; acquired, 232 f., 254; and love, 103, 121, 209, 436; and sacraments, 80, 282, 328 ; and Lord's Supper, 413. Fall, The. In Gregory, 21 ; An- selm, 116; Duns, 153; Biel, Occam, 197 ; Luther, 242 ; Zwingli, 309 ; Osiander, 370 ; Cal- vin, 398, 406 ; Council of Trent, 432. Fasting, 92. Faustus. On grace, 23. Fear, province of, 26, 136, 138, 249, 438 (see Law). Felix of Urgellis. On Adoptionism, 27. Filioque, 30. Flacius. In Adiaphoristic and Majoristic controversies, 364 ; in Synergistic controversy, 367 f, ; in Osiandrian controversy, 373. Florence, council at, 125. Florian, St., work of, 59 > on, work of Christ, 73 ; Lord's Supper, 77 ; sacraments, 79- Florus, works of, 30 ; on predestina- tion, 32. Foreknowledge (see Prescience). Forgiveness of Sins. In Gregory, 24 ; Radbertus, 37 ; Early Middle Ages, 46 ; Anselm, 68 ; Abelard, 81 ; Lombard, 83 ; Gratian, 92 ; Thomas, 112 f., 121; Duns, 160 f.; Luther, 260 f., 283, 284, 372; Melanchthon, 356, 358, 360 ; Osiander, 372 ; Formula of Con- cord, 384 ; Council of Trent, 433, 437 ; Bajus, 450, n. 2 ; Jansen, 453 ; Quesnel, 455 n. Francis of Assisi, estimate of, 89, 96 ; mysticism of, 89 ; order of, 90 ; on Virgin Mary, 91 n. Franciscans, 95. Frankfort Recess, 379. Fredeland, consecration of host, 367 n. Free-will. In Gregory, 20 f. ; Rabanus, 31 f . ; Hincmar, 32 ; Councils of Chiersy and Valence, ;iS 'f Thomas, 118 f . ; Bonaven- tura, 120; Biel, 138, 197; Duns, 148 ; Occam, 197 ; Bradwardina, 208 ; Wickliffe, 208 ; Luther, 243 f.; Zwingli, 313 f . ; Melanch- thon, 349 ; Leipzig Interim, 364 n.; Synergistic controversy, Strigel, 367 f.; Flacius, 3^7 f-, 3^3; For- mula of Concord, 383 ; Bucer, 393 ; Calvin, 397, 399; Eolsec, 420; Remonstrants, 422 ; Synod of Dort, 423, 425 n. ; Council of Trent, 433 f . ; Bajus, 450, 451 u.; Molina, 45 1 f. ; Jansen, 454 f. ; Quesnel, 455 n. G. Galilean Church, struggles of, 457. Gelasius. On Lord's Supper, 34. Gendulph, Sentences of, 6^. Genesis, Luther on, 300. Gentilly, council at, 30. Gerbert. On Lord's Supper, 39. Gerhard of Sienna, philosophy of, 187. Gerhoh, philosophy of, 60 ; on per- son of Christ, 66. Germanic church, 15 f. Germanic legal system, 69. Germanus of Paris. On Lord's Sup- per, 77. Gerson, Reformatory ideas of, 188; on communion of saints, 144. Glory, the divine, 397, 420. Gnesio-Lutheranism, 380, 381, n. 3. Goch, Pupper of, and Augustinian- INDEX. 477 ism, I go ; on grace, 208 f.; Scrip- tures, evangelical liberty, 209. God, conception of. In Gregory, 18; Germanic, 29 n.; in Anselm, 69, 107 ; Thomas, lOO, 107 ; Augus- tine, Dionysius, 107 ; Duns, 150, 163 f.; Luther, 253, 265, 298, 407, 416; Zwingli, 314 ; Calvin, 396 f., 407 ; Reformed theology, 416; Synod of Dort, 424 ; Vatican Council, 460 ; existence of, 56 ; as love, 107, 151, 164, 253, 265, 401, 407, 416 ; relation to the world, 107; wrath of, 229 n., 245, 249. 358. 370 f., 400; glory of, 397, 420, Gnosticism, 94. Goddam, philosophy of, 186. Gomanus. On predestination, 421, 422 n. Gospel, The, 228, 246, 248 f., 250 251,311, 342, 358, 366, 385. , Gospels, the Synoptic, Luther on, 300. Gottschalk, works of, 30 ; con- demned, 32 ; on predestination, Trinity, work of Christ, 31. Grace. In Gregory, 22 f. ; Faustus, 23; Council of Chiersy, ^^ ; Thomas, 115, 128; Lombard, 1 18; Biel, John of Paltz, Durand, 201 f. ; Bonaventura, 115, I19; Duns, 158 ; Goch, 208 f.; Wesel, Wessel, 209 ; Colet, 216, 11. I ; Luther, 231 f., 263 ff., 297 ; Zwingli, 314 ; Melanchthon, 360 ; Southwestern Germany, 390 ; Calvin, 399 ; Bol- sec, 420 ; Remonstrants, Synod of Dort, 422 ; Council of Trent, 433, 435. 439, 449; Bajus, 450; Mo- lina, 451 f. ; Jansen, 453 ; Quesnel, , 455 11.; Unigenitus, 455; creata and increata, 1 1 8, 158, 208, 232 n., 264 ; g-7'aiumfaciens, 115, 119, 122, 127, 128, 129, Z^^-y graiia data^ 122, 128, 209; infused, 78, 80, 115, 119, 120, 123, 137 f., 153, 160 f., 190, 201 f., 208 f., 216 n., 232, 239, n. 2, 240, 263, 265, li. I, 297, 433, 449 ; opera- ting and co-operating, 119; irre- sistible, 23, 422, 453, 454 (see free-will); prevenient, 22,32,208, 435, 454 ; in sacraments, 80, 85, 126; in ordination, 84; means of, 293, Zl^. 409- Gratian, and Lombard, 62 f. ; on con- trition, confession, absolution, for- giveness, 92. Greek Church. In Middle Ages, 16. Gregory the Great, works of, 17, 25 ; estimate of, 17, 26; theology of, 15, 16; and Augustine, 26, 32; Melanchthon on, 26 n.; on Trinity, 17 ; angels, 17, 25 ; God, 18 ; horaousia, 18; Holy Spirit, 18, 20 n., 30 ; incarnation, 19 n.; person of Christ, 18 f.; work and interces- sion of Christ, 19 ff.; Scriptures, 18, 19; church, ancient symbols, 18 ; example of Christ, 19, 21 ; saints and martyrs, 20 ; original state, 21 n. ; demons, 17; devil, 21; faith, 17, 22; free-will, 21, 22 ; sin, 21 f. ; fall, guilt, 21 ; vices, 21 n.; carnal conception, 21 f. ; Creationism and Traducianism, 22 ; unbaptized children, 22 ; grace, 22 f. ; justification, predestination, co-operation, merit, 23 ; baptism, 22 ; repentance, contrition, confes- sion, absolution, satisfaction, good works, forgiveness, 24; Lord's Supper, mass, purgatory, 24 f. ; church, 18, 25 ; Christian life, 24, 26. Gregory VII., estimate of, 96; on church, papacy, 50, 85, 86 ; state, 51, 85, 86 ; Lord's Supper, 75. Gregory of Rimini, philosophy of, 478 INDEX. l88 ; on immaculate conception, 1 88 n. ; Luther on, 242. Gropper, imputed righteousness, 434". Grosseteste, philosophy of, 98 ; theol- ogy of, 164 n. Guibert. On preaching, 92 ; Lord's Supper, 39, Guilt, 21, 81, 117. Guitmund. On Lord's Supper, 76 f. H. Habitus, 103, 131 f., 150, 158 f., 195 (see Faith, Grace). Hadrian. On Adoptionism, 29. Haimo. On Lord's Supper, 39. Hardenberg. In Eucharistic contro- versy, 366, Heathen, salvation of. In Zwingli, 315. Hebrews, Epistle to the, Luther on, 300. Heidelberg Catechism. On Lord' s Supper, 418 ; predestination, 421. Heidelberg theologians. On person of Christ, ubiquity, 374. Helvetic Confession, estimate of, 344 ; on predestination, 421. Henry of Ghent, works of, 106 ; philosophy of, 98, 106 ; on uni- versals, 106; will, 106; original state, 115; divine call, 122; in- dulgences, purgatory, 139. Heretics and sacraments, 50, 5 1, 142 ; and baptism, 439 ; and ordi- nation, 142. Hervaeus Natalis, philosophy of, 186. Hierarchy. In Early Middle Ages, 40 f., 50, 87 f., 96; Nicholas, 40; Donation of Constantine, 40 f. ; Pseudo-Isidorian decretals, 41 ; Boniface VIII., 88, 165; Wal- denses, 94 ; Later Middle Ages, 165 ff.; Marsilius, Occam, 167 fF.; Wesel,2ii; Augsburg Confession, 344 ; Luther, 290, 294 ; Council of Trent, 445, 449. Hincmar, works of, 30 ; on Trinity, 31 ; predestination, 32. Hildebert. On Lord's Supper, 77. History of Doctrines, method of, 55 ; scope of, 466. Holkot, philosophy of, 186. Holy Spirit. In Gregory, 18, 30; Luther, 248 n., 256, 263, 280 f., 305; Zwingli, 311; Melanchthon, 360 ; Majoristic controversy, 365 ; Formula of Concord, 383 f., 385 nn.; Calvin, 395, 401, 411 ; pro- cession of, 18, 30 ; intercession of, 20, n. 2 ; work of, 385. Homousia, 303 ; of Christ, 18 (see Christ, Person of); of the Holy Spirit, 18, 30. Honius. On Lord's Supper, 288, 319. Honorius. On systematic theology, 61 ; work of Christ, 73 ; Lord's Supper, 77 ; public repentance, 93. Host, desecrated, 77 n., 132 ; adora- tion of, 440. Hugo of Langres. On Lord's Sup- per, 76, 77. Hugo of St. Victor, estimate of, 64 ; and Ix)mbard, 62 ; on systematic theology, 61 ; sacraments, 19, 80, 61 ; work of Christ, 73 ; confirma- tion, 81 ; repentance, confession, absolution, satisfaction, 82, 92 ; extreme unction, ordination, 84 ; church, 85 f. ; state, 86. Humanism, 213 ff. Huss, influence of, 185, 289 n.; on church, 211, 290. Hussites. On Lord's Supper, 206 f. I. Images, worship of, 29, 94, 448 ; adoration vs. veneration of, 29. Imitation, of Christ. In Bernard, 54, 72 ; Francis, Ludolf, 89 ; Tauler, INDEX. 479 Eckhart, 178 f . ; Wickliffe, 184; Erasmus, 215; Luther, 270; Zwingli, 312 ; of parents' sins, 21, n. I. Impanation, 75. Impulses, natural. In Luther, 273 ; Reformed theology, 415- Indulgences. In Middle Ages, 92 ; Biel, 139, 176 ; Alexander, Thomas, Duns, Henry of Ghent, 139 ; Later Middle Ages, 165, 173; John of Paltz, 176; Wick- liffe, Wesel, Wessel, 210; Luther, 234, 236, 241; Zwingli, 316 n.; Council of Trent, 444 ; for money, 177. Indwelling, of God, 231, 270, 370 f. ; of Christ, 53, 230 f., 270, 370 f. Infallibility, of church, 50, 149, 192; of pope, 169, 170, 461, 462 f.; decree of, 462 f. Innocent III., estimate of, 96 ; on papacy, church and state, 87 ; private confession, 93 ; indelible character, 128 ; faith, 196. Innocent IV. On faith, 90. Ino. On communion of saints, 144 n. Intention. In sacraments, 125 ; in baptism, 439. Intercession, of Christ, 19, 1 13, 269, 359, 400 ; of saints and martyrs, 20, n. 2, 309 ; of the church, 20, 11. 2 ; of the Holy Spirit, 20, n. 2. Interim, Leipzig, estimate of, 355 n. ; and Melanchthon, 363, 364 ; on justification, bishops, Romish cere- mcpies, 364; free-will, 364 n.; righteousness, 381, n. 4. Interpretation, allegorical, 15, 19. Isidore, works of, 16; on predestina- tion, 30. J- James, Epistle of, Luther on, 300. Janduno, philosophy of, 187. Jansen, work of, 453 ; theses of, 454 ; and Augustinianism, 453 ; and Bradwardina, 453 ; on original sin, will, justification, forgiveness, love, predestination, 453 ; irresist- ible grace, 453, 454. Jansenists, estimate of, 453 f, Jesuits, estimate of, 429 f. ; condem- nation of, 453 J on repentance, 429 ; faith, asceticism, preaching. Christian life, 430 ; grace, 449. Joachim of Floris, apocalyptic visions of, 95, 183 ; on Trinity, 108. John, Gospel of, Luther on, 299. John of Damascus, influence on Lom- bard, 63. John of Paltz, works of, 179, n. 3, 201, 175 f.; theology of, 188; on attrition, 175 f. ; absolution, indul- gences, 176; grace^ 201 f. ; justifi- cation, 201. John of Paris. On Lord's Supper, 203 n. John of Ruusbroec, works of, 178. John of Salisbury, philosophy of, 60 ; on church, 85 f. Joslenus. On communion of saints, 144. Jubilee indulgences, 176. Jude, Epistle of, Luther on, 300. Justification. In Gregory, 23 ; Scho- lastics, 120 ff. ; Bonaventura, 120 f., 201 ; Thomas, 120 f . ; Lom- bard, 123 ii.; Middle Ages, 175; Duns, 160; John of Paltz, 201 ; Wessel, 209; Colet, 216 n. ; Luther, 233, 235, 260 f.; Zwingli, 307, 310 ; Augsburg Confession, 336 ff.; Apology, 338; Early Re- formed Confessions, 344 ; Me- lanchthon, 351, 356, 358, 36of., 362, 372, 11. 