Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

definite shapes, and has thrown itself into the form of a science, with a method and a phraseology of its own, under the intellectual handling of great minds, such as St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, and St. Thomas." As a matter of fact, there is probably no single case where the process of doctrinal formation has not been more or less directly promoted by the questionings of heresy. Truth is struck out from the clash of conflicting opinions, to be fixed by theological science, and finally ratified by the sentence of the Church.* And this brings us to the second stage in the course of development. So far many would agree with us, who will differ, when we come to the divine or supernatural element in the process, which is supplied in the Church by the continual guidance of the Holy Ghost, and preserves her in the last resort from giving her authoritative sanction to any development not in accordance with the original revelation and the mind of God. Whether that sanction be expressed through the medium of a Council, as in the case of the oμooúcios, or directly ascertained through

"There are those indeed who seem as though they would be glad to divest themselves of the advantage of such decisions. They would rather fall back on the unreflecting simplicity of that early faith, which rested only on the single facts of the Gospel. But this is to be ignorant, that the gradual expansion of Christian doctrines was only the growth of the religious mind as, under the moulding power of the Holy Ghost, it compared the individual truths with which it had been entrusted. Those truths must have resolved themselves into wrong combinations if they had not been resolved into right ones. ...... Those who seek to regain it (early simplicity of faith) by throwing away what was earned by the religious impulse then given to the age, do but restore the imbecility of childhood without its innocence."-Wilberforce's Doctrine of the Incarnation, p. 129. This development during the early ages, as regards the formation of the Canon, is traced by Mr. Westcott in his Bible in the Church (Macmillan, 1864), only he does not seem to recognize the similar operation of the 'divine instinct' of the later Church.

the sensus fidelium, as with the Athanasian Creed, or by the voice of the Holy See, as with the recent definition of the Immaculate Conception, is immaterial to my present argument; nor need any question be raised here as to the proper organ of its utterance; I am simply concerned with the result. Such, then, is a brief statement of the theory; the chief objections which have been urged against it will be noticed by and by. My present object is rather to explain than to defend it.

First, then, I observe, what is obvious, that the gradual development of Christian doctrine is analogous to the development of Christian history. The grain of mustard seed, which was to grow into a mighty tree, is emblematic alike of the revelation of Christ, and of the Church He established with His Blood. As the one was to expand from a 'hidden sect in the bosom of Judaism,' like an unborn child in its inother's womb, into a 'world-Church,' a 'world-kingdom,' coextensive with the nations of the earth; so too was the original deposit of 'facts, principles, dogmatic germs, and intimations,' afterwards summarized in the Apostles' Creed, not a mere 'lifeless possession ready-made for all times to be taken care of,' but a ктñμa és áεì destined to expand, through the toil of successive ages, and the corporate consciousness of the faithful enlightened from on high, into all the majestic fulness and coherence of Catholic theology.* There was to be a growth, incessant, but with no break of continuity, continuo non vero per saltum, alike in the Church's intellectual consciousness and her or

* Döllinger's Christenthum und Kirche in der Zeit der Grundlegung, PP. 162-164, 219-221.

ganic life. The office and authority of the Holy See were recognized with growing distinctness, as the practical importance of a visible centre of unity became apparent in the clash of conflicting interests and diverse nationalities at work within the common fold; and so, too, successive theological controversies were the providential means of bringing out in detail the due proportion' and harmony of the faith. The fulness of truth was wrapped up in the apostolic tradition, the worldwide religion lay hid in the upper room at Jerusalem, as the results of mathematical science are involved in its axioms, or the oak is contained in the acorn.

And, next, we may trace a certain historical sequence in the evolution of doctrines running parallel to the order of the Creed. First, in the contest with Greek philosophy, the doctrine of the Trinity had to be evolved and fixed, and this mainly occupied the two first Ecumenical Councils; the four next were engaged in formulizing and guarding the faith of the Incarnation; the first definition on the Eucharist occurs in the seventh (787, A.D.) Later on, and in the West, the subjective questions of grace and free will, first mooted by St. Augustine, and their mutual relations in the justification of man (involving the doctrine of 'merit,' so strangely misunderstood afterwards) presented themselves to the mind of the Church; as also the theology of the sacraments, in their nature, number, and distinguishing characteristics. The results of her judgment on all these points found a luminous exposition in the Catechism and decrees of Trent, from which the later doctrinal symbols of the Greek Church do not materially differ. It was in the subjective side of their theology that the strength

of the Reformers chiefly lay. Luther desired to shift the verdict from the Synod, and the lecture-room, and the cloister, and to make his appeal direct to the hearts and experiences of mankind. He questioned them, not of the nature or mission of the Redeemer, but of how the sinner is made just before God. The controversies of our own day turn principally on the last division of the Creed, which deals with the Person and Offices of the Holy Ghost, and concern more especially His inspiration of Scripture, and His abiding Presence in the Church. What the Protestant movement was to the sixteenth century, that is the Rationalistic movement to our own.

I observe further, that, if the principle of development be denied, only two theories remain on which any positive scheme of Christian doctrine can be maintained; first, that laid down by Chillingworth, and accepted in name, but rejected in practice, by nearly all Protestant communities, 'The Bible, and the Bible alone, the religion of Protestants.' On the actual results of this theory, when fairly carried out, I shall have something to say, in another connection, hereafter. Suffice it to remark here, that, when attempted to be reduced to practice for corporate purposes, it is obliged to assume at starting so much of the Catholic principle as will cover the authenticity and inspiration of the Bible, and also some particular scheme of interpretation; if either of these postulates be denied, the theory falls to the ground as a basis for any definite form of belief. In the abstract, however, it is intelligible and coherent. The other theory in fact, though

*

This inconsistency of Protestant systems is dwelt upon in Mackay's Tubingen School and its Antecedents. London, 1863.

not in words, admits the principle of development, but seeks to limit its operation to the early ages. According to this latter, we ought to accept not only the Bible, but the Catholic creeds-i. e., the Apostolic, Nicene, and Athanasian-together with the dogmatic decrees of the earlier Councils, and the judgment of the early Church on the Canon of Scripture, rejecting all later developments, or as they would be called 'innovations,' such as Purgatory or the Double Procession. This principle is professed by the Church of England, and, with more rigid consistency, by the Greek Church, and is acted upon in various degrees, though disclaimed in theory, by the principal Protestant communities of Europe. It has an advantage over the former, or purely Bible theory, in providing, up to a certain point, a definite system of belief; but it is deficient in applicability to fresh circumstances, and in internal coherence. For the question at once occurs, Where are we to draw the line? Theological science cannot come to a standstill, and if we are bound to accept the definitions of Nice and Chalcedon, why are we to reject the decrees of later Councils? If the sensus fidelium is enough to guarantee the Athanasian dogmas, and (in the Anglican Church) the Filioque, why is it inadequate to guarantee the Invocation of Saints, or Purgatory? The Holy Ghost, who guided the Church during the earlier ages, cannot be supposed to have withdrawn His illuminating gifts; and, since the new forms and varied resources of error are confined to no one particular period, so neither should be the Church's capabilities for meeting them, if need be, by fresh definitions, and a fuller exhibition of that portion of revealed truth which happens to be assailed. We

c

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »