Page images
PDF
EPUB

the historical fact of a divine revelation to man the starting point of their systems, and thus necessarily presupposed the metaphysical existence of God.' They indulged more freely in definitions respecting his attributes, adopting for the most part the scholastic method of investigation. But the doctrine of the Trinity in particular was further carried out both by systematic and argumentative theologians, and by theosophic mystics. The theology of the schools, (which even went so far as to make salvation dependent upon dogmatic definitions), 'made a distinction between the relation in which the divine persons stand to each other (opera ad intra), and the relation in which they stand to the world and to mankind (opera ad extra), which were again variously subdivided. On the other hand, the mystics endeavoured to fathom the depths of the mystery, but in doing this frequently confounded theology with natural philosophy.'

· Cartesii Meditatt. de Prima Philos. in quibus Dei Existentia et Animæ humanæ a Corpore Distinctio demonstratur. Amst., 1641, 4 (1654.) Principia Philosophiæ, Amst. 1650, 4, Lib. i. c. 14: Considerans deinde inter diversas ideas, quas apud se habet (mens), unam esse entis summe intelligentis, summe potentis et summe perfecti, quæ omnium longe præcipua est, agnoscit in ipsa existentiam non possibilem et contingentem tantum, quemadmodum in ideis aliarum omnium rerum, quas distincte percipit, sed omnino necessariam et æternam. Atque ut ex eo, qnod, exempli causa, percipiat in idea trianguli necessario contineri, tres ejus angulos æquales esse duobus rectis, plane sibi persuadet, triangulum tres angulos habere æquales duobus rectis, ita ex eo solo, quod percipiat existentiam necessariam et æternam in entis summe perfecti idea contineri, plane concludere debet, ens summe perfectum existere. (As regards the question whether God may be comprehended, or not, Des Cartes appropriately distinguished between comprehendere Deum, and intelligere. The former is denied to us, the latter alone is permitted, 1. c. c. 19.)

Melancthon speaks of the consciousness of God implanted in man; see his Locus de Deo (Corpus Reform. xxi. p. 107), and the passages cited by Heppe, p. 261, sq. [e. g. in his Comm. on Romans, i. 19: Divinitas ejus et æterna potentia, i. e., quod sit Deus æternus, potens, sapiens, justus, bonus, puniens injustos, exaudiens et adjuvans justos, hæc, inquam, agnoscit mens, intuens opificium mundi. In his De Anima, he says, that the works of the visible creation would not lead men to a knowledge of God, nisi prius fulgerent in mentibus nostris multæ notitiæ, distinctio unitatis et multitudinis, distinctio naturæ sapientis et bonæ. Imo etiam aliquam Dei notitiam inter has falgere in nobis oportet, ut ad eam accommodari signa possint.] Luther speaks in the same way, ibid. p. 264, 89. [The knowledge of God, he says, in his Commentary on Romans, i. 19, is implanted in the heart of man, etc. Calvin, also in his Institutes, strongly asserted this implanted knowledge of deity; and this was generally held by the Reformed divines : see Schweizer, Glaubenslehre, i.; and Heppe, Dogmatik der evang.-Reform. Kirche, 1861, p. 37, sq.] On the proofs of the existence of God, Baier, observes, p. 159 : Esse Deum inter christianos supponi magis, quam probari debere, videri potest; quia tamen non solum cum Atheis, verum etiam alias ob corruptionem naturæ cum dubitationibus mentium nostrarum decertandum est: ideo non sunt negligendi, qui Dei existentiam probant. Most of the earlier orthodox theologians made no mention of these arguments, and it was not till after the time of Wolf, " that they were held to be as momentous as if the existence or non-existence of God depended on them ;" Hase, Hutterus Redivivus, p. 126. Yet still it was a part of orthodoxy to hold that the existence of God could be proved. Thus the Consensus Repetitus, Punct. 10 (in Henke's ed., p. 9), says against Calixt: Rejicimus eos, qui docent, quod sit Deus non debere a Theologo probari, sed tamquam naturaliter supponi.

