Page images
PDF
EPUB

dogmas, into a Symbol of its ideas. But by degrees the Aristotelian Element made itself felt against the Platonic; we have already noticed its peculiar influence among the Artemonites. Platonism favoured a tendency for deeper Christian contemplativeness, the rights of faith were respected, and that Dogmatism was discountenanced which would bring all things within the limits of the Understanding. But at this period, a confined tendency of the Understanding was developed which was hostile to the intuitive Element in Theology. In ARIUS we find an antagonism to the prevalent Dogma, not merely in his doctrine respecting Christ, but in a more general reference, which is palpably evident in his attempt to bring the doctrine of the Trinity within the comprehension of the Understanding. But the most eminent representative of this mental tendency is his follower EUNOMIUS,* a man of more logical mind than himself. An opponent of whatever was inconceivable and transcendental, he pursued knowledge in a one-sided direction, not deeply speculative, but proceeding from an empirical understanding to make everything clear, which was his principal aim. In short, he advocated an intelligent Supranaturalism in which a rationalistic tendency was concealed, similar to what we find in Socinus. This tendency of an external Dogmatism was strenuously opposed by Gregory of Nyssa. Even Heathens, he says, can dispute about dogmas; but correctness in dogmas does not make a Christian. Christianity is rather grounded in the religious life. Here we have that which constitutes the radical difference between heathens and Christians. By him and the other great Cappadocian teachers, and by CHRYSOSTOM, the distinction between believing and knowing was maintained against Eunomius, also the rights of independent faith, the Inconceivability of God; the relation of faith and intuition, and the practical foundations of religious knowledge.

* ἔκθεσις τῆς πίστεως, in Socrates, v. 10, ed. Valesius. ἀπολογητικός, ed. Fabricius, Biblioth. Græc. viii. 262. Fragments from the book Tεpi Toỡ vioũ, in Maji Collect vii. 1, 202.

+ Philostorg. H. E. lib. vi. Epiph. h. 76. The replies of Gregory of Nyssa and Basil. C. R. W. Klose, Geschichte u. Lehre des Eunomius. Greg. Naz. Orat. 33. De Theologia, i. 34. Initium Greg. Nyssa. De Animâ et Resurrectione, t. iii p. 238, ed. Mor. 1638.

Homilies on the Inconceivability of God. Opp. i. p. 544, ed. Montf. in 1 Cor. Homil. 34, 1, 2; vol. x. p. 310, &c.

THE ANTIOCHIAN SCHOOL.

265

Although the influence of ORIGEN was extended over the whole Oriental Church, yet his school at Alexandria did not retain its original character.* Its last representative, in the fourth century, was Didymus, † who, though blind from childhood, was the most learned man of his age. Afterwards the school was removed to Sida in Pamphylia, and became extinct. In the Alexandrian Church only one element of Origen's spirit was retained, the speculative mystical, as exhibited by Athanasius in opposition to Arianism; but the other side, the historically literal tendency of Origen, met with no encourage. ment in Alexandria. Gradually an opposition was formed against the Alexandrian tendency: it proceeded from a new dogmatic school, the Antiochian, ‡ which in its fundamental elements may likewise be traced back to Origen, for the impulse he had given to learned pursuits in general, and his zeal for sound biblical study were transferred to Antioch. The first foundation of this school was exegetical, and was laid by DOROTHEUS § and LUCIAN,|| in the fourth century by EUSEBIUS of Emesa, ¶ and especially by DIODORUS of Tarsus,** and THEODORUS++ of Mopsuestia. The Exegetical direction of this

* On the characteristics of the various theological schools at this period, see Niedner, Kirchengeschichte, p. 317, &c.

De Spiritu S. in Jerome's Latin vers. De Trinitate, libb. iii. ed. Mingarelli: Bonon. 1769, fol. Adv. Manichæus in Combefisii Auctuar. Gr. P. ii. Expositio vii. Canonic. Epistolar., the fragments in Lücke, Quæstiones ac Vindicia Didymiana: Göttg. 1829-32, 4 t. See Cölln. Hall. Encyclop. xxiv. art. Didymus.

On the Antiochian school, see Neander's Der Heilige Chrysostomus u. die Kirche, besonders des Orients in dessen Zeitalter. 2 Th. 1821, 1832. Neander's Ch. H. iii. 212.

