THEOLOGICAL COLLECTIONS. VIEW OF THE PROGRESS OF DOGMA- Translated for the Christian Spectator from Muenscher's Handbuch der Dogmengeschute. Vol. I. Introd. Pt. v. DOGMATIC history is a modern species of composition, scarcely known before the Reformation. In the preceding centuries, an enquiry into the variations and changes in the prevailing creed was never thought of. The opinions of those accounted heretics were described, though generally with too much prejudice and partiality; but the opinions of the catholic Fathers were subjected to examination, only with the view of convicting or acquitting them of the charge of heresy,--as in the case of Origen and the three points;-or they were collected as testimonies in favour of the writer's own opinions. From the high respect for tradition, it was very natural that the testimony of the more eminent Fathers should be often cited, and quotations from them be multiplied, for the purpose of evincing the true doctrines of Christianity. Thus, for instance, while the monophysite controversies were agitated, both Theodoret and Leo the Great made collections of passages relating to the person and the natures of Christ. So in the ecclesiastical councils, it was customary to collect a number of ancient testimonies on the points to be decided, and then to subjoin the decrees of the council. In subsequent ages, the scholastic divines made much use of the writings of the Fathers, particularly of Augustine, and were guided by them in their own enquiries and decisions. But from all these efforts to exhibit and explain the early opinions of the church, little or nothing was gained to dogmatic history. For it VOL I.-No. V. 32 was always taken for granted, that the views of the church had remained unchanged, and that every departure from her faith was a wicked innovation. All the ecclesiastical councils and the distinguished Fa ters were supposed to be entirely at agreement, at least in matters of importance, and their disagreements and contradictions were either winked at, or explained away. Only two persons, so far as I know, are here to be excepted. The monophysite Stephen Gobarus, in the sixth century attempted to make a collection of the doctrines on which the early Fathers held contrary opinions. Of this collection, Photius has preserved a short abstract. A similar attempt seems to have been made, in the twelfth century, by the acute Peter Abelard, in his Liber sententiarum sic et non, which has never been published.a The revival of learning, the thirst for knowledge, and the freedom of inquiry, which characterized the fifteenth century, prepared the way, and the reformation in the sixteenth century produced an urgent demand, for the cultivation of dogmatic history. The more the refarmers were decried as daring innovators, who disturbed the church by advancing opinions before unheard of, the more were they stimulated and roused to defend themselves with historical arguments. They of course eagerly sought for proofs, that the prevaling theology had gradually degenerated and been corrupted, particularly in the middle ages, in consequence of ignorance and superstition. Luther frequently darted a penetrating glance on the history of doctrines; and Melancthon, possessing more erudition, was still better prepared to a See Histoire Liter. de la France, tome xii. p. 130, &c. employ history in support of the protestant faith. Martin Chemnitz, in his Examination of the Council of Trent, shewed himself a man of much reading, of extensive knowledge in history, and of great penetration, which give a permanent value to his works, and may atone for some degree of partiality, and the want at times of better criticism.b At length, Matthias Flavius Illyricus, with his coadjutors, crowned the advantages to dogmatic history from the reformation, by the Centuriae Magdeburgicae,c in which much labour is bestowed on the history of doctrines, in a chapter on each century devoted to the subject. This work, notwithstanding the not unfrequent mistakes of the compilers, and its polemic aspect, has thrown far more light on dogmatic history, than could have been expected in a first work of the kind and with so imperfect helps. The attacks of the Protestants upon the Catholics, with historic arguments, roused the Catholic clergy, and obliged them to study ecclesiastical history with more care, in order to defend their church. Cardinal Cæsar Baronius,d who led the way, though his insufficiency in knowledge and his partialities led him into numberless misstatements, has the merit of bringing to light many records before unknown, and b. Examen Concilii Tridentini, 1565 -73, 4 vol. 8vo. best ed. Francof. ad Mo enum 1707. Fol. Also in his Locis Theologicis, ed. opera Polyr. Lyseri. 1610. Fol. C. Ecclesiastica Historia per aliquot pios et studiosos viros in urbe Madeburgica. Basil, 1559--74, 13 tomi, Fol. Also abridged somewhat Basil, 1624, 13 tomi in 3 Fol. The ed. of Semler, 1757--65, 4 to. was never completed. d. Annales Ecclesiasticæ, Romae 1588-1607, 12 vol. Fol. The most convenient ed. is that with Pagi Critica, and full Indices, Venet. 1738--42, 13 vol. Fol. But the latest, with Raynold's Continuation, is by Mansi, Luccae 1738--59. 