* The divine attributes were not called proprietates (which have reference to the Trinity, comp. note 4), but attributa Dei, i. e. conceptus essentiales, quibus notio Dei absolvitur ; these again were subdivided into quiescentia and transeuntia, etc. See Hollaz, p. 235 : Attributa divina ab essentia divina et a se invicem distinguuntur non nominaliter, neque realiter, sed formaliter, sec. nostrum concipiendi modum, non sine certo distinctionis fundamento. Concerning the particular attributes, compare the compendiums of De Wette, p. 56; Hase, Hutterus Redivivus, p. 135, ss. Among the Reformed divines, the doctrine of the divine attributes was most completely developed by Hyperius, and Ursinus ; see Heppe, Dogmatik des deutschen Protest. i. p. 274 [also his Dogmatik d. evang.-Ref. Kirche, p. 42, 89.]-The Socinians (like Origen) limited the omniscience of God; see Dorner (review of Winer's Symbolik in the Theolog. Studien und Kritiken, 1838, part 2.)*

• After the manner of the Athanasian symbol, Quicunque vult salvus esse, etc., the Consensus Repetitus, punct. 11 (in Henke, p. 10), declares : Rejicimus eos, qui docent, quod sufficiat credere unum esse Deum, qui pater sit, et filius, et spiritus sanctus, neque ad credenda sive ad articulos fidei proprie stricteque ita dictos, quorum videlicet ignorantia salutem excludit, pertineant notiones divinæ, proprietates et relationes, quomodo et a se invicem et ab essentia modaliter sive alio modo distinguantur personasve constituant, etc.

• A. The opera ad intra (notæ internæ) constitute the character hypostaticus of each person. They are immanent, and may be divided into a. Actus personales (a) Pater generat filium et spirat Spiritum. (B) Filius generatur a Patre, spirat cum Patre Spir. Sanctum. (y) Spir. S. procedit a Patre Filioque. b. Proprietates personales. (a) Paternatis, (3) Filiatio s. gene

* How much Luther avoided all scholastic subtility in his definitions of the divine attri. butes, e. g., the omnipresence of God, may be seen from the following passage, taken from his treatise: Bekenntniss vom Abendmahl (Walch, xx. 1802): “We say that God is not such an outstretched, long, broad, thick, high, deep being, but a supernatural, in. comprehensible being, existing wholly in every grain of sand, and yet at the same time in, above, and beyond, all creatures; hence there can be no limitation, such as man fancies....Nothing is so small

, but that God is still smaller; nothing so great, but that God is still greater ; nothing so short, but that God is still shorter ; nothing so long, but that God is still longer; nothing so broad, but that God is still broader; nothing so narrow, but that God is still narrower. Thus he is an incomprehensible and ineffable being, above and boyond all that we may name or think."

[ocr errors]

ratio passiva. (y) Spiratio passiva. c. Notiones personales, à yevvnoia et spiratio activa. d. Ordo subsistendi. Pater est prima, Filius secunda et Spiritus tertia persona deitatis. B. The opera ad extra may be divided into : a. Opera æconomica, i. e. ea, quæ Deus facit ad reparandam generis humani salutem æternam. (a) Pater ablegavit Filium ad homines redimendos, et mittit Spir. Sanct. ad homines regenerandos et sanctificandos. (B) Filius redemit genus humanum et mittit Spir. S. (y) Spir. S. mittitur in animos hominum, eosque participes reddit salutis per Christum partæ. b. Opera attributiva (communia), i. e. ea, quæ, quamquam sint tribus personis communia, tamen in Sc. S. plerumque adscribuntur singulis. (a) Pater creavit, conservat et gubernat omnia per Filium. (B) Filius creavit mundum, mortuos resuscitabit atque judicium extremum exercebit. (y) Spir. S. inspiravit prophetas. Compare De Wette, p. 81, where an estimate is given in the light of doctrinal history; Hase, Hutterus Redivivus, p. 173; Heppe, p. 292, sq. J. Böhme, Myster. Magn. vii, 6 (Wullen, p. 5) : “ When it is said of

