IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 If KS I I.I 1.25 2.5 1^1 110 22 2.0 11= U IIIIII.6 V] <^ /a ^M o // 7 ///. Photographic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80 (716) 873-f the Apostolic Rules (Norms) for Ecclesiastical Christianity. The Catholic Church 81 A. The Recasting of the liaptismul (Jonfeabiou into tho Apostolic Rule of Faith b5 B. Tho Recoguitiou of a Selection of Well-kuowu Scriptures as Virtually Belougiug to the Old Testament; i. e. , as a Compilation of Apostolic Scriptiu-es 88 C. Tho Transformation of the Episcopal Office in tho Churcli into tho Apostolic Office. History of the Transformation of the Idea of th<» Church . 95 Chapter III. — Continuation: Tho Old Christianity and the New Church 100 Section II. Establishment of Christianity as Doctrine and its Grudaal Secularization. Chapter IV. — Ecclesiastical Christianity and Philosophy. Tho Apologists 117 Chapter V. — Beginnings of an Ecclesiastico-Theological Exposition and Revision of the Rule of Faith in OpiK)sition to Gnosticism on the Presupposition of the New Testament and the Christian Philosophy of tho Apologists : Ireuajus, Tertullian, Hippoly- tus, Cyprian, Novatian 130 CONTENTS. IX ;)M TO 74 rAfii: ('liiH»t«'r VI.— TraiiHlMniiJitioM nf KcclcsiaHticjil Trmlitinii into u I'liilosopliy of Ucli^iuii, or tlii' Oii^iii of SchMitilic Iv'cU'siastical 'I luolu^'y ami DoKHiaticH : Cli'iiu'nt andOriK'H 1411 Chapter V'll. — Decisive lirsult «»f Tlirnldj^ical S|w>('uIation \\ itiiiit the Rcaitii of llic itulcof Faith, or tiit> Ddin- ing of tiu' IvT'lrHiufstical I)2^nitioH8 of the iJortriiie of Sah'ution, or Aa^ Hi'ul Theoloyij. Chapter IV. — The Presuppositions and Conceptions of God, the Creator, as tho Dispen.ser of Salvation . 22") Cliapter V. — The Presupjiositions and Conceptions of Man as the Recipient of Salvation .... 229 R. Tlie Dot'triu'i of Rrih'wjttiou throinjh the Person of the Qod-M'in in itx IIistorie<(l Dereloj»iie)it. Chapter VI.— Tlie Doctrine of the Necessity and Reality of Redemption through the Incarnation of the Son of God Chapter VII.— The Doctrine of the Ilomousion of the Son of God with Go.1 TTimself I. Until Council of Nic;ea . . . • • II. Until I^eath of ('(inst;intius III. Until Comicils of Constantinoi)le. IWI, 383 . Supplement: The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit and of the Trinity .266 235 242 242 253 259 CONTENTS. 1 PAOB (Chapter VIII.— Tho Doctrine of the Perfect Equality aH to Nature of the Incarnate »Son of God and Humanity 274 Oliapter IX. — Continuation : Tlie Doctrine of the Personal Union of the Divine and Iluniau Niitures in the Incarnate Son of God 280 I. The Nestorian Controversy ..... 280 II. The Eutychian Controversy 287 III. The Monopliysite Controversies and the oth Council 294 IV. The Monergistic and Monothelitic Controversies, the Gth Council and John of Damascus . . 300 C. Tlie Temporal Enjoyment of Redemption. Chapter X. — The Mysteries, and Matters Akin to Them Chapter XI. — Conclusion : Sketch of the Historic Begin- nings of the Orthodox System . . . . 305 318 Book IT ■H EXPANSION AND RECASTING OF THE DOGMA INTO A DOCTRINE CONCERNING SIN, GRACE AND THE MEANS OF GRACE UPON THE BASIS OF THE CHURCH. Chapter Chapter Chapter Chapter I. II. III. IV. Chapter 326 I. — Historical Survey ...... II. — Occidental Christianity and Occidental The- ologians before Augustine ..... III. — The World-Historical Position of Augustine as Reformer of Christian Piety .... IV. — The World- Historical Position of Augus- tine as Teacher of the Church .... Augustine's Doctrine of tlie First and Last Things 345 The Donatist Contest. The Work "DeCivitate Dei." The Doctrine of the Church and of the Means of Grace ...... The Pelagian Contest. Doctrine of Grace and of Sin Augustine's Exposition of the Symbol. The New Doctrine of Religion .... V. — History of Dogma in the Occident till the Beginning of tlio Middle Ages (430-G04) 329 335 342 354 363 376 382 % CONTENTS. XI PAOE 300 305 318 I. Contest between Semi-PelaKiauisiuaiul Au^ustini- anisni ......... II. Gregory tlie (Jreat (oOO-GOi) Chapter VI. — History of Do^nia iu the Tinu' of tin* Carlo- vingiuu Ki'iuiissancf ...... I. A. The Adoption Controversy .... I. B. The I'retlentination Controversy II. Controversy about thi; Filiocjue and about Images 3!»7 III. The Development, in Practice and in Theory, of tlieMass (Dogma of the Eucharist) and of Penanci; Chapter VII. — History of Dogma in the Time of Clugny, Ansehn and Bernard to the End of the 12th Century I. The Revival of Piety II. On the History of Ecclesiastical Ljiw Hi. The Revival t>f Science ...... IV. Work upon the Dogma ...... A. The Berengar Controversy B. Anselm's Doctrine of Satisfaction and tin; Doc- trines of the Atonement of the Theologians of th(> 12th Century Chapter VIII. — History of Dogma in the Time of the INIen dicant Orders till the Beginning ul th(i 10th Century I. On the History of Piety II. On the History of Ecclesiastical Law. The Doc- trine of the Church ...... III. On the History of Ecclesiastical Science IV. The Remiuting of Dogmatics into Scholastics A. The "Working Over of the Traditional Articuli Fidei B. The Scholastic Doctrine of the Saciaments . C. The Revising of Augustinianism in the Direction of the Doctrine of Meritorious Works . . . 488 383 887 393 31)1 3!>r) 399 406 407 412 414 422 423 427 433 434 442 452 40 L 462 468 Book HI. THE THREE-FOLD ISSUING OF THE IIISTOKV OF DOOMA. Chapter I.— Historical rUu-vcy .",01 Chapter II. — The Issuiiig of the Dogma in Roman Ca tholicism 510 xii CONTENTS I. <^'odification of tliP \f«,i- tion to I'ro J.a' i *^Sn?"'J;-s i., Opp,.,. II- Post-Tridenfino D,.vJta„nlt '^ '^"'«>»> ■ ■ the Vatican Couiioi ' "'"' " P'-^^Paration for ,"';"'« Vatican Council ' ' ' • ■ . CImptcr III. -Tl,o Issuing of thon„' ■ • ■ nanisn, „„„ Soc-in^i:!!", "'""" '» ^""-THnita. I. I ,»tor,caUnt,,,„uctio„ . ' ' ' • . Cl-apterV^r? ''-'"- ■.•;•• ' "''' „I. Int..,;,U.rtL'^""-«'""-I'"*,-ain Protostanti.ni 5« II, i"''''"'s Cliristiaaity ' ' " ■ • . 541 m- Luther's Strictures on the Domi ' r ' ' ' «■' Luther's ChrtliZ> ^'^'"■""' -". and within ' rAOK 510 518 527 529 52D 535 PAriK in Opposi- -GH) . .510 aration for . 518 . 527 ti-Trinita- . 529 . 529 . 535 estantism 541 . 541 . 545 Ecclesi- . 551 d within . 557 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. PROLEGOMENA TO THE DISCIPLINE. I. — Idea and Aim of the History of Docjma. 1. Religion is a practical aiYair with mankind, KfiiRion. since it has to do with our highest happiness and with those faculties which pertain to a holy life. But in every religion these faculties are closely con- nected with some definite faith or with some defi- nite cult, which are referred back to Divine Reve- lation. Christianity is that religion in which the impulse and power to a blessed and holy life is bound up with faith in God as the Father of Jesus Christ. So far as this God is believed to be the omni intent Lord of heaven and earth, the Christian religion includes a particular knoirledge of God, of the world and of the purpose of created things; so far, how- ever, as this religion teaches that God can bo truly known only in Jesus Christ, it is inseparable from historical knowledge. 2. The inclination to formulate the content of "'^^^^^Ith "^ religion in Articles of Faith is as natural to Chris- tianity as the effort to veriffj these articles with reference to science and to history. On the other a OUTLINES Oi^ THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. rrnldcin Insoluble. Attompts at Solu- tion. hand the un^^crsal and supornatural character of tho Cliristian religion imposes upon its adherents tho duty of finding a statement of it which will not bo impaired by our wavering knowledge of nature and history; and, indeed, which will be able to maintain itself before every possible theory of nature or of history. The problem which thus arises permits, indeed, of no absolute solution, since all knowledge is relative ; and yet religion essays to bring her ab- solute truth into the sphere of relative knowledge and to reduce it to statement there. But history teaches, and every thinking Christian testifies, that the problem does not come to its solution ; even on that account the j^rcxjressivc efforts which have been made to solve it are of value. 3. The most thorough-going attempt at solution hitherto is that which the Catlujlic Church made, and which the churches of the Reformation (with more or less restrictions) have continued to make, viz. : Accepting a collection of Christian and Pre- Christian writings and oral traditions as of Divine origin, to deduce from them a system of doctrine, arranged in scientific form for apologetic purposes, which should have as its content the knowledge of God and of tho world and of the means of salvation ; then to proclaim this complex system {of dogma) as the compendium of Christianity, to demand of every mature member of the Church a faithfid ac- ceptance of it, and at the same time to maintain tlmt the same is a necessary preparation for the blessed- PROLEGOMENA. i I ness promised by the religion. With this augmen- tation the Christian brotherhood, whose character as " Catholic Church " is essentially indicated under this conception of Christianity, took a definite and, as was sui)posed, incontestable attitude toward the science of nature and of history, expressed its relig- ious faith in God and Christ, and yet gave (inas- much as it retpiired of all its members an acceptance of these articles of faith) to the thinking part of the community a system which is capable of a wider and indeed boundless development. Thus arose dog- in afic CJi ristia n itij. 4. The aim of the hisfonj of docjtiia is, (1) To ex- plain the origin of this dogmatic Christianity, and, (v>) To describe its development. 5. The historij of the rise of dogmatic Christian- ity would seem to close when a well- formulated sys- tem of belief had been established by scientific means, and had been made the ^' articulus const itn- tiviis ccclesirv,^^ and as such had been imposed upon the entire Church. This took place in the transition from the lUl to the 411i century when the Logos- Christology was established. The development of dogma is in ahstnicto without limit, but in cou- creto it has come to an end. For, (a) the Greek Church maintains that its system of dogma has been complete since the end of the " Im.'ige Controversy " ; (b) the Roman, Catholic Church leaves the ix^ssi])il- it}' of the formulating of new dogmas open, Ijut in the Tridentine Council and still more in the Vatican Aim of History of Rise of Do(;iiia. Dovelop- niont of Oroek Church. Roman Otiirch. OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA. Evangel- ical Churches. has it in fact on political grounds rounded out its dogma as a legal system which above all demands obedience and only secondarily conscious faith ; the Roman Catholic Church has consecjuently abandoned the original motive of dogmatic Christianity and has placed a wholly new motive in its stead, retain- ing the mere semblance of the old ; (c) The Evan- gelical churches have, on the one hand, accepted a greater part of the formulated doctrines of dogmatic Christianity and seek to ground them, like the Cath- olic Church, in the Holy Scriptures. But, on the other hand, they took a different view of the author- ity of the Holy Scriptures, they put aside tradition as a source in matters of belief, they (questioned the significance of the empirical Church as regards the dogma, and above all they tried to put forwartl a formulation of the Christian religion, which goes directly back to the "true understanding of the Word of God." Thus in principle the ancient dog- matic conception of Christianity was set aside, while however in certain matters no fixed attitude was taken toward the same and reactions began at once and still continue. Therefore is it announced that protestan? *^^^ history of Protcstaut doctrine will bo excluded Exduded. from the history of dogma, and within the foniier will be indicated only the position of the Reformers and of the churches of the Reformation, out of which the later complicated development grew. Hence the history of dogma can be treated as relatively a com- pleted discipline. PROLEGOMENA. 5 uot KxjMt- sitioii of CliiiHtiau K»'v«*lu- tloa. C. The claim of tho Cliuivh that the dogmas are simply the exposition of the Christian revelation, because dedueed from the Holy Scriptures, is not confirmed by historical investigation. On the con- trary, it becomes clear that dogmatic Christianity (the dogmas) in its conception and in its construc- tion was ilie work of the Hellenic sjririf Kpnn the Gospel soil. The intellectual medium by which in early times men sought to make the Gospel compre- hensible and to establish it securely, became insep- arably blended with the content of tlio same. Thus arose the dogma, in whose formation, to be sure, other factors (the words of Sacred Scripture, re juire- ments of the cult, and of the organization, political and social environment, the impulse to push things to their logical consequences, blind custom, etc.) played a part, yet so that the desire and effort to formulate the main principles of the Christian re- demption, and to explain and develop them, secured the upper hand, at least in the earlier times. 7. Just as the formulating of the dogma proved to Jyy*t,?jfJ[ be an illusion, so far as the same was to be the pure exposition of the Gospel, so also does historical inves- tigation destroy the other illusion ci the Church, viz. : that the dogma, always having been the same therein, have simply been explained, and that eccle- siastical theology has never had any other aim than to explain the unchanging dogma and to refute the heretical teaching pressing in from without. The formulating of the dogma indicates rather that the- »'d the Dogma. Aiijnistinc l.iillu'r. I ! 11 ( > OUTLTNKS OK TIIK HISTORY OF DOCJMA. olngy corirttrucU'd llic dogma, Imt that the Church must over conceal the lahor of the thi\)logiaiiH, wliicli thus i)hiceH them in an unfortunate jtliglit. In each favoraUe case the result of their lahor has been declared to be a reproduction and they them- selves luive been robl)ed of their best service; as a rule in the progress of histt)ry they fell under the condemnation of the dogmatic scheme, whose foun- dation they themselves had laid, and so entire ge?UT- rations of theologians, as well as the chief leadtis thereof, have, in the further development of dogma, been afterwards marked and declared to be heretics or held in suspicion. Dogma has ever in the prog- ress of history devoured its own progenitors. 8. Although dogmatic Christianity has never, in the process of its develoi)ment, lost its original style and character as a work of the spirit of perishing anti(puty upon Gospel soil (stfjle of the Greek apoloijists and of Origiu), yet it experienced first through Augustine and later through Luther a deeper and more thorough transformation. Both of these men, the latter more than the former, cham- pioned a new and more evangelical conception of Christianity, guided chiefly by Paulinism; Augus- tine however hardly attempted a revision of the tra- ditional dogma, rather did he co-ordinate the old and the new; Luther, indeed, attempted it, but did not carry it through. The Christian quality of the dogma gained through the influence of each, and the old traditional system of dogma was relaxed some- niOLECiOMENA. what — this was so much llio cjisc in Protostantisin that one dix'S well, as ivinarkod ahovo, no l(>ngi»r to consider the syniholical teaching of the Protestant churches as wholly a recasting of the old dogma. !>. An understanding of the dogmatico-historic ivri(xis in " ^ ° History nf process cannot be se( ired by isolating the special L)^k"»" doctrines and considering them sei)arately (8|)ecial History of Dogma) after that the epochs have been previously characterized (General History of I)(^gma) . It is much better to consider the " general " and the " special " in each period and to treat the periods sep- arately, and as much as possible to prove the special doctrines to be the outcome of the fundamental idejus and motives. It is not possible, however, to mako more than four principal divisions, viz. : I. The Ori- gin of Dogma. II. a. The Development of Dogma in accordance with the principles of its original con- ception (Oriental Development from Arianism to the Image-Controversy). II. b. The O lental Devel- opment of Dogma under the influence of Augustine's Christianity and the Roman papal politics. II. c. The Three-fold Issuing of Dogma (in the churches of the Reformation — in Tridentine Catholicism — and in the criticism of the rationalistic age, i.e., of So- cinianism) . 10. The history of dogma, in that it sets forth the value of process of the origin and development of the dogma, offers the very best means and methods of freeing the Church from dogmatic Christianity, and of hast- ening tiie inevitable process of emancipation, which 8 Ol'TLINKH OF TIIK HISTORY OF DOGMA. began with AuguHtim;. But tlio hi.stoiy of dogma teHtifies also to tho unity and continuity of tho Christian faith in tho progress of its history, in so far as it proves that certain fundamental ideas of tlio Gospel have never been lost and ha.ve defied all attacks. II.— History of the History of Dogma. MoHhelm, etc. li! Baronlus, ftL-. Luther, etc. Erasmus, etc. Benedic- tine, etc. Gottfried Arnold. The narrative of the History of Dogma begins first in the 18th century with Mosheim, Walch, Ernesti, Lessing, and Semler, since Catholicism in general is not fitted for a critical handling of the subject, al- though learned works have been written by individ- ual Catholic theologians (Baronius Bellarmin, Peta- vius, Thomassin, Kulm, Schwane, Bach, etc.), and since the Protestant churches remained until the 18th century under the ban of confessionalism, al- though important contributions were made in the time of the Reformation (Luther, Okolampad, Mel- anchthon, Flacius, Hyperius, Chemnitz) to the criti- cal treatment of the History of Dogma, based in part upon the labors of the critically disposed humanists (L. Valla; Erasmus, etc.). But without the learned material, which, on the one hand, the Benedictine and other Orders had gathered together, and, on the other, the Protestant Casaubonus, Vossius, Pearson, Dallaus, Spanheim, Grabe, Basnage, etc., and with- out the grand impulse which pietism gave (Gott- fried Arnold), the work of the 18th century would PROLEGOMENA. 9 have been iuconsi«loral)lo. Kaiiunalism robbed tlio history of dogma of its ecclesitiHtical interest and gave it over to a critical troatnKMit in which its darkness was liglitod np in part by the hunp of connnon nnderstanding and in part by the torch of general historical contcnii)lation (first History of Dogma by Langc, ITi^O, previous works by Sond(»r, H()ssler, Loffler, etc., then the History of Dogma by Miinscher, Handb. 4 Bdd. 1T!>7 f., an excellent Lehrbnch, 1. Aufl. IS 11, 'A. Antl. 1S:5^, :M (inter 2 Bdd. 1S()2 f, StJiudlin ISOO and l^'l'l, Augusti 1805 and 1S:)0, Gieseler, edited l)y Redepenning 2 Bdd. 1855). The valuable handbooks of Baumgar- ton-Crusius 18:52, i.e. 1840 and 1840, and of Meier 1840, i.e. 1854, mark the transition to a class of works in which an inner understanding of the pro- cess of the History of Dogma has been won, for which Lessing had already striven, and for which Herder, Schleiermacher and the Romanticists on the one side, and Hegel and Schelling on the other, had prepared the way. Epoch-making were the writings of F. Chr. Baur (Lehrb. 1847, i.e. 1807, Vorles. 3. Thl. 1805 f.), in which the dogmati co-historic process, conceived to be sure in a one-sided way, was, so to speak, lived over again (cf . also Strauss, Glaubenslehre 2 Bdd. 1840 f. Marheineke 1840). From the Schleiermacher point of view, is Neander (2. Thl. 1857) and Hagenbach (1840, i.e. 1807). Dorner (History of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ, 1839 i.e. 1845-53) attempted to unite Hegel Lango. MllLwlior. Iiauiiii;nr- t<'ii-Cru- KillS. Herder, Schleier- inucher, Heijel, Scbelling. Baur. Neander. Domer. If! NiUHch. 10 OUTLINKM OF THE FII8TORY OF DOOMA. and S('lil<'i(MiuHclHT. From tli<» Liithcraii Confc'H- Hioiial standpoint Klicfotli (Kinl. in d. D. (I. l.s;;:>), TlioinasiuH ("i Hdd. isTt f. and lss7 edited by Bon- wetsch 1 l^d.), Hdiniid (isrj'.l i.v. 1SH7 od. l)y llauck) and, with reservations, Kahnis (The Faith of the Clinreh, 1S(;4). A marked [idvanco is indieated in the History of Dogma by Niizsch (I Bd. ISTo). For a correct understanding esiK»cially of the origin of dogma the hibors of Rothe, Ritschl, Ronan, Over- beek, v. Engeliiardt, Weizaiicker and Reville are valuabk\ Oospcl is .It'siis Cliiist. PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. III.— Introductory. 1. The gosp{»l appeared in the "fulness of time." And t]>e Gospel is Jesus Christ. In these sentences the announcement is made that the Gospel is the climax of an universal development and yet that it has its power in a personal Life. Jesus Christ " de- stroyed not," but "fulfilled." Ho witnessed a new life before God and in God, but within the confines of Judaism, and upon the soil of the Old Testament whose hidden treasures he uncovered. It can be shown, that everything that is " lofty and spiritual " in the Psalms and Prophets, and everything that had been gained through the development of Grecian ethics, is reaffirmed in the plain and simple Gospel ; but it obtained its power there, because it became m PKOliKCJoMKNA. u ^ I: 1 lifi' ami (Iced in a I'rr.son, wljosr j^rcatiioss coiisiHts also in this, that ho did not remould Ids oartldv en- vironnicnl, nor encounter any suhsetjuent rehutV, — in other words, that he did not iHconie entangled in his times. '^. Two L'enerat ions lati'r there I'xisted, to be sure, •'•"'/"'I'T- " ' ' ati'il Cull- no united and liomoj^eneous Clinrc/i, hut there ^■'"'^^''^"""''• wore Hcattorud througliout the wide Roman empire ronf(>derated congregations of Christian l)elieverH (churehes) who, for the most l)art, were (Jentile- horn and condennied the Jewish nation and religion as apostate; thoy apju'opriated tlu; Old Testament as theirs by right and considered themselves a "new nation", and yet as the " ancient creation of (iod", while in all departments of life and thought certain sacred forms were graduallj' l)eing i)ut forward. The existence of these confedt^rated Cientile Christian comnuuiities is the preliminary condition to the rise of dogmatic Christianity. The organization of these churches began, indeed, Frtvin*,' of _ (IllSIM'l in the apostolic times and their peculiar constitution ''""j'^i;''"" is negatively indicated by the freeing of the (losi)el from the Jewish church. While in Islamism the Arabic nation remained for centuries the main trunk of the new religion, it is an astonishing fact in the history of the Gospel, that it soon left its native soil and went forth into the wide world and realized its universal character, not through the transformation of the Jewish religion, but by developing into a world-religion upon Grceco-RoDian soil. The Oos- Cliunli. ■l I Gospel Worlcl-Ri- ligiuu. Classical Epoch of Gospel History. Paul's Mis- sion. No Chasm Between EarliLT Epoch and Succeeding Periotl. 12 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. pel became a workl-reliqion in thnf^ having a messiuje for all mankind^ it preached it to Greek and barbarian^ and accordingly attached itself to the spiritual and political life of the world- wide Roman enqyire. 3. Since the Gospel in its original form was Jew- ish and was preached only to the Jews, there lay in this transition, which was brought about, in part gradually and without disturbance, and in part through a severe crisis, conseciuences of the most stringent kind. From the standpoint of the history of the Church and of dogma, the brief history of the Gospel within the bounds of Palestinian Judaism is accordingly a paloontclogical epoch. And yet this remains the classical epochs not only on account of the Founder and of the original testimony, but quite as much because a Jewish Christian (Paul) recog- nized the Gospel as the power of God, which was able to save both Jew and Greek, and because he designedly severed the Gospel from the Jewish na- tional religion and proclaimed the Christ as the end of the Law. Then other Jewish Christians, personal disciples of Jesus, indeed, followed him in all this (see also the 4th Gospel and the Epistle to the Hebrews) . Yet there is in reality no chasm between the older brief epoch and the succeeding period, so far as the Gospel is in itself universalistic, and this character very soon became manifest. But the means by which Paul and his sympathizers set forth the uni- A. PROLErJOMENA. 13 iving a 3 Greek d itself world- as Jew- 3 lay in in part in part le most history 7 of the iiism is 'et this Dunt of t quite recog- 1 was use he sh na- le end rsonal 11 this o the older IS the acter by B uni- Oentilo Chiiroh (iid not C'oni- versal character of the Gospel (j roving that the Old Testament religion had been fulfilled and done away with) was little understood, and, vice versa^ the manner and means by which the Gentile Christians came to an acceptance of the Gospel, can only in part be attributed to the preaching of Paul So far as we now possess in the New Testament substan- tial writings in which the Gospel is so thoroughly thought out that it is prized as the supplanter oi the Old Testament religion, and writings which at the same time are not deeply touched with the Greek spirit, does this literature differ radically from all that follows. 4. The growing Gentile Church, notwithstanding Paul's significant relation toward it, did not com- prehend prehend, nor really experience the crisis, out of problem, which the Pauline conception of the Gospel arose. In the Jewish propaganda, within which the Old Testament had long since become liberalized and spiritualized, the Gentile Church, entering and grad- ually subjecting the same to itself, seldom felt the problem of the reconciliation of the Old Testament with the Gospel, since by means of the allegorical method the propaganda had freed themselves from the letter of the law, but had not entirely- overcome its spirit; indeed they had simply cast off their national character. Moved by the hostile power of the Jews and later also of the Gentiles and by the consciousness of inherent strength to organize a " people " for itself, the Church as a matter of course 14 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. ' •- fi.'ntilf Chiirclirrt Kt'taii;i(l Many Pilt'stiiiian Cliaractcr- istics. TTistiiry of l)<);,'ma has to ilti witli (iciitilc Chtirc'li Only. took on the form of the thought and life of the world in which it lived, casting aside everything polythe- istic, immoral and vulgar. Thus arose the new or- ganizations, which with all their newness bore testi- mony to their kinship with the original Palestinian churches, in so far as, (1) the Old Testament was likewise recognized as a primitive revelation, and in so far as, (2) the strong spiritual monotheism, {'.)) the outlines of the proclamation concerning Jesus Christ, (4) the consciousness of a direct and living fellowship with God through the gift of the Spirit, (5) the expectation of the approaching iJid of the world, and the earnest conviction of the personal responsibility and accountability of each individual soul were all likewise maintained. To these is to be added finally, that the earliest Jewish-Christian proclamation, yes, the Gospel itself, bears the stamp of the spiritual epochs, out of which it arose, — of the Hellenic age, in which the nations exchanged their wares and religions were transformed, and the idea of the worth and accountability of every soul became widespread; so that the Hellenism which soon pressed so mightily into the Church was not abso- lutely strange and new. 5. The history of dogma has to do with the Gen- tile Church only — the history of theology begins, it is true, with Paul — , but in order to understand his- torically the basis of the formation of doctrine in the Gentile Church, it must take into consideration, as already stated, the following as antecedent condi- I'KOLEGOMENA. Uy tions: (1) TJw Gospel of Jcsiis Christ, (2) The rr.'snpi><>- general and sinuilfaneons jyt'odamation of Jesns Christ in the first generation of believers, {'■]) The eurrent understanding and exposition of tJie Old Testament and the Jewish anticipations of the fu- ture andtheir speculations, (4) The religious con- ceptions and the religious philosophy of the Hel- lenistic Jews, (5) The religious attitfide of the Greeks and, Bomans during the first two centu- ries, and the current Grceco-Eonian philosophy of religion. Gen- Ins, it ll his- In the |n, as mdi- of KinK- (loin of God. IV.— The Gospel of Jesus Christ according TO His Own Testimony. The Gospel is the good news of the reign of the JI'^^I^'^^J^.^ Ahnighty and Holy God, the Father and Judge of the world and of each individual soul. In this rtn'gn, which makes men citizens of the heavenly kingdom and gives them to realize their citizenship in the ap- proaching eon, the life of every man who gives him- self to God is secure, even if he should immediately lose the world and his earthly life; while those who seek to win the world and to keep their life fall into the hands of the Judge, who condemns them to hell. This reign of God, in that it rises ahove all ceremonies and statutes, places men under a la?r, which is old and yet new, viz. : Whole-hearted lore to God and to one's neighbor. In this love, wher- ever it controls the thoughts in their deepest springs, that better Justice is exemplified which corresponds T ovf to (ioi! and Man. i\ 16 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. to the perfection of God. The way to secure this righteousness is by a change of hearty i.e. by self- denial and humility before God and a heart-felt trust in him. In such humility and trust in God the soul realizes its own unworthiness. The Gospel, however, calls even sinners, who are so disposed, unto the kingdom of God, in that it assures them satisfaction with his justice, i.e., guarantees them the forgiveness of the sins which have hitherto separated them from God. In the three-fold form, however, in which the Gospel is set forth, (God's ^'vrv^fSv' sovereignty, higher justice [law of love] and for- L.m%^For- givcuess of siu) it is inseparably connected with Sin. Jesus Christ. For in the proclamation of the Gos- pel, Jesus Christ everywhere called men unto him- self. In him is the Gospel icorcl and deed; it is his meat and drink and, therefore, is it become his personal life, and into this life he would draw all men. He is the Son, who knows the Father. Men should see in him how kind the Lord is; in him they may experience the power and sovereignty of God over the world and be comforted in this trust ; him, the meek and gentle-hearted One, should they follow ; and inasmuch as he, the holy and pure One, calls sinners unto himself, they should be fully as- sured that God through him forgives sin. This close connection of his Gospel with his per- son, Jesus by no means made prominent in words, but left his disciples to experience it. He called himself the Son of Man and led them on to the jon- TfOspcl Word and Divd in Jesus. 1 1 lA. euro this . by self- leart-felt in God ) Gospel, lisposed, •es them es them hitherto d form, , (God's md for- 3d with he Gos- to him- Ij it is >me his raw all Men :n him nty of trust ; i they 3 One, ly as- per- ords, called jon- PROLEGOMKNA. 17 fession that he was their Master and Messiah. Jfsua Mes- siah. Thereby he gave to his lasting significance for them and for his people a comprehensible expression, and at the close of his life, in an hour of great solemnity, he said to them that his death also like his life was an imperishable service which he rendered to the "many" for the forgiveness of sins. By this ho raised himself above the plane of all others, although they may already be his brethren ; he claimed for himself an unique significance as the Redeemer and Rwipj^mer, as the Judge ; for he interpreted his death, like all his suffering, as a triumph, as the transition to his cjlorij, and he proved his power by actually awaken- ing in his disciples the conviction that he still lives and is Lord over the dead and the living. The re- ligion of the Gospel rests upon this faith in Jesus Christ, i.e. looking upon him, that historical Per- son, the believer is convinced that God rules heaven and earth, and that God, the Judge, is also Father and Redeemer. The religion of the Gospel is the re- ligion which frees men from all legality, which, how- ever, at the same time lays upon them the highest moral obligations — the simplest and the severest — and lays bare the contradiction in which every man finds himself as regards them. But it brings re- demption out of such necessities, in that it leads men to the gracious God, leaves them in his hands, and draws their life into union with the inexhaustible and blessed life of Jesus Christ, who has overcome the world and called sinners to himself. Gospel Frees from all Legal- ity. i !i I ■ I 18 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA. Josus IJis- «'n Lord. Way, Truth, Life. Kinp. Contont of Disciples' IJeliof. New Chiiivh, Tnu' Is- rael. V. — The General Proclamation concerning Jesus Christ in the First Generation of His Adherents. 1. Men had learned to know Jesns Christ Jind hud found him to bo the Messiah. In the first two gen- erations following him everything was said about him which men were in any way able to say. Inas- much as they knew him to be the Risen One, they exalted him as the Lord of the world and of history, sitting at the right hand of God, as the Way, the Truth and the Life, as the Prince of Life and the living Power of a new existence, as the Contiueror of death and the King of a coming new kingdom. Although strong individual feeling, special experi- ence, Scriptural learning and a fantastic tendency gave from the beginning a form to the confession of him, yet common characteristics of the proclamation can be definitely pointed out. 3. The content of the disciples' belief and the gen- eral proclamation of it on the ground of the certainty of the resurrection of Jesus, can be set forth as fol- lows : Jesus is the Messiah promised by the prophets — ho will come again and establish a visible king- dom, — they who believe on him and surrender them- selves entirely to this belief, may fool assured of the grace of God and of a share in liis future glory. A new community of Christian believers thus organized itself within the Jewish nation. And this now com- munity believed itself to be (he true Israel of the * . X. PROLEfJOMEXA. 10 JERNING nON OF [«ik1 Ijad WO gen- ii about Inas- le, they history, ''ay, the unci the ntjiieror ngdom. experi- ndoncy sion of mation le gen- 'tainty las fol- [ophets king- them- of the A mized com- )f the AssiiriiiiLMi of I)!^!!- plrsliii). Messianic times and lived, accordingly, in all their thoughts and feelings in the future. Thus could all the Jewish apocalyptic expectations retain their pow- er for the time of the second coming of Christ. For the fulfilment of these hopes the new community pos- sessed a guarantee in the sacrificial death of Christ, as also in the manifold manifestations of the Spirit, which were visible upon the members upon their entrance into the brother-hood (from the beginning this introduction seems to have been accompanied bv rosscssion ^ • dl' Spirit, bajitism) and in their gathering together. The pos- session of the Spirit was an assurance to each indi- vidual that he was not only a " disciple " but also a "called saint," and, as such, a. priest and king of God. Faith in the God of Israel became faith in God the Father ; added to this was faith in Jesus, the Christ and Son of God, and the witness of the gift of the Holy Spirit, i.e. of the Spirit of God and Christ. In ihe strength of this faith men lived in the fear of the Judge and in trust in God, who had already begun the redemption of his own people. The proclamation concerning Jesus, the Christ, rested first of all entirely upon the Old Testament, yet it had its starting-point in the exaltation of Jesus through his resurrection from the dead. To prove that the entire Old Testament pointed toward him, and that his person, his work, his fate were the actual and verbal fulfilment of the Old Testament in-ophecies, was the chief interest of believers, in so far as they did not give themselves entirely to ex- PrcatOiinjj Based Kii- tirclv on Old Tfstii- IlU'Ill. «! I' .?i'! >lk' Specula- tion Began in Apostol- ic Ages. 20 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. poctations of tho future. This roferenco did not serve at once to make clear the meaning and worth of tho ]\Iossianic work — this it did not seem to need — but rather to establish the Messiah-ship of Jesus. However, the Old Testament, as it was then under- stood, gave occasion, through tho fixing of the per- son and dignity of Christ, for widening the scope of the thought of Israel's perfected theocracy. And, in addition, faith in the exaltation of Jesus to the right hand of God caused men to think of the begin- ning of his existence in harmony therewith. Then the fact of the successful Gentile conversion threw a new light upon the scope of his work, i.e. upon its significance for all mankind. And finally the per- sonal claims of Jesus led men to reflect on his pecu- liar relation to God, the Father. On these four points speculation began already in the apostolic age and it went on to formulate new statements concern- ing the person and dignity of Christ. In proclaim- ing Jesus to be the Christ men ceased thereby to proclaim tho Gospel, because the -rr^petv rtdwTa Una iveTeiXazn 6 Ir^nuu'? was to be included as a matter of course and so did not especially engage the thoughts. That this must bo for the future a questionable digression is plain enough; for since everything depends upon the appropriation of the Person of Jesus, it is not possible for a personal life to be appropriated through opinions about the Person, but only through the record of the concrete Per- sonality. \i. I'HOLK(;()MKNA. 21 'Ta una .5. U|)on tho basis of tho pUiiii vvordH of JesuH and A>simiiir.. * * lit I' (iif-'i ve- in tho consciousness of tho possession of the Spirit men u'i'^M*" ui- were already assured ot i\ 2)n'si'Ht possesHioii oi iha ii..ii forgiveness of sin, of righteousness before God,, of tho full knowledge of the Divine Will and of the call into the future kingdom. In tho acquiring of those blessings, surely not a few realized tho consequences of the first coming of the Messiah, i.e. his work, and they referred especially the forgiveness of sin to the death of Christ, and eternal life to his resurrec tion. But no theories touching tho relation of the blessings of the Gospel to the history of Christ were propounded; Paul was the first to develop a theology upon the basis of the death and resurrection of Christ and to bring it into relations with the Old Testa- ment religion. 4. This theologj' was constructed in opposition to ^'HJjV'^oT the legalistic righteousness of the pharisees, i.e.., to i!,'Sii.sVic tho official religion of the Old Testament. While its form was thereby somewhat conditioned, its power rested in the certainty of tho new life of tho Spirit, which the Risen One offered, who through his death overcame the world of the flesh and of sin. With the thought that righteousness comes through faith in God who raised Jesus from the dead and fulfilled the Law by the legal way of the crucifixion of the Christ upon the cross, Paul wrenched tho Gospel from its native soil and gave it at the same time through his Christological speculation and his carry- ing out of the contrast of flesh and spirit, a charac- UfSS. ^\ ! 1 I |! 1' n Ol'TMNKS OK TIIK IIISTOKY OK F)()(1MA. Heathen Not Ol)lifjwl to Bwom« JtiWS. Transfor- mation of Christian- ity Oi- curred Apait from Paul. toristic Htamp whicli was romproliciisiblo to the (i rocks, although thoy were illy prepared to accept his special manner of reconciling it with the Law. Through Paul, who was the first theologian, the (juestion of the Law (in theory and practice) and the principles of missionary activity accordingly he- came the absorbing themes in the Christian coninni- nities. While he in-oclaimed freed()m from the Law and baptized the heathen, forbidding them to become Jews, others now for the first time consciously made the righteousness of Christian believers dependent upon the punctilious observance of the Law and re- jected Paul as an apostle and as a Christian. Yet the chief disciples of Jesus were convinced, perha.i)s not a little influenced by the success of Paul, and concede \ to the heathen the right to become Chris- tians without first becoming Jews. This well at- tested fact is the strongest evidence that Christ had awakened among his personal disciples a faith in himself, which was dearer to them than all the tra- ditions of the fathers. Yet there were among those who accepted the Pauline mission various opinions as to the attitude which one should take toward heathen Christians in ordinary life and intercourse. These opinions held out for a long time. As surely as Paul had fought his fight for the whole of Christendom, so sure also is it that the transformation of the original form of Christianity into its universal form took place outside of his activity (proof* the Church at Rome). The Juda- 1 \ MA. I'llOI.EGOMKNA. > to tlie to accept he Law. pan, the ice) and ingly 1)0- conimu- the Law ) become ly made pendent and re- n. Yet perhaps nl, and ) Chris- veil at- ist had lith in he tra- ? those )inions oward 'oiirse. )r the at the ianity ►f his Juda- ism ot' the diaspora was lon<^ since surrounded h}- a retiiuie of half-hred Grecian brethren, for whom the particular and national forms of the Old Testament religion were hardly existent (see VIL). And, far- ther, this Judaism itself had begun to transform for the Jews the old religion into a universal and spirit- ual religion without casting aside its forms, which were rather considered significant symbols (myster- ies). The Gospel, being received into these circles, completed sim|)ly and almost suddenly the process of s])iritualizing the old religion, and it stripped oflf the old forms as shells, replacing them at once in part by new forms {e.g., circumcision is circumcision of the heart, likewise also baptism; the Sabbath is the glorious kingdom of Christ, etc.). The outward withdrawal from the synagogue is also here a clear proof of the power and self -consciousness oi the new religion. The same developed itself rapidly in con- secpience of the hatred of the Jews, who adhered to the old faith. Paul exerted an influence, and the destruction of Jerusalem cleared up entirely the ob- scurities which still remained. VL— The Current Exposition of the Old Tes- tament AND THE Jewish Future Hope, in their Bearing on the Earliest Formula- tion of the Christian Message. 1. Although the method of the pedant, the casuis- ^Kx^^Kl'sii'* tic handling of the Law and the extortion of the »)y churJh. 1, 1 , I i i; Jewish Apociilyp- tic Litt'ia- ture Rtv tuiued. 94 OUTLINES OF TIIK IIISTOHY OF IJOOMA. dtH'[)(»s( moaning of tho itropliccics, liad Im'cii in priii- ciplo (lono away with by Johus Clirist, the old school-oxogesis still remained active in the Cliria- tian rhurchos, and especially the nnhistorical local- method in the exposition of the Old Testament, as well as the allegoristic and the Ilaggada ; for a sacred text — and as such the Old Testanu^nt was considered — ever invites men in the exposition of it to disre- gard its historical conditions and interpret it accord- ing to the needs of the time. Especially wherever the proofs of the fulfilment^ prophecy, i.e., of the Messiah-ship of Jesus was concerned, the received point of view exercised its influence, as well upon the exposition of the Old Testament as upon the conception of the person, fate and deeds of Jesus. It gave, under the strong impression of the history of Jesus, to many Old Testament passages n foreign sense and enriched, on the other hard, the life of Jesus with new facts, throwing the emphasis upon details, which were often unreal and seldom of prime importance. 2. The Jewish apocalyptic literature, as it flour- ished after the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, was not forbidden within the circles of the first believers oi the Gospel, but rather was it retained and read as an explanation of the prophecies of Jesus and, as it were, cultivated. Although the content of the same appeared modified and the uncertainty regarding the person of the Messiah who was to appear in judg- ment w^as done away with, the earthly sensuous J *'- PHOLKfJOMKNA. 5i5 hoiH's wore by no moans wholly roproHsod. Confused pioturos filled tho fjincy, throatonod to obsouro the plain and earnest description of the judj^nient which every individual soul is sure of, and drove many friends of the Gospel into a restless turmoil and intt) a detestation of the state. Consecpiently the repro- duction of the eschatological discourses of Jesus be- came indefinite; even things wholly foreign were mingled therewith, and the true aim of the Christian life and hope began to waver. 