38 vol. Fol. giving new explanations of several points of doctrine. Thus the contest between Protestants and Catholics it was, that first called attention to the changes in matters of faith, and put the learned on both sides upon efforts to investigate the subject. But there arose other controversies, which increased the interest, and widened the range of these investigations. Not only were the Protestants divided among themselves on several points, but there arose among them Anti-Trinitarians, who thought they must reject some doctrines of the common faith, which the Protestants had spared. All these contending parties, maintained, that their own distinguishing tenets coincided with the doctrines of the primitive churches; and all laboured to prove this coincidence, by means of history, though evidently in a partial and defective mode of reasoning. In the seventeeth and beginning of the eighteenth centuries, less was done in Germany than in some other countries, to advance the history of religious doctrines. John Gerhard was well read, and a learned collector; but with him history was entirely subordinate to polemics.e George Calixtus possessed a generous mind, and true historical learning; but being involved in un happy theological quarrels, he could elucidate only certain parts of doc trinal history. Several elementa ry works on the history of doctrines, scarcely deserve notice, as they were deficient in all the requi sites of a good history.g Balthazar lampadias,q early applied history to Bebelius made a compilation, on the confutation of Luther's doctrine the four first centuries, which is of concerning the Lord's supper; and some use.h In the beginning of Henry Bullinger,r to confute the the eighteenth century, J. F. Bud- peculiar doctrines of the Catholics. deus at Jena, and C. M. Pfaff at Afterwards Ludov. Lavater,& Rud. Tubingen, not only published vari- Hospinian,t and John J. Hottingous essays on subjects in dogmatic er,u attempted to elucidate dochistory, but also interspersed his- trines by history. torical remarks and illustrations in their dogmatical works.i Many other learned Germans, about the same period, published more or fewer works illustrating the history of particular doctrines. Of this class were Thomas Ittig,j John Chr. Wolf,k Sal. Deyling, Chr. Aug. Salig,m Siegm. J. Baumgarten.n John Aug. Dietelmaier,o and John Geo. Walch.p In France, during the same peri. od, much more was done than in Germany. The Catholics and Reformed were martiailed against each other, and illustrated Christian an. tiquities with untiring assiduity, and sometimes with much skill and discernment; for not only the ar dour of combat, but solicitude for their respective churches quickened their diligence. On the side of the Reformed, stood forth Philip de Mornay, Edmund Aubertin,w and David Blondel.x On the same side, Daniel Chamier y enriched his polemics from the armoury of history. But John Daillez eclips ed all his party by his intimate knowledge of the Fathers, whom he employed with great adroitness against the Catholics. John Claude a likewise gained not a little credit, by the ability and eloquence with which he stated the history of the Eucharist. Against these, the Catholics could oppose men of equal learning, and of no less ability in dogmatic history; namely, James Sirmond,b John Launoy,c Anthony Arnaud,d Daniel Huet,e and others. The Jesuit, Denys Petau (Dionysius Petavius) f attempted to embrace the whole compass of dogmatic history in a single work, which, though unfinished, is of permanent value as a collection of materials; but it lacks arrangement and impartiality, and is little more than a series of extracts from the Fathers and the scholastics. What is commonly regarded as his fault, -namely, his representing the doctrinal views of the early Fathers as indistinct,--should be reckoned among his excellencies. A work on the same plan, though not of equal merit with that of Petau, was attempted by Lewis Thomassin, a presbyter of the Oratory.g The s. De Usu Patrum, 1656. 4to. [also in English, 1675. 4to.]-De Patrum fide circa imagines, 1642. 8vo. De Poenis et Satisfactionibus humanis, 1649. 4to. Adversus Latinorum,de Cultus relig. Objecto, traditionem, 1664. 4to. De cultibus Latinor, religiosis, 1671.-De confirma tione et extrema unctione, 1659. 4 to. De Confessione auriculari, 1661. 4 to.Replique aux deux livres, que Adam et Cottiby ont publies contra lui, 1662. 4 to. a. Reponse au livre de M. Arnaud, intitute la Perpetuite, &c. 1670. b. Opera varia, 1696 and 1728. 5 tomi, Fol.-especially the 4th volume. c. Opera omnia, 1735. 5 tomi, Fol. d. Tradition de l'Eglise sur le sujet de penitence et la communion, ed. 5 me. 1700. 8vo. Probably also: La perpetuite de la foi de l'Eglise catholique touchant l'Eucharistie, 1670-72. 3 tomes, 4 to: to which Renat. Renaudot added a fourth and a fifth volume, 1711-13. e. His valuable, Origeniana-still more the fourth volume of the Works of Origen, edition of De la Rue. f. Opus de theologicis dogmatibus, 1645-50. 