Page images

1814, 1816. Richard Challoner, bp. of Debra, d. 1781, Britannia Sacra, 1740. John Lingard, d. 1851: Hist. England, new ed., 10 vols., 1849; Antiq. of Anglo-Saxon Church, 2, 1848; Strictures on bp. Marsh's Comparison of Confessions, 1815; Transl. of Gospels, etc.—Cardinal Nicholas Wiseman (Abp. of Winchester, 1850) is the ablest of the English Catholics : Lectures on Doctrines, etc., of Church of Rome, 2, 1844; Real Presence, 1836; Science and Revealed Religion, 2d ed., 1842, reprinted in Andover; Essays, 3 vols., 1853, etc. The following went from the Oxford School to the Catholic Church (comp. above, $ 285, a.) John Newman, now head of the Catholic Univ., Dublin, Difficulty of Anglicans, 1850; Position of Catholics, 1851; University Education, etc. W. G. Ward, Ideal of Church, 1844; Anglican Establishment, 1850, contrasted with Church Catholics ; Nature and Grace, 1860. Henry E. Manning, Unity of Church, 1852; Sermons; Grounds of Faith, 1852. Henry W. Wilberforce, Baptism, 2d ed., 1849 ; Incarnation, 3d ed., 1850; the Eucharist, 1853. The Dublin Review, since 1855, has been the ablest organ of the English Roman Catholics.]

[Bp. John England (S. C.), d. 1842: Works, 5 vols., 1849. Prince Gallitzin, d. 1840 : Defence of Catholic Principles. Abp. John Hughes of New York, controversial pamphlets. Abp. F. P. Kenrick, b. 1797 : Theol. dogmatica, 2 vols., 1840 (repr. in Antwerp); Theologia Moralis, 3, 1842; the Primacy, 1837; Justification, 1841, Reply to bp. Hopkins, etc.—Bp. Spalding (of Kentucky), on the Reformation (against Merle d'Aubigné); Miscellanies; Evidences. 0. A. Brownson, Society and Church, 1836; Essays on Church Questions, 1852; ed. Brownson's Quarterly, which has been Catholic since 1844.]


§ 288.


[ocr errors]

[4. N. Monravieff, Hist. of Church of Russia, 1838, transl. by Blackmore, Oxf., 1842. R.

W. Blackmore, Doctrine of the Russian Church, from Sclavonic and Russ. originals, Aberdeen, 1845. Macaire, Theologie dogmatique orthodoxe, trad. par un Russe, 2 vols., Paris, 1860. Introduction à la Theol. orthodoxe de Macaire (rector of Ecclesiastical Academy of St. Petersburg, translated by Michael Bulgakoff ; see Christ. Rembr., Jan., 1858), Paris, 1857. Catechisme detaillé de l'Eglise catholique orientale, trad. du Russe, Paris, 1852. W. Palmer, Dissertations on the Eastern Catholic Communion, Lond., 1852. Prince August. Galitzin, l'Eglise greco-russe, Paris, 1861. Wad dington's Greek Church, 1854. Gass in Herzog's Realencyclop. Glaubenszeugnisse der griechischen Kirche, in Appendix to Hase, Dogmatik, 5te. Aufl., 1860. A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the Eastern Church, 1861, Lectures 4 to 8 on Russia.]

In the Russian-Greek Church Theophanes Procopowicz' and Platon' set forth the orthodox doctrines which were afterwards defended by the Imperial Counsellor, Alexander of Stourdza,' against the attacks of the Jesuits. But none of these exerted any influence upon the development of the doctrines of Christianity in general,

[ocr errors]

Procopowicz was born at Kiew, A, D., 1681, died 1739, as archbishop of Novgorod. After his death was published his: Christiana Orthod. Theolog. Tom. i.-vii., 1773–76, ss. See Schröckh, Kirchengeschichte (as continued by Tzschirner), ix. p. 207, ss.