3. Through the apocalyptic literature, tho artificial ^'J!j/|'"''^,f** exegesis and the Haggada, a mass of mythological i!il.u!,"il|.'. and poetical ideas crowded into the Christian com- munities and were legitimized. Tho most imjMjr- tant for tho succeeding times were tho speculations in regard to the Messiah, which were drawn in part from the Old Testament and the apocalypses and in part were constructed in accordance with methods whoso right no one questioned and whoso adoption seemed to give security to the faith. Long since in the Jewish religion men had given to everything that is and that happens an existence within the knowledge of God, but they had in reality confined this representation to that only which is really im- portant. The advancing religious thought had above Pn-Exist- ence As- all included individuals also, that is, the most promi- jiJ,yy|lJ," nent, within this speculation which should glorify God, and so a pro-existence was ascribed also to the Messiah, but of such a nature that by virtue of it he abides ivith Ood during his earthly manifesta- i' ilil «^ ! |l > ! I Hoot . f Speciiiii ti.ju. 26 <>l TLINKS OK THE HISTORY OP' 1)0(JMA. tioH. In <)i)pu.siti()n to tliis, llio Hellenics ideas of pre-existeiice rooted themselves in the distinguishing of God and matter; spirit and flesh. According to the same the Spirit is pre-existent and visible na- ture is only a shell which it assumes. Here was the soil for ideas about the incarnation, the assump- tion of a second nature, etc. In the time of Christ these Hellenic ideas influenced the Jewish and thus both were so spread abroad that even the most prom- inent Christian teachers adopted them. The relig- ious convictions (see V. 2), that, (1) the establish- ment of the kingdom of God upon the earth and the sending of Jesus as the perfect Mediator was from eternity the highest purpose in God's plan of salva- tion, that, (2) the glorified Christ has entered into his own proper position of God-like dominion, that, (3) in Jesus God has revealed himself, and that he therefore excels all Old Testament mediators, yes, tlie angel-powers themselves — these convictions were so fixed (not without the influence of Hellenic thought) that Jesus pre-existed, i.e. tluit in him a heavenly Being of like rank with God, older than the world, yes even its creating Principle, has ap- peared and assumed our flesh. The religious root of chis speculation lay in sentences such as I. Pet. 1, 20 ; its forms of statement were varied even accord- ing to the intelligence of the teacher and his famil- iarity with the apocalyptic theology or with the Hellenic philosophy of religion, in which intermedi- ate beings (above all the Logos) played a great role. . ii ! PK(>LK(;()MKNA. 27 Rise nnil Sni'ciid In. istiiift. Only the Fourth Evangolist — he hardly hulungs to the 1st century — saw with perfect clearness that the pre-earthly Christ must be established as '''^''V iu> iv "■I'XJI '('^^"^ '"^ '''^'''^) ill order not t(j endanger the content and significance of the revelation of God in Christ. In addition there prevailed in wide circles such con- ceptions also as recognized in a spiritual communi- cation at his baptism the eciuipment of the man Jesus (see the genealogies, the beginning of the Gospel of Mark) for his office, or found upon tlie basis of Isa. vii. in his miraculous birth (from a virgin) the germ of his uni(iue being. (The rise and spread of this representation is wholly indistinct to us ; Paul seems not to hjive known it ; in the be- ginning of the l^d century it is almort universal.) On the other hand, it is of great significance tlmt every teacher who recognized the new in Christian ity as religion ascribed pre-existonco to Christ. Supplement . — A reference to the witness of proph- ecy, to the current exposition of the Old Testament, to apocalyptic writings and valid methods of specu- lation was not sufficient to clear up every new point which cropped out in the statement of the Christian message. The earliest brother-hoods were enthusias- tic, had prophets in the midst of them, etc. Under such conditions facts were produced outright contin- ually in the history (c.^., as particularly weighty, J'acts ito- the ascension of Christ and his descent into heF.). It is farther not poesiblo to point out the motive to such productions, which first onlj" by the creation of Knrlii'sf IkhmIs En- thusiast if. iM fl I i ! 'i!i I ,ii 4 \ b< Ii', 28 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. the New Testament Canon reached a hy no means complete end, i.e., now became enriched by compre- hensible mythologumena. VIL— The Religious Conceptions and the Re- ligious Philosophy of the Hellenistic Jews in Their Bearing on the Transfor- mation OF THE Gospel Message. Religion of 1. From the remnants of Jewish- Alexandrian lit- Diaspora, aud"^ooJ- erature (reference is also made to the Sibylline naoogy. Qp^cles as Well as to Joseph as) and from the great propaganda of Judaism in the Grseco- Roman world, it may be inferred that there was a Judaism in the diaspora to whoso consciousness the cultus and the ceremonial law disappeared entirely behind the mono- theistic worship of God without images, behind the moral instruction and the faith in a future reward beyond. Circumcision itself was no longer abso- lutely required of those converted to Judaism; one was also satisfied w'th the cleansing bath. The Jewish religion seemed here transformed into a com- mon human morality and into a monotheistic cos- mology. Accordingly tne thought of the theocracy ae well as the Messianic hope grew dim. The latter did not entirely fail, however, but the prophecies were valued chieily for the proof of the antiquity of the Jewish monotheism, and the thought of the future spent itself in the expectation of the destruction of the Roman empire, of the burning of the world and — PROLEGOMENA. 29 Propara- tion for Christian- Greeks. what is Weightiest — the general judgment. That which is specifically Jewish preserved itself under a high regard for the Old Testament, which was con- sidered as the fountain of all wisdom (also for the Greek philosophy and the elements of truth in the non- Jewish religions). Many intelligent men also observed punctiliously the Law for the sake of its symlolical significance. Such Jews, together with their converts from the Greeks, formed a new Juda- ism upon the foundation of the old. And these j^re- pared the soil for the Christianizing of the Greeks, as well as for the establishment within the empire of a great Gentile Church free from the Law; under the influence of Greek culture it developed into a kind of universal society with a monotheistic back- ground. As religion it laid aside the national forms, put itself forward as the most perfect form of that " natural " religion, which the Stoa had discovered. But in that way it became more iiioralifitic and lost a part of the religious enorgy, which the prophets and psalmists possessed. The inner union of Juda- ism and the Hellenistic philosophy of religion indi- cates a great advance in the history of religion and culture, l)ut the same did not lead to strong religious creations. Its productions passed over into " Chris- tianity." 2. The Jewish- Alexandrian philosophy of religion had its most noted defender in Philo,— the perfect ^JiJophy^df Greek and the sincere Jew, who turned the religious ^phila"' philosopliy of his time in the direction of Neo- Jpwish- Alexan- It I ! M( in til : 'i t I Asc'Ptic Virtue. Inrttiencp of AU'xnii- (Iriim Plii- losojihy of |{<'li).^ioii U|)OI» Christ iiin- ity. 30 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. Platonism and prepared the way for a Christian tlieology, which was able to rival the philosophy. Pliiio was a Platonist and a Stoic, but at the same tinio a revelation-philosopher; he placed the final end in that wliich is above reason and therefore the highest power in the Divine communication. On the either hand, he saw in the human spirit some- thing Divine and bridged over the contrast between God and creature-5j>/y/^, between nature and history, by means of the personal- impersonal Logos, out of which he explained religion and the world whose material, it is true, remained to him wholly perish- able and evil. His ethical tendencies had, therefore, in principle a strong ascetic character, however much he might guard the earthly virtues as relative. Vir- tue is freedom from the sensuous and it is made per- fect through the touch of Divinity. This touch sur- passes all knowledge; the latter, however, is to bo highly prized as the tvay. Meditation upon the world is by Pliilo dependent upon the need of hap- piness and freedom, w^hich is higher than all reason. One may say that Philo is therefore the first who, as a philosopher, gave to this need a clear expression, because he was not only a Greek, but also a Jew imbued with the Old Testament within whose view, it is true, the synthesis of the Messiah and of the Logos did not lay. 'A. The practical fundamental conceptions of the Alexandrian philosophy of religion must, in different degrees, have found an entrance very early into PROLEGOMENA. 31 the Jewish-Christian circles of the diaspora, and through the same also into the Gontile-Christian ; or rather the soil was already prepared wherever these thoughts became widespread. After the beginning of the 2d century the philosophy of Philo also be- came influential through Christian teachers, espe- cially his Logos-doctrine, as the expression of the unity of religion, nature and history; and ahoi'e all his fundamental liermeneutic principles. The sys- tems of Valentine and Origen presuppose the system of Philo. His fine dualism and allegorical art (*'the Biblical alchemy ") became acceptable also to the learned men of the Church; to find the spiritual meaning of the sacred text, in part alongside the letter and in part outside, was the watchword of scientific Christian theology, which in general was possible only upon such a basis, since it strove, with- out recognizing a relative standard, to unify the monstrous and discordant material of the Old Testa- ment and the Gospel, and to reconcile both with the religion and scientific culture of the Greeks. Here Philo was a master, for he first in the largest sense ])oured the new wine into the old wine-skins — a i)ro- codure in its ultimate intention justified, since his- tory is a unit; but in its pedantic and scholastic execution the same was a source of illusions, of un- reality and finally of stultification. Vnlt'ntinus nn!l "I 1 1 i .( < ,i I in stoicism, riatouism. Nfo-Plat- ouism. 34 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. greatest significance as regards the deveh^pment of something new. Everywhere there sprang up that cosmopolitan feeling, which points beyond itself, there toward the practice of charity, here toward the uniting of mankind under one head and the wip- ing out of national lines. The Church appropriated, piece for piece^ the great apparatus of the earthly Roman empire; in its constitution, perhaps, it also saw the portrayal of the Divine economy. 3. Perhaps the most decisive factor in the change of the religious-ethical attitude was the philosophy, which in almost all its schools had more and more brought ethics forward and deepened the same. Upon the soil of Stoicism, Posidonius, Seneca, Epic- tetus and Marcus Aurelius, and upon the soil of Platonism, men like Plutarch had achieved an ethi- cal-outlook, which in its principles (knowledge, res- ignation, trust in God) was obscure, yet in some particulars scarcely admits of improvement. Com- mon to them all is the great value put upon the soul. A religious bent, the desire for Divine assistance, for redemption and for a life beyond, comes out dis- tinctly in some of them ; most clearly in the Neo- Platonists and those who anticipated them in the 2d centurj'- (preparation by Philo). Characteristics of this mode of thought are the dualistic contrasting of the Divine and the earthlj^ the abstract idea of God, the assertion of the unknowableness of God, skepti- cism in regard to sense-experience and distrust of the powers of reason ; at the same time great readi- PROLE(}OMENA. 35 Fantawii' I,«';riti- inizcd. ness to investigate and to utilize the results of the previous scientific labors; and farther, the demand for freedom from the sensuous through asceticism, the want of an authority, belief in a higher revela- tion and the fusing of religion, science and mythol- ogy. Already men began to legitimize the relig- ious fantasie within the realm of philosophy, by reaching back and seizing the myths as the vehicle of the deepest wisdom (romanticism). The tlieo- sophical philosophy which had thus equipped itself was from the standpoint of natural science and clear thinking in many ways a retrogression (yet not in all partic':lcirs, e.g. the Neo-Platonic psj^chology is far] bocter than the Stoic) ; but it was an expression for the deeper religious needs and the better self- knowledge. The inner life with its desires was now altogether the starting-point for all thought concern- ing the world. Thoughts of the divine, gracious Providence, of the kinship of all men, of the common fraternal love, of the ready and willing forgiveness of wrong, of the indulgenc patience, of the insight into tlicir own weaknesses were no less the product of the practical philosophy of the Greeks for wide circles, than the conviction of the inherent sinful- ness, of the need of redemption and of the value of a human soul which finds its rest only in God. But Revpiation and Relif? men possessed no sure revelation, no comprehensive 'bunion' and satisfactory religious eommunion, no vigorous and religious genius and no conception of hislonj, which could take the place of the no longer valuable ,'M munion Wan tin; k •^ - I I i' t 1 1 ' I ; I : i ! f ■ 36 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOKY OF DOGMA. political history; men poHsessed no ccrtilnde anil thoy (lid not get beyond the wavering between the fear of God and the deification of nature. Yet with this philosophy, the highest the age had to offer, the Gospel allied itself, avd the stages of the Ecclesiastical History of Dogma dnring the first fwe centuries correspond to the stages of the Hellenistic Philosophy of Religion ivithin the same period. introduc- As an introduction to the study of the history of tory Works to History dogma the following works are to be especially com- mended: Schiirer, Geschichto des jiidischen Volks im Zeitaltor Jesu Christi, 2. Bd. 1885 (English translation published by T. & T. Clark). Weber, System der altsynagogalen palastinensischen The- ologie, 1880. Kuenen, Volksreligion und Weltre- ligion, 1883. Wellhausen, Abriss der Geschichte Israel's und Juda's (Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, 1. Heft, 1884). Weiss, Lehrbuch der bibl. Theolo- gie, 4. Aufl., 1884. Baldensperger, Das Selbstbe- wustsein Jesu im Licht der messianischen Hoff- nungen seiner Zeit, 1888. Leben Jesu von Keim, Weiss and others and the Einleitungen in das N. T. von Reuss, Hilgenfeld, Mangold, Holtzmann und Weiss. Weizsiicker, Apostolisches Zeitalter, 188G. Renan, Hist, des Orig. du Christianisme, T. II.- IV. Pfleidorer, Das Urchristendum, 1887, Dics- tel, Geschichte des A. T. i. der christi. Kirche, % a I A PROLEGOMENA. 37 18r,!l, Siegfried, Philo v. Alex. 1875. Bigg, The ChriHtian PlatoniHts of Alexandria, ISSO. Die UiiterHUchungen von Freudentlial (' Hellenistisclie Studion ') and Bernays. BoisKier, La R«''ligion Romaino d'Augiiste aux Antonins, 2 vols,, 187 4. Reville, La Religion a Rome sous len Sevr'res, 188G (German by Kriiger 1888). Friedliinder, Dar- stellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Roms in der Zeit von August bis zu Ausgang der Antonine, 3. Bdd. 5. Aufl. Marquardt, Romische Staatsverwaltung, 3. Bdd. 1878. Leopold Schmidt, Die Ethik der alten Griechen, 2 Bdd. 1882. Heinze, Die Lebre vom Logos, 1872. Hirzel, Untersucbungen zu Cicero's philos. Schriften, C Tble. 1877. Die Lebrbiicber der Geschicbte der Pbilosopbie von Zeller, Ueber- weg, Striimpell and otbers, H m %\ fif I i h M ! II ii ' ' I ' part I. THE RISE OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOCMA. BOOK I. THE PREPARATION. CHAP . KU I. HISTORICAL SURVEY. THE first century of the existence of Gentile- Christian communities is characterized, (I) l)y the rapid retirement of Jewish Christianity, ('^) by religious enthusiasm and the strength of the future hope, (;]) by a severe moralit}' deduced from the Masters' teaching, (4) by the manifold form and freedom of expression of belief, on the basis of plain fornuilas and ever increasing tradition, (5) by the lack of a definite authority, in the transition to a recognized outward authority among the churches, (0) by the lack of a political connection among the various communities, and by an organization which was firm and yet permitted individual liberty, (7) by the development of a peculiar literary activity, claiming assent to its newly produced facts, (8) by the reproduction of detached phrases and individual 39 Oontile- ChriHtiuii (Viinnuuii- tics. ! ^^l i\\ * m :ii' ;;., i ' ■ ; 1 40 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA. inferences from tlie apostolical teacliiiig, without a clear understanding of the same, (0) by the crop- ping out of those tendencies which served in every way to hasten the process already begun of fusing the Gospel with the spiritual and religious interests of the time, — with Hellenism, — as well as by numer- ous attempts to wrench the Gospel free from its native setting and to introduce elements foreign to it. And finally, above all, it belonged to the (Hel- lenic) representation to consider knowledge, not as a (charismatic) supplement to faith, but as of like essence with it. CHAPTER II. GROUND COMMON TO CHRISTIANS AND ATTITUDE TAKEN TOWARD JUDAJ^M. Beliefs That the great majority of Christians had com- Courion to cHHs- ^QT^Qii beliefs is indicated by this fact, among others, that gnosticism was gradually expelled from the churches. Assurance of the knowledge of the true God, consciousness of responsibility to him, faith in Christ, hope in eternal life, exaltation above the pres- ent world, — these were fundamental thoughts. If we enter into details the following points may be noted : Gospel. 1. The Gospel, being founded upon a revelation, is the- reliable message of the true God, the faithful acceptance of which guarantees salvation ; 1 ■t f u — l*i THE PREPARATION. 41 TDE Icom- lers, the true ih in ires- If be ion, itiil 2. Tlie real content of this n»-^3snage is spiritual moncUieism, the announcemonc of tlie resurrection and oternal life, as well as the proclamation of moral purity and abstinence on the ground of repentance toward God and of attested cleansing through bap- tism in remembrance of the reward of good and evil; 3. This message comes to us through Jesus Christ, who " in these last days " is the commissioned Sa- viour and stands in a peculiar relationship with God. He is the l^edeemer (nutrrj/i) because he has brought full knowledge of God and the gift of eternal life {yxutri^ and ^ojrj, and especially y-'wrn^ ry;^ C<«?7s% the ex- pression for the summa of the Gospel). He is also the highest Prototype of every ethic?il virtue, the Law-Giver £.id the Law of the perfect life, and accordingly the Conqueror of demons and the Judge of the world ; 4. Virtue is abstinence (a renunciation of the good things of this world, in which the Christian is a stranger, and whose destruction is awaited) and brotherly love; 5. The message of the Christ is entrusted to chosen men, to apostles, and more especially to one apostle; their preaching is the preaching of the Christ. Moreover, the Spirit of God reproduces his gifts and graces in the "saints," and thus equips special "prophets and teachers," who receive com nuuiications for the edification of others ; ). Christian worship is tiie offering of spiritual Content of Message. C'onios throu^^h Christ. Virtue is Abstinence and Love. Message Entrusted to Apos- tles. G. Worship. i ' I '■ ! II Li Basis of lirother- huod. Christian- ity and Judaism. 42 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOGMA. sacrifice without regard to statutory rites and cere- monies; the holy offices and anointings, which are connected with the Christian cult, have their virtue in this, that spiritual blessings are therewith im- parted ; 7. The barriers of sex, age, position and nation- ality vanish entirely for Christians, as Christians; the Christian brotherhood rests upon the Divine election and is organized through the gifts of the Spirit; in regard to the ground of election there were divers views ; 8. Since Christianity is the only true religion and is not a national religion, but belongs to all mankind and pertains to our inmost life, it follows tuat it can have no special alliance with the Jewish people, or with their peculiar cult. The Jewish people of to- day, at least, stand in no favored relationship with the God whom Jesus has revealed; whether they formerly did is doubtful; this, however, is certain, that God has cast them off, and that the whole Divine revelation, so far as there was any revela- tion prior to Christ (the majority believed in one and looked upon the Old Testament as Holy Scripture) had as its end the calling of a " new nation " and the spreading of the revelation of God through his Son. ^1 THE PREPARATION. 43 CHAPTER III. THE COMMON FAITH AND THE BEGINNINGS OF SELF- RECOGNITION IN THAT GENTILE CHRISTIANITY WHICH WAS TO DEVELOP INTO CATHOLICISM. Sources: The writings of the so-called Apostolic Fathers, inferences drawn from the Works of the Apologists of the 2d century ; Ritschl, Entstehuug der alt-kath. Kirche, 2. Ed. 1857 ; Engelhardt, Das Christenthum Justins, 1878 ; Pflei- derer, Das Urchristenthum, 1887. 1. The Christian Communities and the Church. — Both tho outlines and the character of the founda- tions of Christianity were fixed by those disciples of thr faith, who were members of well-ordered Chris- tian communities, and who accepted the Old Testa- ment as an original Divine revelation and prized the Gospel tradition as a free message for all, which should be kept faithfully pure. Each little brother- hood should, through the strength of its faith, the certainty of its hope and the holy ordering of its life, as well as through love and peace, be an image of the holy Church of God, which is in heaveji and whose members are scattered over the earth; it should, also, in the purity of its daily life and in the genuineness of its brotherly kindness be an ensample to those who are "without," i.e. to the alien world. In the recently discovered " Teaching of the Apos- tles " we come upon the sphere of interest in those communities who had not yet been influenced by philosophical speculation. They awaited the return FixiiiK of Outlines and Char- iictcr of t'hristiau- ity. I i ill I 1 ti;r 111 l.il III \ Mi 44 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. of the Christ, and urged a holy life ("Two Ways," dependence of its ethical rules upon the Jewish-Alex- andrian gnomic and the Sermon on the Mount) and, without outward union and a common polity, they recognized themselves as belonging to the new and yet original creation of God, to the Church, which is the true Eve, the Bride of the heavenly Christ (Tertull. Apolog. 30 : corpus siimus de conscientia religionis et disciplinae imitate et spei foedere ; II. Clem. 14 : r:iii(v)\irsrrjg t^^' Trvsu/iaruj^S", t^? ;:/)(> 7j?u<>u xai rreXrj'^r^g kxTtu)v rrjg Tzapadoirsox?^ zd XTJpoy/ia, ij didaxTJ^ ij Trc'fl-TJ?, 6 xaywv t^? r.laxs.ii} IhkaToo (Txaupio^thTa xa\ raifivra^ zrjj Tfiirrj r^iiipa dvaffzdvTa ix vsx/uyy, nva^d-iza £;V t<) X'-^yir) dWiyAr^^; — ><)//.os' ''7s' iXtuHtpia^ — Christ himself is the Law) ; but this rep- resentation vv'.is always doubtful and was gradually abandoned. The setting forth of tlic Gospel under the conceptions: ^vw'rrs' (God and world), Ir^ayyElia (eternal life), '-'Oiw^ (moral duty), appeared as plain as it was exhaustive, and in every relation the -((rzi-i was held to be confirmed, since it exhibits itself in knowl- edge as well as in hope and in obedience; but in reality it is only ru<7rt<5 rr;? xXrjo)Trj/>)^ and only through the knowledge of the identity of the Creator and Redeemer God does faith in God as the Father reach its perfection. Redemption, how- ever, was necessary, because mankind and the world in the very beginning fell under the dominion of demons. A general and acceptable theory in re- gaxd to the origin of this dominion did by no means exist; but the conviction was fixed and universal, that the present condition and course of the world is not of God, but of the devil. Still, faith in the al- mighty Creator, and hope in the restoration of tho c{U'th did not allow theoretical dualism to make any lieadw\ay and practical dualism dominated. Tho world is good and belongs to God, but the present course of it is of the devil. Thus men's thoughts os- cillated between the conception of the world as a beautiful and orderly whole, and the impression of the present evil course of things, of the baseness of the sensuous and of the dominion of demons in the world. Dominion of D»"MUDS. rraotical Duaii.sm. ■L || '||M' 50 OUTLINES OF TIIK IIISTOIfY OF DO(iMA. !l! it ' -I I' \ 18,: I il i i- .Tori IK Is I. (Ill I ami Kaviciir Uko (ioil, Titles 01 von to Josus. Son of God. G. Faith in Jesus (lirisi as the Redcrmer was closely identified with faith in (lod as the Kodeenier. Jesus is x>)f>ti>[ if-ob " (II. Clem. 1). In THE I'KKI'AKATION. 51 this plirnsiiif? of it the indirect thcoloqia Chvisfi, in 7r(jar(l /o icliich fhcre tras no ivarcrinfj, found ox- proswion in classical forms. It is necessary t(» think of Jesus as one thinks of God, (1) because he is the God-exalted Lord and Judge, {'I) because he brought true knowledge and life and has delivered mankind from the dominion of demons, from error and sin, or will deliver them. Therefore he is n, x''y'J"s', >^s'k y^/jicov, dei Jilius ac dciis, ih>nii)in8 ac dens, but not 'l ff:<>,\ He is "our Hoi)e," ''our Faith," the High- Priest of our prayers, and "our Life." Starting from this basis there were divers theoi'ies ThoorioH -^f in regard to the Person of Jesus, which however all J*?sus- bore a certain analogy to the niiive and the philo- sophical Greek " theologies", but there wore no uni- versally accepted " doctrines''. We may distinguish here two princi})al types: Jesus was looked ujjon as the man whom God had chosen and in whom the Spirit of God (the Godhead itself) dwelt; he was, in accordance with his own testimony, adopted by God and clothed wn"th authority {Adoption Chris- totof/f/) ; or Jesus was looked upon as a heaveidy spiritual Being (the highest heavenly spiritual Being next to God), who became incarnate and after the completion of his work upon the earth returned to the heavens {Pnevmatic Christolof/y ; Twociuis the transition here to the Logos Christologij was easy). These two different C^hristologies (the D(m- fied mari and the Divine Being appearing in the f(jrm of a man) were however brought closely to- tologies. fr'A ■I ,!'! : ^ ; 1 1 ! 52 OUTLINES OF THE IIISTOKY OF DOUMA. gothor HO Hoon as tli(> i!ni)lanto(l Spirit of Ood in the niiin Jesus was lookod upon as tho pro-oxistont Son of (iod (Hernias), and so soon as tho titlo "Son of 0)d," as ai)pli(3d to that spiritual Being, was derived from his (miraculous) incarnation — both, however, were maintained. Notwithstanding these transition forms the two Christologies may he clearly distinguished : In the one case the election (emphasis npon the miraculous occurrence at the baptism) and the exaltation to God are characteristic ; in the other, Niiivt. Do- a naive docetism ; for as yet there was no two- nature theory (Jesus' divinity was looked upon as a gift, or else his human form as a temporary taber- nacle). Tho declaration: Jesus was a mere man {ir'nXu's avOfno-i)^) was undoubtedly from the beginning and always highly objectionable; likewise was the denial of the " l'-' ^'//'X£'" ; but the theories which iden- Niiivft Mo- titled tho Person of Jesus with the Godhead (naive dill ism. ^ modalism) were not cast aside with the same assur- ance. A formal theonj of the identity of God and Jesus does not seem to have been wide-spread in the Church at large. The acceptance of the existence at least of one heavenly, eternal, spiritual Being close to God was demanded outright by the Old Testa- ment Scriptures, as men understood them, so that all were constrained to recognize this^ whether or not they had any basis for reconciling their Christology with that heavenly Being. Pneumatic Tho pnoumatic Christology was always found ogy. wherever men gave themselves to the study of the THE rUKPAHATloK. 53 was found ^f the Old TcHtamont and whorovor faitli in C'hrist hr tho c'oniplcto revelation of God was tlic forcmoHt tliou{^ht, i.e. it is found in , '.; I I <*< ii' i. I' I r Sj . I. I fu lin- Exap atfi portanoe (jiven to Facts. 54 OUTLINES OF THE HISiORY OF DOCiMA, qiiering of demons, forgiving of past sins in the time of error) were connected by some (following cv- ^nt tradition, using the Pauline Epistles) with his death and resurrection, by others they were affirmed with- out direct reference to these facts. Independent re- flections upon +he close union of the saving work of Clirist with the facts set forth in his preaching are nowhere found; and yet the representation of the free endurance of suffering, of the cross, and of the blood of Christ, was accepted in many communities PS a holy mysterium, in which the deepest wisdom and power of the Gospel is concealed (Ignatius), although the death on tae cross and the forgiveness of sin were by no means everywhere (as in Clement, Polycarp and Barnabas) Inseparably joined together (Hermas knows nothing whatever about such a union). The peculiarity and the individuality of the work of the historical Christ were moreover menaced I y the idea that Christ had been the revealer of God in the Old Testament. All the facts pertaining to the history of Jesus, tlie real and the imagined, received an exaggerated significance when reiterated in the work of instruc- tion and when attacked bv heretics. To the mirac- n.lous birth, death, resurrection, exaltation and return, v/as added definitely now the ascension on the 40th day and, less definitely, the descent into hell, while the history of the baptism was more and more ig- nored. The reality of these occurrences was strongly emphasized ; but they had not yet become " dogmas" ; HI »' .. THE i REPARATION. 55 IIC- ac- lirn, 0th lile ig- }S ly for thty were neither insepariibly connectetl with th« idea of salvation, nor were they definitely outlined, nor was ilm fcuitasie restricted in its artistic exuber- ance. 7. That the Worship of God should be a pure, worship, spiritual exercise, without ceremonies, was taken for granted. Every divine service was looked upon as a spiritual offering (of thanks) accompanied with fasting and deeds of compassionate love. The Lord's Supper (eucharist) was held to be an offering ^uuv^t. in the strictest sense of the word, and e^'orything which was associated with it {e.(j. assistance of tlie poor) became imbued with the idea of sacrifice. Thenceforward the institutional idea found a wide range, notwithstanding the essential spirituality of w^orshii). Starting with the idea of the symbolical^ " mysteries " which were so necessary to the Greeks were soon established. Baptism in the name of the Baptism. Father, Son and Spirit w^as esteemed as the mystery through which the sins of blindness are wholly set aside, and which only thenceforward, however, irni)0ses obligations (mortal sins, committed after baptism, were considered unpardonable, and yet })ardoning power was reserved for G(jd who here and there exercises it upon the earth through in- spired men. The idea and practice of a "sec- ond repentance" were born through the stress of necessity, became however wide-spread, and were then established by the prophetical book of Hernias). Baptism was called 'riffxiyii and (fioTiaiw^ (no infant k! MWMMJWPMpI III '1 ! * i: I ' '"\ ,1 ■■■! H 9 fi i! 5G OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. I);il)tism); tlio uniting of baptism with the gift of th(j Holy Spirit became somewhat uncertain. The LorcVs Supper was viewed as (pd[)imxuv dfhvmnia^i^ as a mysterious communication of gnosis and of life (see the eucharistic prayer in the Didache; tiie for- giveness of sins is not there mentioned) ; it was at once a communion meal and a sacrificial meal. Realism Realism and symbolism were here mingled together, boiisiii. j^^^^ jjj^ were the ideas of grace and of sacrificial offering. Hellenic conceptions early crowded in here (see Ignatius, Justin, Apol. I., the close). Church organization^ as such, exercised no in- fluence upon the form of the statement of belief until about the year 150. And yet the high esteem in which the apostles, prophets and teachers were held laid the foundation for future developments; besides, Ignatius had already declared that the attitude toward the bishop determined the attitude toward God and toward Christ, and other teachers insisted that one must follow the "ancients", the disciples of the apostles, in all things. Clinrch Or- guuizutiuu. Catholic Systt'in of Doctrine iu Embryo. This survey indicates that tae decisive premises for the evolution of the Catholic system of doctrine were already in existence before the middle of the 2d century and before the heated contest with gnosti- cism. The records which have come down to us from the 1st century of the Gentile Church are of a very I j THE PREPARATION. 57 111 SOS trine e 2d osti- It'rom very I. 1 Didaohe. Barnabas- Epistle. varied character from the point of view of the his- tory of dogma. In the Didache we have a catechism for the Christian life, dependent upon a Jewish- Greek catechism, and bringing out in the prayers and ecclesiastical discipline that which is specifically Christian. The Bainabas-Epistle, probably of Al- exandrian origin, teaches the correct (Christian) interpretation of the Old Testament, casts aside verbal interpretation and Judaism as of. the devil, and follows Paul essentiall}'' as regards Christology. The same Christology is represented in the Roman 1. Clement-Epistle, which also contains Pauline reminiscences (in regard to atonement and justifi- cation), but these are conceived from the moral standpoint. It is classically represented in Hennas Pastor and in the II. Clement-Epistle, where the eschatological element is also very prominent. The Clu'istology of the former is the adoption; the author of the 11. Clem. Epist. has no consistent Christolojy, but follows various motives. The the- ology of Ignatius is the most advanced, in so far as he, in the contest with the gnostics, made the facts of salvation prominent and drew his ow^n gnosis from the history of Christ rather than from the Old Testament. He sought to make Jesus Christ, xfira 7:viT)fia and xaTd ffdpxa^ the centre of Christianity. The Epistle of Polycarp is characteristic on account of its ^V'y^ll'^'J^P dependence upon earlier Christian writings (Paul's Epistles, I. Peter, I. John), and on account of its conservative attitude toward the most valuable tra I. Cltv meut. Hennas I'astor, n. fle- iiieut. )^1 hi w -i !!l| ''ii i:' !i ■' !■ it I j! ,; ; •' ill' 'it! -i;i ': ^;t 58 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. Preedicatio ditions. Tho ZVT^(//r'rt//o /V//"/ maiks tlie transition Petri. from the primitive Christian literary activity to tho apologetic writers (Christ as v'v^'^? and /'Y"^')- CHAPTER IV. THE ATTEMPT OF THE GNOSTICS TO CONSTRUCT AN APOSTOLIC DOCTRINE OF FAITH AND TO PRO- DUCE A CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY ; OR, THE ACUTE SECULARIZATION OF CHRISTIANITY. Sources : The writings of Justin and the early Catholic Fathers, together with Ei)iphanius and Theodoret. Frag- ments collected by Hilgenfeld, Ketzergesch, 1884. Descrip- tions by Neandei-, Gnostisclie System, 1818, Baur, Gnosis, 1835, Lipsius, Gnosticismus, 1800, Moeller, Kosmologie in der griech. Kirche, 1860; ride also Renan, Hist. des. Orig. du Christianisme", T. V.-VII. Gnosti- cism. Aims at a World -He- ligion. 1 . Gnosticis:j is a manifestation of the great syn- cretic movement of the 2d and 3d centuries, which was occasioned by the interchange of national relig- ions, by the contact of Orient and Occident, and by the influence of Greek philosophy upon religion in general. It aimed at the winning of a irovld-relig- io7i, in which men should be rated, not on the basis of citizenship, but according to the standard of their intellectual and moral aptitude. The Gospel was rec- ognized as a world-religion only in so far as it could be severed from the Old Testament religion and the Old Testament, and be moulded by the religious philosophy of the Greeks and grafted upon the existing cultus-wisdom and practice of occult mys- li:; i>y )asia their rec- lonld the lions the THE PUKPARATION. 59 .Jt'w ish ila. C'liristian (inosis. teries. The moans Ity which this artificial iiiiioii was to he hroiiglit about was the allegorical method '^^/^.^[ll^'ip' as used long since by the Greek religious philoso pliers. The possibility of the rise of a Christian gnosticism ki}^ in this, that the Christian commu- nities had everywhere fallen heir to the heritage of the Jewish propaganda, where there vris alrtnidy an exuberant tendenc}' to spiritualize the C)ld Testament religion, and where the intellectual interesi, in relig- ion had long been unbridled. Besides, the Gospel of Christ, and especlall}" Christ himself, had made such an overwhelming impression that men were pos- sessed bj the strongest impulse to subordinate their highest conceptions to him, whence, as so often, the "victus victori legem daf'' attained its right. Fi- nally the Christian preaching from the beginning promised a gnosis of the wisdom of God, espe cially that of Paul an antinomian gnosis, and the churches in the empire conceived the Christian wisdom as /.oyuii hiTinia^ in accordance with their Greek conceptions; they combined the mysterious with a marvellous openness, the spiritual with the most significant rites, and sought in this waj-, jiy^tt. through their organization and through their " phil- osophical life", to realize that ideal for which tlie Hellenic religious spirit was then striving, — namely, a communion, or fellowship, which, upon the basis of a Divine revelation, comes into the possession of the highest knowledge and therefore realizes the holiest life, and which communicates this knowledge, rioua Kites. '\ '•r J ! '! I II I I I I i I! Acute Staj^f of Process. 60 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. lU )t tl tori( iroiigh nitional discussion, but tlirougb m}''^- efficacious consecrations and revealed doc- Attempt to Fuso Cluistian- ity aiul Helleuism. Christian- ity Be- comes Oc- cult Tlieos- ophy. lOUS trines, 2. We are now prepared to assert, that in gnos- ticism the acute stage of a process was reached, which began early in the Church and which under- went a slow and distinct evolution under the Catho- lic system. The gnostics were the theologians of the 1st century; they were the first to transform Christianity into a system of doctrines (dogmas); they were the first to treat tradition and the primitive Christian Scriptures systematically ; they undertook to set forth Christianity as the absolute religion, and they therefcjre placed it in opposition to the other re- ligions, to that of the Old Testament as well (not alone to Judaism) ; but the absolute religion, which they coupled with Christ, was to them essentially identical with the results of the philosophy of religion, for which they had now found the basis in a revelation : They were accordingly a class of Christians who essayed through a sharp onset to conquer Christianity for Hellenic culture, and Hellenic culture for Christian- ity, and they thereby abandoned the Old Testament in order to fitly close up the breach between the two opposing forces. Christianity became an occult the- osophy (revealed metaphysics and apparition philos- ophy, permeated witl: the Platonic spirit and with Pauline ideas, constructed out of the material of an old cultus-wisdom which was acquired through mysteries and the illumined understanding, defined \ 1 THE PREPARATION. 01 by a keen and, in part, true criticism of the Old Testament religion and the scant faith of the Church. Consequently one is obliged to verify in the promi- nent gnostic schools the Semitic cosmological prin- ciples, the Hellenic philosophical ideas and the knowledge of the redemption of the world througli Christ. And one must also take account of these three factors: The speculative philosophical, the cultish-mystical and the dualistic -ascetic. The con- junction of these elements, the entire transformation of every ethical problem into a cosmological prob- lem and, finally, the view that human history is but a continuation of natural history, especially that redemption is but the last act in the drama which had its origin in the Godhead itself and its develop- ment in the world — all these are not peculiar to gnosticism, but a stage in the general development which was in manj- ways related to Philonism and which anticipated Neo-Platonism and Catholicism. Out of the crass mythology of an Oriental religion, by the transformation of the concrete forms into speculative and ethical ideas, such as " Abyss", " Si- lence", "Logos", "Wisdom", "Life" (the Semitic names were often retained), tliere was formed a my- tliology of notions in which the juxtaposition and the number of these ideas were determined by the pro- pounding of a scheme. Thus was produced a philo- sophical, dramatico-poetic representation similar to the Platonic, but far more complicated and therefore more fantastical, in which those mighty powers, the Three Factors. Philosoph- ic Draniat- ico-Poetic Sj'Sttiin. (1 ' I ' t *~h\ 62 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. ! .' f I il 4-. ! flnspol History AllfKOfi- cal. Absti- iicnoi! thi spiritual and the good, appeared to have been brought into an unholy alliance with the material and the base, from which however finally the spiritual, as- sisted by kindred pov^ors wl, 'ch are too exalted ever U be abased, ',.i if(oi ;i]l it ad r^id free. Tnc good and the heavenly w'lici. i !' /raded to the material is the human spirit; and the . ; llime Power which sets it free is the Christ. The Gospel history is not the history of Christ, but a collection of allegorical representations of the groat Divine world-history. Christ has in truth no history; h;s appearance in this world of confusion and delusion is his own act and the enlightenment of the Spirit, as regards itself, is the effect of this act. This illumination itself is life, but it is dependent upon asceticism and upon a surrender to the mysteries ordained b}^ Christ, in which one conies into communion with a praesens nunien, and which in a mysterious way gradually free the spirit from the world of sense. This spiritualiz- ing process should also be actively cultivated. Absti- WiUcii-cry. uQuce is therefore the watch-cry. Christianity is accordingly a speculative philosophy which redeems the si)irit {y^Afrc; (ryia. The fundamental principles \\ THE PrtEPARATION. e3 free laliz- bsti- -y is eems ight- glVG sible and iples aro accordingly liio following: M) The supersensi- ble indefinite and eternal nature of the divine pri- mordial Being, ("^) the eA'il (not real) matter opposed to the d: v^ino iJeing, {']) the plenitude of the divine powers (eons) which, viewed partly as powers, partly as real ideas, partly as relatively independent beings, represent in stages the development and revelation of the Divinity, but which at the same time are intended to make possible the transition from the higher to the lower, (1) the cosmos as a mixture of matter with sparks of the divine Being, and whici: originated from the descent of the latter into the former, i.e. from a reprehensible undertaking of a subordinate spirit, merely through the Divine suf- ferance, (5) the freeing of the spiritual elements from their union with matter, or the separation of the good from the sensuous world through the Christ- Spirit, which is active in holy consecrations, knowl- edge and asceticism — thus arises the complete gnos- tic, the independent world-free spirit, who lives in God and prepares himself for eternity. The rest of mankind arc earth-born (liylikers). Yet leading teachers (School of Valentinus) distinguish also be- tween hylikers and psychikers ; the latter were the doers of the lavr, who lived by law and faith, for whom the common faith is good enough, that is, necessary. The centre of gravity of the gnostic S3',qtem did not r3st in its changing details, which iwe so imperfectly known to us, but in its aim and in its postulates. Funda- mental Principled. Ilylik.'fs (umI Psy- chikers. I I i . i I r w :\ I! riinHos of (InoHti- ciHUi. ^^um nasi lid- inns. Val- ontiniaus. Tlx' First 'I'll'Mllo- Kiaiis. 