5 tomi, Fol,-enlarged and improved by Theoph. Alethinus (J. le celebrated bishop of Meaux, James Benignus Bossuet, endeavoured craftily to turn upon the assailants the historical weapons, which the Protestants so often wielded against the Catholics; but found in the reformed theologian, James Basnage,i an able and eloquent oppo nent. Many learned Frenchmen contributed to perfect the sources of dogmatic history, by their valu ble editions of the Fathers, accom panied with notes, and often with essays on the doctrinal views of the Fathers. These editors never shew any want of diligence; but they too often betray their prejudi ces and partiality. The names of Henry de Valois (Valesius,) Stephen Baluze, Michael le Quien, John and Julius Garnier, Renatus Massuet, Anthony Augustus Touttee, Prudentius Maran, Bernhard de Montfaucon, and others, will ever be remembered by readers of the Fathers with gratitude. Several works of ecclesiastical history, likewise, contributed much to dog. matic history. Sebastian le Nain de Tillemontj made a collection of documents for the history of the six first centuries, which bears unde niable marks of the forty years' labour bestowed upon it. Lewis Ellis Dupin k ventured to criticise Clerc,) 6 tomi. Fol.-and Florentiae, 1757. 7 tomi.-The 1st. volume treats of God; the second of the Trinity; the third of Angels, Creation, and Pelagian. ism; the fourth of the Hierarchy, Priesthood, Consecrations and Penance; the fifth and sixth, of the Incarnation of Christ. g. Dogmata Theologica, Paris 168089. 3 tomi, Fol. h. Histoire des Variations des Eglises protestants; best ed. 1734. 4 vol. 12 mo. Also in English. i. Histoire de l'Eglise Depuis Jesus Christ, Rotterd. 1699, and à la Haye, 1723. 2 vol. Fol.-The second vol. gives the history of opinions respecting the Canon, Tradition, Grace, and the Eucharist. j. Memoires pour servir à l'histoire ecclesiastique des six primiers siecles, 1693-1712. 16 tomes, 4 to. the authors whose history and works he describes, so freely, that notwithstanding his guarded manner, he drew on himself the censure of his Catholic friends. And the Dominican, Natalis Alexander, who often inserts in his church history entire essays on the history of doctrines, could not atone, with the popes and their supporters, for his declarations concerning the rights of the Gallican churches, by all the zeal with which he combats the opinions of Daille and other Pro testants. In Italy there was in general more devotedness to the papal throne, and more caution not to yield any point, however trivial, to the Protestants. Yet from them, dogmatic history received very considerable advantage. Leo Allazzi (Allatius) m was a diligent, though not impartial compiler. Norris n earned higher commendations, notwithstanding his researches were limited to the horizon of an Augustan monk, Joseph Maria Thomasi,o Scipio Maffei ;p and still more, Joseph Simon Assemani,q John Lamy,r Lewis Ant. Mu Henry Historia Eccles. V. et N. Test. 1690, &c. 8 vol. Fol.-18 vol. 4 to. 9 vol. Fol. m De Ecclesiae occidentalis et orientalis perpetua Consentione, Libri III. 1648. 4 to.-Græciæ orthodoxa, tomi II. 1652-59. Opera. 1729-32. 4 tomi, Fol. [contain: History of Pelagianism.] • Institutiones theologicae antiquorum Patrum, 1709--12, 3 tomi 8vo.This anonymous work is not what its title imports; but is merely a correct edition of some of the principal dogmatic, moral and polemic works of the Fathers. p Istoria theologica delle doctrine--della grazia, del libero arbitrio e della praedestinatione, 1742. Fol. [also in Latin, by Reiffenberg, 1756. Fol.] q Bibliotheca Orientalis, tomi I. II. 1719--21 tomi III. Pars I. et 2. 1725--28. Fol. ratori,s and Peter and Hieronimus Ballerini,t deserve notice. In the Low Countries, the history of doctrines was not neglected. Gerhard John Vossius u excelled all his cotemporaries in historical learning, of which his history of Pelagianism is a standing memorial. And his friend, Hugo Grotius,v on one occasion, shewed that he was no stranger to this kind of learning. Henry Alting w treated of these four subjects-the state of theology, the Holy Scriptures, the Unity of God, and the Trinity: but the work is superficial and imperfect. Frederick Spanheim, the younger, both in his Ecclesiastical History, and in various Essays, has contributed not a little to dogmatic history. The two Basnages, James y and Samuel ≈ were Frenchmen by birth, but lived in Holland. John Caspar Suiur a composed a valuable help to understand the language and opinions of the Greek Fathers. The learned and communicative Arminian, John le Clerc,b had courage to lift the veil, which even the Protestants were wont to throw around the errors and weaknesses of the ancient church, and vivaciously to show how much the most r De recta Christianorum in eo, quod mysterium Trinitatis adtinet, sententia, 1733. s Liturgia Romana vetus. 1748. 2 tomi, Fol. Antiquitates Italiae medii aevi. t Learned additions to the works of H. Norris.-Works of Leo the Great, &c. u Operum tomus VI. opera theologica complectens. 1701. Fol. v In his work: De Satisfactione Christi, contra F. Socinum. w Theologia Historica, Amstel. 1664. 4 to. x Opera, Lugd. 1701, 3 tomi Fol. The historical works are in vol. 1st and 2d. y See note j. ≈ Annales politico-eccles: a Caesare Aug. ad Phocam usque. 1706. 3 tomi, Fol. a Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus, ex Patri hus Gr. collectus. 1682 and 1726. 2 tomi, Fol. |