Platon, born 1737, became archbishop of Moscow (1775), and died 1812. He wrote: Rechtgläubige Lehre, oder Kurzer Auszug der christlichen Theologie, zum Gebrauch Seiner Königlichen Hoheit des Grossfürsten Paul Petrowisch, Riga, 1770 (translated into German.) Comp. Schröckh, 1. c. p. 212, ss. Schlegel, Kirchengeschichte des 18ten Jahrhunderts, vol. p. 59, s. [English translations of Platon by Pinkerton, viz., The Present State of the Greek Church in Russia, or Summary of Christian Divinity, Lond., 1814; another translation by Coray, The Orthodox Doctrine of Apostolic Eastern Church, etc., 1857; by Potessaco, Lond., 1858.]

• Considérations sur la doctrine de l'esprit de l'église orthodoxe, Stuttg. 1816. Translated into German, 1817 (by Kotzebue.)

Concerning the sects of the Greek Church, the Nestorians, Monophysites, and Monothelites (Maronites), as well as those who dissented from the Russian Church (from the year 1666), viz. the Staroverzi (Rascolniks), and the Duchoborzi (the Russian Quakers), comp. the works on ecclesiastical history. Hase, p. 667. Deutsche Vierteljahrschrift. 1842, No. 19. Hefele, Die russische Kirche, in Tübing. Quartalschrift, 1853. [The Malakans-eating milk on fast-days, have become widely diffused during the present century. See Lo Raskol (means dissent); Essai historique et critique sur les Sectes religieuses de la Russo Paris, 1864. Russian Schismatics, in Revue des deux Mondes, 1859.7







§ 289.



After Christianity, from the time of Wolf, had ceased to lo regarded as the only religion, and a distinction had been made between natural and revealed religion, it became necessary to define the latter more precisely. For a considerable time both rationalists and supernaturalists adopted the definition : Religio est modus Deum cognoscendi et colendi,' with this difference, that the former made religion to consist chiefly in morality.' Semler made a distinction between religion and theology,' and Herder separated religion from doctrinal opinions and religious usages. According to Schleiermacher, religion consists neither in knowledge, nor in action, but is a certain definite tendency of the soul, manifesting itself as the absolute feeling of dependence on God. Most of the modern mediating theologians rest their systems on the same principle. The adherents of speculative philosophy consider knowledge as the foundation ;' the practical systems appeal to conscience, in the last instance.

On this point comp. Twesten, Dogmatik, i., p. 2, and Nitzsch, System 8 6. The formula is somewhat enlarged by Ammon, Summ. Theol. Chr. 81: Conscientiæ vinculum, quo cogitando, volendo et agendo numini nos obstricos sentimus.

[ocr errors]


According to Kant, religion consists in this, that in reference to all our duties we consider God the legislator who is to be reverenced by all. See his Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, p. 139.

• Semler too confounded religion with ethics (the reformation of the life). See Tholuck, ii., p. 111.

* In his treatise : Von Religion, Lehrmeinungen und Gebräuchen, 1798. (Works, xviii., p. 169-330.)

• Christliche Glaubenslehre, § 3 ss., comp. his Reden über die Religion, p. 56–77. [On Schleiermacher's and kindred views, see Morell's Philosophy of Religion (1849), pp. 82-106; Thornwell in Southern Presb. Rev., April, 1856. Miles, Philosophic Theology (1849), 175, sq. G. Wissenborn, Vorlesungen über Schleiermacher's Dogmatik (1847), p. 31–65.]

• This definition was adopted by T westen and Nitzsch, l. c. and, with some modifications by Hase, § 2-6, and De Wette, Vorlesungen über die Religion, Vorles. 4. Wegscheider (Inst. § 2.) defines religion as æquabilis et constans animi affectio, etc. That this theory does not necessarily exclude knowledge, may be seen from the passages of the respective writers above referred to. Comp. also Elwert, über das Wesen der Religion, Tübinger Zeitschrift, 1835, part 3. Ch. Weisse, in his Philosophische Dogmatik, oder Phil. des Christenthums (ii. Leipz., 1855-60), comprises religion under the generic idea of Experience (Erfahrung), § 22–103. See also, S. A. Carlblom, Das Gefühl in seiner Bedeutung für den Glauben, Berlin, 1857. [Lechler, Idea of Religion, in Studien und Kritiken, 1851, translated by W. Stearns, Bib. Sacra, 1852. Hase, defines it as “a striving after the absolute, in itself unattainable; but by love to it, man becomes a partaker of the divine perfection.” Nitzsch, $ 7: "an active and passive relation of the finite consciousness to the Creator, Preserver, and Ruler of the World."]