04 OUTLINES OK TIIK HISTORY OK IXXiMA. ;j. The phases of gnosticism were }is variegated as possible (brotherhoods, ascetic orders, cultus of mys- teries, secret schools, free devotional associations, performances by Christian swindlers and betrayed betrayers, attempts to establish new religions after the pattern and under the influence of the Christian religion). Accordingly the relation of gnosticism to that which was common to all Christians and to the individual Christian communities was exceed- ingly varied. On the one hand, gnosticism pene- trated to the very heart of those Christian churches in which docetic and dualistic-ascetic influences were largely at work and where there was a strong tendency to vary the original form of the kerygma; on the other hand, there were gnostic communities that remained apart and indeed abhorred all alliances with others. For the history of dogma the right wing of gnosticism and the real stem, the great gnostic school sects (Basilidians, Valentinians) come especially under consideration. The latter wished to establish a higher order of Christians above the common psychikers, who were barely endured. The contest was mainly with these and they were the theologians from whom later generations learned and were the first to write elementary works on dogmatics, ethics, and scientific and exegetical trea- tises; in short, they laid the foundations of Chris- tian theological literature and began the elaboration of Christian tradition. The expulsion of these gnos- tics and of the right wing (Encratites, "Docetee," THE PREPARATION. 65 Tutian) could bo accomplished only slowly and it was a result of tho consolidating of the Christiail communities into the Catholic Church which was culled forth by this gnostic movement. Tho rise of gnosticism is fully explained from tho general conditions under which Christian preaching liuurishod on Roman soil and from its own attraction as a sure announcement of knowledge, life and dis- cipline, attributed directly to a Divine Person who had appeared upon the earth. The Church fathers hold distracted Judnism, together with tho demons, responsible for its rise; later they attribute it to tho Samaritan messiah, Simon, then to tho Greek i)hi- losophors, and finally to those who show themselves disobedient to ecclesiastical discipline. In all this there was a. particula veri as may be easily shown; the syncretism which led to this Christian gnos- ticism undoubtedly had one of its principal centres in Samai'itan-Syrian territory and the other in Alex- andria ; but it must not be overlooked that the con- ditions were everywhere present in the empire for a spontaneous development. On that account it is im- possible to write a history of tho development of gnosticism, and it would be so, even if wo knew more than wo do about the particular systems. We can distinguish only between Jewish-Christian and Gentile- Christian gnostics, and can group the latter only according to their greater or less departure from the common Christian faith as exemplified in their varying attitude toward the Old Testament and tho Encratitw, l)«K't't(l', Tatlati. Exyilnna- tiuiisof of (JnoHtl- cisiii. Simon Ma- guy. Samaria and Alex- andria. ■Jcwish- Christian and (J«ii- til(>-Chri!+- tian Gnos- tics. «i "i \ n u ' i,u i! I liill i i:!: tTts, guided in this hy tho early Christian consciousness and a certain iud(»pen(lont judgment. However, the Church in its contest with gnosticism learned a great deal from it. Tho princii)al points iTincipai I'liinls im- which were under discussion may ho hri(>flv sum- 'I'-r i>iwus- marized as follows (tho word "positive" appended to a gnostic jn'oposition indicates that the doctrine had a positive intiuenco in tlu> di velopment of tho Church view and doctrine) : (1) Christianity, which is tho only true and. absolute religion, contains a re- vealed system of doctrine (pos.), (2) the Rcvealer is Christ (pos.), but Christ alonc^ and Christ, only so far as ho was made manifest (no O. T. Christ). This manifestation is itself tho redemption, — tho teaching is tho proclamation of this and of tl'c nec- essary presuppositions (pos.), (3) the Christian teach- ing is to bo dedue. 1 from the apostolic tradition critically treated ; the same is found in tho apostolic writings and in an esoteric doctrine transmitted by the apostles (pos.); as an open doctrine it is con- densed in the regula Jidei (pos.), as an esoteric doc- trine it is transmitted by appointed teachers, (4) the primitive revelation (aiK)stolic Scriptures), even be- cause it is such, must be exixnuided by means of tho allegory, in order to draw out its dee])er meaning •1 I' / I f ^i;; ' m ! 'I , !'l Disparit}' iit ill Matter and a IMiysieal Eons. riirist Re- vealei- )f Unktuwii God. Jesus, Heavenly Eon. 68 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. (pos.), (5) as to tho separate portions of the ?'egula as the gnostics understood them, the following are to be especially noted : (a) The disparity between the supreme God and tho Creator of the world, and the consequent contrast of redemption and creation, ?'.e., the separation of the mediator of revelation and the mediator of crea- tion, (b) the distinguishing of the Supreme God from tho Go'l of the Old Testament, and the consequent rejection of the O. T. ; i.e. the declaration that the O. T. does not contain a revelation of the Supreme God, unless it be in certain parts, yc) the doctrine of the absoluteness and eternity of matter, (d) the affirmation that the present world came into existence through a fall into sin, i.e. through an undertaking antagonistic to God, and that it is therefore the product of an evil, or intermediate being, (e) the doctrine that evil is inherent in matter and is a physical agency, (^) the acceptance of eons, i.e. of real powers and heavenly per.stmy, in whom the absoluteness of the Divinity unfouls itself, (g) the affirmation that Christ proclaimed a hith- erto unknowTi Divinity, (h) the doctrine that in Jesus Christ, the heavenly Eon — the gnostics rightly saw redemption i - his Person, but they reduced his Person to a mere self- THE PREPAFtATION. Gt) and rs and )f the hith- ivenly II . bis re self- Valf'ntiu- iatis. Satornil. existent Being — Christ and the human manifestation of him are to be clearly distinguished and to each nature a " cUstincte atjere " was to be given (not docetism, but the two-natu v- doctrine is character- istic). Accordingly some, as Basilides, recogni/.ed BaKiiides. no real union whatever between Christ luid the man Jesus, whom they otherwise accepted as a real man. Others, as a portion of the Valentinians — their Chris- tology was exceedingly complicated and varied — taught that the body of Jesus was a heavenly-psychi- cal form, and that it only apparently came forth from the womb of Mary. Others finally, like Sator- nil, explained that the entire visible manifestation of Christ was only a phantasma, and hence they ques- tioned the reality of his birth, (i) the transformation of the ixxXr^cria (that the .c-^.V^!' '^ heavenly Church wa» looked upon as an eon was a/atiki'Is. nothing new) into the collegium of the pneuma- tikers, who alone shall enjoy the highest blessedness, while the hylikers shall suffer destruction and the psychikers with tlif^ir ^''^Ar^ -((rn^ shall obtain only an inferior blessedness, (k) the rejection of the ^rhole of primitive Chris- tian eschatology, especially the return of Christ and the resurrection of the body ; with this was coupled the affirmation that in the future one should expect only the freeing of the spirit from the veiled life of the senses, while the spirit itself is enlightened and assured of God and already possesses inmiortality itnd only awaits an entrance into tlie pleroma, Ri'kH'tioii of Vriiiii- tivf Cliris- tiaii Ksclia- tology. in I ■• . -^ ...•:',: :<«^%N^ n 'A. i I 7f) OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA, Dualistic Ethics. (1) the dualistic eiliics (rigid ascetisiii) vvhicii here and there may have veered over into libertinism. How strongly gnosticism anticipated Catholicism becomes apparent especially from its Christology and its doctrine of redemption, from its magic-cult and its doctrine of the sacraments, and from its scientific literature. CHAPTER V. MARCION'S ATTEMPT TO SET ASIDE THE OLD TES- TAMENT AS THE FOUNDATION OF THE GOSPEL, TO PURIFY TRADITION, AND TO REFORM CHRIS- TIANITY ON THE BASIS OF THE PAULINE GOS- PEL. Marcion's Marcion should not be classed with gnostics like Principles. Bfigjij Jes and Valcntinus ; for (1) he was guided by no metaphysical, also by no apologetical, but only by a purely soteriological interest, (2) he therefore placed the whole emphasis upon the pure Gospel and upon faith (not ujwn knowledge), (3) he did not em- ploy philosophy — at least not as a main principle — in his conception of Christianity, (4) he did not en- deavor to found schools of philosophers, but to re- form, in accordance with the true Pauline Gospel, the churches whose Christianity he believed to be legalistic (Judaistic) and who, as he thought, denied ^rhuich ^ ^^®® grace. When he failed in this, he formed a church of his own. Wholly captivated by the nov- elty, uniqueness and glory of the grace of God in 1 ■,' THE PPKPARATION. 71 -k, 1 Christ, ho believed that tlie sharp antitheses of Paul (Law and Gospel, works and faith, flesh and spirit, sin and righteousness) must be made the foundation of religious conceptions, and that these antitheses must be apportioned between the right- eous, angry God of the Old Testament, who is iden- tical with the Creator of the world, and the God of the Gospel, who was unknown before Christ, and wh(j is nothing but Love and Mercy. This crass Crass Duai- dualism — a Paulinism without dialectics. Old Testa- ment, or the Jewish-Christian view of history — was put forth by Marcion, not without his being influ- enced by the Syrian gnosis (Cerdo). With the ethi- cal contrast of the sublime and good on the one side, and the petty, just and hard on the other, there was joined the contrast between the eternal, spiritual and the limited, sen+ient, in a way which threatened to debase the problem again to a question of cosmology. In detail, the following points are especially impor- tant : 1. The Old Testament was expounded by Marcion Exposition ^ "^ of Old Tes- acc irding to its verbal sense and with a rejection of talent. all allegorical interpretations; he accepted it as a revelation of the Creator of the world and of the God of the Jews ; but even on this account he placed it in sharp antithesis to the Gospel (see the " Antithe- ses") the content of which he discovered solely in the utterances of Jesus and in the Pauline Epistles, w^f,![f"^'u(j aft H" that he had purified them from supposed Jew- Ep'^stii^s ish interpolations. These interpolations were, ac- oospei. j 'fi'' I'aul Aloii! Under- stood Jesus. Marc ion's Thi'oloK.v, Chriatol- ogy- Docetism. Oim.lNES OF THE HISTORY OF r)0(iMA. cording to his idea, of long- staiuliiij;', since the twcilve apostles did not understand Jesus and mis- construed his Gospel, making it to correspond with the Old Testament. Paul, who was called bj- Christ to restore the true Gospel, was the only one who pc^r- ceived that Jesus had proclaimed a hitherto unknown God of grace in opposition to Jehovah. As his preaching has also been obscured, he, Marcion, iias been authorized to restore the pure Gospel. This was the mission which Marcion's church attributed to him, and it gave his " Antitheses " a sort of canon- ical authority. 2. Marcion's conception of God and his Christol- ogy resemble the gnostic in so far as he also empha- sized most clearly the newness, uniqueness and abso- luteness of Christianity in opposition to the Church at large; he surpassed the gnostics, however, in so far as he conceived mankind to be wholly the off- spring of the Creator of the world and found in man's nature nothing akin to the God of Love. But love and grace are according tc/ Marcion the entire substance of the Godhead ; redemption is the most incomprehensible act of the Divine mi?cy, and everything that the Christian possesses he owes to Christ :!one, who is the manifest ition oi the good God liimstb Through his suffering he purchased from the C^fitr^r of ^he world hose who believe on him, :viv{ v"»n rhem for himself. The rigid loce- tism, hov;ew;r, which Marcicu taught, — the declara- tion that thw sj'i'3 only of men will be saved, — Lhe ] ( I 1 r t r C f: i i !' THE J'REI'AKATION. 73 Aaceti- eisiu. Marcion'8 Hil>li(-ul C'auou. renunciation of the return of Clirist and tiie increas- ingly hard asceticism, even to the prohibition of mar- riage (in spite of the thought that God's love should control the "new " life), are proofs that Marcion was to a certain extent defenceless agahist Hellenism ; on the other hand, his eschatological ideas indicate that he was seeking to return to the monarchy of the good God. ;i. With the view of restoring the Church of the pure Gospel and of gatheiing together the redeemed who are hated by the God of this world, Marcion caused certain evangelical writings of a particular character to be collected (Luke's Gospel and 10 Pauline Epistles), laid down certain principles for their interpretation and drew the communities into a closer, though freer, organization. Inasmuch as he rejected the Old Testament, together with all " natural " religion, philosophy and secret tradition, he was obliged to answer the question. What is Christian? out of the historical records. Here, as in many other respects, did he anticipate the Cath- olic Church. 4. The profound conception that the laws which conception of Nature, rule in nature and history and the course of civil Hisr.iy, righteousness are a reflection of the acts of Divine mercy, and that humble faith and fervent love are the very opposite of self-complacent virtue and self- righteousness — this conception, which dominated the Christianity of Marcion, and which restrained him from every rationalistic attempt at a system, was not lil t 1 i :y 'i -^^^mmfi Apelles. 1 i .Sit i ' OUTLINES Or^" TF7E HISTORY OF I)0(iMA. clearly inMintaiiiod hy liis chuiTh as time wont on. In order to close up the breaches and to remove the inconsibtencies of his conceptions, some of his pupils advanced to a doctrine of three principles, others to a vulj^ar dualism, without however surrendering en- tirely the fundamental ideas of their master. Apelles, lujwever, Marcion's greatest pupil, returned to the confession of the one God, without in other respects surrendering the master's conceptions ; and, indeed, he further developed some valuable ideas, at which Marcion had only hinted. The Church fathers strenuously opposed Marcion as the worst of heretics. In its contest with him the early Catholic Church doctrine was developed in special directions. CHAPTER VI. SUPPLEMENT: THE CHRISTIANITY OF THE JEWISH (CHRISTIANS. m Mi il'.i ■M Primitive Cbristiaii- ity. 1. Primitive Christianity appeared simply as a Christian Judaism, the establishment of a universal religion upon the Old Testament basis; accordingly it retained in so far as it was not hollenized — and that was never fully accomplished — the Jewish im- press of its origin ; above all it retained the Old Tes- tament as a primitive revelation. Hence the dispo- sition made of the Old Testament was wholly Chris- tian, proceeding on the assumption that the Chris- tians are the true Israel, that the Old Testament .iiiii .1 ip TITK PREPAl^\TTO^^ 75 as a n'sal |ngly -and im- iTes- jispo- hris- Ihris- nent Jewish C'luistiaii- ity. rcffi's to ilio Cliriritiaii org.iiiizatioii and teachiiit;', and this, wiiotlier a more or loss realistic or spiritual interpretation of it was in vogue. The question as to the principles of iiiterpri'tation was a pro])U'ni within the Chnrch, so long- as no sn})eriority was conceded to the Jewish nation as such, and until the abrogation of the Jewish ceremonies and laws was insisted upon. Therefore the fovui '' JcfCi'sh-CJiris- tianit/j " is applicable exclusively to those Christians who really retained, entirely or in the smallest part, the national and political forms of Judaism and insisted upon the observance of the Mosaic I iw without moditication as essential to Christianity, at least to the Christianity of the Jewish-born converts, or who indeed rejected these forms, but acknowl- edged the prere)gative of the Jewish people also in Christianity (Papias in spite of his chiliasm; the papias, di author of the Didache, in spite of his transference of the Old Testament priestly rights to the Chris- tian prophets; Hermas, in spite of the waning an- cient Greek philosophy ; the adoption Christologists, in spite of their rejection of the Logos, are not Jewish Christians; Paul, hov»'cver, is because of Romans XL). The strong draft made upon the (Jld Testament in favor of the Catholic cultus-, doctrine- and discipline 33'stem, is so little a sign of the ad- vance of Jewish Christianity in the Church at large, that it rather runs parallel to the advancing Hellen- ism, and was called forth by it. The formula, "the new law," in the Catholic Church is not Jewish, Hernias, Paul. i If 1 1* \f, — — -BW- - ^ Bl ii WHWI . J» n«» l«»i a a — ^fl4*f-V»»Ji(id,.V'H '» J»«h,. I r 70 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF I)0(;MA ^ M 1 S ■!* !M ' li :i' . t U Jewish Ohristiiui- ity ()\f'r- couie. Niizan'Ut's C^oiitimu'cl fur Soiiu' Time. Points ill Controver- sy Among Them. hut anti-Jcvvisli, yot it left room for thf slipping in of more and m'i Christiniis (Ebionites, Nazarenes) existed for some time, and among them the distinctions re- mained which were already formulated in the apos- tolic age. Sept rated from the main Church origi- nally, not on account of " doctrine ", but on account of principles of social Church life, of morals and missionary practice, there were among them the fol- lowing points in controversy: (1) Whether the observ- ance of the Law was a condition, or the determining condition, of the reception of the Messianic salva- tion, (2) whether the same was to be required also of Gentile-born converts, in order to their recognition as Christians, (3) whether and to what extent one might hold fellowship with Gentile Christians who do not observe the Law, (4) whether Paul was a chosen servant of Christ, or a God-hated interloper, (5) whether Jesus was a son of Joseph, or was mirac- ulously begotten of the Holy Spirit. Thus there i t ( I d ^ ' Jll, THE PRE;'AKATJ0N. 77 ifitiifw (Jot-pel. were shades of l)elief within Jewish Christianity (not two clearly distinguished parties). There se(>m3 to have been little literary activity among these Jew- ish Christians, who were expelled by the Jews, (see, however, Synnnachus) ; their Gospel was the Hebnnv Gospel which was related to the Synoptics (testimony of Justin, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, Ei)i[)hanius). Justin still recognized the liberal Jewish Chris- tians who observed the Law for themselves alone, and were friendly toward the Gentile Christians, as Christian brethren. As yet no Christological creed, no iTew Testament, divided them, and even in their eschatological expectations. Gentile and Jewish Christians could still come to an understanding. But the more Jewish Christianity withdrew from the world in general and the more firmly the Catholic fjimiuaiiy Kx|u'llc(l Church fixed its doctrine and discipline (add to this fiom cutii- the formation of the New Testament canon) and formulated its Logos-Christology, the more foreign and heretical did Jewish Christianity appear; and after Irenaeur, it was even placed in the same cate- gory with gnosticism. Certain Orientil fathers, however, pass a better judgment upon it. ;>. Judaism was in the 1st century a very compli- cated affair on account of foreign influences (Hellen- istic Judaism, Samaritans, "Sects"). Accordingly there were already "gnostic" Jewish Christians, (" false teachers " at Colosse, see also the Pastoral <-*i"-istians. Epistles; on the other hand, Simon Magus, Menan- der) who introduced into Christianity angelological Church. .Tiidaism Very rom- plicattvl. (inostic .I«>\visli 1 m ''niim ] iiKmt>it0. m ' ■■ •"rtffr i jl ifc^w yl li w I B^ a. |:i 'li if !' I ;i i: [I I I: i :« OCTLIXKS OK TUK HISTORY OK IXHiMA. ^'1 llJIIllllT, Ccriutli ^iJirs.'Sf.-"' f^pocuUitii^ns (tlioso were also familiar to the phar- isoos and tlui writors of apocah'pscs) and gavo ciir- n^ncy to cosmological idoas and myths, throuj^h both of which thoy snhlimatdd i\\o idea of God, bisoctt'd, corrected or transformed the Law (rejection of the blood offering) and gave an impulse to a peculiar asceticism and cultus of mysteries. They continued until far into the Byzantine age. Cerinth (c. 100) retained certain ostablislied laws (circumcision) and preached a grossly sensuous, realistic future king- dom; but, on the other hand, ho distinguished the supreme God from the Creator of the world, freely criticised the Law and distinguished in the Redeemer the man Jesus from the Christ whom he identified with the Holy Spirit. Another branch of this Jew- ish Christianity is to bo found in the Pseudo- u iiunKs. Qlementine Writings. Therein, as appears from their sources, the attempt is made by means of stoic ra- tionalism, on the one side, and Oriental mj'thologic cosmology on the other, to fortify apologeiicallu the conception that the Gospel is the restoration of the pure Mosaic doctrine. The contradictory represen- tations of stoic naturalism and a positive revelation through prophets are to be united through the idea of the one Prophet, who from Adam down has ap- peared in different forms. The Gospel was believed to be the restoration of the primitive and universal religion, which is simply Mosaism freed from all its peculiar characteristics (circumcision, statutes re- specting off(n'ings). Christ is the one true Prophet, Pscudo- ('K'liifiitiiK Oosjwl llrl.l to be l.'cstura- t iiiii (if I'riiiiJtivo lit'liLrion. Mi '■II '' THE PREPARATION. 70 a- ic he he en- ion lea ip- ^ed sal its \ve- let, who, as it socms, was identified witli the tirst Adam. Tlie stoic idea of the ^y>r'>t was accepted, hut it was justified througli a dualistically-coiiceived eon-spec- ulation, in which the <>arly Semitic ])rinciples cropped out (masculine-feminine; neutralization of the ethi- cal contradictions in the supreme God). Platonic elements are hardly discern ihle. But along with the apologetical tendency, the polemical is strongly marked. This is directed, under the form of a r(>futa- tion of Simon Magus, against every phase of (lentile- Christian gnosticism (jilso against Marciou), while the primitive writings douhtless contained a polemic against Paul. The polemic and the means made use of prove that the Catholic Church was already in ex- istence. Therefore the Pseudo-Clementine Writings helongtothe od century. Accordingly it is ])rol)ahle tinoWrit that the compilers had hefore them earlier, anti-Paul- <^'''"'<""y ine writings. Moreover it is prohahle that the last redactors were in no sense Jewish Chri,-* ians, that, also, the ahove-mentioned characteristics are not ascrihable to a group of writers, as such, but th;.t they belong to them only accidoifalhf, thjit [)rimi- tive Jewish Christian writings passed through vari- ous hands and were innocently transmitted and re- vised. This being so, the seeking for a " Pseudo- Clementine System" is a fruitless undertaking; it were better to accept the last narrator as a Catholic Christian who made use of whatever interested him and others, but who was by no means a disciple of Irenjmis or Origen. Whether under such conditions ( 'Iciiifn- .' ' ■ ' 1 IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) .V4 ■^f 1.0 I.I UA 1^ 1^ 12.2 H: Ml III 2.0 18 !25 1.4 J4 ,^ 6" — ► V] 4V% V Photographic Sciences Corporation 4 \ is ^ V <> ^9) .V 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 6^ ,.^^ , 6^ : ■' I'll it I \$^ :i|! :i-i f ■ Hi. Ill 11 III ElkusaiU's. HO OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. it is possible to distinguish tlie gnostic, Jewish- Cliristian, and anti-Paulino sources is questionable. A third group which did not have in a true sense, like the former, a literary existence is composed of the Elkesaitos (in Syria, pushing toward Rome at the beginning of the 3d century) . These were such Jewish-Christians as wholly set aside the Old Testa- ment through their " nature-speculations " ; who did, however, retain the idea of prophecy, especially of Jesus as a Prophet, but who followed a new prophet that had perfected religion through penitential and cultus ordinances (washings) on the basis of a new scripture revelation. A series of elements belong- ing to this no longer Christian Jewish-Christianity (sources: Hippolytus, Eusebius, Epiphanius), — viz. rigid monotheism, partial criticism of the Old Tes- tament, rejection of blood offering, prohibition of wine, frequent washings, connivance in respect to marriage, r>erversion of the Messianic idea in the interests of their prophet, discarding of atonement idea and, as it seems, also of the idea of a king- dom, high regard for the relatives of their prophet — reappear again in Islamism, that was in a measure influenced by this "Jewish-Christianity", which is related to the Sabier. The main Church troubled itself very little about this aberration. i i M' ') BOOK II. THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. i t •4 i» CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL SURVEY. Ritschl, Entstehung dor altkathl. Kirche, Origines, T. V-VII. 1857. Renan, THE second century of the existence of Gentile- Christian Churches is characterized by the victorious contest with the gnostics, Marcion and the early Christian enthusiasm ; that is, by the de- clining of the acute hellenizing tendency on the one side, and by the suppression of the primitive Chris- tian freedom of expression, discipline and, in part, hope also on the other. An important part of prim- itive Christianity was rescued by the conserving force of tradition (faith in the Creator and Redeemer God) ; but men speculated all the more freely about the world and its wisdom, since they believed that they possessed in the apostolic Scriptures, in the apostolic creed, in the apostolic office, the definite assurance of what is " Christian". The subjectivism of Christian piety was curbed and the fanciful niyth- 6 81 Gentile Christian- ity in the M Century. J '• i I 1 i J t : 1 1 ! 1 ! ! ; ■ ! I ' i , { > M H'l OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY O^' IXXiMA. ' 11 If. . B ,| J ill :| !l i t Gnostic Kyst«Miis Itt'futed, Doublt! Problem. First: Ori- Kiu of Catholi- cism as a Church. Second: Oripinof Scicntiflc System of Fttith. I * I creating,' tendonry was restrained, likewise also the acceptjiiice of wlioUy foreign material as doctrinal teaching; but the individual was made subject to a sacred primitive record and to the priest, since he Wi's put under the rigid episcopal restraint of the one, holy, apostolic, Catholic Church, which men identified with the kingdom of Christ as a prepara- tion for blessedness. The gnostic systems were linaliy refuted ; but men then made for themselves out of the kerygma and with the help of Greek philosophy a scientific system of faith, which was a superlative medium for commending the Church to the intellectual world, but which was nothing but a mystery to the laity, obscuring their faith, or inter- preting the Gospel in the language of the Greek phi- losophy of religion. 2. The problem of the history of dogma for the period from about 150-300 A.D., is a double one: First, it has to describe the origin of Catholicism as a Church, i.e. the rise and development of the apos- tolic-Catholic standards (Rule of Faith, New Testa- ment, Ecclesiastical Office ; standards regarding the holiness of the Church), by which the scattered churches were gradually fused into one empirical Church, which, however, was held to be the apos- tolic, true and Hohj Church. Second, it has to describe the rise and development of the scientific system of faith, as this grew up on the circumfer- ence of the Church for apologetical j)urj)oses, not it is true as a foreign growth, but rather in closest THE T.AYTN(i OF THE FOrXDATTON. the lone : as ipos- sta- tho lered 'ical )OS- to \tific ifer- i.t it )sest connection with the aims of the earliest Gentile Christianity (see Book I. Chap, li) ; to describe how this, which was originally through revelation sim- ply an assured monotheistic cosmology, Logos-doc- trine and moral theology, became in the contest with gnosticism amalgamated with the ideas of salvation in the ancient mysteries, on the one side, with the Church kerygma and tbe Old Testament ideas on the other (Iremeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian), and was thus transformed into a complicated system (philo- sophical, kerygmatical, Biblical and primitive-Chris- tian -eschatological elements) ; how, farther, under the influence of the Alexandrians^ it was recast into an Hellenic, syncretic system in the interest of Catholic gnostics (type of Philo and Valentine), and how, then, the great breach between scientific dog- matics and the traditional faith was made manifest, which already in the 3d century had received such a thorough solution that the aims of scientific dog- matics and a part of its teaching (above all its Logos-doctrine) were adopted as the faith of the Church; while other things were cast aside or con- tested, the realistic propositions of the kerygma were shielded from the spiritualizing tendency that would transform them, and the right of distinguish- ing between a system of faith for thinking minds and a faith for unthinking minds (thus Origen) was fundamentally denied. The four stages of the de- velopment of dogma (Apologists, early Catholic Fathers, Alexandrines, Methodius together with Irontrtis, Hippoly- tus, Ter- tullian, Alcxnn- •Iriuns. Doctrine Accepted. • 1 4 / t i j 1 mm I m ■M 81 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA. his followers) corrt'spoiiil to the progressive relig- ious ciiid philosophical ileveloi)ment of paganism dur- ing that time : Philosophical theory of morals, idea of salvation (theology and practice of mysteries), Neo-Platonism and reactionary syncretism. I. ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY AS CHURCH AND ITS GRADUAL SECULAR- IZATION. I :i I ( lit Rulo of Kaiili, Nt'w Tfsimiit'ut, onicc-. I I CHAPTER II. THE SETTING FORTH OF THE APOSTOLIC RULES (norms) for ECCLESIASTICAL CHRISTIANITY. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. The three apostolic norms (Rule of Faith, New Testament, Office) — see Irenaeus, III.: 1 sq., Tertul- lian, de praesc. *il. '-Yi. 30.*) — found their way into the different provincial churches at different times, but the three always went together. They had their preparatory stages in the brief kerygmatic confes- '' A' praescr. 21: "Constat omnem doctrinam quae cum ecclesiis apoa- tolicis watricibiis vt oriyinolibus fidci conspiret I'eritnti lieputandatu, id sine dubio tenenteni quod ecrlesiae ub apostoh's, apnstnli a Chrisfo, Christus adeo acce])it." 3G: "Vidcatnusqui]>us (diipieni e.v djiostolis i-cl apostolicis riris. (/ni tamen cum apustulisperseceravit, habuerit auctorem et antecesseorein." I TIIK LAYINC or THK K()l'\l).\TI(»N, 85 New M'tul- iiito imes, 1 their Infes- apos- bidani, Uct'vit. deiiiii jhetdn aqua fi(»\ ft <)(■(//- ■III, ttt Itamen 8K>II. sions, in the antliority of the x'' sub 'I) and brief confes- sional formulas (Father, Son and Spirit) ; and espe- cially in the Roman church, at least since ± 140 a.d., a definite baptismal confession (probably als(» in Asia Minor) . These confessions were " the faith " and were considered the quintessence of the apostolic preaching and were, therefore, referred back to Christ and ultimately to God himself. But every- thing indeed wliich seemed inalienable was looked upon as an apostolic rule of faith, cfj. the Christian interpretation of the Old Testament. However, probably nothing was fixed, save that the Roman sj'mbol and the ethical rules (''•"^«;^i? xu(hoo) stood at least upon the same plane as the kerygma of Christ. From the beginning, however, in the work of in- struction, in exhortations and, above all, in the con- tests with false teachings men enjoined: «-»»;. j'r<«/iev xa) fl-e/ivov r^s' ~apafio(7tius- tolic creed. Under these circumstances the partic- churciu's ularly closely allied churches of Asia Minor and of Asia -^ -^ '^Komi' Ac^ Rome, whose experience is known to us through Jrena3us (he is hardly the first writer on the subject), accepted the fixed Roman baptismal confession as apostolic in such a way that they proclaimed the current anti-gnostic interpretation of it as its self- evident content, and the expounded confession as "fides cathoUca^' ; i.e. they set it up as a standard of truth in matters of faith and made its acceptance the condition of membershi]) in the Church. This procedure, by which the centre of gravity of Chris- tianity was shifted, (the latter, however, was pre- served from entire dissolution) rests upon two un- proven assertions and an exchange. It is not proven that any confession of this kind emanated from the apostles and that the churches founded by the apos- tles always preserved their teaching without modi- fications; and the confession itself was exchanged for an exposition of it. Finally, the conclusion that co\tt nap tisinal Coiift'ssion as Apos- tolic. ^Ik THK LAYINfJ OF THK F'orXDATroN, 87 from ihv virtual ap^rormtMit in doctrine of a j^roup of churclu's (l)ishoi)s) there existed a fides ((ithohCit waw uniustitied. 77/ /.s (tct)(»i csfahlislird tin' Vtiilt- enthoii.- Arjfiiiiuiit olic (tnjunie)it from tradition and Ims determined [|'j','!!|,,'il;".' its Jnndauientiil suinifivane'' iintn the j>rese)it time: The e([nivocal rij;ht, on tlie one side, to an- nounce the creed as complete and idnin, and, on the other side, to make it ho elastic that one can reject every uncomfortable meaning, is to the j)resent day characteristic of Catholicism. It is also characteris- tic that men identify Christianity with a system of faith which the laity cannot understand. The lat- ter are therefore oppressed and referred back to the authoritn. TertuUian developed the method of Irenirus still T.'rtuiiian * Makes iiii farther. As the latter found the chief gnostic AjU-am-.M.n teachings already refuted in the baptismal confes- sion, while as yet only the common sense of the Church protested against them; so the former, embracing the confession all the more firmly as au- thority for the faith, found in the reyula already the creation of the universe from nothing, the mediator- ship of the Logos in creation, the existence of the same before all creatures, a definite theory in regard to his incarnation, the preaching of a nova lex and of a nova promissio^ and finally also the trinitarian economy and the correct teaching in respect to the natures of Christ {de praescv. 13; de vivg. 1; adv. Prax.^ 2, etc.). His "recjula^' is an apostolic lex et doctrina^ inviolable for every Christian. I'na'us. ii : ' t: I . i R8 OITF.INKS OF TIIK IIISTOKY OK IKXJMA. Not Wid.'- .Spnail till During :i r^Js' Ux).r,n>a^ was tile anti-j^^nosllc in- torpH'tation ol" tlio Holy Smptures) ; Orip'ii, liow- ovor, canio very near accepting it (sec, dc princip. 2)rj x'V"^'", which was indisputable. The words and deeds of the Lord (" the Gospel ") were recorded in numer- ous, oft-revised scriptures closely related to each other, which were called the " Lord's Writings", also ho he > of er- ich THF I.AYINfJ OK TMK KnlND ATloN. RO loll. ">.«Yf'/", thru yet in>l till aft«'r tlic niiddlo of tlic "^d century — '* i''>'iyy!/.>u'' ainl " 'irrnnvriHi^innura r »irr«<- #rr«/««v"; tliene wore puhlicly ivml at least after C. 110 (Jnstiii). Th<» last named title oxi)resses the jiidj^nieut, that everything which was reported of the Lord could he traced directly (»r indirectly to the apostles. Out of these luinierous evani'clical TatimrM writings there wore in certain churches, already before the middle of the '^d century, four tluit were prominent — our pvesciit (Ittsjwls — which, c.f/., very soon after HiO were worked over hy Tatian into a single Gospel (Diatessaron). About the same time they took on their final form, nion* than likely in Rome. Together with those writings the Kj)istle8 of tho apostlo Paul, which had been collected earlier, were read in the churches, i.e. by tho leaders, as the Epistles of Clement, Barnabas, Ignatius and par- ticuhirly Polycarp testify. While however tlie (ios- pels had a direct relation to the kerygma and met there(iuiremonts of tradition (Ignatius, Justin), such was not tho case with the Paulitto Epistles. Finally all definite scriptural productions of prophetic spirits {j:-^vj;La7n>.) were rovorod as inspired Holy Scrip- tures, whether they were Jewish apocalypses with high-sounding names, or the writings of Christian prophets and teaciiers. The yi>'i-l| < '' : • ■! , ' 1 I 1 1 i i I * ^ i ' ■ ; f t 1 1 1 y^i Fitl t n 'it roofs, formed a new collection of Scrip- tures and gave it canonical rank (Luke's Ciospel, 10 Paulines Kpistles). At the same time i)n;hal)ly, or a littler later, the gnostic school leaders did tlu' same, favoring the writings in widest circulation among th(^ churches, hut with new additions (X'alentinus, Tatian, Encratites). Everywhere in such circles tho Epistles of Paul came to tho front; for they were theological, soteriological, and could bo interpreted as dualistic. The new critically constituted collec- tions, which the gnostics set over against the (.)ld Testament, w(»re clothed with the same authority as tho ( )ld Testament and were allegorically interpreted in harmony with it (still, besides, secret tradition and secret scriptures). Again, a reference to the r/'^'^f^i and the xn/no^^ did not suffice for tho leaders of the churches. It was necessary, (1) to determine which evangelical writings (in which recension) were to be taken into consideration ; it was necessary, (2) to deprive the heretics of everything which could not bo discredited as new and false ; it was neces^ry, (;j) to put forth such a collection of writings as did not overturn the evidence from tradition, but on the contrary by their inherent (jualities even added "ti J! ■( THK ?.\viN(j (H«- rm: KnrNr>ATi()N. !•! wt'ij^Iit. At Mist tluT cniirmrtl tlu'iiisi'lvcs tt> \\\v proclamation of tlic four (iosiK'ls uh the only aiitlicii- tic aptislnliv rcconls of tlu» Lord. Thcsr wvw al- ready hold ill an cstct'in so noarly <'(|iial to that of the ( )ld 'rt'staiiu'nt, that tlu> inunrnsc stride iicces- sary to declare tiie words and letters holy was HOtireely recoj^nizcd as an innovation; hesides, what th(3 Master had said was from the he^inniii}^ «*onsid- (>ro8 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOCiMA. flueiiced by tho h ierarch ical Church idea. The hitter was only hinted at by Irenieus and Tertullian (the last named finally contended against it and in this contention he even reverted to the primitive Church idea: spiritus equals ccclesia, universal priesthood) ; it was farther developed by Calixtus and other Roman priests, esi)ecially by Cyprian, while the Alexandrians blended the earliest Church idea with a mystic-philosophical conception, and Origen, al- though greatly impressed by the empirical Church, never lost sight of its relative significance and office. Calixtus and Cyprian constructed the hierarchical Church idea out of existing relations and the exigen- cies which these imposed ; the latter rounded out the standard of the former, but on one point, touching the justification of the earthly character of the Church, he lagged behind, while Calixtus had reso- lutely advanced to its completion (v. the following chapter). The crises were so great in the 3d cen- tury that it was nowhere sufficient, — save in isolated communities, — to simply preserve the Catholic faith; one must obey the bishops in order to guard the ex- isting Church against the openly proclaimed heathen- ism (in practical life) , heresy and enthusiasm (the primitive Christian recollections) . The idea of the one episcopally constituted Church became supreme and the significance of doctrine as a bond of union was left in the background: The Church, resting upon the bishops, who are the successors of the apoetV^s, the representatives of God, is by reason of g t t c r( THE LAVINi; OF THK FOUNDATION. 99 these fuiulaincntal facts itself the apostolic legacy. According to Cyprian the Church is the seat of sal- vation {extraquam nulla aalus), as a single^ organ- ized confederation. It rests wholly and solely upon the episcopate, which, as the continuation of the apostolate, equipped with the powers of the apos- tles, is the bearer of these powers. The union of tho individual with God and Christ is therefore con- ceivable only in the form of subordination to the bishops. The attribute, however, of the unity of the Church, which is of equal significance with that of its truth, since the unity comes only through love, manifests itself primarily in the unity of the epis- copate. This has been from the beginning a unit and it remains a unit still, in so far as the bishops are installed by God and continue in brotherly inter- change. The individual bishops are to be considered not only as leaders of their own particular churches, but as the foundation of the one Church (''ecclesia in episcopo est"). Thence it follows farthe)*, that the bishops of those churches founded by the apos- tles possess no longer any peculiar dignity (all bish- ops are ecjuai, since they are partakers of the one office). The Roman chair, however, came to have a peculiar significance, since it was the chair of the apostle upon whom Christ first conferred the apos- tolic gifts in order to indicate clearly the unity of these gifts and of the Church; and farther also, be- cause historically the Church of this chair was the root and mother of the one Catholic Church. In a ClmrHi Ili'sts upon Episoi- piito. Roman Chair. ■•;: II I, i; i 100 OUTLINES OF THE TIISTORY OF DOOMA. severe Carthaginian crisis, Cyprian so appealed to Rome as if communion with this Church (its bishop) was the guarantee of the truth ; but later he denied the claims of the Roman bishop to special rights over other churches (contest with Stephen). Fi- nally, although he placed the unity of the organiza- tion of the Church above the unity in articles of faith, the essence of Christianity was guarded by him to this extent, that he demanded of the bishops everywhere a Christian steadfastness, otherwise they ipso facto would forfeit their office. Cyprian also as yet knew nothing of a character indelihilis of the bishops, while Calixtus and other Roman Inshops vindicated the same to them. A consequence of his tlioory was, that he closely identified heretics and schismatics, in which the Church did not then fol- low him. The great one episcopal Church, which he presupposed was by-the-bye a fiction ; such a homo- geneous confederation did not in reality exist; Con- stantino himself could not complete it. CHAPTER III. CONTINUATION: THE OLD CHRISTIANITY AND THE NEW CHURCH. [Sec the Literature on Montanism and Novatianism. ] Montan- isin, iNova- tiaiii.sm. 1. The denial of the claims of the ethical life, the paling of the primitive Christian hopes, the legal and political forms under which the churches protected THK t-AVrxn OP TITR FOrNDATION. 