2 ; Leipzig Interim, 364 ; Majoristic controversy, 365 ; Osiandrian controversy, 369 f., 373 ; Formula of Concord, 384 j 48o INDEX. Southwestern Germany, 390 ; Bucer, 392, n. 3 ; Calvin, 403 f. ; Later Reformed Confessions, 420 ; Synod of Dort, 424 ; Council of Trent, 433 ff., 435, 436, 437; Contarini, 434, n. I ; Bajus, 450 ; Jansen, 453; Quesnel, 455 n.; progressive, 437. K. Kempis, Thomas k, works of, 178; mysticism of, 178 f. Kenotism, 376 n. Keys, power of the. In Gregory, 26, 51 ; Hugo, 86 ; Thomas, 145 ; Marsilius, Occam, 168 ; Luther, 293 ; Augsburg Confession, 341, 343 ; Council of Trent, 444. Klebitz, in Eucharistic controversy, 366. Krell. On person of Christ, 374. Kilwardby, philosophy of, 98. Kingdom of Christ, 266, 277, 292, 340, 391, 410, n. 2. Kings, Books of the, Luther on, 300. Knowledge, median, 451 f . ; original, 115; theory of, in Boetius, 56; Thomas, 104 f . ; Albert, Anselm, 105 ; Abelard, 60 ; Duns, 148 ; Occam and his school, 186 f., 190 f.; Henry of Ghent, I06. L. Lanfranc, works of, 74 ; on reason, 55 ; Lord's Supper, 76 f. Lauterwald, Osiandrian controversy, 373- Law, The. In Luther, 239, 246 ff. ; Zwingli, 311 ; Melanchthon, 358 ; Augsburg Confession, 337 ; Osi- ander, 370 f . ; Calvin, 403; Re- formed theology, 416; preach- ing of the, 248 f., 250. Law and Gospel. In Luther, 228, 246, 248 f., 250; Agricola, 251, 366 ; Augsburg Confession, 342 ; Zwingli, 311 ; Formula of Con- cord, 385 ; Antinomian contro- versy, 365. Law, natural, 52, 55, 171 f., 183, 184 n., 246 f., 309, 399. Legalism. In Middle Ages, 46 ; An- selm, 69. Leipzig Disputation, 225, 289 f., 291, 298. Leo I. In filioque controversy, 30. Leo III. On Adoptionism, 29 ; fil- ioque controversy, 30. Leo X. On councils, 166; bull of, 166. Leo XIII. On inspiration of Scrip- tures, 460, n. ■^. Liberty, evangelical. In Later Middle Ages, 182 f. ; Goch, 209 ; Luther, 275. Life, civil, 273 f. ; eternal, 359; the new, 231, 256 f., 337, 360. Lombard, Peter, estimate of, 62, 64, 185 ; system of, 63 ; and Abelard, 59 ; Luther on, 224 ; on person of Christ, 65,74 ; work of Christ, 73 f., 91; sacraments, 63, 80; Lord's Supper, yS ; repentance, 74, 80, 83, 92 ; confession, absolution, sat- isfaction, S^i 92 ; forgiveness, pur- gatory, 83 f. ; extreme unction, or- dination, 84 ; Trinity, 108 ; orig- inal sin, 116; grace, 118; faith, justification, 123 n. ; baptism, 130; marriage, 143. Lord's Supper. In Middle Ages, 16, 34; Gregory, 24 f . ; Gelasius, 34 ; Carlovingian period, 34 ; Al- cuin, 35 ; Radbertus, 35, 37, 76 ; Rabanus, 37, 39 ; Ratramnus, 38 ; Guibert, Haimo, 39 ; Gregory VII., 75 y Durand, ^6, 203 ; Berenger, 75 f.; Lanfranc, Hugo of Langres, Alger, Guitmund, 76 f.; Comester, Hildebert, St. Florian, Roland, Honorius, Omnebene, 77 ; Abe- lard, 77 n. ; Pullus, Lombard, Rupert, 78 ; Duns, Alexander, 131 f-> ^33 ; Biel, 132, 134 f., 204; Thomas, 133 ; Occam, 133, 202, 327; Albert, 134 n.; EugenelV., 134; John of Paris, 203 n. ; Thomas of Strassburg, Wesel,Wes- sel, D'Ailli, 204; Faber, 205 n.; WicklifFe, 206; Erasmus, 215 n. ; Luther, 235, 286 ff., 322 ff.; Bo- hemian Brethren, 288 ; Brenz, 320, 366; Zwingli, 318 ff.; Ho- nius, 288, 319 ; Oecolampadius, 319, 322; Bucer, 319, 331; Capito, 319 ; Carlstadt, 288, 322 ; Pirckheimer, 320 ; Blaurer, Schnepf, 331 n.; Schwabach Ar- ticles, 330 ; Augsburg Confession, 341; Variata, 351 ; Reformed Confession, 345 ; Chemnitz, 377 ; Melanchthon, 350, 366, 380 ; Cal- vin, 366, 386, 412 f., 417 ; Hess- husen, 366 ; Eucharistic contro- versy, 366 ; Westphalia, 366 ; Saliger, Cerveus, 367 u.; Frank- fort Recess, 379 ; Gnesio- Luther- ans, 381 ; Formula of Concord, 386 ; Southwestern Germany, 391 ; Reformed theology, 415 ; BuU- inger, 417 ; Consensus Tigurinus, 417; Heidelberg Catechism, Hel- vetic Confession, 418 ; Council of Trent, 439 f. ; as bond of unity, 33if.;asfoodforthesoul, 134,345. 418 ; as a memorial, 134, 319, 322, 345. 412; as a pledge of fidelity, 322; as a sacrifice, 134, 441, et passim (see Mass); as a symbol, 36, 38, 39, 75, 126, 206, 286 f , 318, 320, 340 ; matter and form in, 135 ; elements in, 289, 440 ; in usu, 386, 440 ; spiritual 31 reception of, s^, 207, 328, 330; worthy and unworthy reception of, 77, 329 n., 366, 386 ; miracles ac- companying, 35, 7^ ; ^^*l immor- tality of the body, 36, 329, 387, 414, n. 2; and the unbelieving, 36, 38, 206 n., 328 n., 331, 386 ; benefits of, 25, 36, 37, 38^ 78, 133, 134, 287 f., 327 f., 329, 345, 386 f., 440, 441, 442 (see Christ, Body of). Loyola, estimate of, 429,430 n. ; and Calvin, 430, n. 2. Louis XIV. and papacy, 457. Louis of Bavaria, and papacy, 1 65 ; on papacy, 165, 167 f., 174. Ludolf of Saxony, mysticism of, 89. Lullus. On logical demonstration, 105. Lupus, Seratus, works of, 30 ; on predestination, 32. Luther, works of, 221, 225 u., 226 nn., 227; theses of, 236; scholas- tic training of, 223 ; estimate of, 221 f., 225 f., 296 f., 348, 389, 417 ; and Bucer, 393 ; and Calvin, 393, 394, 401, 414 f., 416; and Melanchthon, 349, 352,363, 381, n. 3; and Osiander, 372, 373 n.; and Southern Germany, 320 ; and Southwestern Germany, 391 ; and Zwingli, 303, 308 n., 319 f., 323 n. ; on Aristotle, Lombard, Thomas, Biel, 224 ; on attrition, 222, 237 ; contrition, 222, 234, 237 ff.; repentance, 224, 234, 235, 241, 251 n., 272, 358 ; confession, 240 ; absolution, 234, 240 ; satis- faction, 234, 241, 265 f. ; indul- gences, 234, 236, 241, 267, li. 2, 268 n.; law, 239, 246 ff. ; law and gospel, 228, 246, 248 (., 250; Scriptures, 226, 228, 290 f., 298 f., 301 f. ; Apocrypha, 300; criticism of Scriptures, 300 ; Word, 234, 452 INDEX. 