See Hegel's Preface to Hinrichs Religionsphilosophie. According to Hegel and Vatke, religion is the process of the mind. (Nitzsch, System, p. 9). Feuerbach insists upon the subjective element as making the essence of religion, and then finds in this the evidences that it rests upon self-deception; theology is only anthropology, God is only a reflex of man. See his Wesen des Christenthums, p. 20 : “Religion is a relation of man to himself, or, more correctly to his own nature (his subjective nature), but a relation to his own nature as if it were another nature.” In reply see Zeller, Ueber das Wesen der Religion, in his Theolog. Jahrbücher, 1845, p. 26, sq., 393 sq., Biederman, Die freie Theologie, Tüb., 1844, pp. 31–45. [Comp. Marian Evans's translation of Feuerbach's Essence of Christianity, p. 32 sq.: "Consciousness of God is self-consciousness, knowledge of God is self knowledge." He urges the position, conceded by some theologians, that the divine attributes have only a subjective sense and value; what is admitted of the attribates or predicates, he says, must also hold good of the subject of these predicates : “That which has no predicates or qualities, has no effect upon me; that which has no effect upon me has no existence for me. the qualities is to deny the being."]

J. T. Beck, Christliche Lehrwissenschaft, i. 230 sq. Ebrard, i., p. 11. See also J. P. Lange, i. 185. [Ebrard, “ Religion is the elevation of sensibility, will and feeling into a higher and immediate unity of the God-con


[ocr errors]

To deny sciousness; or the indivisible unity of blessedness, holiness and wisdom." Lange says there is a threefold relation to God; first, man recognizes God as the all-determining spirit, and his dependence upon him : second, gives himself to God, as a being of absolute power, goodness and love, and in doing this attains the pure determination of his own nature: third, in this union with God he receives the true life of his own soul, etc. Schenkel in his Dogmatik vom Standpunkte des Gewissens, 1858, i. 135-155, makes conscience to be the organ of religion in man. Rothe, Ethik, i. 264, views conscience as essentially religious ; "conscience stands or falls with the idea of

; God.”]

§ 290.




Notwithstanding their many differences of opinion, all Christians agreed in believing, that of all historical forms of religion, Christianity was most worthy of God, and best adapted to the religious wants of mankind. The rationalists, however, had recourse to the suppositions, either, that the historical religion, serves as a mere vehicle for the natural, and will at some time be resolved into it,' or, that it will gradually lose its present local and temporary character, and be perfected after the ideal formed by reason. On the other hand the supernaturalists of course regarded the religion revealed in Holy Writ as complete in itself for all times. As regards the nature of revelation, and its relation to reason, the supernaturalists belonging to the earlier part of the present period conceded important rights to the latter.' Asserting that revelation was, more properly speaking, the complement of reason, they assigned to the latter (now becoming conscious of its limits) the office of proving the possibility and necessity of revelation. But after Kant had combated the idea that reason was competent to decide what was revealed or not, the rationalists substituted the idea of positive (historical) religion for that of revealed religion, and maintained that the moral value of the former was to be determined by practical reason. In opposition to both these systems, others assigned a more comprehensive meaning to the idea of revelation. In the opinion of some speculative philosophers, it is not so much the communication of isolated and abstract ideas, as the intellectual intuition of the universal, which constitutes the essence of revelation.' According to others, (practical theologians), revelation is rather the manifestation of the divine power, which, however, does not exclude the cognitive faculties of man, though it puts them in a secondary place. At any rate the idea of revelation is now taken in a more living and flowing

« PreviousContinue »