101 le [d d tlieniselvcs aj^aiiist the world and aj^ainst hcivsics called forth soon after the middle of tlie '^*d century, first in Asia Minor, tlien in other Christian commu- nities, a reaction which sought to estaiilisli, or rather to re-estahlit>h, the primitive times find conditions and to protect Christianity from the secularizing tendency. The result of this crisis (the so-called Montanist crisis and the like) was, that the Church asserted itself all the more strenuously as a legal organization which has its truth in its historical and objective foundation, that it accordingly gave a new significance to the attribute of holiness, that it expressly authorized a double state, — a spiritual and a secular, — within itself, and a double morality, that it exchanged its character as the possessor of certain salvation for that other, viz. to be an indispensable condition for the tnmsmission of salvation and to be an institution for education. The Montanists were compelled to withdraw (the New Testament had already thereby done good service), as well as all Christians who made the truth of the Churcli de- pendent upon a rigid maintenance of its moral claims. The consequence was that at the end of the 3d cen- tury two great Christian communities put forth claims to be the true Catholic Churcli : viz. the na- tional Church confederated bv Constantine and the Novatian churches which we refused with the rem- nant of Montanism. The beginnings of the great schism in Rome go back to the time of Hippolytus and Calixtus. I . I it 1 V I' t'i! ; ; ij 102 OUTMNRS OF THE IIISTOMY OF DOfJMA. ^'"'"i',"""** 'i. The M(t!il;i!iist opposition liad uiult^rgont' a groat trunsfornialion. Originally it was tlio stupen- dous undertaking of a Christian prophet (Montanus), who with the assistance of proi)h(^tesses felt called upon to realize for Christianity the rich prophetic promises of the Fourth Ciosj)el. lie interpreted these in accordance with the Apocalyi)se, and proclaimed that the Paraclete had appeared in his own person, in whom also Christ, yea, even Clod Alnii^ht}', luul come to his own in order to lead them into all truth and to gather tt)gether into one fold his scattered flocks. Accordingly it was Montanus' highest aim to lead the Christians forth from their civic relations and communial associations and to form a new, homogeneous brotherhood which, separated from the world, should prepare itself for the descent of the oppofWHi heavenly Jerusalem. The opposition which this ex- of Church, orbitant prophetical message encountered from the leaders of the churches, and the persecutions under Marcus Aurelius, intensified the already lively es- chatological expectations and increased the desire for martyrdom. That which the movement lest, how- ever, in definiteness (in so far as the realization of the ideal of uniting all Christians was not accom- plished, except for a brief period and within narrow limits) it gained again after c. 180 inasmuch as the proclamation of it invested earnest souls with greater power and courage, which served to retard the growing secularizing tendency within the Church. In Asia and Phrygia many Christian communities THE LAYING OF TlIK FOUNDATION. loa acknowledgoil iu corporc the Divino mission of tlio ^^'^|',|'',^,'„i" prophets ; in other provinces asscinblies were formed '""J*^'"^- in which tli(» ciirrent teachings of tliese prophets were considered as a (fospel, at the same time vari- ous modifications were going on (synipathit^s of tlie confessors in Lyons. The Roman bishops came near acknowledging the new prophecies). In the Mon- tanist churches (c. 1!K)) it was no longer a question of a new organization in the strict sense of the word, or of a radical re-formation of the Christian organi- zations, but rather, wherever the movement can be clearly traced, were these questions already pushed aside, even when they were active and influential. The original prophets had set no bounds to their en- thusiasm ; there were also no definite limits to their high pretensions: God and Christ had appeared in them ; the Prisca saw Christ living in female form ; these prophets made the most extravagant prophecies and spoke in a loftier tone than any one of the apos- tles; they subverted apostolic regulations; they set forth, regardless of every tradition, new command- ments for the Christian life; they railed at the great body of Christian believers ; they thought themselves to be the last and therefore the highest prophets, the bearers of the final revelation of God. But after they had passed off the stage, their followers sought an agreement with the common Christian churches. They recognized the great Church and begged to be ^g^^J?^ recognized by it. They were willing to bind them- 'church.'° selves to the apostolic regula and to the New Tes- t: i J ■h i .r 101 (U'TlilNKS OK Till', lllsroKV <)|.' I)0(SMA. tainciit ; tli(<3' no Ioniser licsilahMl to accept tlio ecclesiuHtical organization (the bishopH). And they ftccordingly deniandod the recognition of their own prophets, wlioni tliey now Mougiit to commend as successors of the earlier propliets (prophetic succes- sion) ; the "new" i)rophecy is really a /((tcr rervhi- fi'on, which, as the Cliurch understands it, presui)- poses the earlier; and the hiter revelation i)ertains simply and solely (in addition to the confirmation which it gives to the Church fcachhig as opposed to the gnostic) to the burning questions of Christian discipline which it decides in the interest of a more rigid observance. Therein lay the significance of the new prophecy for its adherents in the empire and accordingly ihey had bestowed their faith freely. Through the belief that in Phrygia the Paraclete had given revelations for the entire Church in order to establish a relatively severe regimen (n^fraining from second marriage, severer fast regulations, mightier attestation of Christianity in daily life, complete readiness for martyrdom) , the original en- thusiasm received its death-blow. But this flame was after all a mighty power, since Christendom at large made, between the years 100 and 220, the greatest progress toward the secularization of the Gospel. The triumph of Montanism would have been succeeded by a complete change in the owner- ship of the Church and in missionary operations: its churches would have been decimated. Con- cessions, therefore, (the New Testament, apos- THK LAVIN(i <»K TIIK KnlNDATION. lor) tolicii rci/nhi, rpiscopalc) ^t ' y^H pi, ^ nr^^H i^fii^M W it i 1 i ^ ! ■: Heiitcd Controver- sy ahont ForKivt'- iioss of Siu. lOG OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. regard to the (luostion of the forgiveness of sin. The Montanists, otherwise acknowledging the bishops, ascribed this right to the Holy Spirit alone {i.e., to those who possess the Holy Spirit), — for the power of the Spirit is not necessarily attached to the office — and recognized no human right in the forgiveness of sins, which rested far more on the (rare) laying hold of the Di'/ine mercy {^''potest ecclesia {spirit us) donare delicta, sed non faciam'"). They therefore expelled from their churches all who had committed mortal sins, committing their souls to God. The bishops on the ':)ther hand, contrary to their own principle, were obliged to maintain that baptism alone cleanses from sin, and to vindicate the right conveyed by the power of the keys by a reference to the apostolic office in order to protect the standing of the ever less holy churches against the dissolu- tion which would have resulted from the earlier re- gime. Calixtus was the first to make use of the right of the bishops to forgive sins in the widest sense, and to extend this right even to mortal sins. He was opposed, not onl}^ by the Montanist, Tertullian, but in Rome itself by a very high ecclesiastical rival bishop (Hippoly tus) . The Montanists were com- pelled to withdraw with their " devil-prophecy", but they withdrew willingly from a Church wdiicli had become " unspiritual " (psj'chic). The bishops as- serted the stability of the Church at the expense of its Christianity. In the place of the Christianity which had the Spirit in its midst, came the Church THK LAVlN(i OF THE lOlNDATION, lo: re organization which pc^ssessod tiio Now Te.itanient and the spiritual office. 3. Meanwhile the carrying out of the pretensions of the bishops to the right to forgive sins (opposed in part by the churches and the Christitm heroes, the confessors) and the extension of the sfune to mortal sins (contrary to the early practice, the early conception of bai)tisni and of the Church) was at- tended by great difficulties, although the bishops encountered not only the early practice of the j)rinn- tive rigid discipline, but also a wide-spread laxness. The extension of the forgiveness of sins to adulterers was the occasion of the schism of Hii)polytus. After the Decian persecution, however, it was necessary to declare even the greatest sin, apostasy, as j)ardona- ble, likewise to enlarge the ancient concession that one capital sin after baptism might still be ])ardona- ble (a practice founded upon the Hernias Pastor) and to abolish all rights of spiritual persons (confessors), i.e. to make the forgiveness of sin dependent ui)on a regular, casuistic, bishoply action (Cornelius of Rome and Cj^prian). Only then was the Church idea radically and totall}' changed. The Church in- cludes the pure and the impure (like Noah's ark) ; its members are not collectively holy and every one is by no moans sure of blessedness. The Church, solely in virtue of its endowments, is holy (objective), and these have actually been conferred, together with the })ure teaching, upon the bisho})s (priests and judges in the name of God) ; it is an indispensable salva- Bishops Assiiiiie to I'lii'trivi' Sins. <'Vfti Mortal Sins. Idea nf Cliin'cli Ka.lically CliaiiL'i'ii. ^ J I ."! -*i('^ 108 OUTLINKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. IJ 1 tion iiistituto, so that no one will bo blessed who remains without; it is also societas fidei, but not Jideliiini^ rather is it a training-school and eultus- institutc for salvation. It possesses also, in addition to baptism, a second cure for sin, at least in practice; the theory, however, was still confused and uncer- tain. Now for the first time were the clergy and laity sharply distinguished 7'eligiou.slf/ {"^ ecdesia est numerus cpiscoporum^'')^ and the Roman bish- ops stamped the clergy with a character indelibilis (not Cyprian). Now also began the theological speculation in regard to the relation of the Church, as a communion of saints, to the empirical holy Church, to the milder secularizing of Christianity Novatian tempered by the "means of grace." But all this Opposi- tion, could WKjt be accomplished without a great counter- agitation which began at Rome [Novatian) and soon spread among all the provincial churches. Novatian required only a minimum, the unpardona- bleness of the sin of apostasy (upon the earth) , other- wise the Church would no more be holy. This minimum, however, had the same significance as the far raore radical demands of the Montanists two generations before. There was in it a vital remnant of the ancient Church idea, although it was strange that a Church should consider itself pure (katharoi) and truly evangelical, merely because of its unwill- ingness to tolerate apostates (later perhaps other Second mortal sinners) . A second Catholic Church, stretch- chiirch. ing from Spain to Asia Minor, arose, whose archaic THE LAYING OK THE FOUNDATION. 109 fragments of the old discipline, however, did not help it to become a more independent earthly system of life; nor did it really distinguish itself from the other Church, although it declared the ministrations of the same invalid (practice of re-baptism) . With wisdom, foresight and relative severity the bishops in these crises brought their churches around to a new attitude. As it was, they could use only one bishop's Church and they learned to consider themselves rightly as its pupils and as its sheep. At the same time the Church had taken on a form in which it could be a powerful support to the state. Besides, its inner life was much better organized than formerly in the empire, and the treasure of the Gospel was still ever in its keeping (the image of Christ, the assurance of eternal life, the exercise of mercy) as once the monotheism and piety of the Psalmists remained alive within the hard and foreign shell of the Jewish Church. Note 1. The Priesthood. The rounding out of the '^'''^j^'jp*^- old Catholic Church idea is clearly manifested in the completed development of a priestly order. Hier- ourgical priests are found first among the gnostics (Marcion's followers) ; in the Church the prophets (Didache) and the local ministers (I. Clement) were formerly likened to the Old Testament priests. Ter- tuUian first calls the bishop a priest, and from that time until about 250 the priestly character of the bish- ops and presbyters was evolved very rapidly in the Orient, as well as in the Occident ; so strong indeed ho(xl. opera et eleemosynae crowded into the absolution system of the Church and secured therein a firm footing : ( )ne can — through God's indulgence — win again for himself his Chris- tian standing through works. If men had remained wholly satisfied with this, the entire system of moral- ity would have been encompassed by it. Hence it was necessary to enlarge the conception of graiia (lei, and not as hitherto to make it depend s(jlely upon the sacrament of bai)tism. This was first accom- Mcritori- (lUS Works. 14 J ;; l\ «i ]\ LV 112 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. Priestly Re-enact- iil- ii $ Christ. plished, however, by Augustine; (2) the idea of "nfil^H^T' sacrifice underwent a change in the cultus. Here also is Cypi'itin epoch-making. He first clearly as- sociated the specific off^'ering of the Lord's Supper with the specific priesthood; he first declared the passio domiui, and also the sanguis Christi and the doniiiiica hostia the object of the eucharistic offering, and thereby reached the idea of the priestly re-enacting of the sacrifice of Christ (^z -fwnifo(,a zob (TU)!iaro^ xai to^j a'tiuiro^ also in the apostolic Church regulations) ; he placed the Lord's Supper decidedly under the point of view of the incorporation of the Church and of the individual with Christ, and cer- tified in a clear way for the first time that the commemoration of those taking part in the offering {vivi et defuncti) had a special {deprecatory) sig- nificance. The real effect of the sacrificial meal for those participating was, however, the making of prayers for each other more efficacious ; for unto the forgiveness of sins in the fullest sense this act could, notwithstanding all the enrichment and lofty repre- sentations of the ceremony, not be referred. There- fore the claim that the service was the re-enactment of the sacrifice of Christ remained still a mere claim ; for against the conception so closely related to the cultus of the times, that participation in the service cleansed from sin as in the mysteries of the magna mater and of Mithras, the fundamental ecclesiastical principle of baptism and repentance stood in opposi- tion. As a sacrificial act the Lord's Supper never lip rou THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 113 Means of Grace, attained to ecjual importance with baptism; but to the popular imagination this solemn ritual, modelled after the ancient mysteries, must have gained the highest significance. Xote 3. Mcaufi of Grace, Baptism and Euclia- rifit. That which since Augustine has been called b^p^"^'"- " means of grace ", the Church of the 2d and Ikl cen- tury did not possess, save in baptism : According to tlio strict theory the baptized could not expect any new bestowal of means of grace from Christ, he must rather fulfil the law of Christ. But in practice men possessed in absolution, from the moment when mortal sins were absolved, a real means of grace, whose significance was screened by baptism. Re- flection upon this means of grace remained as yet wholly uncertain, in so far as the thought that God absolves the sinner through the priest was crossed by the other (see above) , that the penitential acts of sinners the rather secure forgiveness. The ideas con- cerning baptism did not essentially change (Hoefling, Sacrament der Taufe. 2 Bdd. 184G). Forgiveness of sins was looked upon in general as the result of baptism (however, here also a moral consideration entered : The sins of the unbaptized are sins of blind- ness ; therefore it is fit that God should absolve the penitent from them) ; actual sinlessness, which it was necessary now to preserve, was considered the result of forgiveness. Often there is mentioned in connec- tion with the remissio and the consecutio ceterni- tatis the absolutio mortis, regeueratio hominis, 'H' 'it fl f (1 \ i 1 1 1 , 'i 1, 1 it' ( i ^ i 4i ^ ;'Mm wm ( 4;4r^ ■vw 1 ^r^^ Wfr-. 1 ''','M Pg ■i\ f , Mystr- riuiii. Lord's Supper. 114 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOKY OF DOGMA. restitutio ad similitndineiii (Jci, ronsecutio spiri- tus snncti {'^lavacrnm rcfjcnerniionis et scmctiji- cafitmis''), and all possible blessings as well. The cver-ineroasiTig enriehment of the ritual is in part a consecpienco of the purpose to symbolize these pre- supi)ose(l rich effects of baptism; in part it owes its origin to the desire to worthily ecpiip the great mtjs- tei'inm. An explanation of the separate acts had already begun (confirmation bj- the bishop). The water was looked upon as a symbol and vehicle. The introduction of infant baptism lies wholly in the dark (in the time of Tertullian it was already wide-spread, but condemned by him, de hapt. 18, because he held that the cunctatio was indicated by reason of i\\Q iwndus of the act; Origen referred it back to the apostles). The attempts of some to repeat baptism were repelled. The Lord's Supper was looked upon not only as an offering, but also as a divine gift (Monographien von Doellinger 1826, Kahnis 1851, Rueckert 185G), whose effect, however, was never strictly defined, because the rigid scheme (baptismal grace, baptismal duties) excluded such. Imparting of the Divine life through the Holy Sup- per was the chief representation, closely connected with purely superstitious ideas {a(Tia(i) \ the spiritual and the physical were strangely mixed (the bread as ^vwrr:? communication and ?">'j'). No Church father made a clear discrimination here: The realistic became spiritualistic and the spiritu- alistic mystical; but the forgiveness of sins re- lll'f THE LAYING OF THE FOrXDATION. 115 ^v ixed No ere : •itu- re- treated entirely from view. In aecordance with this the representation of the relation of the visil)le ele- ments to the body of Christ bej^^an to take form. A problem (whether syiiil)olieal or realistic) no ont^ dreamed of: The symbol is the inherently potential mystery (vehicle), and the mystery apart from the symbol was inconceivable. The flesh of Christ is itself "spirit" (no one perhaps thought of the his- torical body) ; but that the spirit becomes perceptible and tangible, was even the distinguishing mark. The anti-gnostic fathers recognized that the con- secrated bread was composed of two inseparable ele- ments, — one earthly and tlio other heavenly, — and thus saw in the sacrament that which was denied by the gnostics, viz. : The union of the spiritual and the fleshly and the warrant for the resurrection of the flesh which is nourished by the blood of the Lord (even so Tertullian, Avho has falsely been classed as a pure symbolist). Justin spoke of a transforma- tion, but of a transformation of the participants; the idea of the transformation of the elements was, how- ever, already taking form. The Alexandrians saw here, as in everything which the Church at large Ai.'xan- did, the mystery behind the mystery ; they accommo- dated themselves to the administration, but they wished to be such spiritual Christians that they might be continually nourished by the Logos and might partake of a perpetual eucharist. Every- where the service was departing from its (jriginal significance and was made mon; and more precise^ as Justin. ''I .'■ Ill i^ I i! I ; :i 11 Jlvsturit'.s. 116 OUTLINES OK THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. regards its form and content, both by the learned and ignorant (practice of infant communion testified to by C-yprian) . Magical mysteries, superstition, authoritative faith and obedience, on the one side, and a highly realistic representation of the freedom, ability and responsibility of the' individual in moral matters, on the other side, is the mark of Catholic Christendom. In religious matters authoritatively and supersti- tiously bound, therefore passive; in moral matters free and left to themselves, therefore active. That the Roman church led the way throughout in this process of broadening the churches into cath- olicity is an historical fact that can be unquestiona- bly proven. But the philosophic-scientific system of doctrine, which was evolved at the same time out of the faith, is not the work of the Roman church and its bishops. ■■ji THE LAYINO OF THE FOUNDATION. ii: II. ESTABLISHMENT OF CHRISTIANITY AS DOCTRINE AND ITS GRADUAL SECULARIZATION. i' ClIAPTKU IV. ECCLESIASTICAL CHRISTIANITY AND PHILOSOPHY. THE APOLOGISTS. M. V. Eugelhardt, Das Christen thuin Justin's, 1878. Kiilin, Octaviua, 1883. Ausgabe Uer Apologeteu in it Comnieutar, von Otto. 1. The apologists wishing to declare and defend tikapoi- ogist.s. the Christianity of the churches stood therefore in all things upon the hasis of the Old Testament, em- phasized the universalism of the Christian revela- tion and held fast to the traditional eschatology. They rejected gnosticism and saw in the moral power which faith gave to the uncultured a princi- pal proof of its genuineness. But anxious to present Christianity to the educated as the highest and surest christian- philosophy, thoy elaborated as truly Christian the p,','y"/i^". moral cast of thought with which the Gentile Chris- '"^""'" tians from the beginning had stamped the Gospel, thereby making Christianity rational and giving it a form which appealed to the common sense of all earne^'t, thinking and reasoning men of the times. Besides, they knew how to use the traditional, posi- tive material, the Old Testament as well as the his- tory and worship of Christ, simply as a verification and attestation of this rational religion which had k 1. f! * 1 •J •V ,(h,' HI pi I ■ IIK OLTMNKS OK TIIK illSTOlCV OK I)0(iMA. Imm'U liillicrto waiiliii}^ Jiiid had Imhui soiij^lii fur with fVrv(!Mt «h»sir(>. In tlio a|)<)!n;^Ttic thj'ology C'liriH- tiaiiit}' is concoivccl as a religious clovelopment brouglit about by God hiiiisdf and corrospouding to tho primitivo condition of man and placed in the sharpest contrast with all polytheistic national religions and ceremonial observances. With the gr(»atest energy the apologists proclaimed it to be the religion of the spirit, of freedom and of absolute chriHtian morality. The whole positive material of Christian- formwl. ^*^^y» however, was transformed into a great scheme of evidence; religion did not obtain its content from historical facts — it received it from Divine revela- tif t!u' past jiiul to doseviul from tho piano of (ho learned to tho plane of tho common jKioplo. Tlio ai)()lo!^ists wero in contrast with tho gnostics Aj><.i.>;?istH cunseri'dtici'^ inasmuch as thoy wore not really dis- posed to investigate at any ixjint the traditions of the Church or to make the content of the same compre- hensible. Tlio argument from prophecy, now liow- ever formulated in the most external way, allied them with the Church at large. The gnostics sought in the Gosi)el a netr reliyion, the apologists by means of the Gospel were confirmed in their relig- ions moral sense. The former emphasized the re- demptive idea and made everything subordinate to it; the latter brought all within the radius of natural religion and relegated tho redemptive idea to the circumference. Both hellenized the Gospel; but only tho speculations of tho ai)ologists were at once legitimized, because they directed everything against polytheism and left the Old Testament and the kerygma untouched and emphaKized in the clearest manner freedom and responsibility. Aj)ologists and gjiostics carried forv/ard tho work which the Alex- andrian Jewish thinker (Pliilo) had begun as regards to the Old Testament religion; but they divided the work, so to speak, between them : The latter devot- ing themselves rather to the Platonic-religious side of the problem and the former to the stoic-rational- istic side. The division however could not be sharply made ; no apologist entirely overlooked the redemp- Apolopists mitl Olios- tics ("on- timn*«l Work of I'hilo. t ,')" w / I ii ; ' 120 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. ,! 1' ■ iW I li IrenH'us Two I'rub- leuis. Christian- ity is Plii- losopliy and Reve- lation : Thesis o,' Apolop^'ots. tive irlea (rcdemplioii fi-Din the pinver of the demons can be wrought only bj" the Logos). AVith Irenseus begins again in the theological work of the Church the blending of the two problems ; not only the con- test with gnosticism made this necessary, but the spirit of the age turned more and more from the stoic morality to the Neo-Platonic mysticism, within whosb shell lay concealed the impulse toward religion. 2. Christianity is philosophu and revelation: This is the thesis of every apologist from Aristides to Minucius Felix. In the declaration that it is philosophy, the apologists encountered the wide- spread opinion among the churches, that it is the antithesis to all worldly wisdom (see the testimonj^ of Celsus) ; but they reconciled this difference through tiio friendly understanding that Christianity is of supernatural origin and as revelation, notwithstand- ing its Tc 'ional content, cannot be apprehended save by a diviuv iy illumined understanding. On the principles v. jderlying this conception the apologists v\'ere all agreed (Aristides, Justin, Tatian, Melito, Atlicnagc; -aS; Theophilus, Tertullian, Minucius Felix and othci i whose writings are attributed to Justin) . The stron^^ost impress of stoic morality and rational- ism is found ill Minucius ; Justin's writings (Apol- ogy and Dialogue) have the most in common with the faith cf the churches. On the other hand Justin and Athenagoras think the most favorably of philos- ophy and. of philosophers, while in the succeeding time the judgment became ever harsher (already by ! D THE LAYING OP THE FOUNDATION. 121 lie .1- ih n Tatian) without changing the view of the philosophic content of Christianity. The general conviction may Summarr. be thus summarized : Christianity is philosophy, be- cause it has a rational element and because it gives a satisf actor}" and generally comprehensible ans\^er to those questions in regard to which all true philoso- phers have exercised themselves; but it is not a phi- losophy, — indeed it is the direct antithesis to philos- ophy, so far as it is free from all mere notions and opinions and refates polytheism, i.e., originates from a revelation, therefore has a supernntural, Di- vine origin, upon which finally the truth and cer- tainty of its teaching alone rest. This contrast with pliilosophy shows itself also above all in the unphil- osophical form in which the Christian preaching went forth. This thesis permits in detail various judgments in regard to the concrete relation of Christianity and philosophy, and it urged the apolo- gists to labor at the problem, why then the rational needed to be revealed at all? The following general convictions however may also be laid down here: (1) Christianity is, according to the apologists, rev- christian- elation, i.e. it is the Divine wisdom which from uf old has been proclaimed through the iwopliets and possesses through its origin absolute trustworthiness, tvhich is also clearly evidenced in the fulfilment of the ivords of the prophets (the evidence from prophecy as the only sure evitionce; it has nothing to do with the content of religion, but is an accompani- ment to it). As Divine wisdom Christianity stands elutiou. 1 • , 1 1 m j w I III i } BU^i .1 fty is Pi;i- losophy. Revelation Necessary. Philoso- phers In- debted to Prophets. Christ ouly B^ni- phatii/ed Prophets. 122 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. opposod to }«11 natural aiul philohophical knowledge and makes an end to sncli. {'I) Christianity is the manifestation which accords with the natural, thouj^h darkened reason of mankind; it includes all the essential elements of philosophy — it is therefore the philosophy {fj >:«'''' i,"-''''-^ (ftXaniKfia^ ij /3fa/>(5«/>ury (fihtcrixfia) — and it assists mankind to realize the truths which philosophy contains. (3) Revelation of the rational was and is necessary, because mankind has fallen under the dominion of demons, (t) The efforts of the philosophers to discover the true knowledge have been fruitless, which is above all clearly shown by the fact that neither polytheism nor the wide-spread immorality has bean overthrown by them. So far as the philosophers have discovered any truth, they are indebt'^d for it to the prophets (thus the Jewish Alex- andrian philosophers already taught) from whom they borrow^ed it; it is, to say the least, uncertain whether they also have come to the knowledge of any fragment of the truth through the sporadic activ- ity of the Logos (see Justin on S< ?rates) ; certain is it, however, that many apparent truths of the philos- ophers are the aping of truth by evil spirits (to these also the whole of polytheism was referred, wliicli is partly aLo the aping of Christian institutions). (5) The acknowledgment cf Christ is simpl}" included in the acknowledgment of the prophetic wisdom ; a new content the teaching of the prophets did not receive through Christ; he only gave it currency and energy (triumph over the demons; Justin and THE liAYINTJ OF THE FOrXDATTOT^T. 1 :3:] in id a )t id Tortullian ivcogiiizr a new rlcnKiii in tli«' (Gospel). (0) Tlio practical luvStiiig of Cliristianity lies, (a) in its apprehensibility (the unlearned and women bo- come wise), (b) in the expulsion of demons, (c) in its ability to produce a holy life. In the a};ologists Christianity accordingly despoiled antiquity, i.e. the proceeds of the monotheistic knowledge and ethics of the Greek : <'>^i ~n:> i'JTt' (Justin). I i dates itself from the beginning of chnstian- ^ o r» ityoldiis the world. Everything true and good that mankind ^^"^ ^^'iJci. extols came through Divine revelation, but is, at the same time, trul}' human, because it is only a clearer expression of that which men find within themselves. It is at the same time Christian, since Christianity is nothing but the teaching of revelation. One cannot think of another form in which the claim of Chris- tianity tc be the world-religion comes out so strongly (hence the effort to reconcile the world-empire with the new religion) , nor can one think of a second form in which the specific content of the traditional Chris- tianity is so thoroughly neutralized. But its truly spiritual ^ o ^ ./ Culture epoch-making character laj" in this, that the spiritual wjHi'ReiiK- culture of the race appeared now to be reconciled and allied with religion: Revelation is wholly an out- ward, miraculous communication (passivity of the prophets) of rational truth ; but rational truth — theis- tic cosmology and moral it}' — vras set forth simply dogmatically and as the common possession of man- kind. 3. The " dogmas " of Christianity — this conception ion. If I' 4 ■I I I! h i 124 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. ai^Rathl- ^^^^ ^^^^ otlier, ^'^£o^o^u^^ Were first introduced into philosophical language hy the apologists — are those rational truths which are revealed by the prophets in the Holy Scriptures, and which are all summed up in Christ {\fn(Tzdis koyi,'; xa\ >o,'io^^) and have as their conseciuent true virtue and eternal life (God, liberty and virtue, eternal reward and eternal punishment, i.e. Christianity as a monotheistic cosmology, as a doctrine of liberty and morals, as a doctrine of re- demption ; the latter however is not clearly set forth). The instruction is referred back to God, the estab- lishment of a virtuous life (of righteousness) God must needs have left to men. The prophets and- Christ are therefore fountains of righteousness, in so far as they are Divine teachers. Christianity may be defined as the God-transmitted knowledge of God, and as virtuous conformity to rational law, in the longing and striving after eternal life and in the certainty of reward. Through the knowledge of the truth and through the doing of good, men become righteous and partake of the highest blessedness. Knowledge rests upon faith in the Divine revela- tion. This revelation has also the genius and the power of redemption, in so far as the fact is unques- tionable that mankind cannot without it triumph over the dominion of the demons. All this is con- ceived from the Greek standpoint. fS?F^?fh (^) ^^^ dogmas which set forth the knowledge of ^of God.*'*^ God and of the world are dominated by the funda- mental thought, that over against the world as a THE LAYING OF THE FOL'NDATION. 1-^5 created, coiulitioiUHl and transient existence stands the Self- Existent, Unchangeable and Eternal, who is the primal Cause of the world. He has no attri- butes, which are attributable to the world ; therefore he is exalted above every name and has in himself no distinctions (the Platonic expressions concerning God were held as incomparabl}- good). He is ac- cordingly one and (done, splrifmil and faultless and therefore perfect; in purely negative predicates he is best characterized ; and yet he is On'yin (Cause) and the Fulness of all existences; he is Will and Life, therefore also the kind Giver. The following theses remain fixed with the apologists as regards the relation of God to the world: (1) that God is to s»i"niary, be thought of primarily as the final Cause, {'i) that the principle of the ethically good is the Principle of the world, (3) that the Principle of the world, i.e. the Godhead, as immortal and eternal, forms the contrast to the world as the perishable. The dogmas concerning God are not set forth from the stand- point of the redeer 'd Church, but on the basis of a certain conception of the world on the one hand, and of the moral nature of man on the other ; which latter however is a manifestation within the cosmos. The cosmos is everywhere permeated with reason and order (opposition to gnosticism) ; it bears the stamp of the Logos (as a reflection of a higher world and as a product of a rational Will) . The material also which lies at the basis of its composition is not evil, but was created by God. Still the apologists CoKnios rt'niu-at'-d with Ufa- son. f\l ni iil m 'ill .1 m (.', I Ml iiN'ii 120 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. (lid not maku Ood the immetliato creator of the world, but the personified Divine Reason perceptible in the world and inserted between God and the world. This was done with no reference to Christ and with no thought (in the gnostic sense) of sepa- rating Clod and the world; the conception of the Logos was already at hand in the religions philos- ophy of the day, and the lofty idea of God recjuired a being, which should represent the actuality and the many-sided activity of God, without doing vio- lence to his unchangeableness (a finer dualism: The The Logos. Logos is the hypostasis of the active energizing Reason, which makes it possible to think of the God- head itself as resting n-e/)f>n(Tt>:<)^^ in i'h<)->) whose real essence {»'^)T{a) is identical with that of God; he is not separated from God but only severed, and is also not a mere mode or attribute of God; but is the independent result of the self- unfolding of God, and, although being the compen- dium of the Divine Reason, he did not rob the Father of his reason; he is God and Lord, possesses the es- sence of the Divine Nature, although he is a second being by the side of God {ilp'Jhi.oi ezs/)o> tj, //eo^ (hi'm- f»"t); but his personality had a beginning {^^ fuit tcinpus, cum pafri filius non fin' f " TcvtuW.). Since Begotten God, then he had a beginning, and the Father did not, he is, as compared with the Father, a Creature, the begotten, created, manifested God. The subordina- tion lies, not in his essence (for monotheism would then have been destroyed), but in the manner of his origin (^ipyo-^ r^fuozorir/Mv ziin rar//Ms'). This made it possible for him to go forth into the finite as rea- son, revelation, and activity, while the Father re- mains in the obscuritj' of his unchangeablencss. With the going forth of tlio Logos begins the reali- zation of the world-idea. He is the Creator and to a degree the P7*ntotype of the world (the one and spir- itual Being among the many sentiment creatures). Creator and J'loto- tyi.f. ■t'\ ii : k ! 128 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP" DOGMA. I : - dt'omor. from the earth to the Father of Lights ; in equanim- ity, fulness, purity and goodness, which are the nec- essary consequences of right knowledge, it should make it manifest that it has already overcome the world. The vicious die the eternal death, the virtu- ous obtain the eternal life (strong emphasis upon the idea of the judgment; recognition of the resurrec- tion of the body of the virtuous; the idea of right- eousness is not pushed beyond the leijal recjuire- ments) . (c) God is Redeemer in so far as he (although the cosmos and the reason are sufficient revelati(^ns) has still sent forth direct miraculous dispensations of the truth. Inasmuch as the fallen angels at the very beginning gained the mastery over mankind and entangled men in sensuality and polytheism, God sent his prophets to enlighten man's darkened per- ception and to strengthen his freedom. The Logos worked directly within them, and many apologists in their writings were satisfied w- itli a reference to the Holy Scriptures and to the evidence from proph- ecy. But all indeed recognized with Justin the complete revelation of the Lol?os in Jesus Christ, i-'^p'^ 'J*^ through whom prophecy is fulfilled and the truth made easily accessible to all (adoration of Christ as the revealed Logos). Justin still more zealously defended the adoration of a crucified " man " and added many things from the traditions concerning Christ that make their appearance first again in Irenaeus. 9 Christ. }\ ii I i . N* n t 130 OUTLINES OF THE HISTOKY OK DOCJMA. CHAPTER V. BEGINNINGS OF AN ECCLESIASTICO - THEOLOGICAL EXPOSITION AND REVISION OP THE KULE OF FAITH IN OPPOSITION TO GNOSTICISM ON THE PRESUPPOSITION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT AND THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY OF THE APOLO- GISTS: IREN'^EUS, TERTULLIAN, HIPPOLYTUS, CYPRIAN, NOVATIAN. irenocus. 1. Irenyeus, a piipil of Polycarp and a teacher from Asia Minor, who resided in Lyons and was conversant with the tradititjns of the Roman church, set forth in his great anti-gnostic work tlie apos- tolic norms of the Catholic Church and also made an attempt to develop a system of Church doctrine. roinbinod He souglit to Combine the apohx/cfic theolony with Ai)ol<)p'tic *^ -I ./ ./,/ witli Hail ^ theological revision of the Ijaptisinal confession; 'fessioii.'" he took from the two Testaments that material which served not alone to attest his philosophical teaching; like the gnostics he placed the thought of the realized redemption in the centre and sought thereby at the same time to express the primitive Christian eschatological hopes. In this way arose a "faith" of unlimited extent, which was to be tJie faith of the Church, of the learned and unlearned, composed of the most divers elements — the philo- sophi co-apologetic. Biblical, Christosophic, gnostic- anti-gnostic and materialistic-fantastical (the pistis should at the same time be the gnosis and vice versa; THK LAVINCi OF THE FOUNDATION. 131 all consriou.snoss that rational theology and fides credcnihf mv irro('oncilabl(> niagnitiules was want- ing; everything stood upon an even plane; sp(»'.'nla- tion was jnistriisted and 3'et was not discvirded). This complicated structure received its outward compH.at- unity through the reference of all declarations to the '""'■ rule of faith and the two Testaments, and its in- ward unity through the strong emphasis of two fun- damental thoughts: Thai ihe Cveatin'-Hod is also the Redeenter-Ctod, and that Jesus Christ is the Redeemer saleltj on this accointt, beeanse he is the incarnate God {fdius dei fdins honi i n is f actus). In the carrying out of the latter thought, Irenjcus is superior to his pupils, TertuUian and Hipi)olytus. For the former especially ^^'as entirely incompetent to unite the apologetico-rational, the historico-re- demptive, and the eschatological ranges of thought, but he developed., conformably to his juristic temper and equipments, a well-rounded system in certain particulars, which was very influential in the sub- sequent times (terminology of the trinitarian and Christological dogmas; giving Occidental flogmatics a juristic trend). , The joining of the old idea of salvation with the rhristia.i- " ^ ity lit'- thoughts of the New Testament (salvation-history) through" and with the apologetic rationalism was the work of gixi"' Iremuus. Christ ianitfj is to Jiini real redemption., hroiif/ht about bf/ the Creator-God. This redemp- tion is to him reccqjitnlatio, i.e. restoration to a living unity of that which has been unnaturally I m I I I „:t !: I !! ' I I ili liicariui- lintl Kllll- (laiiictital Do/'iua. Gained Ready Ac- ceptance. i;j?. OUTLINES OK THE HISTORY OK DOGMA. ai'pantfrd through death and sin; e8iH3cially, as re- gards mankind, the restoration of human nature unto the Divine image through the gift of imperishable- ness. Tliis .salvation is accomplished, not through tlie Logos in itself, hut solely through Jesus Christ, and, indeed, through Jesus Christ in so far as he was Goil and became man. In that he took upon himself hu- manity he has inseparably united and blended the same with Divinity. The incaniafioii is therefore alotuf with the doctrine of the unitij of God the fiDidamental doijma. Thus the historical Christ stands (as with the gnostics and Marcion) at the centre, not as the teacher (although Irenjeus' rational scheme in many respects intersected his realistic theory of redemption) , but by virtue of his constitu- tion as the Ood-man. All else in the Holy Scriptures is preparatory history (not simply ciphers in the evidence from prophecy), and the history of Christ (kerygma) himself is the unfolding of the process of the incarnation (not simply the fulfilment of prophecy). Although the apologists in reality did not pose the question " cur dens homo " at all, yet IrenoBus made it fundamental and answered it with the intoxicating statement : " That we might become Gods". This answer was accordingly highly satis- factory, because, (1) it indicated a specific Christian benefit from salvation, (2) it was of like rank with the gnostic conception ; indeed it even went beyond the latter in its compass of territory regarding deifi- cation, (3) it met the eschatological trend of Chris- TIIK I,AVIN(J OF TIIK ForNDATION. 133 tianity luilf-way, yet at the sumo tiino it coiiUl tako the j)lacoof tlio fantastic-uschatological t^xpoctatioiiH, (1) it oxpresHotl tho mystic Noo-Platonic trend of tlie time and gavo tho nanio tho greatest satisfaction, (5) it replaced tho waning intellectiialisni (rationalism) by tho certain hope of a supernaturid transformati(»n of our nature, winch will make it capahU' of appro- priating that which is above reason, (•')) it gave to tho traditional historical utterances concerning Christ, and the entire previous history as well, a firm founda- tion and a definite aim, and mad > j)ossible the con- ception of a gradual unfolding of the history of salvation {inxn»,ix{a i^vr>; appropriation of Paulino ideas, distinguishing of tho two Testaments, vital interest in the kerygma). Tho moral and eschato- logical interest was now balanced by a real religious and Christological interest: Tho restoration of hu- man nature unto the Divine imago j^er adopt ioneni. " Through his birth as a man tho eternal Word of God secured the legacy of life for those who, through the natural birth, had inherited dojith ". The carry- ing out of this thought is indeed crossed b}' many things foreign to it. Jrena3us and his pupils warded off tho acute hellenization by the bringing in of the two Testaments, by the idea of the unity of creation and redemption, by their opposition to docetism; they taught the Church anew that Christianity is faith in Jesns Christ; but on the other hand they promoted the hellenization by their superstitious conception of redemption, and by turning the inter- Ironnpiis atid I'lipils Wii 1(1.(1 off Jlcll.-n- i:l1 %l l;)4 OUTUNES OF THE TITSTORY OF DOGMA, Declared [lllillisill iJfstioyt'd Oinnij'o- teuee of UlHi. Ai'oei)t (Jiiostic DeiiiiiirKf- est towai'd tlu> luitures rather than toward the living Pevson. 'I. The early Catholic fathers, in opposition to the gnostic theses, declared that dualism destroys the omnipote ICO of God, therefore in general the idea of God, thai the emanations are a mythological fancy and endanger tho unity of the Godhead, that the at- tempt to ascertain tho inner Divine constitution is audacious, that the gnostics could not avoid placing the final origin of sin in the pleroma, that criticism of the constitution of tho cosmos is impertinent, the same is muL'h rather an evidence of wisdom and good- ness, that docetism gives the lie to the Deity, that the freedom of man is an undeniable fact, that evil is a necessary means of correction, tii.it goodness and justice do not exclude eacli otlun*, etc. E- orywhere they argue accordingly for tho gnostic demi^n'go as against the gnostic Redeemer-God. They refer above all to the two Testaments, jind have therefore been eulogistically called '" Scripture theologians " ; but the " religion of the Scriptures ", whereby the latter is wilfully interpreted as inspired testimony (IrenfBus looks askance at the gnostic exegesis, but comes xery near making use of it) gives no guarantee of contact with the Gospel. The relation between the rule of faith and the Scriptures (now super-, now sub-ordination) also did not come to a clear statement, ^oofrout^^ 111 the doctrine of God the main outlines were All Time fimily drawu cor all time. A middle way between i'^ THE LAYING OF THE FOUND ATIOX. U5 the disavowal of kiiowlodgo aiul an o'. or-ciirious speculation vas much prized. In IreT^ieus are found tendencies tc make love^ i.e. Jesus Christ, the prin- ciple of knowledge. God is to be known through revelation, whereby the knowledge of the world is declared, now to be sufficient, and now insufficient; Fov Irenaeus, the apologist, it is sufficient, for Ire- na^us, the Christologist, it is not; but a God with- out a creation is a phantom ; always must the cos- mical precede the religious. The Creator-God is the starting-point, blasphemy of the Creator is the highest blasphemy. Hence also the apologetic idea of God is virtually made use of (God the negation and the Cause of the cosmos) ; but Irenasus is still enthused by it, since a real interest is at hand as regards the historicia revelation. Especially was it pointed out against Marcion, that goodness re(iuires justice. In the L()(jos-iI()ctriite Tertullian and Hippolytus lo^os-doc- trine; Ter- manifest a deeper apologetic interest than IremBus. tuiiiau aiui ^ r t-> Hippoly- They adopt the whole mass of apologetic material ^""^^ (Tertull. Apolog. 