279 f., 299 f., 322 ; Books of the Bible, 300 ; reason, 224, 243, 247, 299 n.; personal experience, 224, 225, 228 f., 230, 233, 235, 256 f., 281 n., 296, 298, 301, 304 ; human merit, 229, 264 ; synteresis, 229, n. 2 ; sin, 229, 242 f., 297, 309 ; free-will, 243 f . ; will of man, 256, 243 f., 255, n. 4; fall, 212; conscience, 243 n. ; conception of God, 253, 265, 298, 407, 416 ; will of God, 244 ; Trin- ity. 3<^3^ 305 f-; wrath of God, 229 n., 245, 249; predestination, 244, 407; person of Christ, 229f., 235, 253, 266, n. 3, 298, 304 f., 323, 324 n.; work of Christ, 230, 261, 266 ff. ; intercession of Christ, 269; indwelling of Christ, 231, 270; Holy Spirit, 248 n., 256, 263, 280 f., 305 ; grace, 231 ff., 263 ff., 297; love of God, 245, 253, 265, 407, 416; justification, 233. 235, 260 f.; forgiveness, 260 f., 283, 284, 372 ; faith, 223, 225, 232 ff., 240, 241, 252 ff., 275 f-, 296, 297 f, 302, 328; regeneration, 283 f. ; sanctification, new hfe, 256 f., 284, 231, 337, 360 ; Christian life, 256 f., 273, 275 f., 296 ; imitation of Christ, 270 ; good works, 234, 240, 247, 258, 264, 274, 277, 364 ; love to fellow-man, 238 f, 275 f., 248; devil, 267, n. 2 ; devils, 246 n.; communion of saints, 235, 286 f., 291 ff. ; Virgin Mary, 235; Sab- bath, 246, 247 n.; sacraments, 235» 279, 282; baptism, 283 f., 2$$ ; Lord's Supper, 235, 286 ff., 322 ff. ; alloeosis, 324 ; right hand of God, 325 ; ubiquity, 288, 320 "•» 323 f- ; kingdom of God, 277; church, 226, 235, 289, 291 ff. ; key!^, 293 ; hierarchy, 290, 294 ; Romish Church, 295, 289 ; creed, 303 f.; "chief article," 297 n.'^, preaching, 281, 293 ; councils, 291* 303 ; tradition, 291, 302 ff. ; mass, 235, 289 ; monasticism, 274 ; asceticism, 276 n. ; civil life, 273 f.; natural impulses, 273 ; social problems, 278 ; the state, 274, 290. Lutheranism, and Calvinism, 415 ; and Catholicism, 4i7» ^- i > Me- lanchthonian, 381, 383. Lychetus, philosophy of, 186. Lyons, second council at, 146. M. Major. In Majoristic controversy, 364 ; on person of Christ, 374 ; good works, 364, 385. Majoristic controversy, 364 f. Manducation, oral, 327, 350, 386. Marbach. On predestination, 378. Marburg colloquy, 330. Marriage. In Lombard, 80, 143 ; scholasticism, 85, 125 ; Bonaven- tura, 143 ; Council of Trent, 446. Marriage of priests. In Thomas, Duns, 147 ; Albert, Eugene IV., 143 ; Augsburg Confession, 339 ; Council of Trent, 446. Marsilius of Inghen, philosophy of, 186. Marsilius of Padua. On hierarchy, 167. Martyr. On predestination, 421. Mass, The. In Gregory, 24 f. ; Luther, 235, 289; Zwingli, 309; Marburg colloquy, 330 ; Augsburg- Confession, 344 ; Council of Trent, 441, 445 ; modern Roman Cath- olic church, 463. Massa perditionis, ^;^. Maulbronn, Formula of, 382 f. Mayence, council at, 31. Meats, distinction of, 344. Melanchthon, works of, 348, 351 ff.; estimate of, 348, 363 ; and Prot- estant doctrine, 348 ; and ancient symbols, 352 ; and Bucer, 350, 393, n. 2; and Calvin, 394; and hyper-orthodoxy, 356 ; and In- terim, 355 n., 363, 364; and Lu- ther, 349, 352, 363, 381, li. 3; and Majoristic controversy, 365 ; and Oecolampadius, 350 ; and Osiander, 372 n., 373 ; and Zwingli, 350; on Luther, 352 ; fun- damental ideas of, 351; on church, 340, 351. 354 f-, 362 ; Scriptures, 348, 351 f. ; ancient symbols, 348, 352; speculation, 348; reason, science, 353 ; Aristotle, 348, n. 3 ; free-will, sin, predestination, con- version, 349 ; Lord's Supper, 350, 366, 380; repentance, 351, 358, 361 ; experience, 353 ; justifica- tion, 351, 356, 358, 360 f., 362, 372, 11. 2; pure doctrine, 352 f., 354 ff.; Romish Church, 355; ministry, 355 11.; law, wrath of God, 358; contrition, 35S, 361; faith, 356, 360 f. ; regeneration, 360; merit, 361 ; gospel, 358; work, merit and intercession of Christ, fruits of redemption, eternal life, 359 ; grace, Holy Spirit, 360 ; new life, 360; good works, 361, 364- Mendicants, 146. Menius. In Majoristic controversy, 364 ; in Osiandrian controversy, 373- Merit, human. In Gregory, 23; Albert, 1 16; Thomas, 116, 121 f., 124, 136; Bonaventura, 1 16, 121 f., 124; Duns, 158; Occam, 192; Biel, 199, 202; Luther, 229, 264; Zwingh, 313; Augsburg Confes- sion, 337; Melanchthon, 361 ; Council of Trent, 434, 43S; of fit- ness and worthiness, 112, 115, 123, 13S, 160, 199, 202, 229, 337, 434, 436. Migetius. On Trinity, 27. Ministry, The. In Luther, 293 f., Zwingli, 316 11.; Augsburg Con- fession, 341 ; Melanchthon, 355 n. ; Calvin, 409; Council of Trent, 445- Miracles, 35, 76, 91. Mohna, work of, 450; on grace and free-will, 451 f . ; median divine knowledge, 452. Monastic life, 124, 274. Monastic vows, 344. Monastic works, 339. Money, abuse of, in the church, 165, n. I, 177, 203. Moralism. In Middle Ages, 91. Multivolipresence, 376, 3S6, 3S7, 388. Musculus. On predestination, 421. Mysticism. In Bernard, 52 f,, 88; Bonaventura, 88 n., 89 f., 100, Hugo, Richard, 88 n., 89 f.; Fran- cis, Ludolf, 89; Scholastics, 124; German, 178 fF., 280. N. Napoleon I. In Galilean church, 457; on pope, 457. Narbonne, council at, 43. Naumburg, diet at, 379. Nestorianism. In thirteenth century, 66. Netter z'j-. Wickliffe, 189. Nice, councils at, 29, 290. Nicholas of Clemanges. On greed of papacy, 166 n. Nicholas of Hontheim, work of, 457; on episcopacy, 457; papacy, 458. Nicholas I. On papacy, 40, 41 n, Nihilianism, 65. 4«4 INDEX. Niphus, philosophy of, 187. Nominalism, 56, 1S6, 188, 190 ff., 428, 429. Nunciatures, papal, 458. Osiandrian controversy, 366 ff. Otto, Anton. Antinomianism of, 366. Otto of Freising. On papacy, 146. Otto the Great. On papacy, 40. O. Obedience. In Jesuitism, 430. Obedience of Christ, 371, 373, 400. Objective vs. subjective, 191. Obstacle, in sacraments, 129. Occam, estimate of, 185 f., 191 ; on communion of saints, 144 ; Scrip- tures, 162, 172, 192 f.; hierarchy, 167 ; natural law, 183 ; Nominal- ism, 190 ff.; Trinity, communicatio idiomatum, 192; transubstantiation, church, 192 f.; faith, 195 f. ; sin, free-will, 197. Oecolampadius. On Lord's Supper,. 