. God, that he is Father, Son and Spirit, it is right well so said ; but it must be explained, or else the unillumined soul will not comprehend it. The Father is the Will of the Uncaused (Ungrund], he is also from all nature, outside of all that has beginning, the producing Will; he concentrates himself in a desire for self revelation"....7: “This Desire is the determinative Power of the Will or of the Father, it is his Son, Heart and Seat, the first, eternal, beginning in the Will, and is called Son, because it takes its eternal origin in the Will, when the Will is first determined”....8: “The Will thus expresses itself in and by this self-determination as an out-breathing or a revelation; and this outgoing of the Will in expression or breathing is the Spirit of Deity, or the Third Person, as the ancient church alleges.” Theosophische Fragen, ii. 2, 3 (Wullen, 8, 8): “ The Will is a mere willing desire of love, a proceeding from itself to its susceptibility. The Will is the eternal, aboriginal Father, and the susceptibility of love is the eternal Son, which the Will generates in itself to an emotional capacity of love, and the proceeding of the willing, susceptible love is the Spirit of the divine life. And thus the eternal unity is a threefold, immeasurable life without beginning, which consists in pure willing, purpose and susceptibility in and of itself, and in an eternal proceeding from itself”.... Morgenröthe im Aufgang, iii. 14 in Wullen, p. 9): "The Father is all, and all power consists in the Father, he is the beginning and the end of all things, and besides him is nothing, and all that has come to be, comes from the Father; for before the beginning of creation there was nothing but God. But now thou must not think that the Son is another God than the Father, that he is outside of the Father, as when two men stand alongside one another, the one of whom does not comprehend the other. No, this is not the relation between the Father and the Son, for the Father is not an image that can be compared with anything; but the Father is the fountain of all powers, and all powers are in one another as one power; hence he is also called one God. If his powers were separated, he were not almighty; but now he is the independent almighty and all-powerful God." iii. 15: "The Son is the heart in the Father, the heart or the kernel in all the powers of the whole Father. From the Son

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

ascends the eternal, heavenly joy, springing up in all the powers of the Father, a joy which no eye bath seen,” etc. iii. 28: “ Just as the three elements, fire, air and water, proceed from the sun and the stars, and make the living movement and the soul of all creatures in this world; so too the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son, and makes the living movement in all powers of the Father. And just as the three elements move in the depths as independent souls, although flowing forth from all the powers of the stars, and just as all the forces of the sun and the stars are in the three elements, as if these were themselves the sun and the stars; 80 the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son, he moves in the whole Father, and is the life and soul of all the forces in the whole Father." Von dem dreifachen Leben des Menschen, vii. 22 (in Wullen, p. 25): “God is threefold in person, and willed to move himself in a threefold way according to the properties of each person, and no more in eternity. First the centre of the nature of the Father moved itself to the creation of angels, and then to this world. Next the nature of the Son moved itself, wherein the heart of God became man, and this will not happen again in eternity; and that it occurred was through the same one man, who is God, through many in many. Thirdly, at the end of the world the nature of the Holy Spirit will move itself, and the dead will arise. Thus the Holy Spirit will be the mover, who will put the great wonders, which occur in this world, all in the eternal essence, to the honor of God and the joy of the creature; and he will be the eternal mover of the creatures, for through him Paradise, which we had lost, becomes green again." Erste Schutzschrift wider Balth. Tilken, 406 (in Wullen, p. 69): “He that seizes hold upon the one living God, has hold upon

the whole Trinity.” With Calixtus and his disciples there was a controversy on the question, how far the Trinity was contained in the Old Testament; see Schmid, Dogmatik, p. 217, sq. Consensus Repetitus Fidei, Punct. 13 (in Henke, p. 11): Rejicimus eos, qui docent, in libris Vet. Test, vestigia Trinitatis potius, quam aperta animumque convincentia dicta reperiri, seu insinuari potius, quam clare proponi Trinitatis mysterium. Proof-texts ; Gen. xxvi.; Psalm xxxiii. 6, etc.