§ Euseb. H. E. vii. 32.

Euseb. H. E. viii. 13; ix. 6. Hieronym. Catal. Script. Illustr. c. 77. Hieronym. Catal. 91, 119. Socrates, H. E. ii. 9. Sozom. iii. 6, Thilo üb. d. Schriften des Eusebius von Alexandriæ u. Eusebius v. Emesa: Halle, 1832.

** Hieronym. Cat. 119. Socrates, vi. 3. Suidas, s. v. Atódwpos. Assemanni, Biblioth. Oriental. iii. 1, 28. In the Spicileg. Solesm. p. 269, fragments are given of a work by Victor of Capua, which must have been taken from a Commentary of Diodorus on the second book of Moses. In the fragments themselves there is no reason to the contrary. Other fragments are Marcus Mercator and Photius, cod. 122.— [JACOBI.]

++ Comment. in Proph. xii. Minores in Theod. Mops. quæ supersunt, ed. Wegnern. t. i. A. Magi, vi. 1. Commentar. in Epist. ad Roman. in A. Magi, Spicel. iv This large fragment, with smaller ones from

The

school continued to be its prominent characteristic, according to which Dogma, independently of Tradition, was to be derived from Holy Writ. Allegory was the medium for bringing the Bible into harmony with every tradition; but here the Exposition of Scripture was formed from its own contents by an unprejudiced, grammatical, and logical method. Antiochian method of Exposition formed the right medium between the allegorizing method, and that grossly literal style of interpretation by which alone it had hitherto been opposed. With this was connected a more liberal method in the criti cism of the Canon, and in the consideration of the historical relation of the Old and New Testament; there was also an endeavour to contemplate Christ in his earthly appearance, not according to a preconceived dogmatic scheme, but as he is represented in the Gospels. Altogether, there was a striving after clearness and rational development; after a knowledge of the divine in connexion with the natural. In the opposition between this and the Alexandrian School, we notice the most divergent tendencies of the theological spirit; the supranatural and the rational element, only that neither were of an exclusive character. In Alexandria the greatest stress was laid on the supernatural in dogma; those formulæ were preferred in which this was most strongly expressed, and all attempts at explanation were rejected. The Antiochians did not deny the supernatural; there were among them men of the deepest

the Commentaries on the other epistles of Paul, is in Th. Episc. Mops. in N. T. Commentaria quæ reperiri potuer. colleg. O. F. Fritzsche: Turic. 1847. In the Spic. Solesmens. i. 49, Latin Commentaries are to be found on the Epistles to the Galatians, &c., as far as Philemon; those on the Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, and Philemon, are complete. Pitra, the Editor of the Spicileg., ascribes this work to Hilary of Poictiers. But there is no doubt that they are translations of the Commentaries of Theodorus. See Jacobi's Deutsche Zeitschr., 1854, and his Programs, Hal. 1855, 1856, for the Commentaries on the Epistles to the Philippians and the Colossians. Other fragments are in Facund. Hermian. Pro Defens. Trium Capitul. libb. xii. in Bibl. Patr. Lugduni xii. Galland xi. For Catalogue of his writings, see J. A. Assemanni Bibl. Orien. iii. 1, 30. Ernesti Opusc. Theolog. p. 502. Miniter, Ständlin and Tzschirner, Archiv. f. Kirchengesch. i. 1. R. E. Klener, Symbolæ Litter. ad Theod. Mops. Episc. Pertinentes: Gött. 1836. O. F. Fritzsche, De Theod. Mops. Vita et Scptis.: Hal. 1836. T. L. Sieffert, Theod. Mops. vet. Tti. sobr. Interpretandi Vindex: Regiom. 1827.-[JACOBI.]

THE WESTERN CHURCH.

267

Christian spirit, such as Chrysostom* and Theodoret; † but they aimed at making their views of divine things as perspicuous as possible and in unison with reason. Between these tendencies there was necessarily a complete antagonism; this might be seen in their anthropology; but in accordance with the character of the Greek Church, it was most strikingly apparent in their speculative Christology.