319, 322. Offices in church, Calvin, 409, Omnebene, work of, 59 ; on person of Christ, 65 ; Lord's Supper, 77 ; sacraments, 79. Omnipresence of Christ's body, 66, 77, 288 (see Ubiquity). Opus operatum, 46. Ordinances, human, 341. Ordination. In Gregory, 51 ; Hugo, Roland, Lombard, 84 ; Scholastic- ism, 125 ; Thomas, Bonaventura, Duns, 141 ; Eugene IV., 142; Council of Trent, 445. Osiander, works of, 369 ; estimate of, 372 ; and Brenz, 373, n. 2 ; and Calvin, 373, 11. 2 ; and Melanch- thon, 372 n.; and Luther, 372, 373 ii- J ^^ justification, 369 ff., 373 ; person and work of Christ, 370 f.; inner word, faith, right- eousness, obedience of Christ, 371 II.; forgiveness, 372 f . ; re- newal, Christian life, 370, 373 ; symbolic subscription, 352 n. Palude, Petrus de, philosophy of, 186. Pantheism, 95. Papacy, greed of, 166 n. Pascal vs. Jesuits, 453, Paternoster, 92. Paul of Venice, philosophy of, 187, Paulinus, works of, 27. Peckham, philosophy of, 98. Penance, forms of, 45 ; redemption of, 44 f. Penitence, compulsory, 24 u. Penitential books, 42. Perfection, Christian. In Francis, Ludolf, 89 f. ; Thomas, 124 ; Bona- ventura, 89 f., 124; Luther, 275 f.; Augsburg Confession, 339 ; Cal- vin, 403. Perseverance, 378, 391, 406, 423. Peter, Epistles of, Luther on, 300 ; primacy of, 168. Pfeffinger. On Synergism, 367. Philippism, 381. Philosophy of Aristotle, 95 ; Arabian. 95- Piacenza, council at, 78. Pictaviensis, Petrus, works of, 64. Pighius. On predestination, 420 , righteousness, 434 n. Pilgrimages, 173. Pirckheimer. On Lord's Supper 320. Pisa, council at, 166. Pistoja, synodal, 445, u. I, 458. Pius IX. On i mmaculate concep- tion, 456 ; Vatican Council, 460. Poach. On law and gospel, 365. Polygamy, 142, n. 3. INDEX. 485 Pope, authority of. In Nicholas I., Donation of Constantine, 40 ; Humbert, Gregory VII. , 5° f* 5 Hugo, Pullus, 86 ; Innocent III., 87; Boniface VIII., 88, 97, 165 ; Thomas, 102, 145 f.; 2d Council of Lyons, 146, 165 f., 167 f.; Wickliffe, 211 ; Luther, 225 f., 289 f., 298 n.; Council of Trent, 440, 446 f. , 448 ; Catechismus Romanus, 448 ; Louis XIV., 457 ; Galilean church, Nicholas of Hont- heim, 457 ; Punctation of Ems, 458 f.; modern church, 459 ; Vati- can Council, 461. Porphyry, philosophy of, 56 n. Port Royal, abbey at, 452, 454. Poverty, Book of Spiritual, 178. Prayer, 405 n., 419. Preaching. In Middle Ages, 91 f.; Guibert, 92 ; Later Middle Ages, 174; Luther, 281, 293; Jesuits, 430. Predestination. In Gregory, 23 ; Florus, 30 f. ; Isidore, 30 ; Gotts- chalk, 31 ; Rabanus, 31, 32 ; Council of Mayence, 31 ; Councils of Chiersy and Valence, 32, ;}^ ; Prudentius, Remigius, Ratramnus, Lupus, Hincmar, Amolo, Scotus, 32 ; Council of Toucy, 33 ; Duns, 151 f, 156, 164; Biel, 198; Bradwardina, 207 ; Wickliffe, 208 ; Luther, 244, 407 ; Zwingli, 313 f., 315; Melanchthon, 349; Calvin, 397, 405 ff-, 420; Zanchi, 378, 421; Marbach, Hesshusen, 378; Formula of Concord, 388 ; South- western Germany, 391 ; Bucer, 392 f.; Reformed theology, 416, 421 ; Later Reformed Confessions, 419, 421 ; Pighius, Bolsec, 420 ; Gomarus, 421, 422 n.; Beza, Martyr, Musculus, 421 ; Synod of Dort, 421 ff. ; Arminius, Uyten- bogaart, Episcopius, 421 ; Re- monstrants and Contra-remon- strants, 422 ; Consensus Helvetica, 425 ; Amyraldus, 424 f. ; Jansen, 453 f. ; Helvetic Confession, Heid- elberg Catechism, Westminster Confession, 421. Presence, mode of, in Lord's Supper, ^33* 204, 326, 329, 440; sacra- mental, 350, 440 ; Real (see Christ, Body of). Prescience. In Gottschalk, 31 ; Coiinci' of Valence, ^$ ; Formula of Concord, 388 f. ; Bucer, 392. Prophecies, Luther on, 300. Prosper of Reggeo, Eremite, 187. Prudentius, works of, 30 ; on pre- destination, 32. Pullus. On work of Christ, 73 ; transubstantiation, 78 ; sacraments, 79; confirmation, 81 ; confession, absolution, purgatory, 83 ; church, 85 f. ; state, 86. Punctation of Ems, 458. Purgatory. In Gregory, 24 f. ; Early Middle Ages, 44 ; Abelard, Ro- land, 81 ; Lombard, Pullus, 83 f. ; Waldenses, 94 ; Alexander, Bona- ventura, Biel, Henry, Duns, 139 ; Luther, 241 ; Zwingli, 316 n. Purification. In Mysticism, 179 f. Q- Quesnel, work of, 454 ; theses of, 455 ^'i on Scriptures, church, will, faith, forgiveness, justification, grace, 455 11. R. Rabanus, Maurus, works of, 16, 30 ; on predestination, 31, 32 ; Lord's Supper, 37, 39. Radbertus, works of, 16,34; on Virgin 486 INDEX. Mary, 34 ; faith, 37 ; Lord's Sup- per, 35> 37, 76. Rationalism. In Abelard, 58 ; PVed- erick 11., 91 ; thirteenth century, 60. Ratramnus, works of, 30, 34 ; on pre- destination, 32 ; Virgin iMary, 34 ; Lord's Supper, 38. Realism. In William of Champeaux, 60; William of Auverne, Alex- ander, 98 ; Duns, 147 ; Later Middle Ages, 186 f. Reason. In Scolus, 15 ; Abelard, 58 ; Anselm, 57, 68 ; Berenger, Lanfranc, 55 ; Thomas, Bonaven- tura, 104 ; Luther, 224, 243, 247, 299 n.; Pullus, 62 ; Melanchthon, 353- Recarred, Confession of, 30. Redemption. In Hugo, 6l ; Mystics, 119 ; benefits of, in Lombard, 14 ; Thomas, 113 ; Duns, 106 f . ; Melanchthon, 359 ; Osiander, 370 (see Christ, Work of). Reformation, attempted, 49 f . ; need of, 188 f. ; forerunners of, 190. Reformation, The, 217, 222, 225 u., 308 f., 411, 415. Reformed Church, asceticism in, 415, 420. Reformed Confessions, Earlier, 344 f.; Later, 345 f., 41S f. Reformed Theology, pre-reformation