21); but they give it a more par- ticular reference to Jesus Christ (Tertull. de came Christ i and adr. Pra.v.). Accordingly Tertullian fashioned the formulas of the later orthodoxy, in that he introduced the conceptions substance and person, and notwithstanding his very elaborate sub- ordinationism and his merely economical construction of the trinity, he still hit upon ideas concerning the relatioi'S of the thret. Persons v/hich could be fully ii : i-i i ^ ! !lt I' I i '. ;^ I.- Una Siib- stiintiii. Trcs Per- SOUIL'. LoRos Der- iviitio ft Portio D'.'i. 1.30 OUTLINES OF TUK HISTORY OF DOGMA. rec'ijgnized upon the soil of the Niceiie Creed {'^ una substantia, tres personw. ") . The unity of the God- head v,vas set forth in the una substantia; the dis- position of the one suhstance among the three Per- sons {trinitas, -fifi-^ first by Theophihis) did not destroy the unity (the gnostic eons-speculation is here confined to three in number). Already it was considered a heresy to maintain that God is a numer- ical unity. But the self-unfolding (not partitioning) of the Godhead had made a beginning (the realiza- tion of the world-idea is still ever the main-spring of the inner Divine dispositio) ; the Logos became a distinct being {" secundus a deo constitutus, perse- vcrans in sua foi-nm"); since he is derivatio, so is he por^?o of the Deity ("pafer tota substantial^). Therefore notwithstanding his unity of substance {unius substantice — v/woufTux^) he has the charac- teristic of temporality (the Son is not the world-idea itself, although he possesses the same) : He, the Stream, when the revelation has accomplished its aim, will finally flow back into its Fountain. This form of statement is in itself as yet not at all distin- guishable from the Hellenic; it was not fitted to preserve faith in Jesus Christ, for it is too low ; it has its importance merely in the identification of the historical Christ with this Logos. Through this TertuUian united the scientific idealistic cosmology with the declarations of the primitive Christian tx'adition concerning Jesus, so that both were to him like the wholly dissimilar wings of one and the THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 137 t^ same building. The Holy Spirit Tertullian treated merely according to the schema of the Logos-doctrine, — an. advance upon the apologists, — yet without any trace of an independent interest (" tertiKS est spiri- tus a deo et filio ", " vicaria visfdii ", subordinate to the Son as the latter is to the Father, yet still " iiiiius substantice ") . Hippolytus emphasized the creature- character of the Logos still stronger (Philos. X, ;33 : koyou TO TzapadeiytLa) ^ but did not attribute an indepen- dent prosqpon to the Spirit (adv. Noet. 14: i-^-t ''^sf'V Tveufxarixs) . While T'ortuUian and Hippolytus simply add the Christ of the kerygmas to the complete Logos-doc- trine already at hand, Irenteus took his point of de- parture from the God-Christ, who became man. The " Logos " to him is more a predicate of Christ than the subject itself. His declarations concerning Christ were won from the standpoint of the doctrine of redemption; the apologetic Logos-doctrine even troubled him; but he could not rid himself of it, since redemption is recapitulaiio of the creation, and since John 1 : 1 teaches that Christ is the Logos. However, he rejected from principle every -nofitiXrj^ emanation and theological speculation. Christ is the eternal Son of God (no temporal coming-forth) ; he is the eternal self -re vela cion of the Father; there exists between him and God no separation. Yet so greatly did he strive to reject the eon-speculation — Holy Spirit. Irenspus Dim-rs fro'n 'IVr- tiillian and Hippoly- tus. 138 OUT LINES OK TifR iiisToirr OF DOCJMA. L< i \ /-»/ Vl 1 1 i 1 t-* /^T- / < niT/\ LJ r\r\ tXmx I Iit^iii/^ tt\ 1 Mitiit .+ ;« Ironnnus' Doi'trinc of Mau. Fall Ex- cusaliK' and Adviin- taj^eous. the redemption; he was obhged to give him apart ill the creation, and then he taught nothing different from Justin and TertuUian. But he always had the inearnation in view, whose subjeot must be the full Divinity. "God placed himself in the relation of Father to the Son, in order to create, after the like- ness of his Son, men who should be his sons". Per- haps the incarnation was to Irenrous the highest expression of purpose in the sonship of Christ. In regararn the distance between man and Crod, an riij^lit use of freedom. It is a question of life and death; the consequence of sin is that wldch is really dreadful. But the good- ness of God showed itself at once, as well in the re- moval of the tree of life, as in the ordaining of tem- poral death. Man regains his destiny, when he tle- cides freely for the good, and that he can still ever do. The significance of the prophets and of Christ reduces itself here, as by the apologists, to the tvdch- ing which strengthens freedom (s(j taught Tertul- lian and Hippolytus). The second course of thought ircnfrus lllllut'IK't'll by Irenjx3us flowed out of the gnostic-anti-gnostic '>>• t^^i"'- recapitulation-theory and was influenced by Paul. This encompasses entire humanity as the sinful Adam, who having fallen once cannot help himself. All offended God in Adam; through Evt» the entire race has become subject to death; the original end is forfeited and God alone can help by descending again into conmiunion with us and restoring us to likeness with his Being (not out of freedom does blessedness flow, but out of C(^mmimion with God, " in quantum dens nulUus indiqef, in tanfuni homo ciuist sec- ond Aduiu. indigef dei commuiiione^\ TV. U, 1). Christ, as the second Adam, redeems the first Adam (" Christ us liberfateni restantxirif), in that he step for step restored in bonnm, what Adam had done in malum. (The testimony of prophecy is liere changed into a history of destruction and salvation). This relig- ions, preconceived historical view is carried out in 11^ ! i I ivlf' Idea of Gcxl-Man Domi- nates. Perfect Union Be- tween Lo- fjos and Man Jesus. 140 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. an almost naturalistic way. Jrom the consetjuence of tho apokatastasis of every individual man Ire- naeus was preserved only by his moral train of thought. The idea of the God-man dominated this entire scheme. Ecclesiastical Christology, so far as it em- phasizes tne oneness of the Divine and human in Christ, stands to-day still bj' Irenteus (TertuUian did not so clearly see the necessity of the oneness) . Jesus Christ vere homo vere deus, i.e., (1) he is truly the Word of God, God in kind, (2) this Word be- came truly man, (3) tho incarnate Word is an insep- arable unit5^ This is carried out against tho "ebionites" and Valentinians, who taught the de- scent of one of the many eons. The Son stands in natural, and not in adopted kinship (the virgin birth is recapitulatio: Eve and Mary) ; his body is substantially identical with ours; for docetism menaced the redemption just as did "ebionitism ". Therefore must Christ, in order to be able to restore the whole man, also pass through a full human life from birth to mature age and to death. Tho unity between the Logos and his human nature IrenaDus called, '^ adunitio verhi dei adj^lasma'^ and "com- munio et cominixtio dei et hominis". It is to him perfect; since he did not care to distinguish what the man did from what the Word did. On the con- trary TertuUian, dependent upon Irenseus, but not viewing the realistic doctrine of redemption as the key to Christianity, used it is true the formula, i I ! THE LAYING OK THE FOUNDATION. Ul "homo deo niLrtns'\ but not understamling tho "homo FACTUs" ill the strict sense. He speaks (adv. Prax.) of two substances of Cb:ist {corporalis ct spiritualis), of tho "conditio duariim siibsfanti t- rum'^ which in their integrity persist, of tho "du- plex status domin/i, non confusus, sed cujunctiis in una persona — deus et honio''\ Here is ah'eady the Chalcedon (juristic) terminology. Tertullian developed it in endeavoring to ward off the thought : God transformed himself (so some patripassionists) ; but he did not see, although ho used the old formulas, " deus crucifixus ', * nasci se cult deus ", that the realistic redemption becomes more strongly menaced through tho sharp separation of the two natures, than through the acceptance of a transformation. Indeed he only asserts the oneness and rejects tho idea that Christ is "teriiamquid". But even Ire- nseus could not persuade himself, against his own better judgment, to divide the one Jesus Christ after the manner of the gnostics: (1) There are not a few passages in the New Testament, which can be re- ferred only to the humanity of Jesus (not to tho God- man), if the real Divinity on the other hand is not made to suffer (so e.g. the descent oi the Spirit at his baptism, his trembling and shaking), (2) Ire- nseus also conceived of Christ in such a way as to make him the new Adam {" perfectus homo^')., who possesses tho Logos, which in certain acts in tho history of Jesus was inactive. The gnostic distin- guishing of the Jesus patibilis and the Christus Two Sub- stanct's Non Con- fusus. Two-Na- tur»> Doc- trine. 1} M ji , • ;| ; 'I f:-Xt •r In-iiaMis I'V.th.'f (if Tiii'ulojry of Facts. AVork (if ( 'In ist Vii'ionsly IiUcr- 112 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. «T«>7)j9 was by Tertulliaii explicitly, and by Irenfeus indirectly, legitimized. Tiius arose the ecclesias- tical two-nature doctrine. Hi])polytus stood be- tween the two older teachers. However, the oneness was still the penetratinjjj con- cept'on of Irenieas. Since Christ becam;* what we are, he as God-man likewise passed through and suffered what we slioi.ld havo suffered. Christ is ^ot oidy " sahis ef salcot<)r'\ but also his wliole li'e is a work of icden jjiion. From his conception to his burial everything was inwardly nrcessary. Ire- nreus is the father of the " theology of facts " in the Church (Paul emphasized only tlie death and the resurrection). The iniiuence of the gnosis is unmis- taka!.le, and ue even uses the same expressions as the gnostics when he conceives redemption as fully ac- complished, — on the one side, in the mere manifes- tation of Jesus Christ as the second Adam, on the other, in the mere knowledge of this manifestation (IV. 3(3, 7: r/ yMOfTii nth uin') run >'i^iri^ y'lri^ r]> diff^apnifi) . Still he empiiasizes the personal meritorious service. He looked at the work from many points of view (loading back into communion, restoration of free- dom, redemption from death and the devil, propitia- tion of God); the dominathig one is the procuring of the aif<^aniiia (adoption unto Divine life). But how uncertain all is to him, he betrays in I. 10, 3, when he attributes the question. Why did God become HeshV to tlu^se who will have nothing to do with the simple faith. He can alsn still ever rest satis- THE LAYING OF THV! FOUNDATION. 143 fiod with the hope of the second coming of Christ and the resurrection of the hody. Between tliis hope and the deification-idea lies the Pauline view (gnosis of the deatli on the cross) ; Irentcus exer- cised himself to prove its legitimateness (the death of Christ is the true redemption). Still he had not reached the idea ()f the atonement (the redemption money is not paid to the devil ui)on his '• with- drawal'"); within the recapitulation-theory he ex- presses the idea, that through disobedience upon \\h) tree Adam became a delator toward God, and through obedience u])on \\w tree God became reconciled. Retiections on a substitutional sacrifice are not found in Ironrous; seldom do we find the idea of sacrificial death. Forgiveness of sins he did not really recog- nize, but only the setting aside of sins ar.d their consequences. The redeemed become through Christ bound together into a true unity, into true human it}-, into the Church, whose head Christ is. In Tertullian and Ilippolytus the same points of view are found, except that the mystic (recapitulating) form of the re- deinption recedes. They oscillate con cmiore between the rational and the Pauline representation of r(>- demption (" ir*o/?z Chrifiiiani noininis et pondns vt fructus mors CJirisfi'\ adv. ]\Iarc. III., S); but Hippolytus (Philosoph. fin.) gave a classical expres- sion to the deification brought about by Christ, inter- weaving therewith the rational schema (knowledge redeems). More sharply come out in Tertullian the conceptions, culpa, rcains pcccati, etc.; he Did Not Ucai-h Id.Mof Atinif- nii-nt, Uippolytus I'liijilia- sizes Deifi- cation. i; ii m Ht .1 ' I |.; I , ^ *■•»-.,. 144 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. ' ■• I.' . Christ nrkk'- i^rooin of Indiviiliial Soul. Esc 'hat ol- has also already ^^ satisfacere deo*\ " vicritum^', ''^ promereri deum ", which Cyprian carried out more Tcrtuiiian precisely. Filially we find in Tertullian the por- trayal of Christ as the Bridegroom and the individ- ual soul as tho briile, a fatal modification of the primitive Christian representation of the Church as the body of Christ, under the influence of the Hel- lenic representation (see also the gnostics), that the Deity is the husband of tho soul. Very striking is tho impression made upon one by the eschatoloyij of the early Catholic fathers; for it corresponds neither with their rational theology, nor with their mysticism, but is still wholly archaic. They do not, however, repeat the same in any urgent way (perhaps on account of the churches, or the re- gula, or the Apocalypse of John), but they and the Latin fathers of the 3d, and of the beginning of the 4th, century live and move altogether in the hope of the earliest Christian churches (like Papias and Justin). The Pauline eschatology they felt as a dif- ficulty, the primitive Christian, together with its grossest chiliasm, not at all. This is the clearest proof that these theologians were only half - hearted about their rational and mystic theology, which they had been compelled to adopt in their contest with the gnosis. They had in fact two Christs: The returning Christ, who should conquer the antichrist and set up his judgment seat as the victorious King, and the Logos, who was looked upon, now as a Divine teacher, now as God-man. This very com- I'apias, Justin. ■ I TIIK LAYINtS OF TIIK FOUNDATION. U5 plication recommeuded the now ChiuH'h doctrine. The details of the eschatological hopes in Ironwus Tfrtllnhm. (I.V., see also Melito), Tertullian and Hippolytus tuH. (de antichr.) are in the main as stereoty|)od, in par- ticulars as wavering, as in the earlier times. The Johaunean Apocalypse, together with its learned ex- positions, stands with Daniel in the foreground (six> or rather seven thousand years, heathen earthly- power, antichrist, site in Jerusalem, cami)aign of tho returning Christ, victory, resurrection of Christians, visible kingdom of joy, general resurrection, judg- ment, final end). But after the Montanistic crisis there arose in the Orient an o])i)()sition movement ^M'P'^s'tif.n against this drama of the future (the " alogoi ") ; the learned bishoi)s of the Orient in the IJd century, above all the Origenists, opposed it, yes, even the Johannean Apocalypse (Dionysius Alex.) ; they found howevei* tenacious oppposers among the ^' siniplices et idio- tic " (Nepos in Egypt) . The Christian people of the Orient also unwillingly suffered themselves to be robbed of their old faith, they were obliged however to submit gradually (the Apocalypse disappears often in the Oriental church canon). In the Occident chiliasm remained unbroken. There remains still fJie docfrine concernina the i^ysj,'"'ne *^ Oil WO two Testaments. The creation of the New Testa- ment threw a new light upon the Old Testament. This passed now no longer simply as a Christian book (Barnabas, Justin), and also not as a book of the Jewish God (Marcion), but by the side of tho old 10 .< Testa- ments. !; ■I I ':.:iv 1 1 '■ \ » ■ . -:.?..■ m i T fi'!'. 1 |l m 1 ' *"^ll H ! ' ■ i u . :} <- ' ' Ik m \4Ci OUTLINES OF TlIK IIISTOKY OK DOOMA. conception thfit it in (MiriHtian in every lino and Htands upon the summit of tlie Christian rovehition, was peacefully established the other which is in- consistent with it, that it was a }>v<>}>.s7( "). liiasnuicli as tvvu Te.Htaincnts wltc now accoptrd, tlu' spccilic sij^nificanw of tlio Cliristian rovoiiant hccMnic inoni proiniiiont (Tcrtull. *' /r.r et pvojtln'tde v.snus. (Juiced in his Stromata tlie first Christian ecclesiasti- cal work, in which the Greek philosophy of religion served not only an apologetic and polemic purpose, hut was the means of first restricting Christi- anity to thinking men (as by Philo and Valen- tinus). Ecclesiastical literature was in itself un- familiar to Clement ; he acknowledged its authority, because the Holy Scriptures appeared to him as a revelation; but it was his conscious purpose to work their content out philosophicall}' and to make them his own. The pistis is given; it is to be recoined into gnosis, i.e. a doctrine is to be de- veloped which will satisfy scientific demands by a philosophical \iew of the world and of ethics. Gnosis does not conflict with faith, but on the con- trary it supports and enlightens it, not only in cer- tain points, but it lifts it up into a higher sphere out of the domain of authority, into the sphere of pure knowledge and inner spiritual harmony flowing Pistis is Oiveu. t ■•' I \{ I THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 151 a to be e- a ics. from the love of God. Pistis und gnosis, however, ^'i^lulis-s'' are bound together in this, that both have their con- g"tiier.*^ tent in the Holy Scriptures (yet in practice Clement is not an exact Scripture- theologian like Origen). Into these Scriptures tiie highest aim and the entire ai)pa- ratus of the idealistic Greek philosophy is read ; they are at the same time referred to Christ and ecclesi- astical Christianit}' — so far as there was such in Alex- andria at that time. The apologetic purpose, which Justin had had, is hero transformed into a systemati- co-theologic. The positive material is accordingly not shoved into the proof of prophecy, but, as by Philo and Valentinus, is carried over with infinite pains to scientific dogmatics. To the idea of the Logos who is Christ, Clement, in that he exalted it to the highest principle of the religious view of the world and of the exposition of Christianity, gave a far richer content than did Jus- tin. Christianity is the doctrine of the creation, education p.nd perfecting of the human race through the Logos, whose ^v'ork reaches its climax in the per- fect gnostic, and who has made use of two means, the Old Testament and Hellenic philosophy. Logos is everywhere, wherever men rise above the plane of nature (the Logos is the moral and rational prin- ciple in all stages of the development) ; but the authentic knowledge of him can be w^on only from revelation. He is the law of the \7orld, the teacher, "viefel^"^ or in Christ the hierourge, who tlirough holy ordina- ^^'^''"°"'"8®- tions conducts to knowledge ; linally, for the perfect, Idea of Logos. I ; n' Clement Attacked Problem. Ie52 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. the bridge to union with Ood himself. Aside from the Holy Scriptures the Greek combination of knowl- edge and ceremonial ordination made it possible for Clement to let ecclesiastical Christianity pass cur- rent. The ecclesiastical gnostic rises, so to speak, by means of an attached balloon to the Divine realms; he leaves behind him everything earthl}^ historical, statutory and authoritative, yes, finally, the Logos himself, while he struggles upward in love and knowledge; but the rope remains fast beneath, while the pure gnostic on the contrary severed it. This exaltation is accomplished in gradual stages (Philo), under which scheme the whole philosophical ethics is set forth, from reasonable moderation to the excess of consciousness and of apathetic love. Ecclesiasti- cal tradition is also set forth; but here as yonder the true gnostic should upon the higher stage overcome the lower. When the spirit's wings are grown he needs no crutches. Although Clement succeeded very poorly in arranging the unwieldy material under his proposed scheme — he stuck fast in the midst of his undertaking — yet his purpose is perfectly plain. While Irensens wholly naively blended discordant material and therefore won no religious freedom, Clement advanced to freedom. He was the first to give attention to the problem of future theology: In connection with the historical deposits, through which we are what we are, and in connection with the Christian communion, upon which we are thrown because it is the only universal moral- relig- . i ;. THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 153 ious communion, to win for ourselves freedom and independence witli the Gospel and to .so set forth this Gospel that it shall appear the highest message of the Logos, who makes himself known in all rising above nature, and therefore in the whole history of mankind. Truly the danger was for Clement at hand, that the ideal of the self-sufficient Hellenic seer should stifle the voice that declares that we live in Christ by the grace of God; but the danger of secularization was in the trammelled exposition of Irenseus, which placed value upon authorities that have nothing to do with the Gospel, and alleged facts pertaining to salvation that oppress us, in another way, indeed, but none the less. If the Gospel is to give freedom and peace in God and pre])are us for an eternal life in union with Christ, then Clement un- derstood it in that sense. His was virtually an at- Attempted tempt to fuse the aim of the Gospel to make us rich Gosp. raud Plat on ic in God and to gain from him power and life, with the ideal of the Platonic philosophy to raise oneself as a free spirit above the world unto God, and then to bind together the instructions pertaining to a blessed life which are found in the one and in the other. But Origen was the first to succeed in putting this into a systematic form, in which the most scrupulous Bibli- cism and the most conscientious regard for the rule of faith are conjoined with the philosophy of religion. 2. Origen was the most influential theologian in the Oriental church, the father of theological science, the author of ecclesiastical dogmatics. What the I'hilos- upliy. Origen, i . M 1 ' " v ti "!( |( ?f II 154 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. apolojjfists, g'liostios and old Catliolic tli(M)logiaiis had taiiylit, ho brought together and comljinod; he recognized the prc^hleni and the proljlems, the histori- cal and the speculative. He sharply distinguished, with the clearest virion, between ecclesiastical faith and ecclesiastical theology, and spoke one thing t(^ the people and another to the discerning. His nni- o'niwTve" versal spirit did not wish to destroy anything, but everywhere to conserve; he found on every hand that wliich is valuable and he knew how to give to ever}' truth its place, be this in the pistis, or in the gnosis ; no one should be "offended", but Christian truth should triumph over the systems of the Hellenic phi- losophers and tlic old Catholic gnostics, over the superstition of the heathen and Jews and over' the defective presentation of Christian unitarians. This Christian truth bore as gnosis Neo-Platonic marks, and indeed to such a high degree that a Porphyry commended the theolog}' of Origen, and rejected only tl)e intermingled "strange fables". Origen presup- poses the rule of faith in a firmly outlined form (see his principal work, -zin '^'iiy/o^-)^ together with the two Testaments: He who has these has the truth which makes blessed, yet there is a deeper, more gratifying conception. Upon its summit all con- trasts become mere shades, and in the absolute har- orthodox- moiiy wliicli such a view gives, one learns to estimate Tniilitioii- _ o 7 aiist Bib- the relative. Thus is Origen an orthodox tradition- lu'ul Tlieo- i.ta'/isHc alist, a strong Biblical theologian (nothing should phec. pass current which is not in the Scriptures), a keen Prosni)- poses Rule of Faitli. I THE I.AVIN(; OF Till-: I' ( )r ND ATION. 1 :>:» I t'liristiari- itv for Hot 1 1 C'lusst'S. idijilistlc plillosoplicr wlio Iraiislati'd tlu» content of I'aitli into ideas, {•()iiH)K't('d tlio structure of the world lluit is within, and finally let nothing jiass save knowledge of God and of self in closest union, which exalts us above the world and conducts unto deilica- tion. Zeiio and Plato, howe\er, should not bo tho leaders, bu.t Christ; for the former did not overcome polytheism, xior make the truth generally accessibUs nor give a system of instruction which made it pos- sible for the unlearned to bec«jme any better than tiieir natural ability permits. That Christianity is for i)oth classes, — religion for tli(> common man with- out polytheism (of course with jjictures and signs) and religion for the thinking mind, — Ori gen recog- nized as its superiority over all other religions and systems. The Chrisfian rcJii/ioii is the onhi reli(/- Vi'V''^''"^ ion irhicJi is also truih in iiiyfJiical fonn. Tlieol- Mj^hiVai ogy it is true is obliged — as always, so also here — to emancipate itself from the positive traits (character- istic of the positive religion) Ix'longing to external revelation and statutes; but in Christianity this is accomplished under the guidance of Holy Scrii)ture which establishes the positive rc^ligion for the masses. The gnosis neutralizes everything empiricallv histor- onosis Ncutial- ical, if not indeed alwavs in matters of fact, yet iz.s Kn.- wholly so as regards its worth. It sublimates first from tho empirical history a higher transcendental history, which begins in eternity and rests behind the empirical; but in reality it sublimates this trans- cendental once again, and ther*,' remains now only ^>' :■ % ,1): i- Christol- System Monistic, yet has Dualistic Element. ]5(; OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOMA. tho unchangeable (jrod and the created houI. This is most clearly brought out in Origen's Christology. Back of the historical Christ reposes the eternal Logos; he who appeared first as physician and re- deemer, appears on a dee? r vi' ' u< the teacher — blessed are *cho adva.'-^. i od<'-'. v^-h^ need no more the physician, the shepherd i..id ■; itt'eemer! — but the te*.icher is finally no longer necessary io those who are become perfect ; such rest in God. Thus is ecclesi- astical Christianity here stripped off as a husk and thrown aside like a crutch. That which in Justin is proof of prophecy, in Irenteus salvation-history, van- ishes in Origen for the gnostic, or is only a picture of a spiritual history. In the final analysis there fails in his high-flying, all-comprehensive ethics the sense of guilt and fear of the Judge. The system w^as intended to be strongly monistic (that which was oreated out of nothing has only a transitory significance as a place of purification) ; yet in fact there dwelt within it a dualistic element. The dominating antithesis is God and created things. The amphiboly lay in his double view of the spiritual (it belongs on the one side, as the outgoing of God's nature, to God himself, on the other side, as that which has been created, it stands in opposition to God) , which keeps cropping out in all Neo-Platonic systems. Pantheism was to be warded off, and yet the supermundane character of the human spirit was to be stoutly maintained. This spirit is the free^ heav- enly eon, conscious of the right way, but uncertain 'li I ^' :• THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 157 ThrtH' Farts. L its Btriviiig. Divine origin, divine end, and free cL'jice constitute its essence. T \e knot is tied how- e\ er, v that moment when the spirit comes forth in manifestation, "^hero is therefore a history prior to temporal history. The system is divided into three S3f»t<'iii ni parts: (1) God and his outgoing, {2) the fall of the created spirit and the consequences, (3) redemption and restc ration. That freedom will only be a sem- blance, if the spirit must finally attain unto its end ( )rigen did not observe. In carrying out his sche" . : he was so earnest that he even limited the Divine onmipotence and omniscience. Out of the Hi.' Scriptures the God-world drama is educed (secret tra- dition which still played a great role in Clement en- tirely recedes). As the cosmos is spiritual, psychic and material, so also the Holy Scriptures, the second revelation, consist of these three parts. Thereby was a secure method given for exegesis ; it has, (1) to discover the verbal sense, which, however, is tlie shell, (2) the psychic-moral sense, (.'3) the pneumatic. Here and there this pneumatic is alone taken into consideration and the verbal sense must even be cast aside, whereby only one is permitted to discover the deeper sense. This Biblical alchemy Origen devel- oped with the greatest virtuosity. (a) God is the One, who stands over against the God is one Over many that point back to him as the Cause ; he is the tife^Man*^ absolute Existence and spiritual Being, who stands over against conditioned existences. He is different from the many, yet the order, the dependence and Oript-n's Ex«'Kt'si.s. H 158 OiriJNKS OK TUE IIISTOKV OF DOCiMA. \i Mi. um if O'..' Not Absolutely Oiiiiiis- cii'Tit and Oimiipo- tciit. Lotr Miiiiy- potency of tlio world. Tlu' Lojjjos is tlie perfoi't like- ness of God (">'">'''"T£"v) . Ill" has nothii).i; (•(•rporeal uhoiit him and is therefore true God, yet a second God (no sharing of Divinity, "'> xara inrnnrtia-^^ iOJA Xjur onni'vj ffzo^). Hu /.s' hn/oftcii of the essence oi tlu» Father from eternity; there was no time when he was not, and ho over goes forth from the Father's heing through the Divine constraining will. But even because ho is siibslnntid suhsfdiilidlUcr sfih- sistois, he is as such no '/y'-^'-"'/'"^; he is an uiTiarn,^ the Father is -[>oj7 £«*>. Accordingly he is the first stage in the transition fnmi the One; to the n-ui'iMmn" many; from the standpoint of God the xTi>T;ia i>;i(ii>n- (T'.iry^ from (jur standpoint the manifest, essential God. For us alone therefore does the essential likeness of the Father and Son exist; his uncliangeahleness is therefore only relative, since it does not reside in tlie autousie. Everywhere in this speculation in regard to the Logos-Creator, there is no thouglit of the Logos-Redeemer. The Holy Spirit also — the rule of faith necessitated him — is included in tlie Godhead as a third unchangealjlo being and reckoned as a third stage and hyi)Ostasis. He is become through the Son and is related to him as the Son to the Father. His sphere of activity is the smallest — strangely enough, indeed, the most important. The Father is the principle of existence, the Son (jf reason, the Spirit of that which is holy. This grad- uated trinity is a trinity of revelation, but even on that account also innninent and persistent, since God Holy spirit. k I ' H-' 'ii^ ('rfat4'(| SpiritH. |M 100 OUTLINKS OF THK HlSTOliY OK FXXiMA. can never bo thought of {ipart from revelation. The Holy Spirit is tlio transition to tho fulness of spirits and ideas, which, created through the Son, are in truth tho unfolding of his own fulness. Tho charac- teristic of cvvdled spirits is the hoconu'ny (advance, 7r/>»x»*:rr;'), i.e. frecidoui (opposition to tho heretical gnosis). But tho freedom is still relative, i.e. in a broad sense they are free; fundamentally however there exists the rigid necessity for the created spirit Frotdom. to reacli the goal. Freedom therefore is snh specie aetenutatis necessary evoUition. Out of freedom Origen sought to understand tho actual world; for to tho spirits belong also human spirits; they were all created from eteniiff/ (G(xl is ever a Creator), orig- inally alike in substance; but their duties are dift'er- ent and therefore their development. In so far as they are changeable spirits they are all endowed with a kind of corporeality. In tho fact itself of being created there is ordained for angels and men a kind of materiality. As to how they might have devel- oped themselves Origen did not speculate, but only as to how they have developed. (b) They should all attain unto a persistent exist- ence, in order to make room then for new creations. But they fall into idleness and disobedience (pre- existent fall into sin) . To curb and purify them the visible world was created; this is also a house of correction and the spirits are, through the bondage of the soul, shut up in divers bodies, the grossest of which have devils, the finest angels, the medium Fait, World Crc- att'd to Kfdft'in TlllMll. \ i THK I.AVIN(J OK TIIK KorNDATION. IGl rnon, wlio are Mupj^orted and ('ndjiiij^crcd by devils iUid angels (acceptance of popidar repn^sentatidns). Lifi3 is a discipline, a contlict under the pennissiou and loading of (iod, wliich will end with the con- tion in ''deeds''. (Oi'igen first introduced into the Gentile Church a theory of reconciliation and atonement; but one should consider in what age he wro^e.) To others, however, he must, as Divine teacher and Hicrourge, disclose the depths of knowledge and bring to them a new principle of life, so that they may share his life and, interwoven with the Divine Being himself, may become divine. Return to connnunit)n with God is here, as 3'onder, the goal; 3'onder through facts toward whi(^li man directs his faith ; here through knowledge and love, which, striving up beyond the Cruciiied, lays hold upon eternal lif(> as the Logos himself encompasses it. The " facts" are also, as with the gnostics, not simulation or an indifferent basis of truth, but are truth, though not fJie truth. Thus he reconciled faith and the philosophy of relig- ion. Ho can commend the cosmic significance of the death on the cross, a work which encompasses all spirits, and yet rise above this occurrence by spec- idatioDS which have no history. In accordance therewith his Christologv takes its form; its characteristic is its comj)lexity: Th(» \ie- tleenicr wat- all tliat Christians <';>n think him tolia\o THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION, 1 r,3 i> lie B of OS je- ts ,0- boen. For the gnostic ho is the divine Principle, the Teacher, the First-Born, the knowablc, Divine Reason. The gnostic knows no " Christ ol()' have fallen asleep will go at once to paradise (no i. Lopos- C'liiis- tolugy. IOC OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. sloe})iiig of tlio soTil) ; tlio souls which aro not yet purified will pass into a new condition of ;^)unish- meut (purgatory), which will purify them still far- ther (the remorse of conscience is hell). Only so far, however, did Origen accept the ecclesiastical doctrine of damnation; at last all spirits, the demons them- selves, will return to God pnrified. Yet is his doc- trine esoteric: "for the common man it is enough to know that sin will bo punished". This sj'stem drove fr(jm the field the heretic gnostic theology and later dominated the ecclesiastical theology of the Orient. But the Church could not for any length of time ap- prove of all the teaching of Origen or content itself with his sliarp discrimination between faith and the svieiice of faith. It was obliged to iry to miite both and to put them upon the same plane (like Irenaius). CHAPTER VII. DECISIVE RESULT OF TIIEOLOCJICAL SPECULATION AVITHIN THE REAL\I OF THE RULE OF FAITH, OR THE DEFINING OF THE ECCLKSlASl iCAL DOC- TRINAL NORM THROUGH THE ACCEPT INCE OF THE LOCJOS-CHRISTOLOGY. The L v>g )s-(Jln'i8*-ology alone permitted a uniting of faith and scinnce, corresponded to the doctrine that Godlvcauiv '.n\ ii\ ordartiip' v/e might becon^e gods, and thiv- Mr^iporlul Christianity from without and from withn Bit 't .vhs by no means wide-spread fl TliE LAYING OF TTIE F(^rNT)ATTON. \'.\7 in the ehiirche'S in tlu) yonv lOO, or even later; rather was it in part unknown, and in part feared as heretie-gnostic (destruction of the Divine monarchy, that is, on the other hand, of the Diviniiy of Christ) ; Tertull. adi\ P)-a.v. ',}: '' Siuiplices qu((2nc, nedixe- reni iitpiiidotfcs et idiotac, quae malor semper pars cre(le}iti 1(1)1 est, ((uouiam et ipsa requJa jidei apluribiis diis saeeuli ad tnu'einn et rerion deitm transfert, uon. iiiteJligeitfes iiuiemn (piidein, sed cum sua ir./.ir,,>i,.i(L esse eredeiidum, e.vpavescunt ad oixuvofjL'M . . . Jfaque duos et tres iam iactitaut a nobis pradieari, se rero unius dei cultures prae- sumunt . . . )no)ntrcJiiam iiiquiunt tenemus^\ The establishment of the Log'os-Christology with- Estab- lislit'u J>y in the faith of the Church — and indeed as articu- .u.out :^(h> *' Effect. lus fuiidamoitalis — was accomplislied after severe conflicts during the course of a hundred years (till about 300). It signified the transformation of the faith into a system of beliefs with an Hellenic-philo- sophical cast ; it shoved the old eschatological rejire- sentations aside, and even suppressed them ; it put back of the Christ of historj' a conceivable Christ, a principle, and reduced the historical figure to a m< -e appearance; it referred the Christian to "natures" and naturalistic magnitudes, instead of to the Person and to the ethical ; it gave the faith of tlu^ Christians a definite trend toward tlie contemplation of ideas and doctrinal formulas, and prepared the ^^'ay, on the one- side for the monastic life, on the other for the chap- eroned Christianity of the imi)erfect, active laity ; it 11 \^ Monarrh- ianisiu Rt'Kisted. Resistance in Vain. ins OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOCiMA. logilimized ji liiindrod questions in metaphysics, cosmology, and natural science as ecclesiastical, and demanded, inider threat of l(jss of bliss, a definite answer; it went so far that men preached, instead of faith, rather faith in the faith, and it stunted religion while it appeared to broaden it. But in that it made the bond with natural science perfect it i-aised Chris- tianity to the world-and-everybod3''s religion and prepared the way for the act of Constantine. The tendencies in the Church, which strove against philosophical Christianity and the Logos-Christology , men called monarch iaii (so first Tertullian). The name was not hai)pily chosen, since many monarch- ians acknowledged a second hypostasis, yet made use of it for everything except for Christology. Two tendencies can be distinguished among the monarch- ians (see the old Christologies, Book I. chap. 3, sub (i) : The adoption, which looked upon the Divine in Christ as a power and started from the human per- son of Jesus which was deified, and tlie niodalistic, which held Christ to be a manifestation of God the Father. Both contested the Logos-Christology as "gnosticism"; the first through an avowed interest in the historical rei)resentation of Christ (Synoptic), the second in the interest of monarchy and of the Di- vinity of Christ. Both tondcnicies, passing into each other, were CafJioIic, maintnining the fundamental principles of the ru1(* of f;».itli (neither " ebi(mitic ", nor gnostic) ; but after the New Testament had es- tablished itself as such the contest was in vain ; for i TUV: I,AYIN(i OK TUK KolNDATlUN. IGO altlumgh there are passages in the New 'Pcstanieiit ill favor of these theses, the other passages whieli maintain the pre-existeiiee of Christ as a speeial hypostasis outweigli them — at least aeeording to the interpretation then enrrent — and it seemed self- evident that the "lower" in the e.\])r('ssions should everywhere be interpreted aeeording to the '"higher" (pneumatie), (therefore the Synoptics in aeeurd- anee with John). In all eeelesiastieal i)n)vinees there were nionarehiaii contests; but we know them only in ])art. (1) The licjeciiou of Df/uiiiiiic MouarcliiaN- isniy or A(Joj)fiottisi)i. — {(() The alo(/oi (iiicl; ;.: .i-; sources: Ireiunis, Hippolytus, Epiphanius) in Asia Minor were a party of the radical anti-]\Iontanis- tic op})osition, which rejected (/// prophecy in the Church; they a])peared at a time when there was as yet no Xew Testament. They criticised the Johaii- iiean writings on historical grounds and rejected them on account of their proclamation of the Paraclete and the apocrdypse, at the same time proving tlu^ in- accuracy of the historical narratives in the Johaimeaii Gospel. But tlu>3' criticised also the docetism of the Gospel, hesitated at the Logos, and decided that the untrue writings, which, on the one hand, contained Jewish-naturalistic elements, on the other, docctic- giiostic, must have originated with Cerinthus. Their own Christology was fashioned after the Synoptics: The miraculous birth, the descent of the S})irit upon Jesus, his develoiimeiit, the exaltation through his Adiiptidii i s I u Kej.i't.-a. Svnnptic Chris tulDKy. "Si II : ■ ' •)l > ) k > !i Expelled from KoriiH. 170 OUTLINES OF TIIR HISTORY OF DOfJMA. resurrortioTi coiistituto liis dignity. The earliest op- jxnicnts (Irciia'iis, Hippolytiis) treated these in a measure respectfully, since these "alogoi " did good service* against the Montanists. But one must s/iy, notwithstanding the high esteem which the '* alogoi " had for sound historical criticism, that their relig- ious inspiration could not have been of a very high order; for they were neither apocalyptic enthusiasts, nor mystics: Wherein then consisted the power of their piety? [b) The same can be said of the Roman-adopfioii parties of fJie Theodotiaiis, who stood in evident alliance with tlie " alogoi " (the cobbler Theodo- tus and his party, Theodotus the banker, the Artemonites). They established themselves after al^out 1 85 in Rome (the elder Theodotus was from Byzantium, a mai; -^f unusual culture); but already had bishop Victor (;f Rome expelled Theodotus (c. l'J5) from the Church, because he held Christ to be a (/nko-y/' of the miracu- lously born man Jesus, equipped by his baptism and pre})ared for his exaltation through the resurrection ; stress upon the ethical proof), but recognized the Johannean Gospel already as Holy Scripture, and carried on his Scripture argument in the same sound critical way as did the latter (Deut. 18: 15; Jer. li: 9; Isa. 53: 1 seq.; Matt, i"^: 31; Luke 1: 35; Jno. THK I.AV1N({ OI' TIIK FOlNDATION. 171 S: 4(»- Arts - -> ; I. Tim. "> : 5). Und.r their most ^i-M- distiiiguisliL'd pupil TluMuU.tus, tho baniu-r, the adoptionists zc.dously cultivated the eriticisui of the sacred text, empirical science aud natural phenomena (not willi Plato), and stood as a school alonu:side the Church (see the description in FAiscbius, H. E. V, -.^S). Their attempt to found a church (bishop Xatalis) was soon frustrated (at the timc« of })ishop Zephyrinus); they remained as officers with an ever-dwindling army. Out of their thesis, that the Holy Spirit, ^vhose hypostasis (as eternal Son of God, see llermas whose Christolo^y they followed) they acknowledged, stood higher than Jesus, since the latter is only an adopted God, their opponents made a capital heresy. Inasmuch as they ascril)ed the Old Testament theophanies to this eternal Son of God and took Melchisedec to be a manifes- tation of the eternal Son, they were called Melchis- edecs, because they prayed to him. Of the learned labors of these men nothing remains to us. Ilippo- lytus informs us that some of them would not concede that Christ is a God, even after his resurrection; others acknowledged the ^^^o::,nr,n:,. It became clear in the contest that an alliance with the science of Aris- totle, Euclid, and Galen, was not compatible with the Church, but on the contrary that it demands an alli- ance with Plato, and that the old Christology of Hermas~the adoptionists app'aled t<^ such docu- ments-was no longer satisfactory. Some decades later there appeared in Rome in the person of Arte- Cliris- rUiltiiiic. I I i I ?!: (PP ' I I7'i OITI.INKS OF THE IIISTOKV OF DOfJMA. moil a still uu>vv iiiii)(»rtaiit adoidioiiist teacher, of whom, liowevcr, littlo is known. He also put asido the predicate? "(jjod " im applied to Christ, but seems not to have agreed rigidly in all particulars with the AdupHnii- 'I heodotians. About the 3'ear "350 ad opt ion ism was ism N'liii- isin-; rr,,m insignilicaul in Homo (Cvprian is silent; yet see Novatian. (/<' lriiiH.)\ but in the Occident it contin- ued for a long time in the Church formulas, as '' '!jjirilns sdiichis del Jilins, caro Jesus — spirH us scinefns Chrislus — spirit us earui lui.rfus ,/esns C/u'ishfs'' (through tli(> reading of tlic highly es- tt»emed TIermas) ; and it is instructive that Augustine still a short time before his conversion thought the adoption C-hristology to be the Catholic. Therefore the orthodox Christological fornmlas were still little known in the fourth century in the Occidental laitv- wt)rld. ((*) From the writings of Origen one gathers that there were adoptionists also in the Orient. Origen treated them as misguided, i.e. as simple-mindetl Christian brethren, who needed friendly instruction; did he not himself make use of the adoption view in his com})licated Christology (accordingly he was later unjustly classed with the adoptionists; against this Boryiius..f Pam])hilus defended him) ? Ber^dlus of Bostra, the nostra. i 'J ' . mcHiarchinn tivicher who won a large following in Arabia and Svria, became conyinced of the truth of the Log()s-ChristoU)gy through Origen (Euseb. VI., 33 : T'''V (7(1)7," iiu xo.) /.')ii'.