§ 264.

CREATION AND PRESERVATION OF THE WORLD. PROVIDENCE AND

GOVERNMENT OF THE WORLD.

Theologians of all denominations agreed in the theistic conception of the divine nature, and, consequently, in supposing that God performed a real act of creation, i. e. created the world out of nothing.' The mystics, however, promoted more than ever before the pantheistic tendency. The speculative systems of the age were favorable either to such pantheistic tendencies, by which God and the world were confounded, or to deistic principles, which banished the Creator from his works. The results of the newly cultivated study of the natural sciences already appeared irreconcilable with the literal interpretation of the Mosaic account of the creation of the world. The doctrines concerning the preservation of the world,' concerning providence and the government of the world, propounded by earlier theologians, were more fully developed in the theological systems of the present age. Leibnitz elevated the Theodicy into a philosophical science."

а

* The prolific and genial soul of Luther, and his fresh love of nature, led him to view the work of creation with the eye of a pious poet rather than with that of a subtile scholastic, as may be seen from many

humorous and witty passages in his “ Table-Talk,” etc. To questions such as, What was God doing prior to the creation of the world ! he replied ironically.* Melancthon, on the other hand, had a special Locus de Creatione in his system (edition of 1543, Corpus Reform, xxi. p. 638), in which, wholly in the sense of Luther, he points to the necessary connection between creation and preservation (see note 5).--Calvin had less susceptibility to nature than Luther (see Henry, i. 485), and hence did not view the world as much from the esthetic side. Nevertheless, comp. Inst. i. c. 14, p. 53 : Interea ne pigeat in hoc pulcherrimo theatro piam oblectationem capere ex manifestis et obviis Dei operibus. Est enim hoc.... etsi non præcipuum, naturæ tamen ordine primum fidei documentum, quaquaversum oculos circumferamus, omnia quæ occurrunt meminisse Dei esse opera, et simul quem in finem a Deo condita sint pia cogitatione reputare. ... Verum quia nunc in didactico versamur genere, ab iis supersedere nos convenit, quæ longas declamationes requirunt. Ergo, ut compendio studeam, tunc sciant lectores se vera fide apprehendisse, quid sit Deum cæli et terræ esse creatorem, si illam primum universalem regulam sequantur, ut, quas in suis creaturis Deus exhibet conspicuas virtutes, non ingrata vel incogitantia vel oblivione transeant ; deinde sic ad se applicare discant, quo penitas afficiantur in suis cordibus. In the symbolical books only a passing reference is made to the doctrine of creation, because there was no occasion for entering into controversies; the expressions there used have regard to the practical rather than the doctrinal aspects of this subject. Comp. e. g. the Catech. Major of Luther, Art. 1.-On the other hand, later theologians more fully developed the idea of creatio ex nibilo. They made a distinction between nihil privatum (materia inhabilis et rudis) and nihil negativam (negatio omnis entitatis), and maintained the creation out of nothing in both respects.—To the questions, whether there was any time antecedent to the creation of the world, or, whether God created time when he created the world? some replied (after the example of Augustine) mundum esse conditum cum tempore. Again, other theologians (of the Reformed Church), supposing the previous existence of time, fixed upon different periods as those in which God created the world; thus Alsted de.

а

• His reply to the question, Where was God prior to the creation of the world? Was : " in the birch-grove, cutting rods, to punish impertinent questioners." Hase, Gnosis, ii. P 183. Comp. his Introduction to Genesis.

« PreviousContinue »