THE WESTERN CHURCH. After the first period of scientific dependence on the Eastern Church, HILARY of Poictiers was the first who appeared in the West as a professed Dogmatic writer. Before he became involved in the Controversies of the East, he had arrived, in his own way, at his dogma respecting the Trinity. JEROME, § who long resided at Bethlehem, occupied an important position as mediator between the Eastern and the Western Church, which latter he had enriched with the learning of the East. He is distinguished as a learned collector, and for certain ingenious ideas, but had little talent for the formation of a dogmatic system. AMBROSE of Milan, || also, whose peculiar excellence lay in the direction of practical ethics, was largely indebted to the Greeks.

In the preceding period, the African Church had already begun to develope the Western mind in a scientific manner. And in this age also, North Africa had manifested scientific productiveness. AUGUSTIN formed a new system within the Opp ed. Montfaucon: Par. 1718—38, 13 t. fol.; Par. 1834-39,

13 t.

ἑλληνικῶν θεραπευτικῆ comp. libb. v. Opp. ed. Garnier: Par. 1684; ed.

† ἐρανιστὴς ἦτοι πολύμορφος, libb. iv. Talnμárov, Disputatt. xii. Hæretic. Fabular., Sirmond Par. 1649, 4 t. fol. t. 5; add. Jo. Schulze et Noesselt: Hal. 1769-74, 5 t. 8. J. F. Richter, De Theodoreto Epist. Paulin. Interpret.: Lips. 1822.

De Trinitate, libb. xii. De Synodis. De Synodis Arimin. et Seleuceus. Commt. in Psalm. Matth. Opp. ed. Bened. (Constant): Par. 1693; Maffei, Veron. 1730, 2 t. fol.; Oberthür. Wirceb. 1785, seq. 4 t.

§ Opp. ed. Erasmus: Bas. 1516; ed. Bened. (Martianay): Par. 1693 -1706, 5 t. fol.; Vallarsi Veron. 1734-42, 11 t. f; Venet. 1766-72, 4 t.

Hexameron de Incarnationis Dominicæ Sacramento de Fide, libb. v. De Spiritu S. libb. iii. ed. Bened.: Par. 1686-10, 2 t. f. Böhringer, Die Kirche u. ihre Zeugen. 1 Abth. 3.

Opp. ed. Erasmus: Bas. 1529; Bened.: Par. 1659-1701, xi. t.; Antwp. 1700-1703. xi. t., with Appendix by Le Clerc, 1703. Brudemann, d h. Augustin, Th 1: Berl. 1841. Poujoulat, Geschichte d. h.

sphere of scientific development. His influence may be compared with that of Origen in the East, but it was more general and enduring in the West. He was one of those great men of world-wide celebrity, whose agency is not limited to their own times, but is felt afresh at various epochs in the lapse of centuries. His position in reference to Theology was similar to that of Plato and Aristotle in the department of Philosophy. On the one hand, the development of the Catholic dogma which appears in the writings of the schoolmen proceeded from him, and, on the other hand, a reaction of the pure Christian consciousness against the foreign elements of the Catholic dogma. Those tendencies within the pale of the Catholic Church from which a new Christian life emanated connect themselves with him. Even the more complete reaction at the Reformation, and the various revivals which the evangelical Church has experienced may be traceable to the same source He resembled Origen in his turn for speculation, but surpassed him in originality, depth, and acuteness. Both passed through Platonism in the process of their culture; he did not, however, like Origen, mingle the Christian and Platonic elements, but developed the principles of Christianity independently of Platonism, and even in opposition to it. But Origen excelled him in greater mental freedom and erudite historical culture, while Augustin's mind was fettered by a definite Church system. The union of their mental elements would, without doubt, have made the most complete Church teacher. Nevertheless, many qualities were united in Augustin, which we find scattered in separate tendencies of theological development, and hence we see the various periods of the Church shadowed forth in his mental career. He was born at Tagaste, in Numidia; the first seeds of Christianity were sown in his heart by his pious mother Monica. His great powers, his ardent temperament and powerful impulses needed to be attempered and refined by the Gospel. Hence, he had to pass through many a stormy conflict, and to be led through an intricate path, ere he could attain mental repose and steady development. In his youth he came to Carthage to study Rhetoric, and became intimately conversant with the Augustin, translated into German by Hurter: Schaffh. 1847. 2 Th. Böhringer, i. 3.

* See Confession. libb. xiii. cum præfat. A. Neandri: Berol. 1823.

« PreviousContinue »