()v rjiiuv /j-r^ 7:(i(i>"Kf£f7T'J'/ac xaz idiw^ Ailtro})()litan nf Antiocli (JMiseh. Vil, 27-;J(); other material in Kouth, liel. Sacr. 11.1.), tho national Syrian l)isli()|>, who opjiosed the (Jreeks and their science as well as the Unmans and their chnrcli. That two great Oriental general council - at .Antiocli proved ineti'ectivo against him, and t)idy the third condenmed and deposed him (ver}' prohahh' 2GS) is an evidence of how little even yet the Alexandrian dogmatics had found acceptance in the ( )rient, Paul was a learned theologian (unspiritual, vain, shrewd, sophistical; a "man oi the world" his o))ponents called him), wdio wished to hreak tlu> powi^* of the Hellenic (Platonic) philosophy in the luu'ch and to maintain tho old teaching. In later times he ap- pears to the Church as a heretic of the first order, like a Judas, ebionite, Nestorian, monothelite, etc. His conception was this: God is to he thought of sim- ply as individually personal y-- z/torrozir^). It is true that in God a Logos (Son), i.e. a Sophia (Spirit), can be distinguished — both are otherwise also to be iden- tified — but these are citiriJ)ntes. God from eternity sent forth tho Logos from himself, so that one can call him Son, but ho remains an impersonal power. Pnnl of Suuiusuttt. PaiiTs DiK'trine. li ri. ^, IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 2.2 I.I 11.25 u m 11° IIUI2.0 1.8 U IIIIII.6 III W Vj. /a f^ > ^c>: / o 7 /A Photographic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 A ^ iV ^ \\ fv O '<* ! A 7a 174 OUTl.INKS OK TIIK HISTORY OK I)0(;MA. t :;;.'<.' i; f Ho worked in Mosoh and the proi)het.s, /inUnv xa) liiatfzin'ivTw^ ill tlio Son of David, born of the virgin. Tlie lledeenier iri a man from "beneath", but the Logos from above worked within him (in-dwelling by means of an inspiration working from without, so that the Logos becomes the " inner man " of the Redeemer). The communion which thus arises is a oufTiiuiii'^ri :> fT(i);w-i) ; tlie Logos did not dwell in Jesus <>n(rui>il<'>s\ ])ut xaT'l-iii'hr^ra-^ tlierefore is ho alwaj'S to bo distinguished from tlie latter as the greater. The lledeemer is the man wrought upon by the Logos; but he possessed in a nniqiic way the Divine grace, just as his position is uni(iue. His testimony bears witness to his endowments. Between two persons — therefore also between God and Christ — unity of dis- position and of will alone is possible. Such unity is realized only through love; but also onl}' that which comc.i from love has value; that which is gained thnnigh " nature " is indifferent. Jesus by reason of the unchangeableness of his love and will is like God and has become one with him, inasmuch as he not only himself remained without sin, but through con- flict and endurance overcame the sins of our progen- itors. Like as he however advanced and persisted in the confirmation of the good, so also did the Father endow him with might and miraculous deeds, ])y which he made known his unswerving will toward God. Thus he became the Redeemer and entered into an indissoluble and eternal union with God, be- lAi' THK LAVINc; OF TME FOINDATION. 11"' r ranso his love can lun'cr fail. As a reward of his victorious love \w has obtained a name above every name, judgment and Divin(» dignity, so that one may call him " tlu' Clod born of the virgin", which he has ever been in (iod's decree and proclamation (through grace and conhrmation did he attain unto Godhood ; the steps were here also i)irth, baptism, and resurrec- tion). This (»vnng(»lical Christology, which was the only one to consciously cast aside the religious physics, Paul sii])ported by Scripture })roofs and zeal- ously refuted its oi)])on(Mits, es])(M'ially the "old ex- ])ositors'\ the Alexandrians. He did away with all (Miurcli liturgies in which the essential Divinity of Christ was ])roclaimed; he would know nothing of "substances", but held fast to the living Pmsou. His teaching was considered heretical in the highest degree by lh(^ learned Hellenic bishoi)s: He has be- trayed the mystery ! In the confession of six bishops against him the physical Logos-doctrine was set forth in broad terms as a most important })art of the apos- tolic and Catholic Church faith. At the s^'uod the word '^ <',aiin''i(T:(>i" was also expressly cast aside, evi- dently because Paul had used it for the Logos in order to prove b}' it that God and the Logos arc; one subject. With Paul's deposition and removal {'Vt'i) it was decided that no Catholic Christian dare any more doubt the Divine />////.s'/.s' of the Redeemer. But the teaching of Paul did not succumb in Antiocb without leaving its trace behind. Lucian and his renowned lu'ofessional sclmul, the birthplace of F.vnntrrli- Clianu't^T. Taiil lK'pi>S«'(l. Lucian. \\i Irif V.'fljll *' 'il ; " ' f 1 1 , t I f i^ • « " •i» • i w 1 tk ' Photlnus. Modalistic MonfU'ch- iani.sm. W) OITTI.INKS OK TUK HISTOIIV OF iXXiMA. Arianism, wero fructified by tlio spirit of Paul. However, the doctrine is badly disfigured in Arian- ism by reason of its combination with the hyposta- tized ki'iyn^-y-iniia. On the contrary Phot inus and the groat Antiochians — although the latter acknowledged the Nicene symbol — learned their bi^st lesson from Paul: So-called Nestorianisni h.id its roots in Paul's teaching, and in it Paul was once more condemned. How long nid)roken adoption views held their sway in outl^'ing Oriental churches is indicated by i\\Q Act (( ArcJtehti, written at the Ix^ginning of the fourth century. What its author, a clerical teacher, says about (Mu-ist is very like the teaching of Paul. But in the great centres of Christianity adoptionism was totally broken down by about '110. (•^) The Rcjccfion of Modalistic Mo)i((irhian- isni. Not adoptionism, but nn)dalism was the dan- gerous opponent of the Logos-Christology between ISO and iJDO, the doctrine according to which the Godhead itself is seen incarnate in Christ, and ho himself considered the very and only God. Against this view Tertullian, Origen, Novatian, and espe- cially Hippolytus contended most enorgoticallj^ (" pa- tripassiani", they were first called by Tertullian; in the Orient later the most common expression was " Sabelliani ''). Hippolytus says that in his time tlio question agitated the whok^ Church (Philos. IX, G: liiyinTov Tfifiaytty xara -rd'^za r^'^ xi'iiT/ur^ cv rurr'.w T(>^.» -V'''''*''0' But an exclusive modalislic docfrinc was first de- veloped in opposition to gnosticism and the Logos- Christology, (!) in order to ward ofl" ditheism, {'i) in order to maintain the full Divinity of Christ, (:!) in order to sever all connection with gnosticism. Now for the first time men sought to (establish this faith energeticall}' as (loctvinc. Scientific; theologians came to its defence. But to this religious conception more than to any other contact with thought and science must needs prove detrimental : It was the beginning of the end; however, the death-struggle! continued a long time. The stoic philosophy with its pantheism and its dialectical formulas was called in to assist (the adoptionists relied in part upon Aristotle; see above). The contn)vers3' thus i)resented a })hase which makes it appear related to the controversy of the Platonists and common stoics about the idea of God (whether the /'^'-v-'Vi')^' is the Intimate God, or whether there still stands behind him an apathetic ^>v as '^£''9). The oldest defenders of modalism, hf)W- ever, had at the same time an express Biblical in- terest. 13 .1 II ' 1; 4 , Calixtus' ( 'iiiiipro- misf 178 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. un.Tuo'm.' (^^) Here also wore Asi<( Minor (uid Rome the Tii.'iMTs. fn'st theatres of the controversy. In tlie former was Noetus (he, however, was i)r()hal)l\- finally (xcom- munieated), in the hitter his pnjiil ]^]j)iju,(>nus (ahont '-ioo), who won lirst Kleonienes, tlien Sahelliiis to his cause. Against them Hipjx^lytnscanK? forward; hut tlie hishops of Home favored the school (above {dl Z(»i)hyrinns). Calixtns (•*! r-2*^'2), originally a modal- runiiuia. ist, sought to satisfy all j)arties l)y a ('onii)ronnse formula and found himself tluM-eby obliged to excom- municate Ilipjiolytus (rival bishop) as well as Sabel- liu.s. His formula seems to have pacitied the maj( r- ity. How imperfect our knowledge of this matter is, is indicated by the circumstance th.it lIi})polytus is wholly silent about the modalist Praxeas in Konie (sec Tertullian). Probably the latter came to Pome before Epigonus (perhaps even under Eleuthcrus), but had not at that time aroused opposition, h^ince ho also went to Carthage and was an out-and out anti-Montanist, Tertullian used his name in order to combat the Roman modalism in general (about 210). Certain is it that Victor, whoexconnnunicated Theodotus, did so, not from the stand{)oint of the Logos-Christology, but rather from that of modalism. Two Moil- Yet it is to be observed that the two monarchian Hl-C'lliilll rostiiiutos. views are more nearl}' related to each other than is either of them to the Logos-Christology. Both defend the redemptive historical view of llie Person of Christ, as against the naturalistic historical, and often pass from into each other (as to Beryllus one I i ^mmmmsmmmm-- 0, lU'O (n;t dvY out it>(l the ^m. ian laii oth son 111(1 one Noi'tus. TIIK LAYlNCi OK TIIK KOlNPATIoN. 1.!) can (lucstion whcllici- lie was an adoptionist or a niodalist; in the wiitinj^s of Origon not a few )>as- sai^cs leave us in doubt whieli party ho is contcndijip^ against; tho conii)roniiso fornnda of Calixtus is alM) varioj^atfd). Tlie siinpKst form of modaliMu is rep- resented l)y No<"'tus (see llippolytus) : (Christ is the Father himself, who was horn and died. If Chiist is not tlie Fnth(»r, tlien is he not (jod. Next lo tiie monotheistic interest (ojjponents were called o.'/:":) was the interest in the full Divinity of ClnMst {(/''txhu- «T'.> t7f»'. — 7! (!">/'//.> ~ii'.u) t)ii~i/'^(try r-v \ n'.rfzi'i'/ xa: rsoxjui rjia^ (loyr^'if). Scripture evi(lenc(» was Ex. ;!: 0; -H): 2 scq ; Isa. 41: C; lo: 5, H; Baruch :J : :U); Jno. 10: :U»; 11: S .srr/.- Rom. ii:"); theJohan- nean Gospel was recognized; but hixr^.r^^ ii.bj y^yzt /.i>Y„y^ a).A tuliDi a).).r,Yi>iiii. The Conception "Logos" SpiiciUu- was rigidlv reiected. 8i>eculatively the idea of tivci-i.-aof '^^ ^ •' ^ "^ God. God is grounded (in Kleomenes) upon the thought that God is invisible if he wishes, visible however when he permits himself to be seen; intangible when he does not wish to be touched, tangible when ho presents himself to bo touched; unbegotten and begotten; mortal and immortal (old Churcii fornudas justified by the stoic idea of God). I'ho Father so far as he deigned to be born is the Son; both are therefore only noiniuaUfi to be distin- guished; but the distinction is also an historical, re- dem})tive one. In favor of the identity they called to miud the Old Testament theophanies. That they t: i V \ IJM n i i : I. Old Niiivc M'Hl.'ilisiii llcvivcd. InO orriJNKs OK THI-: history ok i)0{;ma. after the maiinor of tlic stoics altrihutcd to the fjod- lioad itself tlic ("Icnioiit of tiiiiteiicss caiiiiot \)v proven. It is tii(M)l(l nilivo niodalisni, whicli is hen- exalted to a theory (oth(T\vise, ol)sorve that all early Chris- tian writers, who W(»ro not philosophieal, knew only o//r birth of th(> Son, that from the virgin). The theory was wrecked in this, that in tlie rilos])ols withont donht two subjects (Father and Son) are pr(»su])posed. However the modalists hardh' de- clared nnc^cpiivocally : The Father snffenMl ; they said, tlu» Son, who sntVered, is identical with the Father (bishoj* Zei)hyriinis : ly^* "''''^t '=■'■""■ •'';"> \/'.'^r.-y /refill' .1 y.ii.'. ;://> (ivrir> izijia irin^'/a ^r^r^r"/ xu'. T.aih'ir^^ luit : r*-"y <; -iL7i^p n~l difticulties: "Logos" is no sul)stance, it is nothiuii; else than sound and word. Praxeas, in tendency and in Scri})- ture argument at oni^ with Noi'tus, made, however, a clearer distinction between the Father and the Son : God through the assumption of the Hesh made him- self into the *So^^- ihe jlcnh nidkrs the Fa flier hi to the Son, i.e. in the Person of the Redeemer the flesh (the man Jesus) is the Son, the Spirit (God, Christ) is the FathcH' (citation of Luke 1 : :}")). That trhich was horn is the Son; the Si)irit (God) could not suf- fer; so far as he entered into the flesh he shared the M.Miaiisin suffering' (" y>^^/c/" connxissns c.s7 /i/io""). vVs soon ■^'ism',"" :i« tlu^ distinguishing of <nt as adesiijnation of the KathiT also) and an adoption element (this Hipjiolytiis has well ohserved), hnt l»y means of it actnally trans- ferred the faith of the Roman church to the Lol;()S- Cliristolo;^y, and to the physico-deilicalion doctrine — excommnnicatint^ his olil friend Sahellins. Vet the ^iiostical snhordinationism of Tertnllian and Hippo- F f-oy'-' anr')'^ i:>'/f oiir/^ a'')'r<'''^ xn] rur'/xi (stoic /''^"s*- '*'*'' v) ^•"■'- ~u7-iia ii/nnun ii.iv xa^ji'i/ievoy^ tV f7c <'v r<) ~'yt''f).a an'.a'iicriiv • n'l/. ti/./.n i]>ai ~ar^/tu^ ii)J.n »); u't<>v^ i'y oj xa\ Zn a'>T) ''TTfif)^:'./' X't'. T'l. irnwzn y'ih'.^ rir> f'fiim) 7:'/e'\aaT(i^ zii. rr w^ut xai xurvf xa\ e]'^a'. r'\ -Iv rrj 7:a/i>h!vfi} (Tai)xu»'f~'y z'^e'i/ia n'ty izznn'^ -rafni r''> ~ar'i)a^ i).)JA iv xa\ T(< ii'izi't. I\(i: Tii'tZn ^'yui 7/ £:o7j//.;V()> • Jiio. li: 11, yV, fitv yon /J/srro/iCx/v <'~:i> iTrr^ a'/i^/iiozii'^ r Z(p D'.iij y(i»in^>'t !> rr>i''//a zirizo £;>'/{ z^v 7:az'fia ■ on y"/'i ^^i'^'-'^i -(""^ ''"' '''^"''v ~tizliin XIV. o:')v^ a).K i\>it. f) yo/t iw a'izw yz/<>,'i.:'/(i^' -azy'n r:'l::7^iTtv IvOKTw^ Id'jzu)^ x(L'. Ir.it'.y^nz'^ cv^ u)^ xiu.z'.nihn -(Lz'.na xiv. oViv i\>a f'f;i'i> XIV. zi>'>zi> i> "> ~iii'/(T(i>r:ir^ n:/^ O'lyuirHai i]'^ai ilno xai () .'Twv T'"-v ■razifKi aoiir.zr.iv^i^ i/iv. zih nlih • !>•> yuf) f^iXzt Certain is it that the learned and influential Xova- v\u^^' tiaii (r/c fninf.) did much toward bringing about Ai.un.ioued the final abandonment of the Logos-Christology in Occident. the Occident. About the year '^'CO the Roman bis- hop DionysiuS wrote : -afl.'V.tn^^ [l).a(T(fr,!J.z'.^ anzow Tov ul')-^ i; r.ar'.im^ ('ypriaii mjirkcd pal I'ipa.ssiaii- iHin as a ix'stilmtial Iiorcsy lik(» Marcionitism, and lu» liiiiircir sIm»V((1 into a socond recension of the Kninaii syn»l)(»l (A(iiiileja) tiie phrase :" f '/vv/o /// Jrn jufhc nmnipolnifc, iinisihili <-f iin/Kissihi/i" . However, tlie liOj^os-Christoloj^y liad never i'oinid a eoii^'etiial soil in tile ( )('eident ; men lei it pass, l)ut they lieltl inueii inoreiirinly — in tins there was a real inten'st — to tin; article of faith: Christ is true, complete ( {od, ami there is oidy onr (lod. Tliis attitude of tlie Oc- cident became of most decisive sij^Jiificance in the Arian controversy: The I*Nict»ne doctrine is, not as a j)hiloso]»hical speculation, hut as the direct, symboli- cal faith, as much the jn-operty of the Occidental church of the third century, as the Ohalcedon doctrine. Accordingly many Occidental t{>acbers, who W(»ro not influenced by Plato and the ()ri(?nt, used in the third and fourth centuries modalistic formulas Occidental witliout hesitation, abovc^ all Commodian. The tlie- August iuc. ^^<^»y ^jf ^^^^ Occident until Augustine shows in gen- eral a mingling of Ciceronian morality, massive, primitive Christian eschatology, and unreflecting Christolog}' with more or less latent modalism {oiu^ God in the strictest sense; Christ God and man) and practical Church politics (penitential institute), which is wholly fV)reign to the Orient (Arnobius, Lactantius, Commodian). They were no mystics, in part opponents of Neo-Platonism. How hard it would have been for them to make themselves at home in the speculatit)us of the Orient is indicated .,.kJL^ Mm^^a^^^ TIIK l,ANIN(i (»!<• IIIK KoiNDATFoN, IS.} > an) te), us, cs, it at ted l)y tluMMior^ctic, l»ut .'ilxtrtivr alirm|»t of 1 1 ilariiis and the tlu'olooical Itarharisiii of Lucifer. It is well iiiulcrstood tliat inodMlisin did not coiitinui' in tlio ( Hridcnt as a strt, so loiij^; as in the ( Orient ; it fonnd in llic latter, even in tlie prevailin*^ form of teacliin}^ es|)eeially wIkm'c the IjOj^os was accepted, a shelter. (h) The aeconnts of the oh/ iiKKlnlisni in tli<' <>i.i Ms«ii'>" ♦^ to Wnti' Logos-Christology in the Orient from Origen to "'rJiunsm' Athanasius — the sources have been destroyed — so also one can write no history of modalism. It is certain that the contest began later in the Orient, but it was more passionate and enduring and K'd to the development (^f the Origenistic Christology in the direction of Arianism (also antithetic). The first great agitation took place ir. tiu; Pentapolis, after that Origen combated the " singular " modalists as Christian brethren and sharply criticised bishops (Roman), who made the distinction between Father and Son merely nominal (the condemnation of Origen at Rome under Pontianus may also have had reference to his Christology). Perhaps Sabellius himself near in Orient. !i \ ■■ 1! Ik fii I' i ■''f i ! i^ i Ml OITMNKS <»K THK IIISTOKV f»F T)m;MA DiIctHnr ^'"' •'''' "' '''"^ '""' ^^'"'"^ (ili;;i ill?) l|n|n lvn|||(> into llic IN'iita|H»lis. Ili'was jilrcady dead wlicii J)i(»ii3'- sius <»f' Alexandria ('(iinljatt'd Salx'llianisiu tliciv. He is t » Ix' disliiii^iiislied Inmi Noi'tus hy Ids inon' ('arclid tlu'oloi^ical drdiictions and hy his regard for the Holy Spirit: To one iM-iiij^ arc attached three names (Kathcf, Son, and Spirit), otherwise polythe- ism would he estaliii- 111 d ; tlu^ three names are at tlie same time three ciicn/ir.s. The one Hein|4' is to bo called ":"""*'"/' — a dcsiii^nation lor the hein^;' (»f (Jod himself. lloW(?ver this l>i'in<^ is not at the same moment Father and Son, but in thr»'o consecutive, in- terchanging energies (prosopons) he acts as Creator and Law-giver, as Kedeemer, as Quickener (tlirough this teaching the conception " Prosopon ", "Person" became discredited in the Orient). Whether it was possible for Sabellius to carry through the thought of strict succession, wo. do not know. Perhaj)s he still permitted the Prosopon of the Fatlu^r to continue uctive (the Sabellians fell back ujion the Old Testa- ment Scriptures, but also upon the Gosi)el to the Egyptians and other apocrypha — a proof that the Catholic canon had not yet established itself in tho Pentapolis). This distinguished itself from the ear- lier modalism, not by a stronger pantheistic tendency, nor by a new doctrine of the trinity (both came thereto first later in the fourth century, if the modi- fications were not introduced by the historians), but by the attempt to explain the succession of the Pro- sopons, by the attention given to the Holy Spirit (see Sal)t'l!iai)s Aililiico O. T., (Jus- jii'l ti) EK'vptiaus, t'tC. THK I.AVIN'C OK TIIK K Jl' ND ATloN. isr» of ill line 'ar- mo .di- Iro- see ;ili()Vr) ami Ity lln' (IiMwin;^- nt a I'Mrin.il |iai;illrl l»«'- twcoii tlir l*n»s»ij»«»ii of llic Katlicr and tlic twu otiuT Prosopniis, wldcli iiid«'«'d tclidrd toward tin- accrjit- aiu'o of H /i»v'/v-A''/'<'v l)a('k of tlic l*ro>o|)on {T-hrridf^ and 7:karonii.n^)^ who iicViT rcVi-als luiiisi'lf, lull Ih'coIIU'H known only tliroiii;li his activity (this view is favored by Sc'ldeionnach* r, Thcol. /tschr. is-.>-.> jj. :;). (*<.s- sui-iuan. *^ isiii I'll- moloj^y is introduced hy Sahcllius as a i)arall(l t(» j ,',','. '"'y,^iyj',? Hotorioloj^y, without the prefeicnce hciui; ^^iviii to Tms. the Knther, and therehy in a jteculiiir nianni'r the way was |)re[)ared for i\iv A UnnKisiidi ClnisfohK/j/^ i.e. iUv AuL^ustinian. This is the decisive signifi- cance of Sahellianisni in the Oi'ient. It jjrepareil there the way for the '''iwonnm^'^ for tiiatthe Sahelliaiis made use of this word (on the other hand also I'anl of Samosata) is dear. While within modalism there was hitherto no firm connection between cosmology and soteviology, nnder the later Sahellianisni tlio history of the world and of redeni})tion became (me history of th(> self -revealing God; this became of ecjual rank with the Ix)gos-C^liristology. In different ways Marcellus and Athaiiasius sought to reconcile the main lu'inciples of modalism and the Logos- Christology: The former failed, the latter succeeded in that he almost entirely excluded the world-idea from the Logos-idea, i,<\ restored the Logos (as the Sabellians the olo^)^ to the being, yes, to tiie numerical unity of God. (c) History of On'enUd theology until the he- ^^^l^ ginning of the fourth century. — The next conse- ii: } IP i to 400. «y ":»; ISn Ol'TIJNES OF THE HISTORY OF DO(JMA. ' ? Alexan- drians Submit to Rome. Contro- verHy Pre- lude to Ariau. (jiieiKH? of Tiiodalism was tliat tlic followors of Origen gave to tlio Logos-Christolog}' a strong subordination cast. Dionysius of Alexandria went so far as to set fortli in a doctrinal letter the Son simply as a crea- tion, which iji related to the Father as the vine to the gardener and as the boat to the builder (Atliana- sius, (fe scntent. Diouy.). He was denounced by his R'>aia. He tauglit tbe pre- existcnce of souls and contested tbe verbal sense of some Scripture passages as not autboritative. Tbe- ognostus (in tbe time of Diocletian) composed a com- ]irebensive dogmatic work, wbicli as a system sur- passed tbat of Origen and bad a foi-m tbat bas been in use until to-da5\ lie moreover developed Origen - ism in tbe direction of Arius. x\notber Origenist, Hierakas, establisbed an order of moidcs, in wbose celibacy bo saw somotbing new in Cbristian etbics and, as it seems, empbasized more strong!}- tbe sub- stantial unitv of the Fatber and Son. At all events Peter (f as martyr oil), bisbop of Alexandria, did this. In bim tbe Alexandrian bisbop again in- The- opiiostus Dfvcloiis Orij^cnisui in Direc- tion of Ariauism. Peter, ill "i ,i i fl -t- i ! i. I t i '' 188 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OP DOr,MA. .i ■ II ) I r Il:i UMi- clined toward tlie views of tlio Domotrius, who had condomned Origoii. Under wliat eireuiiistanees this hapi)ened is unkiiowii. But from his extant writ- ings it is elear that he substituted IJililical realism (history of the creation and the fall) for the Ori- genistic spiritualism and designated this as imfhina ri,^^ ' i:).h,.>ix7,>i -atth{u/aiv Kul fitrovaiav^ avyKpdai^ evoikeIv, etc. THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION. 189 en- itial [DTTOV, /'Ce/v, t roil V ore urng, aiav, theologian in Asia Minor. One sees here that the " scientific " itself trembled bef(;re the fine pol^'theism which it introduced, and farther that Christology became pure philosophy : Thi> symbol which Gregory disseminated among the churches hardly corresponded in a single sentence with the Biblical statements; it is a compendium of the i)urest speculations, recall- ing the Gospel onl\' in the words, Father, Son, and Spirit. Therein Christian faith was expected to rec- ognize itself once more ! No wonder that a reaction set in, if indeed a tame R<^action; one. By the side of Peter of Alexandria there ap- peared here and there in the Orient about the year oOO opponents of ( )rigen who compelled those who still honored him to come to his defence. The most significant and influential of these opponents was Methodius (about ;](>()). He was no eneni}- of Plato and of speculation — (piite the contrary ; but he wished to harmonize the Biblical realism and the verbal sense of the rule of faith with science — a new Ire- njBus, he wanted a consistent faith whicli would be purely ecclesiastical and ])U rely scientific. Moreover all the heretical i)oints of Urigenism nuist be rcnmded ^.V^rTT * *=' Modified. off, in order that the latter may be thereby introduced in this form into the ecclesiastical faith {spcculaiire realism; Methodius had read Irena^us). Above all the pessimism of (^rigen as regards the world (with- in the cosmolog}') must be set aside : Matter and the human b(Kly were approved by God and will there- fore be glorified and remain eternal. In accordance "i I ' h ,: I S )r \- r ! ; 1 '■ I I ^ 1 tl 1 mLi nji! LJli '" 100 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. with tliis tlio Oragv^nistic tcarhing roTirorning tho otcriuil creation of s}»irits, concorniiiL; tlio fall in a prc-exi.st(Mit state, concerning the character and pur- pose of the world, etc., were sot aside. In the i^ace of the same the ?y///-s7 /co-realistic teaching of Irenreus concerning Adam (mankind) was reintroduced, but was still more mystically developed and brought into an alliance with the recapitulation-theor}'. Man- kind before Clirist was Adam (in need of redemption, but in the condition of children). Throngh tho second Adam the Logos unites himself with us. But ^s?'t'oi"i^ Methodius went a step farther; the new mankind as a whole is the second Adam. Every one should become Christ, inasmuch as the Logos unites itself with every soul as with Christ (tlie descent of the Logos from heaven and his death must be rei)eated for every soul — namely within). This comes to pass not so much through knowledge as through virginity and ascetism. The theoretic optimism was also bal- Extn'ino aucod bv tlio renunciatiou of the world ex])ressed in Hctrani tor *' '■ \ iiKiiuty. vii-gii^ity, 1^0 ecclesiastic before Methodius had so prized virginitj^ as he, so prized it as a means of mystic union with the Godhead (virginity is tho end of the incarnation). In that the realism of tho doctrine of faith was here bound up with the Origen- istic speculation, the two-foldncss of faith and the science of faith reduced t(^ one, theoretical optimism (as regards the sensuous world) joined to the practi- cal renunciation of the world, and everything mado dependent upon the mystic union with the Godhead l(i. THE LAYINO OF THE FOUNDATION. 191 lity al- iii so of tho tho en- tile sin ti- de ad without a denial of tlu^ objective significance of Christ as the Redeemer (although this is pushed into the back-ground), the dogmatics of the future in its main outlines triumphed. That which ]\Iethodius had done for dogmatics ^'"f,'.-^;,?"*^' as developed doctrine, the bishops did about the 'hui.'o" year ;}0() for the rule t)f faith, in so far as they in- troduced the scientific Logos-doctrine into the in- structional symbol, thereby neutralizing the distinc tion between faith and scientific dogmatics and placing the chief contribution of Hellenic speculation under the protection of the apostolic tradition. Tlie Oriental symbols of this time (symbol of CVrsarea, of Alexandria, of the six bishops against Paul, of Gregory Thaumaturgus, etc.) ])ut themselves for- ward as the incontestiblo apostolic faith of the Church and are the j)hilosophical constructions of the rule of faith : The e.vccicti cat-speculative iheoto- Exp^'tic- al Sptvu- qu was introduced iuto faith itsetf. This came •'i''/*' to pass through the Logos-d(x*trine; the dogma was ^'i''^*''- now found and established. A divine Being has actualljj appeared upon the earth, and his appear- ance is the key to cosmology and soteriology. How- ever, these fundamental theses were acc('j)ted only in the widest circles. But men could not rest with this, so long as it was not definitely determined Jioir the diA'ine Being, who has a])p(>ared ui)on tlx' eai-th, is related to the higliest Divinity. Is the divine Being who lias apjx'ared upon tlie earth the Divinit}' himself, or is he a subordinate, second Divinity? I N B ii • • t .i/s r' 102 OUTLINES OF THK HISTORY OF DOGMA. Are WG redeemed by God himself unto God, or do we Istand also in the Christian religion only in a cosmic system, and is our Redeemer only the subordinate God who is at work in the world? .. i '■ I '!' !f I part 2. THE DEVELOPMENT OF ECCLESIASTICAL DOCMA. BOOK I. HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOGMA AS DOCTRINE OF THE GOD-MAN UPON THE BASIS OF NATURAL THEOLOGY. I CHAPTER I. HISTORICAL SURVEY. Walsch, Entw. einer voUst. Historic der Ketzereien, 1702 ff. Hefelo, Concilieugosch. 3. Autt., Bd. I-IV. His- toiies of the Roman Empire, by Tillemont, Gibbon, and Ranke. Reville, Die Religion z. Rom. unter den Severern (German by Krueger, 1888). Dorner, Entw. Gesch. d. L. v. d. Person Christi, 1845. H. Schultz, Die L. v. d. Gottheit Christi, 1881, Gass, Symbolik d. griech. Kirche, 1873. Den- zinger, Ritus Orientalium, 3 Bdd. , 1803 f. THE Christian religion in the 3d century made ^'n^y.J^oi^ no compromise with any of the pagan relig- ions and kept far away from the numerous intersec- tions out of which, under the influence of the mono- theistic philosophy of religion, a new religiousness developed itself. But the spirit of this religiousness entered into the Church and produced forms of ex- pression in doctrine and cultus to correspond with itself. The testament of primitive Christianity — the Holy Scriptures — and the testament of antiquity — inusn<'ss KntfTs L'lmicli. il i 1^ 13 193 . 1 i h'l 1,, ■> I rjiuroh I>i)ctiinp HccniiK's MysU-ry. Doctrine, Polity, and C'ultus Re- ferred to Apostles. 104 OI^TTJNKS OF THK HISTORY OK DOCiMA. the Now-Platonic speculation — were by the entl of the 3d century intimately and, as it seemed, insep- arably united in the great churches of the East. Through the acceptance of the Logos-Christology Jis the central dogma of the Chtorh, the Church doctrine was, oven for the laity, firmly rooted in the soil of Hellenism. Tliereb}' it became a mystery to the great majority of Christians. But mysteries were even sought after. Not the freshness and clearness of a religion attracted men — there must needs be something refined and complicated, a structure in Barrcxpie style, to content those who at that time wished to have all the idealistic instincts of their nature satisfied in religion. United with this desire was the greatest reverence fcjr all traditions, a senti- ment peculiar to epochs of restoration. But, as al- ways, the old became now by conservation and the new was placed under the protection of the old. What the Church utilized in doctrine, cultus and organization was "apostolic?", or claimed to be de- duced from the Holy Scriptures. But in reality it legitimized in its midst the Hellenic speculation, the superstitious views and customs of pagan mys- tery-worship and the institutions of the decaying state organization to which it attached itself and which received now strength thereby. In theory monotheistic, it threatened to become polytheistic in practice and to give way to the whole apparatus of low or malformed religions. Instead of a religion of pure reason and severest morality, such as the apol- DKVKI.Ol'MENT OF DOC'TRINK OF INCARNATION. 105 K ion, niys- lying and leory ;ic in IS of on of apol- ogists had onco rcpivsontod Christianity to b<', tho hitter hocamo tho religion of tliv most pofcrrful con- sec rati oils, of the nio.st nii/sterious vied id (i)ul of a sensKoKs sauctit}/. The tendency toward tin; in- vention of mechanically-atoning ctmsecn lions (sac- raments) grow constantly mo ])ronouncod and of- fended vigorously thinking honthen even. The ada])tation of the local cults, manners and A.iantation customs mnst needs lead linally to a complete seen- ^"'^"' '''^'• larizing and splitting of tho Church (into national churches); hut for the time th(Miniting force was stronger than tho dividing. The acknowledgnu>nt of the same authorities and formulas, tho lik(> regard for the same sacramental consecrations, the horr(>r at the coarse polytheism, and tho tendency toward asceticism for the sake of the life heyond, formed, together with the homogeneous and well-compacted episcopal organization, the common hasis of the churches. All these elements were not sul. ant, T.MKi.ncy however, to preserve the unit}- of the churches. If int.) ' Na- tional Constantino had not thrown ahout them a ncnv hond cuurchos. by raising them to tho Church of the empire, the split which one observes from tho *)th century would have taken place much earlier; for tho (Episco- pal-metropolitan organization carried within itself a centrifugal element, and the asceticism in which all earnest thinkers found themselves at one, could not but dissolve the historic conditions u])on which tho religion rested, and destroy tho communal veneration of God ; besides, differences crept more and more into \ I) 19G OUTLINKS OK TTIK IIISTOKY OF T)OC;MA. :hl*^ l;tffi ■ f'liristian- ily Tlin-at- ciifil with ( 'lllllpIt'tC Scfiilari/ii- anil TIk'h- loKiaiis' Cliufch. tho oxpuiimliiig of the author'itios and doctrines, which rendered thoir internal harmony questionable. Taking one's stand at the end of the Ikl century one cannot avoid the impression, that ecclesiastical Christianity at that time was threatened with com- ])lete secularization and witii external and internal dissolution. The danj^er from within Just prior to tho Diocletian persecution, Eusehius himself has es- tablished (IF. Vj. VIII, i.). He admits — at least as regards the churches of the Orient — that they threat- ened to mingle with the world, and that pure pagan- ism vaunted itself among them. The Diocletian persecution fidded the external danger, and it cannot be said that it was the strength of the Church alone which triumphed over the danger. Already at that time tho Church was a bishops' and theologians' church. But the power which, as mat- ters then stood, was alone able to support energet- ically the distinctive character of the religion — the- ology — came very near dissolving it and handing it over to the world. In concluding " Part I " it was described how philosophic theology gained the victory within the Church and how it naturalized its theses in the very formulas of the faith. "Ebionism" and " Sabellianism " were conquered. The banner of the Neo-Platonic philosophy, however, was raised in spite of the shaking off of gnosticism. All thinkers still remained under the influence of Origen. But since the system of this man was in itself already I>i;\ Kl.oi'MKN r OK DOCTIMNK (»F IN'( A |{N.\TI()N. I'.l? hetorndox, tlic (levclojdnriit of tlic Alcxainlri.ni tlM>- |\|','|',^'V",,^. ology tlnv{it«Mi(Ml tlir ( '!u!»cli with fiirtlicr daiipTs. MMt.'"' " Origin had kept gnosis and pistis unmixed; ho thoiiglit to link toj^cthcr in a conscrvalivc sense evorythin{^ vahiahh' and to hrin^* to a kind of vi\\\\- Hl)rium tho divcM's factors (cosniolojjfir and sotrri- ologir); lie had j^iv(»n to liis thcoloL^y ])V a strict ad- herence to the sacred text a I'ihlical stamp and demanded throuLrhout Sci'iptnre ])roof. With the <>i;ip:iiisru epigonoi, however, occurred cl>nn<;«>s everywliere: (1) Tlie pupils as well as the oi)i)onrnis of Orit^en en- deavored to place pistis and {gnosis attain upon the same plane, to add some philosophy to tlu^ foi'niulas of faith and to subtract somethinpj from the gnosis. Precisely thereby- a stajjjnation and confusion was threatening, which Origen had carefully' warded off. The faith itself became obscure and unintelligible to the laity; (2) The cosmologic and purely philos()j)hic interests obtained in theology a ])reponderance over the soteriologic. In accordance thercAvith (^hristol- ogy became again in a higher degree ? ]>hil()so])hic Logos-doctrine (as with the apologists) and the idea of the cosmic God as the lower, subordinate God alongside the highest God, threatened monotheism outright. Alreadj^ here and there — in opposition to ^''^l\l'^^^ ',J " Sabellianism " — articles of faith were being com- ^'i7istlnic posed, in which there was no mention of Christ, but in which the Logos alone was glorified in a profu- sion of philosophic predicates as the manifested, but subordinate God ; already the incarnation was cele- X- 11 1 I'lxpt'IlSt' of "listoric Cellist. V "I I m It EllS*>l)lUH of Ccesui'i'u. <^onstan- tine, Atlia- uaiius. lOH olTMNKS OF TIIK UrSTOIIV oV ixxiMA. bratiMl jiH tlio rising of thr sun which //////// ///c.v all men; ah-cady iiu'ii socmtMl (U'simus of ad.ndinj? jdio- noincna and vico-rcLCcnts to tlic Nt^o-IMatonic idea of tho one nnnainal)K' l^cini^ and his ^raiU'd and more or less nnmerons powers, wliilethey encircled nil with a chaj)let of philosophic artificial ex])ressions; (.'») Kven the Holy Scriptures jj^ave way somewhat in those endeavors; vet onlv in a formal manner and without forf(Mtin}jj their vahu'. The theology which was formed out of these elements (c. and outward ix^rsccutioii — (Vnistafiiinc — so at tho hhiuo timo tluM'o appeared aii- otlier man wlio preserved tlu* Clnncli from the ('(»m- plete secularization of its most fundamental faith — Athanasius. Tru(>, reactions ayjainst the Loj^os-doe- trine in tlu» direction of the complet(» alienation of the Son of (lod from the Father were prohahly at no time lackint^ in the Orient; hut Athanasius (assisted Kt'(noyn.).r,y.x>i -rmueia^ would be endurable in the churches; in other words, in what measure the Sacred Scriptures and rule of faith would bear a speculative restatement and spirit- ualization. The treatment of both problems was rendered difficult by countless conditions (also pt)liti- cal ones), but above all was it obscured and vitiated because the Church was never allowed to concede to itself a theological handling of dogma, and because at the same time the great majority of Christians in fact denounced every effort leading to ne\v forms as an apostasy from the faith, since the same was an innovation. The semblance of the ^',sein])er idem " must ever be kept up, since the Church in its " apostolic inheritance " surely possesses every- In Orient T\v(j D»'vel- opineuts. II II i»; 20 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. it> TJii'olo- Kiaiis Dis- ficditfd Ity Lat.-r Geiit'ra- tious. Conson-a- tives Triuir.ph. thing fixed and final. The theology and the theo- logians — oven the best of them — came thereby dur- ing their lifetime and .after their death into the worst predicament; during life they were considered innovators, and after death, when the dogma hnd progressed above and bej^ond them, they came often enough wholly into discredit, for the more ])recisely perfected dogma now became the standard which was applied even to the theologians of the earliest times. The Church found rest onlj- when dogma- building ceased and when by the side of the com- pleted dogma, a scholasti co-mystical theology and a harmless antiquarian science succeeded which no longer touched the dogma, but either explained it as settled, or indifferently laid it aside. Thus was gained at last what the " conserviitives " had alwaj'S longed for. But vital piety had in the mean time withdrawn from the dogma and regarded them no longer in truth as the sphere in which it lived, as its original and living expression, but looked upon them as the sacred inheritmice of antiquity and as the primary condition to the enjoyment of the Christian benefits. ii i: Unification of Churches IlllJIOS- sible. Periods of the Hlstonj of Dogma in the Orient. Constantine made possible a unity in the develop- ment of the Church into dogma (ecumenical synods Rs forum publicnnij in place of the symbols of the provincial churches a homogeneous dogmatic confes- DKVELOPMKNT OF DOCTIIINK OF INCARNATION. 'i^K^ nt. sion was introduced); but tlio uuilicutiun of the churches in the strict sense never became perfect, and the tendency to a pecuh'ar individuality of the national churches grew stronger in direct contrast to Bjv.antinism, but it was overc(jine in tlu* Occident, since there the old Roman enipire took refuge in the Roman church. While the East crumbled to pieces and Islam finally wholly wrecked the creation of Alexander the Great, separating Greeks and Semites, the West and the East fell more and more ai»art. Yet till the end of the dogma-building period in the East, the West took the most active and often de- cisive interest in dogmatic decisions. I. Period from 318-381 (383): Precisely defining orthodoxy the full Divinity of the Redeemer: Athanasius, Constantine, the Cappadocians, Theodosius. Ortho- doxy con(piers through the firmness of Athanasius and a few men in the West, through the course of world-wide historic events (sudden end of Arius, Julian and Valens ; appearance in the East of Theo- dosius from the West) and through the ability of the Cappadocians to place the creed of Athanasius — not without deductions, to be sure — under the protection of the Origenistic science. II. Period from :)83— i51 : The independent theo- QuamHn'- tWt'fll logic science f/vA/r/zu/^ -auhui^ Origen) was alread\' Amioiii violently combated; the ecclesiastical leaders aban- ^llihl." doned it and threw themselves more and more into the arms of communal and monkish orthodoxy. The most violent (piarrels, behind which the question of ii II « i ill ' !' )i:: ' I StHlition and Scbisin. 204 OUTLINKS OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. power hides itself, aros(^ l)etvve(>n Aiitioeh and Alex- andria over the Christohjgieal dogma. The correct ^kiX'suh"*^ doctrine con(inered at Ephesiis, 440; hut, united with the tyranny of the Alexandrian patriarchs, it must needs share the fate of the latter and triumph over emperor and state. Nothing was left to the pm- peror but to proclaim the Occidental creed as the orthodox one (the Chalcedon), which at first was strange to the Orient and seemed, not without rea- son, to be heretical. III. Period from 4r»l-5r);) : Sedition and schism in the Orient on account of the Chalcedon addition ; monophysitism is exceedingly t^nergetic; at first ; 's" <'H()o'')(T(n<; has taken human nature into his own being and fashioned it into oneness with him- self". But these dogmas were carried through only after severe conflicts; they never gained a porfectl}' clear stamp and never obtained the exclusive dominion, which they demand. The reasons for this are as follows : (1) The formulas which wererecpiired, being nrii', had the spirit of the Church against them, which suspected even the best of innovations ; (2) The pure exposition oi JaitJi is at all times the most difficult problem; but at tluit lime it was es})e- cially hampered by apologetic, as well as by other foreign considerations ; (3) The orthodox formulas conflicted with every DoRinas Cut it '(I thri>nt;li afttT StruKglt'S. I 1/ I I I 'i 'A 208 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. I , " I i ?: 'l I philosophy; they proved an offence to disciplined scholastic thinking; but it was a long time before men recognized in the incomprehensible the charac- teristics of that which is Holy and Divine; (-1) The conception of the salvation obtained through the God-man was joined to the scheme of "natural theology " (moralism), i.e. grafted upon it; natural theology endeavored thenceforth to build upon the dogma and to bring itself into conformity with it; (o) The mystical doctrine of salvation and its new formulas had not only no Scriptural authority in their favor, but conflicted also with the evangelical idea of Jesus Christ; New Testament ideas and reminiscences, Biblical theologomena in general of the most varied kind, have always surged about the growing and matured dogma and prevented their exclusive domination; (ij) The peculiar form of the Occidental Christology interfered as a disturbing element with the Oriental history of dogma. Thrown upon its own resources, the Orient would have been obliged to legitimize monophysitism ; the Gospel, the Occident and the emperors prevented it from doing so. An incorrect formula triumphed, but it received a correct inter- pretation ; vice versa, at the end of the fourth cen- tury, the correct formula of Athanasius triumphed, but under an interpretation which was influenced by the secular science of the Cappadocians. Each re- sult had the historical consequence that the orthodox o a .i^mMM^^>iSl fts Uflatrd to Morality. DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCAUNATInN. 209 Church reniaiiied in contact with Biblical theology and with science (scholasticism). 2. Since the doctrine of salvation was kept strictly ^'j'JIvHrioi'i'' within the scheme of the mystico-realistic idea of redemption, it was in itself indifferent to the moral; bat on every side men were sure that Christianity also embraced the highest morality. Accordingly the benefits of salvation were adjudged only to mor- ally good men, but the morally good conceived as the product of the free agency of man and as the condition of sanctification to be fulfilled by him, whereby God at the most was conceived of as assist- ing (this concerns positive morality; the negative, asceticism, was regarded as the direct preparation for deification *). The dogmatic form of the Chris- Freodomof ' ^ Election tian religion was, therefore, balanced by the idea of freedom of election (See already Clem. Alex. Pro- trep. 1, 7: i"'' ''^ C'/-' edioa^sv i ::'.:)<,' w>i^ (hdarrxaXtK^^ 'iva To «££ C>> uffre/xr^ (US' 'Vi-'? xi'i>fiYf','^l)-> ^uid this is only the shortest expression for the whole natural theology which the Charcli appropriated from the ancient phi- losophy and treated as the self-erident presupposition of its specific doctrine, reckoning upon a general un- derstanding of the same. Consequently Greek Chris- tianity oscillates between two poles, which are simply co-ordinate with each other. Dor/ mas in a strict sense exist only within the doctrine of redemption; on the other hand, there exist only 2>''^''S?//;po.s'///o//.s' and conceptions (so far, deviations in simple mat- *See papp lO'i. note. U • '1* 1 1 ' 1 ■ t r^' ' :» ^ ' n>i ■f. '■■* ' 1 ( i ' ' (■■ > ■! I it I Rlhllcnl lifiilisin and Vcr- baliHiii. Natiiral Theology. 