ideals of, 415; and Roman Catho- licism, 417, n. I; and Calvin, 426; on sacraments, 415, 418; predesti- nation, 416, 421, 422. Regeneration. In Luther, 283 f . ; Augsburg Confession, 337 f. ; Me- lanchthon, 360; Calvin, 403 f. ; Synod of Dort,423 (see Renewal). Relics, worship of, gi, 94, 173. Religion, natural, 353. Remigius, works of, 30; on predesti- nation, 32. Remonstrants. On predestination, 422. Renaissance, The, 27. Renewal. In Luther, 231, 256 f., 284, 337 f., 260; Majoristic con- troversy, 365; Osiander, 370 ff.; Formula of Concord, 384, 423 n.; Calvin, 402 f., 404. Repentance. In Middle Ages, 16, 41 to 47; Durand, 92; Waldenseb, 94; Biel, 134 f., 138, 201; Later Middle Ages, 175 ff.; Mystics, 179; John of Paltz, 201 ; Luther, 251 n., 272, 358; Augsburg Con- fession, Apology, 342; Melanch- thon, 351, 358, 361; Later Re- formed Confessions, 419; public 7's. private, 42, 93. Repentance, sacrament of. In Gre- gory, 24, 47; Abelard, 81 f , ; Epit- ome, Roland, 81 ; Hugo, 82, 92; Pullus, 83; Lombard, S^, 92; Thomas, Alexander, Bonaventura, Biel, 134 ff.; Eugene IV., 140; h)hn of Paltz, 174 n., 175 f., 201 n.; Wickliffe, Wesel, Wessel, 210; Luther, 222, 224, 234 ff., 241 ; Calvin, 402 f . ; Jesuits, 429; Council of Trent, 434, 438, 442, 444. Revelation of grace, in Amyraldus, 425- Reward, 23, 91 (see Merit). Richard of Middleton, philosophy of, 98; on will, 106. Richard of St. Victor. On Trinity, loS; communion of saints, 144. Rickel, philosophy of, 187. Righteousness, actual, 259 f., 338, 370 f., 381, n. 4, 384, 438; im- puted, 260 f., 337 f., 359, 370 f., 379. 381, "• 4y 384, 404, 4»8, 43 f., ctpassim ; original, 114, 153. 370- Right Hand of God, 325, 413, 440. Roland, work of, 59; on person of INDEX. 487 Christ, 65 ; Lord's Supper, 77; sacraments, 79; repentance, con- trition, confirmation, ordination, purgatory, 81. Roman Catholic Church before the Reformation, 146 ; reformation within, 428 ; modern condition of, 463 f. ; Luther on, 2S9, 294 ; Me- lanchthon on, 355. Roman Catholic Theology, sources for, 427 ; estimate of, 427 f., 430, 431 ; Thomistic character of, 428 ; iniluence of Duns upon, 428, 431 ; and Paul, 455 ; and opposing schools, 428, 431, 432, 433, 438, 439- Romania, Epistles to, Luther on, 301. Rome, councils at, 29, 76. Roscellin, philosophy of, 56 ; on Trinity, 56. Rupert. On Lord's Supper, 78 n. Sabbath. In Erasmus, 215 n.; Lu- ther, 246, 247 n.; Zwingli, 311, 11. I. Sacraments. In Abelard, 59, 72, 79 ; Hugo, 61, 79, 80; Lombard, 63,80; Anselm, 72; Bernard, Roland, Pul- lus,Omnebene, St.Florian,79; Ber- thold, 93 ; Later Middle Ages, 98, 124 f.; Eugene IV., 125 ; Thomas, Bonaventura, 125 f . ; Alexander, 125, 126 n. ; Duns, 127 f., 161 ; Albert, 128 ; Biel, 187, 200 ; Luther, 235, 279, 282 ; Zwingli, 316; Augsburg Confession, 341 f . ; Apology, 343; Calvin, 411 ff.; Reformed theology, 415, 418 ; Consensus Tigurinus, 417; Re- formed Confessions, 345 ; Council of Trent, 438 f . ; definition of, 79, 80, 93, 125, 411 ; number of, 37 n., 63, 79, 80, 93, 125, 135, 282, 316, 439 ; place of, in dog- matic system, 59; validity of, 94; matter and form of, 126 ; inten- tion in, 125 ; as symbols, 126, 127 f., 282, 316, 411, 417, 439 i as pledges, 411 ; and word, 78, 123 n., 285 f., 411 ; adm^gistered'^ by heretics, 50, 51, 142; benefits of, 80, 93, 127, 345. Saints, communion of, 144!., 212, 235, 2S6 f., 291 ff., 408. Saints, intercession of. In Early Middle Ages, 44, 91 ; Waldense'-, 94 ; Thomas, 124 ; Later Middle Ages, 173 ; Augsburg Confession, 344 ; Council of Trent, 445. Saliger. On Lord's Supper, 367 n. Salmeron. On divine right, 447 n. Salvation, causes of, 405, n. I ; of souls, 94, 225. Sanctification, in Apology, 338 ; Lu- ther, Melanchthon, 360 ; South- western Germany, 390 ; Calvin, 402, 404 (see Life, New). Sanfelice, evangelical views of, 434, n. 2. Satisfaction. In Early Middle Ages, 43, 47; Anselm, 67 f . ; Roland, 81; Abelard, Hugo, 82; Lom- bard, 83, 92; council at Aachen, 84 ; Thomas, Duns, 139 ; Eugene IV., 140; Wessel, 210; Luther, 234, 241, 265 f, 267, li. 2, 26S, n. I ; Council of Trent, 435, 438, 443> 444; Bajus, 451 n. Savonarola. On asceticism, church and state, 19S n.; politics, 318. Scepticism,, Abelard, 58 ; thirteenth century, 60; Frederick II., 91, Scholasticism, estimate of, 54 ff. , 57, 105, 146, 196, 214; in Luther, 223 ; Luther on, 224. Schnepf. On Lord's Supper, 331 n, Schwabach Articles, 330, Schwabian Concord, ^82 n. 488 INDEX. Schwenkfeldians, 389. Scotus Erigena, works of, 30 ; on predestination, 32. Scriptures, authority of. In Gregory, 18; Abelard, 58; Thomas, 100; Bonaventura, loi ; Duns, 149 ; Occam, 169, 172, 192; Wickliffe, 184; D'Ailli, Biel, 192 f.; Goch, 209 ; Erasmus, 215 o-; Luther, 226, 228, 290 f., 298 f., 301 f.; Zwingli, 308, 309 n.; Reformed Confessions, 344 ; Melanchthon, 348, 351 f. ; Southwestern Ger- many, 391; Calvin, 395>396n.; Later Reformed Confessions, 419 n.; Council of Trent, 431 ; Bajus, 450, 45 in.; Jansen, 453; Ques- nel, 455 n. Scriptures, criticism of, 301,301 n. Scriptures, inspiration of. In Gregory, 18 ; Abelard, 58 ; Thomas, loi ; Agobard, loi n. ; Occam, Biel, 192 ; Erasmus, 301 f. ; Luther, Calvin, 395 ; Reformed theology, 415) 4'9 II- ; Consensus Helvetica, 426 ; Council of Trent, 431 ; Vat- ican Council, 460 ; Leo XIIL, 460 n. Scriptures, interpretation of, 15, 19. Scriptures, reading of. In Gregory, 19, 455 n- Secular learning and religion, 353, 362, 363. Secular life, 273 f. Self-communion, 