210 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. tors aro hero not insiipportabk'). But since the Greek natural philosophy stood in conilict in not a few points with the letter and spirit of the Holy Scriptures, and with the rule of faith (mh, above all, the theology of Origen pi'oves), problems must arise her(5 also, which in an increasing measure were solved in dcfdil in favor of Biblical realism and Biblical verbalism, contrary to reason and an idealis- tic view, even though in gcnrnd the rationalistic- moral scheme remained unscathed (vid. dogmatics of John of Damascus; Sophronius of Jerusalem: ''^sio- fkuiit'j fhiai'i fj.-Ta,3f f/oJ Mnd thedoc- ";;';.lji!|;;,;.'^ trino of man. Fartlior, (I*) the doctrine of redt'inp- tion itself must be treated in its historic (Icrc/o/nuciif as tlio doctrine of the trijiity and Christology. The conchision forms (C) the doclrino of the mysteries, T).Miiin.-.,f in which alnvidy in this life the coming deification * of the temporal is rejiresented and can be (»n joyed. To this should bo added a sketch of the history of the origin of the orthodox system. Note: Only through Aristotelianism did the Greek ^'^!S,l[^y Church after Origen arrive again at a dogmatic masnis.'" system, which was, however, by no mesms a uni- versal system (Jt)hn of Damascus). A knowledge of the history of Greek dogma is therefore to be gained, aside from the acts and decisions of synods, (1) from the numerous works on the incarnation of the Son of God, (2) from the catechetical writings, (3) from the apologetic treatises, (4) from the mono- graphs on the " six days' work " and similar composi- tions as well as from the exegetical works, (.5) from the monographs on virginity, monasticism, perfec- tion, the virtues and the resurrection, (''<) from monographs on the mysteries, cultus and priest- hood, (T) from sermons. In using these sources this fact with others is to be considered^ that the fathers frequently wrote '^f^Arxrufwv-, and that the official literature (sjmod literature) in an increas- ing measure bristles with falsifications and is per- meated with conscious untruth and injustice. t S.'(- (.i-c I'.l'.i. imt". 2: .""I' s • " 'J V 2l'i OUTLINES OF TIIK IIISTOUY OF DOGMA. CHAITKII III. 1 ) r •iti! Cathulio Aiillioii- ties. Holy ;M'ri|itui'('s riiiiiiic Autliuiity. Tin-: soL'RCEs OF knowlkf)(;f anf) the au- THOItlTIFS, OK SCKIPTUIiK, TKADITION, AND THE CIILIICH. St'C the IntroductioiiH to tho Old antli., 1H17. Ildlt/inaiin, Kaiioii u. Tradition, IHW. Sodcr, Dor Hcj^rifT d. KallioliritiU d. K. , ISMl, Scclierg. Studicu z. (icsch. d. Bi'grill'H d. K. , IHH'). Router, Augustiu. Studicu, isss. The extent aiitl value of tli(» Catholic authorities wa.s already essentially estahlished at the beginning of the 4th eentury, although iK-rhaps not their mu- tual relation and the maimer of their exposition. Undernealli the great contrast between the more liberal theology and pure traditionalism lay also ii different conception of the anthorities, bv.t this never found a statement. Changes took place during the period between Eusebius and John of Damascus, keeping pace with the growing traditionalism; but no one undertook to make an inventory, a proof that opponents of the method, worthy of notice, failed to palm oil" the existing state of the Church as the tra- ditional (apostolic). The sects alone protested and continued to agitate. ]. The Hoi 11 Scri))tuvcs had a unique authority. To depend upon them alone was in reality not un- catholic; Scripture-proof one might ahva^'s dinnand. But an entirely accepted agreement, even respecting II ...j^.juhkMt/if*'^ UEVKLOl'MKNT OF DOCTKINK OK INCAHNATIUN. "^'l:* jrity. iin- land. cting Au>,'im- tiiic's Vifw the oxtoiit of tho Hil)!*', did not oxist {hvo the sclmol of Antiocli witli its criticism of the canon). As regards the Old Testament thi' llehraic canon only was, in theory, for a long time considered the stand- ard in the Orient; nevertheless, in practice, the writ- ings which were coined with th(» T^XX had value. Only in the ITth century through lloman inllueiico did the e(iualization of the canonical and dcuitero- canonical writings tak(» place in the Ori(>nt, yet not in the form of an olhcial (hrlaration. In the Occi- dent the uncritical view of Augustine gained tlu^ victory over the critical one of Jerome (synods at A..v|.t.-,i ^ , iristfiiil III' Hii)po, '.VX], and Carthage, IJ'.iT), which had oidy a Jfiuin.'s. slight after-eft'ect. Into the Alexandrian canon, moreover, were also introduced apocalypsi^s like Hernias and Esra. — Regarding the Xew Testament, Eusehius made rather a relative end to a highly in- secure state of atl'airs. Witli tin? threo categories which he ado])ted one could not content oneself, and the early decrees of provincial churches had an after- effect, especially in the Orient. Yet after the mid- Kssentiai A^^TflMlll'llI die of the -1th centurv there prevailed (save in the kv M'.i.iir '■ ^ of 4lli Syrian churches) in the Orient an essential agree- ^'^'"^'"> ment in regard to the New Testament. Only the Apocalypse of John remained still for a long time excluded; slight fluctuations were not wanting. How the Occident came to accept the Epistle of James, of II. Peter and III. John is entirely in the dark. The Epistle to the Hebrews was received through the celebrated mediating-men of the 4 th cen- l! U i: it J t - <-, 1:1 \ .1, r 1.1 11 .11 i n I I %i: \ HI? I? '.it Sr !l!i' Holy Scriptures Divine. 214 OUTLINES or THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. tury. Augnstino's views in regard to the extent of the New Testament lias been the aiitlioritative stand- ard for the whole Occident (see also the so-called " Docret. Gelasii"). However, an ecclesiastical judg- ment on this (jiiestion, excluding every doubt, did not take place until the Tridentine council. All predicates concerning the Holy Scriptures dis- appeared behind that of their cUviiicness (works of the Holy Spirit); insi)iration in the highest sense was now restricted to them. From their inspiration came the demand for spiritualistic (allegorical) exegesis, and also for conforming the content of the texts to each other as well as to the accepted dogmatic teach- ing. Yet the letter should also be hoi}' and contain that which is most holy (against Origen) ; laymen, eager for miracles, and critics (Antiochians) took oides in favor of the letter and of history. A safe method was wanting: Opposing views were the spiritual exegesis of the Alexandrians, the histori co- critical one of the Antiochians which sought for a jxed type, the literalistic, realistic one of barbarian monks and of sturdy theologians (Epiphanius). Very gradually a compromise was made in the Orient in regard to the most important Scripture or-rfpuistic passages and their interpretations. The Origenistic, aud Antiochian and Still morc the Antiochian exegesis was repressed I'iXepesis " ^ hi oiS! t)ut not vanquished, the literalistic, realistic one, made palatable through mystic fancies, pushed forward (see John ot" Damascus, and his interpretation of Gen. 1-3.) The Occident became acquainted with the I' i: m ' Hi' I J)KVEL01\MENT OK DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. '4[.) spiritual, scientiiie metliod of tlio Cappadocians through Hilary, Ambrose, Jfrome, and Riifmus. Before and afterward there was a complete lack of system; regard for the letter went hand in hand with allegorical fancies and chiliastic interests. Jerome was too cowardly to teach his contempo- raries the better view, and Augustine, although he learned from the Greeks, never rose abovy the latter and did not even reach them. He introduced into the Occident the Scripture-theology with its waver- ing three- and four-fold sense, and above all the strict Biblicism, although he himself knew that religious truth is an inward assurance to which tlie Scriptures can only lecid^ and that there exists a Christian free- dom which is also independent of the Scriptures {cle doctrina Christiana). Through Junilius especially the more methodical Antiochian exegesis exerted an Influence over the Occident, without being able to remedy the lack of method and the tendency to apol- ogetic renderings on the part of the commentators. After-all the Scrijitures received in fact a position in the life of the Church in the Occident, different from their position in the Orient (formerly it was other- wise; see e.g. Cyril of Jerusalem); they occupied a more prominent place. This is to be explained pri- marily from the influence of Augustine and from the fact that ecclesiastical dogmatics in the Occident was never so assertive as in the Orient. Just as the ex- tent of the Scriptures was never securely settled, so also their properties were not. The predicate of iner- Jcrome, Augustine. Junilius Influences West. - -S -111 Mi li I ::,V ^■^ "«, ' %l. t:f TiK'rr.'uicv : Two Tfsta- UU'UtS. Tradition. Faitii of Church. 21G OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOOM A. ranry had indeed t(j submit to gentle restrictions and men did not really come to a clear conception of the sufficiency of the S^-riptures. In regard to the two Testaments there remained the same want of clear- ness as formerly (the O. T. is a Christian book as well as the N. T. — the O. T. throughout is a record of the prophecies — the O. T. is the book which con- tains, with certain restrictions and under definite en- cumbrances, the verities of the faith, and it has led and leads pedagogicc.'lly to Christ). 2. Trail ii ion. Scripture did not succeed (at least not in the (Orient) in ridding itself of the conditions under which it originated, and in becoming a fully independent authorit}-. The Church, its doctrines and institutions, was in itself the source of knowl- edge and the guarantee of the authority of the truth. Everything in it is fundamentally apostolic, because it is of apostolic origin. Hence it is plain why the making of an inventory of tradition could not take place. It remained de f^icto always elastic; what the apostolic Church found necessary is apostolic, therefore ancient. But at first one did not foiego distinctions and proofs. Trpdition was above all the faith of the Church. The symbols were considered apostolic ; yet only the Roman church prod nmed its creed as apostolic in the strictest sense (composed by the apostles). But the content of the Nicene and Chalcedon creeds was considered as apostolic, yes, as the legacy of the apostles xar£^oj(rjv and as the quintessence of the Holy ifg?;.-.>-^;-A.^,,:i:i ff, --. ;-, , ,„mtepai,..ii..MM— tho in kit ids the DELELOPMEXT OF DOCTRINE OF INX'ARNATION. -^17 Scriptures. Yet tho rehition between Scripture and symbolB remained elastic. In the Orient the so- called Conslantinopulitan creed became the chief symbol; in the Occident the apostles' creed held tho first place and was explained according to the former. But tho regulations also of the organization and ^"^i"-!]}^!,""'' cultus were i)laced under the protection of apostolic •^^'"*'^*' '-• tradition, and one pointed as i)roof to their general spread and also to tho legends concerning the apos- tles. Besides, men began in the -ttli century — not without influence from tho side of Origen and Clement — to introduce the concentions of an apostolic Taf)di nYi>a(fi>i^ in the wholly uncertain content of which they even included dogmatic teaching — how- ever, very rarely trinitarian and Christological watch- words — the understanding of which was not every- body 's concern (thus especially the Cappadocians). But this gnostic conception of tradition (secret tradi- tion), although it became mo'-e and more settled, was yet felt to be dangerous ; use was made of it in dog- matic discussions only in extreme cases {e. (/., in the doctrine of the Holy Spirit), and it was otherwise applied to the mj'steries and their ritual expositions. Since it was understood that the decisive authority was vested in the Church itself by virtue of its union with the Holy Spirit (Augustine: ^^ ego erangelio noil crederem^ nisi me catholicae ecclesiae commo- veret aiicfoiitas"), the questions must arise: ^j^^.^^^^ ,j (1) Through whom and when does the Church ^Loes" , „ Church speak? niwiikt 1 1<( i"* I i: ,'m§ Mil V 21 S OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OK IXXiMA. Iniiova- tious. I|f ^. ,rr M ^« M ' Episco- pate Represents Cnurch. Ecnmeni- cal Couucils. !;• * (2) How aro i\u) innovations in tho Church, espe- cially within the realm of doctrine, to be interpreted if the authority of the Church is lodged entirely in its apostolicity, i.e. in its permanence? Both (ques- tions, however, were never distinctly put, and there- fore only very vaguely answered. Fixed was it that the representation of the Church was vested in the episcopate (see Euseb. II. E.), although the strict theory of Cyprian had not at all become common property and the idea had never cr()i)ped out that the individual bishop is infallible. But already there was attributed a certain inspiration tt) the provincial synods. Constantino first called an ecumenical synod and declared its decisions to be without error. Slowly the thought of the infallible authority of the Nicene coinicil crept in during the 4tli century and was later on transferred to the following councils, in such a way, however, that one synod (^d) was stamped 2^ost factum as ecumenical, and the dif- ference between them and tho provincial synods re- mained for a long time unsettled (Was the synod of Aries ecumenic?). Through .>ustinian the four councils were placed upon an unapproachable height, and after the 7th council the principle established itself firmly in the Orient, that the sources of knowl- edge of Christian truth are the Scriptures and the decrees of the seven ecumenical councils. Even to- day men assume frequently in the Orient an air as if the Church did not possess or need any other, s But this apparently simple and consistent develop- liiai ' lop- DKVKI.OPMENT Ol'^ DOCTlilNK (»K IN'CAKNATION. 'i\U nioiit solved by no moans all tho ili Ilk' ill ties, bucauso councils were not always at band and otber anllior- ities also bad still to bo taken into account. How sbould one act if the Cburcli lias not yot spoken? Does not an especial autbority belong to tbo occu- pants of tbe great aj)ostolic episcopal cliairs, or to tbo bisbops of tbe capitals? Ans. 1 , Tbo Cburcb also sjjoaks tbrougb unan- imous ancient testimonies. Tbe citing of tbe " fatbers '' is important, even decisive. Wbatever bas universality and anticpiity is true. Besides, tbe conception of " anticpiit}' " grew (>ver more elastic. Originally tbe disciples of tbe jipostlcs were tlu^ "ancients", tben tbey counted also tbe .')d and 4tb generations among tbe ' ancients", tben Origen and bis disciples were tbe "ancient" expounders; finally tbe wbole ante-Constantino epocli was considered classic anticpiity. But since one could make use of rather little from tins period, appeal was taken to Atbanasius and tbo fatbers of tbe -Itli century, just as to tbe "anci<'nts", and at tbe same time to numer- ous falsifications under the namc^ of tbe fatbers of the 2d and 3d centuries. At tbo councils one counted more and more only the voices of the " ancients " and employed very general explanations to confirm tbe new formulas and watcbwords. Tilings came tbus to be decided more and more according to autbori- ties, wbich one indeed frequently first created. Tbe council was therefore infallible, only and in so far as it did not teach anything else but the "fatbers". How Aft when Chuivli lias utit Si>okeii? f * \* ■.I »Hf. i i'** 1" ■ :W • lit •: •!» •^■"M <""*f| ■*n\ ^ Jil ^ -.Ui -,^1: , ;-3: ■ ii-t! :.V'[ ^ ^ ;•■■•■ ■ ji'. a ' . m 1 . ■>\rt il til , '■ i ■ i' r '¥M ' ' I lit r !, ,^ i MM' : iliit 2i30 OUTLINES OP THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. The infallibility was therefore primarily not a direct one. Special Ans. 2. Aiigustine recalled to mind the especial Authority Beiongto authority of the a])ostolic chairs (also the Oriental) Apostolic */ L \ / Chairs? ^^jj ^\^q question concerning the extent of the Holy Scriptures. But in the (Jrient this authority was merged in that of the chairs of the capitals and therefore Constantinople moved to the front, being strongly attacked by the Roman bishop. The Roman chair alone was able not only to preserve its ancient authority in the Occident, but also to heighten it (only apostolic chair in the Occident, Peter and Paul, fall of the West-Roman empire, the centre for the remnant of Romanism in the West) and (thanks to the favorable circumstances of political and ecclesi- astical history) to fortify the same also in the Orient, under great fluctuation to be sure. To the Roman bishop was always attached an authority peculiar in kind, w^ithout its being possible to define the same more closely. It only ceased in the Orient, when Orient and Occident possessed nothing more what- ever in common. But before the same became ex- tinct the Roman bishop, in league with the eastern Roman emperor, had gained the point that in the Orient attempts at a primacy of any bishop, espe- cially the Alexandrian, should be suppressed, to whicn suppression the Christological contests contrib- uted. The great chairs of the patriarchs in the Orient, weakened through schisms, partially deprived of their real importance, stood in theory in equal Chairs of Capitals. hm m le le- Ito (.'nuni'ils Not Au- thorita- tive. Apostolic Lt'Kacy. DKVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. '2*2 1 positions toward one another. Tiieir occupants also represented in their co-oj)erations a kind of dogmatic authority, which however was defined neither in itself, nor in its rehition to the ecumenical councils. They form simply a r clique of anti(iuity. From statements made it follows, that the ability to transmit new revelations to the Church did not belong to the councils; rather are the same rendered legitimate through the preservation of the apostolic legacy. Therefore did the declaration and adoption of new formulas {oi the o/woo(tco<^^ of the oneness of the trinity, of the two natures, and so on) cause such great difficulties. When at last the Nicene doctrine gained the victory, it was accomplished only because the Nicene creed itself had become a piece of antiquity and because one endeavored, poorly enough, to deduce from the Nicene all later formulas by giving out (as Irenn?us had once done) asj;rf- scribedj together with the text, also a definite expo- sition of the same. The ability of the councils even to explain the doctrines authentically had not been clearly declared in the Orient; therefore the excuse has onlj seldom been made for the earlier eastern fathers, that at their time the dogma had not been explained and definitely formulated. Whereas a western man (Vincent of Lorinunip) in his Coni- monitorium, after having asserted the criteria of plnj^n."sin the true tradition (that which has ]>vou believed everywhere, always and l)y all), and after having warned men against the heresies of otherwise ortho- Vincent of Leriimin; 1 h ■ i. 1 I f I"* . I» * 'M • ;« ;':i. ■ ■,-'• ■ .^Oi • i .i.il ..•,.,ll 1 "n •■ li.,Jii ; - M' j !■■;«'■ ; '"i^'l 1 '„ i'*i| 1 ; :> ! |8!::i' 'fi'ci ! 1 ■--.;* * ; 'SI ;■ i ) I'lii 1^ .1 Idea of Tradition Vague. OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. dox fathers, mlmitted an " organic " progress in doc- trine (from the more uncertain to the more certain) and proclaimed tlio councils as agents in this progress {"^ cvcitnta hcvreticornm novitatihns^"). Augustine expressly taught, that so long as luieipiiv- ocal decisions on a question had not been given, ilio bond of union between dissenting bishops shoul(^. bo maintained. The Roman bishop has always acted according to this rule, but has reserved for himself the decisions and the time for the same. The conception of tradition is therefore entirely vague. The hierarchical element does not play i)i theorfj the first part. The apostolic succession has even in the Occident not been in theory of such great importance for the confirming of tradition. At the councils, since the time they were called, the author- ity of the bishoi^s as bearers of tradition was ex- hausted. Still, perhaps that is saying too much. Everything w^as very obscure. But in so far as the Greek Church has not changed since John of Damas- cus, the Greek even at the present time has a per- fectly definite consciousness of the foundation of religion. By the side of the Holy Scriptures, the foundation of religion is the Church itself, not as liv- ing power, but in its immovable doctrines and time- honored orders. The Scriptures also are to be ex- plained according to tradition. But the tradition is primarily always two-fold, — the public one of the councils and fathers, and the secret one which con- firms the mysteries, their ritual and its interpretation. DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 223 V- lO- X- is le n- 11. o. The Clinrch. As guarantee of tlio tnio faith, and administrator of 11k' mysteries, theClunrh above all came into consideration. Furthermore, men re- flected about it when they thouj^ht of the Old Testa- ment and false church of the Jews, of heresy and the organization of Christianity, as also of tlio presump- tion of the Roman bishop (Christ alone is the head of the Church). Again, the Church was represented in catechetical instruction as the communion of the true faith and virtue, outside of which there cculd not easily be a wise and pious pers(jn, and the Bibli- cal declaration regarding it was that it was the only and holy one, guided by the Holy Spirit, Catholic in opposition to the numerous impious unions of the heretics. A'"ery evidently men identified thereby the empirical church with the Church of the faith and virtue, without, liowever, coming to a closer reflec- tion on corpus roruni et pennixtum and without drawing all the consecpiencos which the identification demanded. In spite of all this the Church was not primarily a dogmatic conception, Ix longing to the department of the doctrine of salvation itself ; or it became so only when men thought of it as the insti- tution of mysteries, from ^vhich, moreover, the monk was permitted to emancipate himself. Through the restrictions under which the Greeks viewed the duties of the Church and through the natural theology, is this disregard to be explained. The Church is the human race as the totality of all individuals who accept salvation. The doctrini; of salvation exiiausted Clmrcli fiiianmlfc of Trut'. Fuith. Empirical Church iukI ('htin-h of Fuith Idciitilied. m Ji ':^' •'i;^i I ^ ' '3 \i \-\ w- 224 OUTLINES OF THK HISTORY OF l)()(;MA. Pnp?nat ic l(lfll of I'hiircli Not Fixi'il. \V«'stt»rn Chiircli Wi'a Dc- velopinj^. itHolf in the roncoptioiiH : God, luimanily, Christ, tho mystoi'it's, tlio individiuil. Tho coiicoi)tioii of tho Church as tho motluu' of boliovors, as a diviiio crea- tion, as tho body of Christ was not worktul out dog- matically. Tho mystical doctrine of redemption also and tho doctrine of the eucharist did not assist tho Church to a dogmatic position (it is wanting, for ox- ample, in John of Damascus). Its organization, thorough as it is, was not perfected beyond the grade of bishops and was seldom treated dogmatically. Tho Church is not the becpiest of tho apostles, but of Christ; therefore its importance as an institution of worship takes the first rank. All this has reference to the Oriental Church. In the Occident, through the Donatist contest, the foundation was laid by the Church for new and rich conceptions. The Church itself was at tho end of the early period divided into three great parts : The western Church, the Bj'zantine, the Semitic eastern ; and the latter was cleft into manifold parts. Each part considered itself the one Catholic Church and extolled its particular palladia. A. THE PRESUPPOSITIONS OF THE DOCTRINE OF SALVATION, OR NATURAL THEOLOGY. Natural TliiMilojjy. Natural theok)gy with all the fathers was essen- tially the same thing; but it shows shades according as Platonism or Aristotelianism j)redominated and ac- rl|: 1)Kvi:l()I'mp:nt of ixx tkinf-: of in( aijnation. 'i'ib cordinj^ to tlio nioasurc in wliicli the letter of tbo Bible exerted an influence. CHAPTER IV. :-n ; ni- !«»• lic- TTIE rRESL'PPOSTTIOXS AND CON'CEPTIONS OF (JOD, THE CUEATOK, AS DISPENSER OF SALVATION. The main itriiK'inles of tho doctrino of Ciod, as the I'ortrin.'of * '^ (i(mI. apologists and anti-gnostic fathers had ostablislicd them, remained firm and wore directed i)articnlarly against Manichaiism, but were hardly touched l)y tho development of the doctrine of the trinity, since tlie Father as /''-■^rj zr;^ ^'hoTr/Tog alone came into considera- tion here. Yet with ^he growing Biblicism and the monkish barbarism, anthropomorphic conceptions forced themselves more and more into theology. Concerning the ({uestion of man's ability to know God, Aristotelians (Eunomius, Diodorus of Tarsus, especially since the beginning of the 0th century) and Platonists contended with each other, and yet were fundamentally agreed. That man k:iows God only '^",?j,^|^*)If *' through revelation, more exactly through Christ, was generally allowed, but to this declaration as a rule no further consequences were given and men as- cended from the world to G(xl, making use of the old proofs and supplementing them with the ontolog- ical argument (Augustine). Neo- Platonic theolo- gians assumed an immediate, intuitive perception of God of the highest order, but they nevertheless per- 15 God. .: • » fl ,! i 11 'I 'I .A fe:. t hi If 1^ Ji'i ii ' ■ 1 . « 1l» % !■- 1 Ni'pativo AttriliulcH Kmi>li(i- Si/AMl, 2:.*n Ol'TUNKS OF Tin: HISTORY OK DO(i.M.\. footed very pnjcisfly tlio Hcliolastic form of this knowledge) (tho Arcopagite: Negation, exaltation, causality). Tli(! loftiest expression for the being of God was as yet that ho is "not-tho-world", tho spiritual, immortal, apathetic rhihstanco (tho "^^v), to which alono real being belongs (Aristotelians thought of cause and puriiose, without correcting radically tho Platonic scheme). His goodness is perfection, unenviousness and creating will (additions leading to a better conception by Augustine: God as love, which frees men from self-seeking). The attributes of God were treated accordingly as expressions of causality and power, in which the purpose of salva- tion was not taken into account (Origen's conception became tempered, i.e. corrected). By tho side of the Moral At- naturalistic concei)tion of God as tho "f>v stood the moralistic one of Rewarder and Judge; upon this also the idea of redemption had hardlj'^ any notice- able intluenco (less than with Origen), since "re- ward " and " punishment " were treated as one. Yet Augustine recognized the worthlossness of a theol- ogy which places God only at the beginning and the end and makes men independent of him, instead of acknowledging God as tho Power for good and the Source of the personal, blessed life. The cosmology of tho fathers may be thus stated : God, who has carried in himself the world-idea from eternity, has through the Ijogos, which embraces all ideas, in free self-determination created in six days tributes. Cosmology of Fathers. I>KVKI,(M'MKNT OV DnCTIMXK OK INCAHNATTnV. 'i'27 Iff thu lis re- lYet the Id of the Ited : •cm all ciys out of nothing' tlii.s world, wliicli lias had n iH'^itmiiijjj and will havo an ctid ; it was cn^itcd after the pat- tern of an upper world, which was hrouj^ht f«»i'th Ity him, and has its ridniination in man in order to prove his own kindness and to permit creatures to participate in his bliss. In this thesis the lieresies of Origon were set aside (especially his pessimism). Still men did not succeed in entirely justifying; the verbal meaning of Gen. 1-;J, and in the representa- <^''" im tion of an ui)per world {xnTfun; vn^fn'i^^)^ whose lesser copy the earthly is, there remained a significant piece of the Neo-Platonic-Ongenistic doctrine, which was then greatly amplified, after the Areopagite, by the Platonizing mystics. But the pantheistic hore- sios were scarcely felt thereafter, if only in some way the verbal meaning of Gen. 1-3 seemed to bo preserved. The theodicy — still always necessary on Thoodioy. account of Manichseism and fatalism — sought to hold its ground through empirical considerations, but since it too must be natural theology it revealed its ancient root in an oft-estranging casuistry and in doubtful claims. Men referred to the necessity and fitness of the freedom of the creature which must have as a consequence wickedness and evil, to the harmlessness of evil for the soul, to the unreality of wickedness and to the value of evil as a means of purification. In regard to the heavenly spirits the following ^^^l*"^''^ ])oints were settled: That they were created by (j|od, that they are free and lack material bodies, that li ' I* 1" <• '% .'•-II ..,11 ■a ! I .5 '■ I l^^'i(>(TX'')vrj(T','i) . It contributed much ioward this, that the " scientific " theology in the form of the Neo- Platonic mysticism, after about 500, incrdased the esteem given to angels, and that they were received into the system as most important factors (but see alread}^ the Alexandrian theologians) : The angels in graded ranks are, on the one side, the unfolding of the heaveidy, on the other, the mediators between the hejivenly and men. To the earthly hierarchy with its grades, agencies and consecrations, corresponds a heavenly, graded hierarch}' ^v^th heaveidy sacrifices, intercessions, etc. ; in divine worship both unite (vid. the Areopagite and his expounders). Thus '1 1 DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INC'ARNATiON. 2'20 arose — truly aftor U)iig pivi)aratic»:i — a now ecclesi- ^^'^"l"-'.";*;',"'^' astical Jieosopliy which was ])iii\'lyi)agan and wiiitli "'^^"i">'' was finally a shamefaced expression for jiigglering the idea of creation and redemption and for reviving the fantastic pantheism which the bizarre theosophy of perishing antiqnity had created : E^'erything that exists streams out from God in manifold ratliations and must, since it is remote and isolated, be jjurifi and returned to God. This has taken place in nec- ess'tri; processes which were so represented that all needs, even the most barbaric, v.'ere taken into con- sideration, and all authorities and ft)rms were re- spected. But the living God, besides whom the soul possesses nothing, threatened thereby to disai)pear. CHAPTER V. !. ' ^ 1' ♦ ■ f ll eo- tlio ved see s in of een ith Is a THE PRESUPPOSITIONS AND CONCEPTIONS OF MAN AS THE RECIPIENT OF SALVATION. The common conviction of the orthodox fathers Doctrine of Muii. may be stated somewhat as follows: ]\Ian, created after the image of God, is a free self -determining being. He has been endowed with reason, in order to decide in favov of the good and to enjoy immortal life. Having indulged himself and still ever in- dulging himself in sin, misled, or of his own free will, he has missed tliis destination without, how- ever, having forfeited the pri\'ilege and power of a vi:^tuous life and the capability of immortality. ^' 1 9\ ' ,''' .i if f f J . a ' i \ i • A Points under Considera- tion. Idea of Niitural Freedouj Central. 2;jo OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA, Through ihc (*hiistiaii rcvohition, which comes to the aid of the darkened reason with full knowledge of God, that ability has been strengthened and the immortality restored and proffered. Upon good or evil therefore the judgment decides. The will has, strictly speaking, no moral quality. In regard to details there were varying opinions : ( 1 ) What was the original inheritance of man, and what his desti- nation? (2) How far does nature go, and where does the gift of grace begin? (;)) How far-reaching are the consequences of sin? (4) Is mere freedom char- acteristic of the being of man, or does it inhere in his nature to be good? (5) Into what elements is the human personality to be divided? ((5) In what does the Divine likeness consist? and so forth. The various answers are all compromises; (a) be- tween the religious-scientific theory (doctrine of Ori- gen) and Gen. l-o ; (h) between the moralistic con- siderations and a regard for the redemption through Christ; (c) between dualism and the recognition of the body as a necessary and good organ. 1. The idea of inborn freedom is central ; with it reason is included. It constitutes the Divine im- age, which therefore means independence as regnrds God. Whether there belongs to the nature of man only the sensuousness of the creature, or whether he is endowed with reason and even immortalit}^, remained in controvers3\ However, the controversy was quite immaterial, since the glorious nature of man was after all ever considered a gift of grace, «1BS^S ^fe^TTl' aiffii I -; i 1 \ 1 r i ■11^ it ler DKVRLOrMENT OF DOCTRTNK OF INCARNATION. 21)1 and this gift of grace was c'()nsif- preoiutt'd. ^ i w ■ !' I I J I !• The incarnation of God alone balanced the whole ^-'^•'•"'■* ""^ system of natural theology. Value (if ImuriKi- iiecause men believeu tiou. ' '^ +4 I! 1 t ' " Athana- sius" TJH'ory of Incariui- tiun. Two Results Secured. '■I'M'i OUTLINES OF Tin-: IIISTOKY OF IXXJMA. ill its reality, ihoy also asserted its necessity. Tliey referred it to deatli, to the dominion of demons, to sin and error, and not seldom in this connection they made, regarding the wickedness of man, assertions which recall Augustine. But when a definite theory was given, the idea of the aholition of perishableness and of the sting of death 'done held out; for the doctrines oi frecd()in excluded an (vxplation of sin and, on the other side, brought home the thought that heart-felt repentance before (j(»(1 frees from sin (thus, t^.f/. Athanasius, do iiicarn. VII.). After Ire- najus, Athanasius first > rt)poundeil a definite theory of the incarnati(m (1. c.). He bases it, on the one hand, upoi) the goodness /f God, i.e., upon his self assertion and honor; on the otlie)', upon the conse- quences oi sin, i.e. perishableness. These the Logos only is able to remove, who also originally created everything out of nothing. Regarding the means, Athanasius has recourse to all the Biblical concep- tions (sacrificial death, expiation of guilt, etc.) ; but he onl}^ carries out sti'ictly the thout;ht, that in the act of incarnation itself lies the changing from the doom of death to a(f>'h/.f>fTia, in so far as the physical union of the human with the Divine (the dwelling of God in the flesh) elevates humanity into the sphere of bliss and of the nfffhiiKria. The conseqaence of the incarnation is, therefore, primarily a transfox'- mation into the imperishable (renewal of the Divine likeness), but secondarily also the restoriiig of the knowledge of God, in so far as the earthly appeaches as reconciliation and restitutit)n over the whole world from the highest DKVELOl'MENT UV DOC IK INK OF INCAIJNATION. 2.il) ■ill' anj^cls down to the (Iccpcst (l('i)ths. Thus it dis- solves, as with Origi'ii, into a necessary cosmical process; it l)econies a special case of tlie {jjenerai omniproscnco of the Divine in creation. In the cosmos the alicnati(^n from God is set forth in the same manner as the return to him. Gregory assisted in transmitting to futurity this pantheistic idea, which he himself indeed never (juite clearly thought out so as to .separate it from its historical conditions. The pantheistic doctrine of redemption appears in after times in a dou^»le form (pantheistic monoj)hy- sites, the Arcopagite and his discii)les, etc.) : Either the work of the historical Christ appears as a special instance, i.e. as a symbol of the general purifj-ing and sanctifying activity which the Logos in common with the graded orders of super-sensuous creatures, and at tliQ same time for them, continually effects by means of holy agencies — or instantly with the thought of the incarnation the union of each individual soul with the Logos is conceived of, in which there is repeated what occurred in regard to Christ. A third form still is the view, that the humanity of Christ was a heavenly one, i.e. that the Logos always car- ried humanity within itself. Even unconcealed j)an- theism (nature as a whole is of one essence with Divinity) was not wanting. But all this lay only in the background, while the thought that Christ took upon himself humanity ;vs generally conceived spread iu the Ea.st and West, and destroyed the idea of a moral union of the l>ivinity Form of PaiUlH'istic Doctrim*. Hmp- lion Rc- ffiTt'd to Sill anil IVfitli. ' I 1 r I 3 5 'i i : i'i i h • •!• l! IV Adjiist- IlK'Ilt of Facts ill ilcsiis' Life to Ut'dt'rniH tioii Theory. 210 OUTLINKS OK TMK IIISTOHV OF IXMJMA. with Mti individual man, from wiiicli, of conrso, tho certainty of our participation in God cannot bo in- ferred. Tiioso who tauj^ht this moral union (Anti- ochians) ordinarily conceived redemj.tion, not as a restitution, the necessity of wliich they did not exactly feel, but as a leading up to a new state, as the close of the Divine pedaj^ogy. Whereas the theologians fol- lowing Athanasius and Gregory always conceived of the incarnation as a no(,'essary restitution and referred it tlierefore to sin and deatii. Accordingly they firm- ly maintained, so far ns the}' were not misled by pan- theism, that the incarnation was an historical deed of unfathomable Divine compassion, by means of which humanity has been restored to Divine life. Supplemoif. Men attempted to fit the facts of the history of Jesus into the work of redemption, which indeed was a success as regards the resurrection, but not wholly so in any other single point. The death on the cross remained in particular unintelligible, although Pauline points of view wore continually repeated; for by the incarnation everything had re£dly been given and deatli could at the most be but the conclusion of the "becoming flesh" (the sacrifi- cial view moreover has seldom since Grigon been far- ther fertilized according to the scheme of the Greek mysteries). Nevertheless there can be no doubt that death was considered a blissful mystery, before which one should bow down, and it is after all a question whether the dogmatic reticence here of the Greeks is less worthv in contrast with the bold reckon- ^ ii PKVKI.01'.MKNT OF DOCTRINE OK INCARNATION. 5J41 the (Sri'tit Topes. in^' and harj^ainiii}^ of the Occidfntal (li(M)l(>^ianH. •Tho latter hIik-o TuituUiaii and Cyprian havo over ,^''i!£i'J|;,' considered the endurance of death as a service, the value of which should be appraised in juristic ft)rnui- las; they have looked upon death as J^dtisfdctio and placaUn del and ai)[>lied to it the view gained hy the contemplation of the legal scheme of atonement (abo- lition of sull'ering and punishment for guilt through ilmcj'piatiou, i.e. through the mcrif of Christ's death which pacified an angry God. C^alculating the value to God of Christ's death : Ambroses Augustine, the A^."SsTine great popes). Moreover since And)rose they consist- ently advanced to the assumption, that the expiation (the merit) of Christ was made as nntn^ since hu- manity is the (h'btor and since? any services rendered can be ascribed onl}' to the man, who, to be sure, received his worthiness from his Divinity. Tliereby the West alienated itself from the East : Here is God who has taken humanity into union with his being, in conscMiuence of which his constitution as Re- deemer; yonder is man, tho propitiator, whose endur- ance of death has a Divine value. But the West, it is true, did not possess as yet a strict theory. It also still accepted the gnostic-eastern conceptions that a ransom was })aid to the devil, who thereby was de- frauded. 16 r i , 1 ! i il 1 ^ I 1; 242 OUTLINES OF THE Hl.^TORY OF DOGMA. S'. Hnmonsios of Fathor and Son. Liician, Adoptiou- isiu. CHAPTER VII. TliE DOCTRINE OF THE HOMOUSION OF THE SON OF GOD WITH GOD HIMSELF. Principal sources: The Church historians of the 4th and nth centuries and the works of the fathers of the 4th century. Gvvatkin, Studies of Arianisin, 1882; Molder, Athnnnsius, 1827; Zahn, Marcell., 1867; Hahn, Bibliothek d. Synibole, 3. Aufl. Is the Divine, which has appeared upon the earth and reunited man with God, identical with the high- est divine Being who rules heaven and earth, or is he same scini-diviner That was the decisive ques- tion of the Arian controversy. 1. — From the Beginning of the Controversi/ until the Council of Nica'a. At Antioch, 2G8, the Logos-doctrine had been car- ried through, but the ''/^'^'W^/^ was rejected. Yet the legacy of Paul of Samosata did not perish. Lucian, the most learned exegete of his time, took ic up and founded a i)oi)ular, influcntijd (wogotico-theological school, which for a lung time held aloof from the Cliurch, but later made its peace with the same, and became the foster-mother of Arianism. Lucian started from adoptionism ; the high value which he placed upon the dereJopnient of Christ {-no/.u-rj) proves this, But he condescended to introduce the hypostatic Logos, still as /.<'>y„^'-y.T':>-;ia^ as created, capable and in need of development, which is to be f.TW^Wf^^'^^T^^^ le (1, )0 I DEVELOPMENT OF POCTRINE OF 1N(\\RXATI()X. '243 sharply (listinguished from the etornul, impersonal Logos of God. The ego in Christ is tlierefore a heavenly pre-existent Being (no longer man, as with Paul) — by this admission Lucian made his peace with the dogma and the Origenists — hut human qualities were attributed to the same, the incai-nation became a mere assuming of the flesh, and by means of the Aristotelian dialectics and Biblican exegesis a doctrinal principle was now propounded in which the unhegotten Creator (the " Eternal ") was placed in sharp contrast with all created beings, conse- quently also with the IjOgos-Christ, and theology became "technology", that is, a doctrine of the un- hegotten and the begotten was worked out in syllo- gisms founded upon the holy codex, without genu- ine interest in the th(Hight of redemption, yet not v/ichout moral energy, and this was spread abroad by disciples closely allied and proud of their dialec- tics and their exegetical art. To these Arius also belonged, who at a ri])e age became deacon and presbyter in Alexandria. There, at that time, a tendency was represented in the epis- copate which mistrusted the luv^para zi]< 7.7/.y^>.'x>;s- tpiXo(70(fia< and put aside the thought of the difference between Father and Logos. Although Arius had for some time combated Christological errors along with his bishop Alexander, yet about the year 3 1 8 he began to differ with the latter, and the bishop found it necessar}^ about 3"2() to condemn and dispose Arius and some of the other C i^J t sy Tlioolnpy IV'COtlK'S Ti'chnol- Arius. r ii ■ rO' 2U outlinp:s of the history of dooma nt :MJ:i I ) EiiRobins of Nico- niedia. Constaii- tinc, Hosius. Alexan- der's Fn'^ei"i ro'') ol^ '/£: ''/i''v', de) 0'.i'i<. i^ annr) Ttr) f'/eirj o 6».''a;. AloxiiiKlor assei'ted the eternal co-ex- istonce without beginning of the Father Jind the Son (influence of IrenaiusV) He inclmled the Son in the being of the Father as a necessary constituent part; he refuted the tenets, that the Son is not eternal, that he was created out of nothing, that he is not (f'xrst God, that he changes, that he has passed through a moral development [uid is only adopted Son. He consciously contended for the conmion faith in the Church, for the Divinity of Christ, and he rejected above all the dialectics about "begotten " and "un- xJlat'-efri begotteii'\ He quoted in favor of his view the Scrip- Begotten and UiiIh!- ture proofs (John 1: 1-3; 1: IH; 10: 30; U: 8, !» Koiten. and 28; Math. IJ: 17; 11 : 27; I. John 5:1; Col. I : 15, U); Rom. 8: 32; Heb. 1: 2 seq.; Prov. 8: :50; Psa. 2: 7; 110: 3; 35: 10; Isa. 53 : 8). llewasfond of using the favorite expression of Origen : Tlie Son is the perfect reflection; but even the following ex- pression does not satisfy him : -'> nnziu yai>ay-r^i>i^iz(n o r.azr^n. He approaches Sabellianism, but desires to ^s^'^sXn' reject it strongly, and asserts that the Fatlier is nevertheless greater than the Son who belongs to his being. He wants to see the " coming forth " of such a Son revered as a mysterj^ : It is a question of faith, not of speculation. Still he often uses unin- telligible, confused and contradictory expressions, among which even T.azi>uy^ ^Uoyo'-'ia is not wanting, " ! ,1 I i 5 ^ '■- tAi 24(5 OUTLINES OK THE HISTORY OF DOOMA. ft I ■': an Arius' Ductriue. God Alone Ett'iiiiil. which contrast unfavorably with liic phiiii, clear sentoncos ol" Arins, for whom it was an easv task to show that llie doctrine of Alexander was neitlier protected against dualism (two '''r-"'^;'"), nor against gnostic emanationism (-""/5r»//;, d-i'i/iinna)^ nor against Sabellianism (ofo-'/rw//), nor against the representa- tion of the corporeality of God, and had the character- istics of a chameleon and was Biblicall}^ untenable. Arius taught the following (see his own letters and the letters of his friends, the fragments of the Thalia, the characterization in Alexander and Atha- nasius, the writings of the later Arians) : (1) The one God, besides whom thei'o is no other, is alone unbegotten, without beginning, eternal ; he is inexpressible and incomprehensible; furthermore he is the cause and creator oi all things. In these attributes consists his nature (the unbegotten Gen- erator). His activity is in creafuuj ("to Ijoget" is only a synonym). Everything wdiicli is, has been created — not out of the nature of God (otherwise he would not be simple and spiritual), but out of his own free w411. Accordingly God has not always been Father, else the created would be eternal ; tlie created also can never receive the essence of God ; for this precisely is uncreated. Hhn Dwc'H (*^) ^'^i^^iii tliis God dwcll, as inseparable poi(;er,9, and Logos. Wisdom and Logos; there are beside many created poive7^s. When Son ('^^ Before the world was, God created out of his v>as Not. ^^^^ £j^.g^ ^^Yi an independent Being {(>o(T':a, ur.uaraai^)^ DEVELOl'MENT OF DOCTKINE OF INCARNATION. 