440. Selnecker, Lutheranism of, 381. Semi-Augustinianism, 32, Semi-Pelagianism, 16, 63. Sens, council at, 61. Seripando, evangelical views of, 434, li. 2. Seuse, works of, 178. Sigismund, confession of, 421 n. Silent Submission, to doctrine, 456, 463, 465. Simon Baringundus, Eremite, 187, Simony, 50. Sin. In Gregory, 21 f.; Anselm, 67, IIO; Luther, 229, 242 f.; Augs- burg Confession, 335 ; Zwingli, 309) 3^7; Biel, Occam, 197; as disease, defect, 22, 117, 309 ; venial vs. mortal, 43 f., 92, 135 et passim ; propagation of, 117; results of, 1 17, 118. Sin, original. In Gregory, 21 ; An- selm, Lombard, Alexander, Bona- ventura, Thomas, 1 16 f. ; Duns, 153, 154, 163; Biel, Occam, 197; Luther, 229, 242 f., 297; Me- lanchthon, 349 n.; Zwingli, 309, 317; Augsburg Confession, 335; Earlier Reformed Confessions, 345 n. ; Formula of Concord, 383 ; Southwestern Germany, 390 ; Cal- vin, 398 ; Later Reformed Confes- sions, 419 ; Council of Trent, 432 ; Bajus, 451 n.; Jansen, 453. Sins, actual, 154, 242; enumeration of, 443- Social Problems, 182, 202 n., 278, 292 n. z. Soissons, council at, 61. Solida Declaratio, 382 n. Southwestern Germany, theology in, 390 ff., 414. Spires, diet at, :^:iZ- Stancar. On Osiandrian controversy, 374- State,The. In Gregory VIL, 51, 85, 86; Pullus, Hugo, Innocent III., 86 f.; Boniface VIII., 88; Louis of Bavaria, 165 ; Marsilius, Occam, 167, 170 ; Luther, 274, 290; Zwingli, 317 f. ; Augsburg Confession, 341 ; Calvin, 410. State, original. In Gregory, 21 n.; Alexander, Bonaventura, Albert, Thomas, 1 14 f . ; Henry, 115^ INDEX. 4S9 Duns, 153 ; Biel, 197 ; Council of Trent, 432 n.; Bajus, 450. States of Christ, 325 n., 376 f., 387. Stephen of Paris, philosophy of, 98. Strigel. In Synergistic controversy, 367 f. Stuttgart, synod at, 366, Subjective vs. objective, 191. Sufferings of Christ. In Gregory, 19, 53; Anselm, 69; Thomas, 112 f.; Duns, 156 f.; Luther, 266 f. (see Atonement, Work of Christ). Supererogation, works of, 23, 124, 139. Superstition, 49. Symbols, estimate of, 466 ; the an- cient, in Gregory, 18; Thomas, Bonaventura, Anselm, Alexander, Richard, Durand, 102; Duns, 149; Luther, 303; Zwingli, 317 ; Melanchthon, 348, 352 ; Calvin, 396 ; later Reformed theology, 419 n. Synergism, controversy upon, 267 ff. ; in Formula of Concord, 384; Coun- cil of Trent, 433, 435 f.; Molina, 451 f. Syn gramma, 320. Synod, at Alengon, 425 ; Dort. 421 ; Eisenach, 365 ; France, 425 ; Pistoja, 445 XI. I, 458 ; Stuttgart, 366 ; Torgau, 367 (see Council). T. Tauler, works of, 178 ; on word and sacraments, 128 ; imitation of Christ, 1 78 f. Tetrapolitan Confession, 344 f. Theodulf. On filioque, 30. Theology, Systematic. In Abelard, 59 ; Honorius, Hugo, 61 ; John of Damascus, Lombard, ^-i, ; Mid- dle Ages, 9^, 189, 214; Albert, Thomas, 99 ; Gerson, 189 ; Me- lanchthon, 348, 362, 363 ; nature of, 104 n,, 149, 150 n.; German, 178. Thomas of Aquino, estimate of, 96, 97» 98, 99, 100, 146, 185, 224; method of, 99; on God, 100, 107; revelation, icx)f.; Scriptures, loi ; faith, 103, 121; will, I03 ; uni- versals, 104; Trinity, 100, 109; communicatio idiomatum, no ; person of Christ, nof. ; work of Christ, III f. ; intercession of Christ, 113 ; fruits of redemption, 113 ; synteresis, 114 ; original state, Il4f. ; infused grace, 115, 119; original sin, 116; forgive- ness, 112 f., 121 ; free-will, ir9f.; justification, 120 f.; faith, 103, 120; guilt, 117; grace, 115,118; good works, 116, 121 ; human merit, 116, 121 f., 124; merit of Christ, 113; monastic life, 124; sacraments, 125 f. ; indelible char- acter, 128; baptism, 130; Lord's Supper, 133 ; repentance, 134 f . ; contrition, 136 f.; confession, abso- lution, 137 f.; indulgences, satis- faction, 139; extreme unction, 140; ordination, 141 ; marriage, 142 ; church, 144 f.; pope, 102, 145 f.; blessedness, 148. Thomas of Bradwardina. On person of Christ, 1 10 ; predestination, 189, 207. Thomas of Strassburg, philosophy of, 187 ; on immaculate conception, l88n.; Lord's Supper, 204. Thomas sel Vio (see Cajetan). Tilmann. On Eucharistic contro- versy, 366. Timann. On Eucharistic controversy 366. Torgau, synod at, 367. Torgau Book, 382 n. Toucy, council at, ■^'^. 490 INDEX. Toulouse, council at, 93. Tours, council at, 76; school at, 55, 98. Tradition. In Middle Ages, 1 7 ; Abelard, 58; Luther, 291, 302 ff.; Council of Trent, 431 f., 449; Vatican Council, 460; Protestant Church, 464 f. Traducianism, 22. Transubstantiation. In Radbertus, 35; Rabanus, 37; Haimo, 39; Berenger, 76; Comester, Hilde- bert, Roland, St. Florian, Omne- bene, Honorius, Hugo, 77; Ger- manus, Stephen, William of Thiersy, 77 n.; PuUus, Lombard, Fourth Lateraji Council, yS; Later Middle Ages, E27, 205; Thomas, Alexander, Duns, 131 f., 150; Occam, 1925.; Wickliffe, Hussites, 206; Luther, 235, 286 n., 287; Zwingli, 318; Augsburg Confes- sion, Apology, 342; Council of Trent, 440. Treasure, of the church, 139, 236, 241. Trent, Council of, estimate of, 43 1 , 448, 463; history of, 431 ff. ; and scho- lasticism, 55; and modern theology, 448; on ScriptureSj 43 1; tradition, 431. 449; Apocrypha, 432; origi- nal state, 432 n.; sin, fall, Virgin Mary, 432; baptism, 432, 434, 436, 439, 444; concupiscence, donum superadditum, 432; divine call, 433, 435; faith, 433, 435, 436, 437, 440, 449; grace, 433, 435, 439, 449; jus- tification, 433 ff.; 435, 436, 437; imputed and infused righteousness, 434; merit, 434, 438; free-will, 434; repentance, 434, 438, 442, 444; satisfaction, 435, 438, 443, 444; assurance, 435, 437; good works, 434, 435, 437, 443; love to God, 436; work of Christ, 436, 442, II. I; forgiveness, 433, 437; asceticism, 438, 449; Christian life, 438; contrition, 438, 442, 444; confession, absolution, 438, 442, 443, 444; sacraments, 43S f. ; Lord's Supper, 439 f. ; mass, 441, 445; hierarchy, 443, 444, 446 f., 445, 449; indulgences, 444; purg- atory, extreme unction, ordination, priesthood, 445; marriage, church, 446; pope 446 f., 448, 449; and- Augustinianism, 450. Treves, council at, 92, 93. Tribur, council at, 45. Trinity. In Gregory, 17; Migetius, 27 ; Gottschalk, Hincmar, 3 1 ; Roscellin, 56; Abelard, 58 f.; Thomas, 100, 109; Richard, Lom- bard, Joachim, Fourth Lateran Council, 108; Occam, 192; Luther, 303, 305 f-; Augustine, 306 n.; Calvin, 396, n. 2. Tubingen Book, 382. U. Ubiquity, of body of Christ. In Al- ger, 77; Occam, 204; Luther, 288, 320, n. 2, 322 ff.; Melanchthon, 350; Cureus, 366; synod at Tor- gau, 367; Heidelberg theologians, 374; Chemnitz, 376, 388; Formula of Concord, 386 f. ; Calvin, 413. Unbelief, 243. Unction, extreme, 84, 140, 445. Unification with God, 180 f., 328. Union, mystical, 328. Union, sacramental, of elements and body of Christ, 326 f., 386. Union, the Protestant, relation to dog- mas, 466 n. Universals, 56, 60, 104 f., 147, 190 f. Urban of Bologna, philosophy of, 187. Urban VIII. and Jansenism, 453. Uytenbogaart, On predestination. 421. INDEX, 491 V. Valence, council at, ^^. Valla, Lorenzo. On spurious docu- ments, 213. Vatican Council, 456 ff.; sources on, estimate of, 463; and scholastic- ism, 55; on God, Scriptures, tra- dition, church, faith, 460; infalli- bility of pope, 461. Vercelli, council at, 76. Vices, the principal, 21 n. Vincent of Lerius. On tradition, 304. Virgin Mary, immaculate conception of, 18, 19 n., 155, 456, 188 n.; intercession of, 44, 91, 173; par- turition of, 33 f.; worship of, 235, 344; and original sin, 432, 451 n.; in modern Roman Catholic church, 463- Vorillon, philosophy of, 186. Vows, monastic, 344. Vulgate, 432, 460. W. Waldenses. On repentance, church, saints, images, purgatory, 94 ; good works, 95. Walther of St. Victor, philosophy of, 60. Weimar Confutation, 379. Wesel, relation to Augustine, 190 ; on Lord's Supper, 204 ; grace, 2og ; repentance, absolution, in- dulgences, 210; church, 211. Wessel, relation to Augustine, 190; on Lord' s Supper, 204 ; grace, jus- tification, 209 ; repentance, indul- gences, satisfaction, excommunica- tion, 210 ; church, 211 f . ; commu- nion of saints, 212. Westminster Confession. On predesti- nation, 421. Wicklifte, works of, 183 ; influence of, 183 n., 189 n. ; on *'evangeli- cal law," Scriptures, imitation of Christ, 184; work of Christ, 198; Lord's Supper, 206 ; predestina- tion, 108 ; repentance, indul- gences, 210 ; church, pope, ex- communication, 211. Will, of God. In Richard, 106 ; Duns, 151, 156, 163; Luther, 244; Zwingli, 313; Calvin, 396 ff.; 405 ff. ; Reformed theology, 416 ; secret and revealed, 244. Will, of man. In Middle Ages, 97 ; Thomas, 103 ; Henry, Richard, 106 ; Duns, 148, 159, 163 ; Biel, Occam, 197 ; Luther, 243 f., 255, n. 4, 256 ; Synergistic con- troversy, 367 f. ; Formula of Con cord, 383 ; Caraero, 425 ; Jansen, 453 f-; Quesnel, 455 n. William of Auverne. On sacraments, 98. William of Champeaux, philosophy of, 60. William of Paris. On attrition, contri- tion, 136 f. William of St. Thierry. On Lord's Supper, 77 n. Wittenberg, disputation at, 349. Wittenberg Concord, 386. Word, The. In Gregory, 23 ; Tauler, 178; Luther, 234, 279 f., 299 f., 322 ; Formula of Concord, 388 ; Calvin, 409 ; Osiander, 370 f.; significance of, 123; outer and inner, 23, 279 f., 280 f., 370 f; and sacraments, 78, 123 n., 285 f , 411. Words of Institution. In sacraments, 126 ; in Lord's Supper, 131, 132, I35> 322, 328, 414- Worms, colloquy at, 378. Works, good. In Gregory, 24 ; Early Middle Ages, 43 ; Bernard, 53 ; Waldenses, 95 ; Thomas and followers, 116, 121 ; Luther, 234 492 INDEX. 240, 247, 258, 264, 274, 277, 364; Zwingli, 311 ; Augsburg Confes- sion, 339, 343 ; Reformed Confes- sions, 345 ; Melanchthon, 361, 364 ; Major, Amsdorf, Menius, 364, 385; Flacius, 364; Antino- mian controversy, Poach, 365 ; Otto, Agricola, 366 ; Frankfort Recess, 379 ; Formula of Concord, 384 f. ; Calvin, 404 ; Council of Trent, 434, 435, 437, 443 ; Bajus, 450 ; Unigenitus, 455, Worship of Christ, 65, 66; of images, 29. 94, 448; of relics, 91, 94, 173; of saints, 94, 344; of Virgin Mary, 235, 344. Wurtemberg theologians. On person of Christ, 374 ; state of humilia- tion, 377. Zanchi. On predestination, 378, 421. Zwingli, works of, 306, 319 f. ; esti- mate of, 307, 317, 390, 393, n. 4; reformatory ideas of, 308, 318 ; and Augsburg Confession, and Bul- linger, 390 ; and Calvin, 393, n. 4, 394, 412, 414 ; and Erasmus, 307, 317, 318; and Luther, 303, 3o8n,, 319 f.; and Reformed Confessions, 345 ; and Savonarola, 318 ; on Scriptures, 308, 309 n. ; justifica- tion, 307, 310; sin, 309, 317; mass, work of Christ, 309 f. ; per- son of Christ, 317, 321, 323 ; faith, 310 f., 313; Holy Spirit, 311 ; experience, good works, law andgospel, 311 ; Sabbath, 311 n. I; Christian life, imitation of Christ, 312 ; divine will, human merit, 313; predestination, 313 f., 315; God, grace, 314; church, salvation of heathen, 315 ; sacraments, bap- tism, 316 ; confession, indulgences, purgatory, priesthood, 316 n.; an- cient symbols, 317 ; church and state, 317 f. ; Lord' s Supper, 318 ff.; alloeosis, 321.