247 Son Dis- tinct from Fatlier. as an instnnneiit fur ilic production of the other creatures, who according to Scripture is called Wis- dom, Son, Likeness, Word; like all creatures he was created out of nothing and had a heginning. There was therefore a time when this Son was not. He is only called inappropriately "' Son " ; the other crea- tures are also called thus by Scripture. (4) This " Son " therefore is, according to his being, an independent magnitude, totally distinct from the " Father". He has neither one being with the Father, nor like qualities of nature (otherwise there would be two Gods) . Rather has he a free will and is capable of changing. But ho has resolved permanently upon the good. Thus by virtue of his choice he has become uncliangeable. (5) The " Son", then, is not very God, and he has Divine qualities only as acquired and only in part. Because he is not eternal, his knowledge also is not perfect. To him, therefore, is not due like honor with the Father. (G) Still he differs from all creatures; he is the ^''"froiH''''" xrint'.a rihuv^^ through whom everything has been created ; he stands in an especial relationship of grace to God. Through God's communication and his own progress, he has become God, so that we may call him "only begotten God". (7) This Son has truly assumed a human body. The attributes, Avhicli the historical Christ mani- fested, show that the Logos to which they belonged is a being capable of suffering and is not perfect. Son not Very Ood. Son Truly Incar- nated. i " i i t i 1 II ' I Scripture Proof. 248 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. 'siffl"* (^) By the side of and below tho Son stands the uaoo.on. j|,^,]y t^pii-jti for tho Christian boHeves in throe soparato and different onrtiut {''TzotTrdne's)'^ the Holy Si)irit was created througli the Son. (!») Scripture proofs for these doctrines were : Deut. G: 4; 32: UO; Prov. S : 22; Ps. 45 : S; Math. 12: 2S; Mk. i;i: ;32; Math. 20: 41; 28: 18: Lk. 2: 52; 18: 1!); John 11: 34; 14: 28; 17: 3; Acts 2 : 30; I. Cor. 1: 24; 15: 28; Col. 1: 15; Phil. 2: .syv/.; Heb. 1: 4; 3: 2; John 12: 27; 13: 21; Math. 20: 3'.); 27: 40, etc. Dialeetically the sophist Asterius above all de- fended this doctrinal conception. With strict Arian- ism the tradition coming from Paul and Lucian had most weight; with tho more liberal party (Eusebius of Cesarea) the doctrine of subordination as taught by Origen. Athanasius' doctrine, in its dogmatico-scientific delineation not imi)ortant, was great in its victorious perseverance in the faith. It comprises really only one tenet: God himself Jtas entered into humanity. It is rooted wholly in the thought of redemption. Judaism and paganism have not brought back hu- manity into communion with God: Only God could deify us, ?*.c., adopt us as his sons. He who denies that Christ is very God, is still a Jew or a heathen. Athanasius has in fact no longer a Logos-doctrine ; he is a Christologian. He thinks only and always of that Christ who is God. He did not care for a formula; even the ('>iioo>'>fno^ is not so often used by him as one might think. His main principles are the following : Athana- sius' Opposing Doctiiiif. DEVELOI'MKNT OF DOCTKINK OF INCAKNATION. '-it'.t old Lo(;()s- Dortriiif I)()iif Awiiy witli. (1) If Christ is Gotl— and that he must be as lie- ^'J^V.^iiv' (leenier — theti he has as such nothing creainre-like in cv.'i't.'ir.s. him and belongs in no sense to created existences. Athanasius makes jnst as strict a distinction bo- tween created and uncreated as Arius, but he sets the Son aside as belonging to God in opposition to the world. (2) Since the Divine in Christ is not created, it can also not be postnlatcd (jf tlu» world and the creation of the world ; besides, God needs no mediation for the creaticjn of the world. Conse- quently the idea of the Divine, who has redeemed man, is to be separated from the idea of the world ; the old Logos-doctrine was done away with. Nature and revelation were no longer considered identical. The Logos-Son is the principle of salvation, not the principle of the world. {',]) But since Divinity is a unity {!><»'h) and the Son does not belong to the world, he must belong to this very unit}^ of the unbegotten Power which is the Father. (4) The very name " Father '' signifies that there is present in Divinit}' a second being. God has i''***^ ^""• always been Father; he who calls him this, names the Son also; for the Father is Father of the Son, and not properly Father of the world, for it has been created; uncreated, however, is the Divine trias, ex- isting in unity. (5) Consequently the Son is yi'^-^r^.na Ton -ar/>t)')(TU)^ in Athanasius. (7) All creature-(iualities which the Scriptures \ DKVi'.I.Ol'.MKNT OV |)()( TlilN !•; Ol' I N( A KNATK >N". -i.M ascrilK) to oosiis Clii'ist luiw ivfcri'iicr iikmcIv to jiis !i'""'lll'"'' •* *,j'l Ull 1 1 li 'S lii'luii); to His lliiiiiiiii Nut lire. Ariaiiisni, Alhuiia- Riniiisiii. huiiiaii nature. The exalt; it ion also rd'crs to the sanM; i.e. to onr exaltation; for tlie union of the God-Logos with human nature was from the hegin- ning a substantial and perfeet onc^ (Mary as '''^'-rn/ov) : The body beeame his l)ody. Prover])s S: •.'•.' scq. also has reference to the incarnate Logos. Both dootrlnos are formally iu this rcsiu'rt alike, tli;., ih tlu'in religion and theology are most intimately mingle ,inus religious interest, and also no real philoso])! ileal inter- est, much more was everything hollow and formalistic, even 2 f' ti I '■.1; ( ! I > ">\ . f^'>l . li . a 25'^ OUTLINES OF TIIK IIISTOKY OF lUKJMA. a i)ii('ril»' enthusiasm for sporting with husks ami shells and a childish sclf-sullicic'ncy in setting at work unmejining syl- logisms. The <»j)|)onentH wer<' (juite right : This doetrine leads hark to paganism. A relative value only is due to it, when, eoming in contact with uncultured and harharian nations, it was ohliged to strip oir its philosophical garments and in that way was able to j»ass itself otf essentially as adoptionism, as the veneration of Christ by the sid(^ of (fod l)ased upon Hih- Ortlirxlnx Heal jjassages ((Jerman adoptianism). The orthodox doctrine. Dottriiif. Valiii- unit on th(> contrary, possesses its histiiig value through its nuiin- iJclctHs. tenanceof the faith that in Christ (Jod himself has redeemed mankind and brought us into communion with himself. P>ut, since the (Jod in Christ was conceived as ''((Iter <'f/<' " of the Father, and since redemption was conceived in a mystico- ])hysical form, there resulted, Inconc(>iv- 1. Formulas, the direct gainsaying of which is evident iiiili' Fonmilas. (one = three), and ideas, which cannot be conceived, l)utonly asserted in words. Thereby in the jtlace of the kiioirlechjc of God which Christ had promised, was put a mystery, and this was to be recognized as the most profound knowledge. By the side of the miracle, as characteristic of religion, was i)laced the miracle of ideas as characteristic of the true theology ; 2. The assertion that the Person in Christ is the Logos, one being with (Jod, could be maintained only when one reversed the interpretations of all evangelical reports concerning him, and understood his history docetically. Therefore, the in- troduction of the absurd, and the abandonment of the histor- ical Christ in his most valuable traits, is the couseijuence of the orthodox doctrine. But the claim that Jesus Christ has led men back to God, and given to them Divine life, was still maintained. This conviction of faith was saved by Athanasius against a doctrine which, upon the whole, did not appreciate the inward nature of religion, whicli sought in religion only instruction, and finally found satisfaction in an empty dialectics. Contradict Bcriptuiv. DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTKINE OF INCARNATION. 25;) It in eas\' to sec that with Alius, as wtH as with Atlmna- „P"**Vl sins, the (ontradictioiiH and wcakiu'sst's flow from tho reception ThwloKy. of Orif^cnisiii, that is, from thi- scicntilic theology. Without this, that is. without the doetrim' of the pre existent, hypo- statical Lo;4os, Arianism wouhl Iiave hceu adoptioiiism, or pure rationalism, and Atlumasius would havo heen forced either to turn to modalism, or to relin(iuish the idea of tho Divine; "nature" of Christ. At tlio synod of Nicwji {•.)-ir>) tho lionioiisios 'Jrh.mphT (HosJus) finally concjueivd, thanks to tho awkward tactics of tlio Avians and Eiisebians (Origenistic niiddlo party), to tlio docisivonoss of tho orthodox and to th(» dotonnination of tho emperor. Into the Ctosarean creed tlu; watch-words ^£v>r^'V-'>ra on -nir,{hi-^. ra, Ix T/]^^ nnnid^ T(r> 7:nzi>o^^ ujUHi'irsui'^ zip zazfti woro in- serted, the Arian formulas expressly condemned, and this creed was made the law of tho Church. Almost all the bishops (oOO? ;U8?) submitted, Arius and a few compfmions were excommunicated and their fol- lowers persecuted. Athanasiiis attended this synod as deacon, probably not without taking an important part. 2. — Until the Death of Constantins. Tho victory had been gained too (piickly. Neither prl-niature formally, nor essentially had it been sufficiently worked out, therefore the contest had really only begun. Men saw in the homousios an unbiblical, new formula, the making of two Gods, or the intro- duction of Sabellianism, and, in addition, the death ■i vi II ' .1 M'M ! t 25 J onr.iNEs of titr tttstoky of nOCJMA. Athnnasius Haiiislit'd. Constnn- tins Kiivors Ariaiis. Eusphius of Nicomedia. of clear scioTicc. Among tlioopponontH who together came forward ms coiiHcrvatives, two parties now be- came clearl}' i)romiiieHl, the Arians nnd the Origen- iHts (Kiis(>l)ians) to wlioni tl>c in(lilT<'nMils joiiird tliems(>lves. I>tit the}' were united in the cont(>st against ortliodoxy (jjrincipal champion jigainst it was Eiisehius of Nicomedia), Constantine soon understood tliat he would have to come to an agreement with the jinti-Nicenc coali- tion, which afl(>r o'l>< became anti-Athanasian, for the young bishop was the most decided Xicene. Personal difTerences arose at a time when th(» ambi- tion and power of the ecclesiastics could iinally reckon upon the highest gratification. In '.):]') Athn- nasius was declared deposed at Tyre, and in .'l.'ir. he was banished by the emperor to Trier, The solenm reception of Arius into the Church was frustrated by his death. In 'M]7 Constantine died, really aj)prov- ing the promulgating, under the cover of the Niceno creed, of hostile doctrines. His sons divided the empire. Athanasius (;)I)T) returned. But Constantius, the ruler of the East, rightly understood that he could not govern with orthodoxy, and he did not feel hijnself bound, like his father, to the Nicene creed. He deposed the orthodox bishop of the capital; Eusebius of Nico- media took his place. In Cicsarea an Arian, Acacius, succeeded Eusebius; Athanasius was deposed, but he anticijiated his banishment by flight to Rome (1339), leaving Egypt in wild disorder. The Euse- DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCARNATION. 255 (.jl l)iaTiH vvcro not ma.stors nf tlu? sitnation, hut i\w West was true NicciK^ and the stioni^hold of Oriental ortho- doxy. The EuHebians did not wisli to break with the West; they were, therefore, ohlip'd to try to (juietly ])ii.sh aside the Nieene creed, replacinj^ in mere pretenee the lioniousios by In'tler l»il)li('al fornndas and demanding \\\o carrying out of the de- position of Athanasius. It was of great advantage to the Orientals that a strict Nieene and a friend of Athanasius, Marcellus of Anevra, did not sanction Miimiiim " i)f Ancyru. the common foundation of the teaching, the philo- sophical-Origenistic Logos-doctrine, but declared the Logos to be the Power of God, which only at the in- carnation had become divine Person and "Son", in order to return to the Father when once he had fin- ished his work (the Orientals saw in this doctrine "Sabellianism "). Julius of Rome and Athanasius declar(>d ^larcellus to bo orthodox, and provcMl there- by that they were concerned alone al)out redi^nptive faith and laid aside the fonnulas set up by tli(> Ori(>ntals at Antioch (:)U), although tiK> latter now formally renounced Arianism and establishcvl a doc- trine which ofild be taken for Nieene. Political i'easons compelled Constantius to be obliLj- <,v""r'' "^ '■ ^ San lira. ing to his orthodox brother, Constans, the ruler of the West. The great council of Sardica {'.WA) was intende t M te t 1 i # M' ■' / •.' n Synods at Milan. flonstan- titis Solo Ruler. Synods of Arlt's and :\Iilan. 250 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. exodus of tlio Orientals (to Philippopolis) the deposi- tion of the leaders, taking tlieir position rigidly upon the basis of tl^e Nieene creed. The opponents reit- erated the !th iVntiochian formula. Constantius himself seems to have mistrusted them for a time; he certainly feared to irritate his brother who was en- deavoring to gain the supremacy. The Orientals re- iterated once more in a long formula their orthodoxy (Antioch, 34: i) and the minimum of their demands. .A.lthougli the West at the Milan synods (3i5-347) i'ojeciod the doctrine of Photinus of Sirmium, who from tiie doctrine of his master, Marcellus, had de- veloped a strictly ado])tian conception (the Logos never became a person), it yet remained otherwise firm, while in the East political bishops already meditated peace with Athanasius. The latter was restored by Constantius, who was hard pressed by the Persians, and ho was greeted with great rejoic- ings in Alexandria (3-J:(!). About 31(S it appeared as if orthodoxy had conquered; only Marcellus and the icord o/Kio'irr'.!)^ seemed still to give offence. But the death of Constans (350) and the defeat of the usurper Magnentius (353) changed everything. If Constantius during the hist years was obliged t(j bow before a few bishops, his own subjects, who ha(' ruled his brother ho now as sole ruler was de- termined to govern the Church and pay back the humiliations. Already in 351 ('^d Sirmian synod) the Oriental bishops had returned to action. At the synods of Aries (353) and Milan (355) the Western j f r* . . ' .i . ^. art T ^;** ' * W'^'^^^r " J^S ■ -.m^??^ T'.vrflt5'"'«J«^'^ DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTHTNE OF INCARNATION. Ol 'S- io episcopate was ol^liged to como to tonus. At first nothing further was demanded of it than the con- demnation of .Athanasins, but this meant a diver- gence on the question of faith, and the bishops al- lowed it to be forced noon them (a few exceptions: Paulinas of Trier, Lucifer of C^ngliari, Eusebius of Vercelli; also Hosius, Liberius, Hilarius had to go into exile). Athanasius anticipated his deposition by flight into the desert (:55fi). Union seemed restored, but it was as state ecclesiasticism, against which orthodox Western bishops fiercely inveighed, now only remembering that emperor and state should not meddle with religion. The union of the victors was only a seeming one, Actius nn,i " ' Eunoiniu.s. for it became apparent that it did not go beyond negations. Strict aggressive Arianism again came forward in Aetius and Eunomius and wanted to carry through the "anomoian" doctrine ('/>''/i"j<'9 y.a\ xara Tzdvra xat xut uhnia-^) . In opposition to this, semi- Arianism placed itself in sharp contrast (the "un- changeable likeness", v!i.ini>i xari/. r.'v.za y.a\ xara rr,,/ on- (Tiav). These homoiusians (Georgius of Laodicea, Eustathius of Sebaste, Eusebius of Emesa, Basilius of ATicyra) had learned that the Son must be, as to Kusrbius •J I 'of f.niesa. Bn.siliiis of Homoiu- sians: Georcius Laodicen, being, of like fsse/ice with the Father; as scientific Anc, men (cosmol(^gians) they did not wish to abandon the cosmic potentiality of the Logos and the descend- ing trinity. They understood how, with the Scrip- tures as a basis and in connection witli Cliristojogy, to so formulate their doctrine that it made an im- 17 yra. \ \i 1 \' ,■• \ Frnin 857 .'iin CViiistiiii- tiiis Opt'iily Fiivi lis Arianisin. Remi- Ariaiis, Syiidds at SelciU'ia and Riiuiui. 258 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. pressi(m even upon Nicene Occidentals, who, to hr sure, were still half idiots in scientific theolog}'. Tin; third party was that of the politicians, who applauded that formula which had the best prospect of settling the contest (Ursacius and Valens : 'v/''^'^' ^'^^''^^ '^''/s- y/ia(fd<^). The period from ;}57-3r)l is the time during which the emperor, openly dropping the Nicene creed, sought for a Cliristological imperial formula, and proposed with all energy to carry it through at the synods. Here, finally, only the " 'V' -"S" ^'-'"'^ ''h^ Ypatpd^ " could be presented; for with this unmeaning formula, the Arians, semi-Arians and even the ortho- dox could make friends, since it directly contra- dicted no doctrine. The Sirmian synods had not as yet accomplished what they ought, and they even showed a passin" tendency to strict Arianism. At Ancyra (358) the semi-Arians rallied powerfully. Two great contemporaneous synods in the East and West (at Seleucia and Iliniini) were expected to pro- claim tlio Mh Sirmian formula, a dogmatico-political masterpiece of the emperor. But when the one as- sumed a homoiusian, the other an orthodox attitude, they were terrorized, kept in suspense, and the ho- moiusian imperial creed was forced upon them in exchange for concurrence in the expulsion of strict Arianism (synods at Nice and Constantinople .')('»<»). Afterward all homoiusians wore nevertheless ban- ished from the influential positions, so that, in spite of the expulsion of Aetius, an Arianism, moderated in •ict (»()). ){in- ittnl DEVKLOPMENT OF DOCTRINE OF INCAKNATIOX. 250 through want of principle, actually established itself in the Church as the state religion. 3. — Until the Councils at Constantinople^ 381, 383. In the year 3(;i C'onstantius died. Julian sue- '(^S^n.u- ceeded him, and accordingly, instead of the artificial jiiiian^Kiii- iniion, the real parties succeeded again to their rights. But the honioiusians were no longer the " middle party", no longer the ''conservatives" in the old sense; for in o})positioii to Arianism, they had dec})- oned and strengthened their doctrine (conservatives possess elasticity). Conservative and conciliatory were the homoians who inclined toward Arian- ism. Here the change in the Orient — at first, in- deed, only in the minds of the most prominent theo- logians — is sliown. The hoinoiiisians^ disciples of Origen, distinguished alike for ecclesiastical feeling, asceticism a)ul pure seioice, capituUded to the honiousios, an alliance which Hilarius zealously urged forward. Julian ])erinitted the l)anished bishops, therefore <7l'''."^^'°'^ '■ * ' Hislinps also Athanasius, to return. The S3'n()d of Alexandria ^fnln" ( )<)•?) marks the turning-point in so far as Atha- nasius there admitted that the Niceno creed sans ]}hrase should be valid; that is, he expressly re- nounced the phrase "one being ^^ {one hypostasis) and thus allowed such an interpretation of the uiiMontno^ as made it "one essence'' (instead of "one Exile. II B: 2G0 OUTLINES OK THE HISTOTIV OF DOGAIA. Tjucifcr. Apnl linea- ris (if Laoilicca iiiiii tilt' heiuf/"), which constituted tlioroforo three liyposta- sos. But this concession and the great leniency toward those who once had signed the -Ith Sirniian formula provoked the displeasure of some of the prominent Occidentals (Lucifer) and martyrs of the faith. In the West one felt that the old doctrine (the substantial unity of the Deity is the rock and the plurality is the m3'ster3') had been inverted (the trinity of the divine Persons is the rock and the unity is the problem), and Athanasius himself was not able to add real friends to his new scientific friends in Asia Minor, Cappadocia and Antioch; for now tlie science of (^rigen had been rescued for ortho- doxy. The great theologians, Apollinaris of Laodicea and the three Cappadocians, started from Origen and Tiiifc Cap- padociaus. the <'iinnia now received the middle sense between the abstract idea of " beii^ " and the con- crete idea of "individual !)eing"; so, however, that i* v'erv s^.'ongly inclined t(^ the i'oiiner. 'y~o(7za(Tiut \v<\ rejected. The unity of thc^ Deity, 1)K\ KLOI'MKNT OF DOCTRIXP: ' >V FXCAltNATION. 'IC] ligov. was leity, liilitatfd. wliicli 1lu» (*;i{)j);i(l()('i;iiis were (•» iiccfiicd nboiil, was not the same as Athaiiasius and tlif ( )c'('i(l»:iilals liad in mind. '/:V>£ oO^;'u iv Tncrh n-dfrr'U'erriy lu^amo tlu» formula. In order to render clear tb(> r(\d dilTerenco in the Persons within the unity of the Deity, (Jre^- ory of Nyssa added to them -/.';-.-; ■ rr<;//^.-(/K- (w/i/irr^r^s' ^ai>ay-r^y:X"''-T't'.. i:aintT(i. /n.'W'/ar/) , ;illd indeed to the Father {\\o ''lyzy.-r^nia (not MS lu'ing', hut as mode of heing ['"/''^;^~] of tli(» Fatiier), to the Son the Yvy.y,n'ji — even the older homoiiisinns had heen here more re- served than Greg')ry — and to tlie Spirit i/.-uinun:.:. The Origenistie-Xeo-Platonic trinitv-siieculation he- ni-iKonistic came rehahilitated. The Logos idea again came to t jo',"" k'Ii^,\. the front. The unity of the Deity was again provr'd from the monarchy of the Fath(^r, not from the ''"'- ofxrio^. Thus "science'' formed its alliance with the Nicene dc^ctrine. While in the beginning scientists — also among the heathen — ackno\vde(lged Arius *o he in the right, now men hecami^ champions of i >e Nicene doctriiie, to whom even a Lil)anius exten- 'd the palm branch. They stood upon the soil ' a scientific contemplation of the worbl, were in uc- ct)rd with Plato, Origen and Libanius, and i futed Eunomius amidst the apphause of the philosophy's. At the same time it was a victory of Xeo-Platoiiisni over Aristotelian dialectics. Thus orthodoxy in union with science had from about ',Vi()-'.V.)A a beanti- ful springtime, followed, however, by destruciive storms, or, rather, by the blight of traditionalism. Men dreamed the dream of an eternal union between Spritif,'- Tiiiif of Ortho- doxy. It ■J I i - 11. m ! ]'<.li(!(Ml Mvi'iits Hoiiio- usios. 2rr.l Ol'TUNKS OK rilK HISTOHY OK IXXJMA. f.iitli .111(1 !-('i('Ji('(\ True, it was? not vnidistnrbed. The old-t'aith urthport from the orthodox West. Liberius of Rome; was not disin- clined, and Basilius of Oaisarea was after o70 in vig- (;rous activity. Yet Damascus of Rome returned to the old harsh standpoint, and it needed several synods (in the seventies) to convince him of the orthodoxy of the new orthodox Orientjds. These at last signed (at Antioch IiT'.i) tlu^ formulas of faith of Damascus, without, however, being able to settle the schism in Antioch. But the subscription was already a sequence of the world- historical events tliat in the year 375 in the West the youthful (iratian, wholl}' devoted to the Church and orthodoxy (Damascus, Ambrose) succeeded the tolerant Valentinian, and after ;378 became sole ruler (Yalens died at Adri- anople contending against the Goths). Tn the year 370 the orthodox Si)aniard Theodosius was elevated iu 'oiU'ut. to be co-regent and emperor of the Orient. He was (iratiaii Sut'oi't'ils '.'alt'iitiii- iuii. Tlicodo- sius Bc- cipiiii's Em- DKVELOPMENT OF DOfTRINK OF TNCAHN ATIoX. '2(1:') (IcU'i'inincd to govern the (*hurch likc^ Coiist.uitius, but ill the souse of sfricf Oecidontal orthodoxy : The celebrated ediet of Thessalonica showed this in the year ;}8(> (issued by the emperor imnuMliately after his baptism*). He deprived the Arians of all their churches in Constantiiiopli* and forbade the heretics in general to worship in the cities. But he soon per- ceived that he could rule in the Orient onl}' with Oriental orthodoxy, that he dare not apj^ly the severe standard of the West, and that he must win half- friends entirely over. He called, therefore, in '^Sl an Oriental council at the capital and ai)pointed as pre- siding officer Meletius, that is, th(» leadc o' Hie new orthodox party in Antioch. Thereby he of course gave offence to the Occidentals and Eg5'ptians, but securcMJ to himself the Cappadocians and the Asia Minor theologians. At the synod the contrast was so strongl}' expressed that a rupture was near at hand (the new presiding officer, Gregory Nazian- zen, had to resign). But finally the synod (150 bish- ops) proclaimed theNicene doctrine sans 2)Ji rase, the complete homoousion of the three Persons, and also expelled the Macedonifms. In fact, however, "e(iual- ity of being '' concpiered in the sense of " equality of es- *"Ci()K'/o.s popnlos . . . //I tali ruliiinJtn rcUiiUinc firsari. (pKiiii (U- vinum Pi-tnim (ipostdl.ini triuddisse Romdiiis nlhiin k.sv/iu' fj.->(>n,\ In it the " ^x r>;^< oorria? Tn^> -azfio's " is wanting, and it contains a formula about the Holy Spirit which does not proclaim the orthodox doctrine, but avoids the cjiiestion at issue (ro xnillD'/, To !^till>Z nUTftn^i i/.~(li)£0()flZ'^iii'^()v y.ni (Tov tita t(7)> rytufr^Tib'^) . How it Came into the rec- ords of the synod (through Cyril? EpiphaniusV) and how it afterwards became the symbol of the council ticivi' is (juite obscure. Still ecclesiastical legend-making Legt'uil- Makiug. iij^s iiere exercised a strange justice in appending to the synod of the newly orthodox bishops a symbol in which the anti-Arian anathemas and Nicene watch-words are wanting. In reality under the cover of the v!io<,oiTtog men indeed continued in the Orient in a kind of liomoiusianisni, which is to this day orthodox in all their churches.* ♦Concerning ll»i" symbol soc my article in Herzojc's R. Encyclop. 3. Aurt DKVKI.Ol'MKNT f)!' hoCTKINK nK 1\( AKNATION. '2n5 'i'ii(« orcidnit was hij^iiiy dispii-ascd witii tho ,i;*;;i;!;;i;i, course 1)1" llic synod, sinco, among otiior tilings, it council, had acknowledged tli(* orthodoxy of nion who in R(^nio were strongly suspected. Ke})resontations were made, a schism was threatened. I'ut tlie ( )rient was no longer disjjosed to hend further under tho dogmatic rule of Rome, and Theodosius, keeping tho two lialves of the empire sei)arat(\ rcMuained firm and ])rndent, and avoided consenting to a general council, which (iratian (Amhrose) wished t(^ call. In the year l{S-> thev dn>w nearer together, since in Rome, as well as in Constantinople, synods wi^re contemporaneously in session, and since these showed themselves more conciliatory regarding personal questions — to this point tho controversy had nar- rowed down inasmuch as the Antiochian schism continued. But, above all this, circumstance gn^atly contributed to a reconciliation; the spirituid leader of the Occident, Ambrose, went to school to the science of the Cappadocians and became powerfully influenced by it. In the year 381 jperhaps nine-tenths of the Orient was Arian, Theodosius endeavored to frighten them, later, however, also to win them (synod of 3813 at Constantint)ple ; even Eunomius was invited) . But soon he abandoned the gentle method and Am- brose seconded him in the West. One dare assume that most of the Arian and semi-Arian Greek bish- ops did submit; only the extreme left r<.*mained firm (Eunomius) . More rapidly than Hellenism did Arian III 381 Niiic- rciiths Df < )ii»'iit AriuD. !! I ■ ii n, ( ' 2C)C, OUTfJNKS OK TIIK lllSTOin' OK I)0(;MA. ism (Ii(f out amorifj^ thn (ii'('<'ks. Truo, tlic ortliodox l.iyiiicii, always consiu'vativo, coiisiikn'oU the ortlio ilox foi'iiuila luoro as a nocessary evil and an iiiox- pliral)l(> mystery than as an oxpivssion of their faith. The victory of orthodoxy was a triumph of priests and tlu'oloj^ians over the indeed deeply rooted faith of the ])eople; but it did not make this faith an}' clearer. Supplement : The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit and of the trinity. Doctrinoof 1. Siuce the early davs, jdono:side of a belief in the Spirit. Father and Son, there was a belief in the Holy S])irit ; but what the latter was, m* wdiat significance it has, became wholly obscure after the declining of Mon- tanisni and the retiring of the combination "spiritus- ecclesia". The scientific theology of the apologists did, in general, not know what to do with it, and even in the ;}d century the majority viewed the Holy irencpiis, Spirit as a power. However, alrcnidy Irenteus and Tertulliau. Tertallian tried to honor it as a divine power within the Ueit}'. Tertullian admitted it as " God " and as " Person " into his descending but consubstantial trinity {JUio subicctus). Now the Neo-Platonic speculation, science, also found three Divine hy- oripen. postases ncccssary. Origen in accordance with and following the Bible took the Holy Spirit into his theology as the third constant Being ; to be sure as a creature subordinate to the Son, governing the small- I>KVKM)I'.MKNT ( H' DOCTUINK < H' INCAKNATION. 20? pst spluM'c, file circlf (if lli(> s.iiict illrd. Tlio inaiincr of (lisposinj^ of tlic (loctriiir mI' the Holy Spirit l»y IVrtiilliaii and <)rij<('i), \vli belief in tlu^ H<)ly Spirit, without addition or explanation. Athanasius during the fu'st decade never thought of it. Whoever considered it Divine in the full sense deemed it a ])ower; he who conceived it as I)ersoiial, took it for something (piit(> suboi'dinate : Tn fact it was really only a word ;, id it remained such within the trinity even afterward. The Arians solicited the farther formulation of the doctrine, since, by the concession of the inferiority of the Holy S])irit, they were able to sujiport ea;ily the subordination of the Son. Exactly for this Rea- son, however, the orthodox became thoughtful. Athanasius, after about :j58, gave his attention to ihri^'ALi-T the Holy Spirit and never wavered a moment in re- gard to the formula: Since he must be worshipped, he is »^£'3s^ uriudixT'.o^^ like the Son, and belongs in no Arians niscuss C^llrsliiill. I' II : I n '■.I ^^i^ -■ .0. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // Zi 1.0 I.I '25 1^ lis ^ m 1^ 1^ 2.0 1.8 U IIIIII.6 V] <^ /i O^ ■ v> y /A Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 4^ # #; 4^-^ ^\ ^Q> V 6^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 V^ M < I 1 ' i ; ' ■,^i n ' i, iM M 208 OITUNIOS OK TlIK IlISToKV OK fXMJ.M A. Irwprtfd In scUSC lo tllc WOI'M ('7>y>. iwrTt<; uyitaifixi. In their embarrassment in as- signing to the Holy Spirit a proper kind of being in relation to the Father, they decided to attribute to him, according to John, the eternal txTzs/ifj't^ and l<"<'>f>- ^vorlt^^ e'"T£s\ But after 302 the theologians in the Occident on Orient. Were indefatigable in imposing upon the half-won Oriental brethren the Holy Spirit as '^eo? oimo'xTuts^, and, in union with the Cappadocians, they succeeded. It is true that still in the year 381 the Macedonians (pneumatomachoi) were invited to the synod, but only to hear their condenmation and to be expelled. The anathemas of Damascus strengthened the situa- DEVELOPMENT OF l>0( THINE OF INCARNATION. 0<'.'.> tion. Honroforth one was no longer pcnnittc*! to teach that the Holy S})irit is subordinate to th(* Son; indeed, since to the Greek the Father remained the root of the Deity, the homousios of the Spirit seemed safely secured only when he is traced back to the Father alone, the Son thereby not bi-ing taken at all into account. 2. The Cappadocians, and before thom their great ^^inns^^Ui^- teacher ApoUinaris, established the orthodox doctrine Trinity. of the trinit}' (vid. page "2 GO) : One Divine essence in three Subjects, the ecjual nature of which contained in their consubstantialit}- is distinctly stami)ed in their qualities and activities; their diirerences in the characteristics of their mode of being ; but the Father alone is fihar^, the two others airtara^ yet not as the world is (really Tertullian had already used the for- mulas " nature " and " person " ; to him, however, the trinity was still entirely a trinit}^ of revelation, not of immanence). By means of the trinity, so they now said, Christianity is distinguished from the pagan polytheism and the "stark" Jewish mono- theism. Ever since the appearance of the homoiusians, re- rSnlJi^nf Triiiitv gard for Christology exerted in the Orient an infiu- Has suhor- dinatiini ence upon the establishment of the doctrine of the Eit-ment. trinity (there also nature and person; <''/i(ii(i»na origi- nated there, and also the turning to account of the analogy of the conc(»]»tions " humanity " and " Adam " in their relation to tiie individiud man.) A sulxtr- dination and Aristotelian element remained in the Jl 11 It 270 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. ■ \ I i H%; Oriental and ()c(i (lotital Con- cept ions iJissiiuil.u'. trill ity-(lzn(T7ain,; Askusnages, Johannes Philoponus, Peter of Kallinico; against these Leontius of Byzantium and John of Damascus). The latter, in ojjposition to tri- theism, gave to the dogma of tiie trinity a turn ap- proaching the Occidental concei)tion (the ny^'^r^'ria is formally declared equivalent to the yt^^riTia^ the t-' (uXr^hm of the three Persons is strongly emphasized, thereby the ~-i>''/,(i>!>'>,<^'-'>^ but not (ruviumcr^ and (r'>ii.>i)f7t.rn- pruci-ssio. cessio of the Spirit from the P^ither ami Son, with innovati(nis, even willi Manichiean dualism, and heightened this reproach with the still severer charge of falsifying the holy symhol of Constantinoj)le by the addition of "y/Z/o^z/c ". This wtml was really an innovation therein that had originated in Spain. A contest broke out which has never been settled, and tw.'.n i:a.si nml WcBt: in which to the Greek even the " ''£/ -"' o'.ir> " became; FiU.Miu.'. susi)icious. . The (^ccidi-ntals, however, were obliged to cling to their doctrine, because, according to their spiritual picture <»f the trinity, they found the true faith expressed only in the full unity, therefore also only in the full reciprocity <'f the Perstnis. The Greeks did not understand this, because secretly they always remnined cosmologically interested, just as the doctrine of the trinitv, under incessant scientific treatment, has remained the vehicle which the phi- losophy of anticpiity has handed down to the Slavic and Germanic nations: It contains the Christian idea of the revelation of God in Jesus and the testa- ment of the ancient philosophy in a most peculiar mixture. In the Occident the doctrine of the trinity had not as a rule been treated as an object of speculation. The uniff/ was the safest thing, discrimination between substance and person was understood more in tlu^ sense of a (through the jurispiudcnce) vnrreni form (tl distinction. Augustine in his great work, " de trin- AiifTiistinp l>(Mtririt' (if Tiiuity. , r ii i n ! I 272 OrTMNKS OK THK HISTOKV OK DOCJMA. ;,i«i ii it(ife^\ intended to give exi)ressi()n to fhis oonreption of the trinity by nu»ans of (Neo-Platonie) science, but he was guided also by his rehgious consciousness wliich knew only one God.* The consequence was a complete obliteration of every remnant of subordina- tionism, the changing of the Persons into relations (the old Occidental modalism merely veiled) ; but at the same time there arose such a mass of contra- dictory and absurd formulas as to cause a shudder even to the author himself, now exulting in the in- comprehensible and now skeptical (the three together are ecjual to one; the ;d)solute simple must be under- stood as triple ; the Son takes an active part in his generation; sunt semper uivieeni^ neuter solus; the economical functions, also, are never to be thought of as separate — therefore: dicfuin est ^'tres per- sonae'\ non iif illud (h'eeretur, seel ne faceretui). This confession and the analogies which Augustine makes use of regarding the trinity (they are alto- gether modalistic) show that he himself never could have hit upon the trinity, if he had not been bound to tradition. His great work, in which naturally also the procession of the Spirit from the Father and Son is emphasized — for in ever}' act all three are concerned — became the high school for the technico- logical cultivation of the intellect and the mine of scholastic divinit}' in the iMiddle Ages. Through Augustine, first tlu; Spanisli cluirch, then others also, * III rc^riii'ti to Augustine's rfljitinn to (lie fstulilislmifiit of tin' Oriental doctrine of tiie trinity, see Renter, /eitsclirift f. KirchenROSoh. V. :^75 seq. uml VI. 15o scq. n ind ire :o- of lital ]ieq. DE\^:LOrMENT OF DOCTKINK OF INCARNATION. *273 permitted themselves to be induced to proclaim the Jilioque. The paradoxical formulas of the Augustinian doc- trine of the trinity, which deny every connection with the history of revelation and with reason, but possess their truth in the endeavor to sustain com- plete monotheism, l)ecame wide-spread in the Occi- dent and were comprised in the so-called Sijniholnni AtJici)iasia)iu)n, which arose gradually during the Cc'irly part of the Middle Ages, and was on its recej)- tion (8th to 0th century) proclaimed as holy Church doctrine.* "He who will 1x3 saved nuist believe them", i.e. must submit to them. In the Athanasiau creed as a symbol stands foremost the transforma- tion of the trinity doctrine, as an inwardly-to-be- adopted thought of faith, into an ecclesiastical law, upon the observance of which salvation de- pends. With Athanasius the '''imo'xTuii was the de- cisive thought of faith ; with the Cappadocians the intellectually (jver-subtle theological dogma; with the later Greeks the hallowed relic; with the later Occidentals the ecclesiastical law which demands obedience. * On tlif "Athanasianum " sec Kiillncr. Symbolik I. M mn. nnd th« works of Foulkes (1871), Swainson (1875), Otumancy (1875), Luniby (1887). 18 Paradoxi- cal Formuhus. Syinholum Athaiia- sianuni. i; 1 ii * ■ I' ■■ u 'Wfl ri>^ I; -V It n Iliiiiianity. of ( hrist. 274 OUTLINES OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMA. CHAPTER VIII. THE DDCTHINK OF THE PEIlFKrT EgUALITY AS TO NATTRE OF THE INCARNATE SON OF CJOl) AND HUMANITY. Souiros: The fr.ii;inonts of Ajiollinnris, tlie writiii^^s ui Atli.'inasius, of tlio I'appadocians and of the Autiochians. The qnotttioii of the Divinity of Christ was only l)rej)aratory totliO(jiU'sti(>n of the union of tlie Divine and human in Christ. Into tliis jn'ohleni the whole of dogmatics flowed. Irenanis, and afterward Atha- iiasius, had estaljlished the Divinit}' of the Redeem- er with respect to redemi)tion, i.e. upon that assump- tion. But the (piestion of the union presupposed not only a precise conception of the Divinity, but also of the humanity of the Redeemer. True, in the gnostic contest the reality of the (r^ of Christ had been secured (Tertull., de came Cliristi) ; yet a fine docetism had in spite of it continued to exist, and that not only with the Alexandrians but also with all teachers. Scarcely one of them thought of a per- fect human self-consciousness, and not a single one attributed to the human nature of Christ all tln^ limi- tations which surround our nature. Origen cer- tainly — and not as the first — attributed to Christ a human soul and a freewill; but he needed a connec- tion between the God-Logo^- and mailer, and he has shown definitely in his Chi i.-^lology — in so far as he DKAKLOI'MENT OF DOCTKINK (>K INCAIiNATK ►N. «» I .) a (lid ii(»l separate tli<' Jesus and tlic (*!iri-t -tlwit \\\v most evident docetisin remains active when niw coiu'civos tlio ""'V'^, because wlmlly material, as with- out (juality and cajtahle of every attrilnite. With the ( )rigeni >tic thi-olns^ians, and amon^' tlie Christian |)Ooj)lo generally, existed at the beginning of the 4th century the most varii'd conceptions re- garding the incarnation and humanity of Christ, Only a few thought of a human soul and many thought of the flesh of Christ as hi'avenly, or as a transformation of the Logos, or as a vesture. Crass docetic conceptions were softened hy Neo-Platonic speculative ideas (the finiteness a moment within the unfolding Deity itself). No one in the Orient really thought of tiro natures; one eternal (iod- incarnate nature, one nature having become (lod- incarnate, a Divine nature having been changed for a time into human nature, a Divin(^ nature dwelling in the human, i.e. clothed in the covering of human- ity — these were the prevailing couce})tions, and the answers were just as confused to single (juestions (Was the llesh born *A' ^lary, or the Logos Vvith the tlesh? Was the Christ made man, or did he assume human nature? Ifow nuich can be wanting to this nature and it still be considered human?) and to the Biblical considerations (Who suffered? Who hun- gered? Who (li(>d? Who acknowledged his igno- rance? The God or the man, <»r the G'od-man? Or in reality an* not all these -'-"'''/ only apparent, i.e. ecouumic?). A more or less tine docetism wa.s also 'I lit'i>ri<'« .Mtniit In- (MI'Mlltioll. Various (^U'stidiis. I' It • 1 ! r I;. rnity of I'tTKOn- iility Fiirida- nifiital. Aftollina- ris. 270 Ol'TLINES OK THR HISTORY OF DOCSMA. in voncrcto lau^'lit in tin* Occiilcnt. Hut liy the .sido uf it, after TcitulliMii .iiid Novatians, st(X)(l upon tlio l)asis (tf tlio svuihol tlu' juristic formula: Two .sul)stau('os, (t}u> person. This formula, as though it were a protection and lioundary thought, was never further inv(^stij^atcl; but it was destined to l)ccome some day the saving phrase in the conflicts of the Orit'ut. The unHfj of the sui)ernatural personality of Christ was here the common starting-point. How to pro- vide a place for humanity in it was the problem, which in its shari)nesy and gravity Ajjollinaris of Laodicea first discerned. The Arians had given the impulse, since they conceived the humanity of Christ merely as '^'i/'^ in order to expr s the full unity of the p(»rsonality of the Redeemer and at the same time to be able to attribute to their half-divine Logos the limited knowledge and capability of suffering found in the Christ. They threw it up to the ortho- dox, that their dcjctrine leads to two Sons of God, or to two natures (which were still considered iden- tical) . Apollinaris now recognized that this reproach was justified; he made the problem of his theology: (I) To express just as strict a unity in the person of Christ as Arianism did in its Logos clothed merely with the 'r«/'^, (•>) To unite with itthefiill humanity of Christ. Here is the problem which occupied the Church of the ;5d century, and indeed Apollinaris sur- veyed it in its whole range as the chief problem of Christian theology, as the nucleus of all expressions of iM With tho ortiKHinx ;;--- I>EVKI/)I'MENT OK l>(>( THINK OF INCAKNATION. >*^ 7 faitli, and Im' (rcatcd it acc'nidinj^ly witli tlic ^ivatcst ingciniity and witli a dialfctics that aiiticipati'd all tenniiiologios of tlie tiitun'. (AthaiiHsius) ho found fault, liccausc thi'j', in onU'r to escajR^ tlit^ ()hjo('ti»)ns of the Allans, and in spito of their iH'ttcr intentions, constantly discriminated in Christ lu'tweon what the man and what the (Jod did; tlierehy is tlie duality estahlished and redemp- tion is made dependent thereon; for Christ must so have been made man, that everything which is valid of humanity is also valid of the Deity and rice rcrsa (true, Athanasius never used the expression '' '"' v''"t;^^ likeOrigen; but ho was obliged against his will to divide the unity of the ^'Y"v nuftxotfni'; in its applica- tion). Ho censured the Arians because they also take away tiio comfort of redemption in so far as Christ did not assume entire humanity, but only the flesh. He himself, holding fast to the idea of unity as to a rudder, but not rejoicing like an Aristotelian in the mystery of the faith, as did Athanasius, estab- lished the doctrine that the God-Logos had taken unto himself human flesh and a human soul (which constitute human nature as nature), but not a human Logos, i.e. — as w^e should now express it — not that which in man constitutes the (individual) })erson, therefore not free will. With the thus-constituted human nature, however, the Logos was able to fuse into a complete unity, because there never existed two subjects; for the rocks which ApoUinaris had recognized as dangerous were : Also AriiitiH. t II ' 1 . 1 ' 1 1 1 '' 1 . 1 1 » i 1 1 kJi^: hi Vii i 1. m iiraily, fively. a7K Ol'TI.INKS OF THK HISTOKY OK IMHJMA. (I) 'I'Im' idt'.i of Iwn Sons, i.e. tlu' st'piiratiji^' of tli<' mini .iiiil the ( 1(1(1, \\\v .losiis aiiil th«' CluiHt {" two natiii'i's .'ire two Sons"), (".') Tlu' conccptioM that J<'sns was an 'V>.v^w«r:os' (.'J) Tilt' idea lliat lie liad a fire, clianL^c'aldc natiuv. Tln' siihjcct nnisl l)(> removed IVoni the Iniinan nature of Chiist, otherwis(» one wouM arrive at a douhle-l)ein^' (liyhrid, niiiiotaur); wlienvis his concep- tion renders tho /''■"■ Ttsi nri h'lynu tT£o)r:no {hhazn>; on xaTUfiYzl r^>v fhharny ; tlu' Deity hecanie through Christ the >"^'V and /''j-'^' of tlie entire humanity; the human nature became tlu'ough Christ the ^'i/'^ of the Deity), Biblicall}' — he was a very able (»xegete — and specula- tively (the human nature is always the thing moved, the Divine is the mover; this relationship comes in the ^>''/'"v (Tui>/.inft£i