In a communication which Dr. Reithmayr has had the kindness to make to me, he writes as follows: "Brief as was the period of Moehler's labours in Munich, yet it is difficult to describe the good he wrought, and the seed for still greater good which he sowed. Powerful as his influence over Southern Germany had become, great as was his authority, honoured as was his name, and mighty as was the impulse he had given to the public mind, he was yet far from entertaining the thought of wishing to form a school, in so far as we thereby understand a certain peculiar theological system, whether its nature consist in a special theoretical method, or in the adoption and more precise development of certain opinions. His faith was of a much too positive kind; he was too removed from all hollow speculation; and his whole intellectual cultivation was too strongly historical, and he was withal too modest, to wish to bring his own person thus prominently forward, or to stamp upon other minds the impress of his own individual conceptions. If anything can be said to characterize, or distinguish in any degree his auditors and admirers, it is a certain idealism in the treatment of science, an enthusiasm for the institutes and interests of the Church, abhorrence of all sectarianism, and a closer attachment to the mother Church of Rome." The new school of German Catholic divines is characterized by the union of great patristic learning and high philosophic speculation; by severe orthodoxy and warm attachment to the Church, coupled with a singular spirit of conciliation and tenderness in the treatment of controversy towards the erring brethren. This spirit is of course modified according to the peculiar temper and genius of different individuals; but such is the general characteristic of the new school. The more celebrated theological contemporaries of Moehler were Klee, Döllinger, Drey, Hirscher, and Veith; and among his scholars, From the Conversations-Lexicon. "If we combine in a single focus all the particular traits of this remarkable man, we shall find that his most eminent peculiarity consisted in the utter abandonment of that pretension, after which so many strive, to be the head of a sect, or even a school. Moehler devoted his faculties purely and entirely to the objective and divinely. established institution of the Church. To this service he gave up his whole being-his high natural endowments-his penetration of intellect--his often overpowering logic, and his great erudition. And as he made it the business of his life, to set forth the Church in all her truth and beauty, so the Church, in her turn, transfigured his whole existence, and made him that model of purity, humility, and conscientiousness, -that mirror of all human and sacerdotal virtues, which called forth the enthusiastic admiration of all, who had the good fortune to come into nearer or remoter intercourse with him."--No xxi, p. 700, vol. iii. Supplement to Eighth Edition. Leipzick. 1840. Staudenmaier, Ruhn, Hefele, and Reithmayr, have attained to great eminence. Klee has treated every branch of theology. His works are characterized by vast erudition, great metaphysical depth, and a consummate power of dialectic. This very acute thinker and eminently learned man, will ever exercise the greatest influence in the school; but as he was deficient in grace of style and power of imagination, his influence will be less perceptible in the great republic of letters.* Döllinger, whose excellent Church History is known to the English reader from Dr. Cox's elegant translation, combines extraordinary learning in theology and canon law, with great historical research, critical acumen, and clearness of method and style. Drey has proved himself a very learned and philosophic apologist for Christianity. Of Hirscher I can speak with less confidence, as I possess but little acquaintance with his writings. He cultivates chiefly moral theology, and unites, it is said, uncommon unction of feeling to originality of thought and extent of learn. ing. Some prejudices, however, which he has still retained, tend some. what to impair the influence his genius and piety would otherwise command. Veith has distinguished himself more particularly in pastoral theology, and combines in an eminent degree eloquence, deep thought, and high asceticism. Ruhn is distinguished for great depth of philosophic speculation; and Staudenmaier displays great fertility of ideas and amenity of feeling. Hefele and Reithmayr, both as scholars and thinkers, bid fair to tread in the footsteps of their illustrious master. The number and excellence, too, of the theological periodicals and smaller essays and treatises, as well as of the more extended works, that now appear in Catholic Germany, evince the vigour and productiveness of her religious genius. Divine Providence, when He suffered the German Church to be despoiled of her temporal riches and political greatness, repaid her with all the abundance of moral and intellectual wealth. * With Professor Klee the writer of these pages was most intimately acquainted. He was a most amiable and excellent clergymen, and delightful companion. He informed the writer, that he had read all the works of the fathers, and some of them twice over. With the writings of the medieval divines, he possessed still greater acquaintance than Moehler. He was uncommonly well versed in history, had read all the Greek and Roman classics, and was familiar with the best productions of English, French, and Italian Literature. He succeeded Moehler in the professorship of theology at the University of Munich; but after one year's residence in that city he died, at the age of forty-three. His loss, like that of his predecessor, will be felt in Germany for long years to come. Last year, in the public cemetery of Munich, a beautiful Gothic sepulchral monument was erected over the spot where Moehler's remains lie interred. Moehler is represented in a kneeling posture, and robed in sacerdotal garments. His likeness is said to be admirably caught. On one side is represented the Blessed Virgin, holding the Divine Infant, who graciously extends his arm to bless the priest, sunk down in adoration before him. On the other side is Moehler's guardian angel, presenting to the Divine Infant certain writings of the deceased. The monument is decorated with other beautiful devices, allusive to the life and writings of this great man. It bears the following appropriate inscription: JOHANNES ADAMUS MOEHLER. S. THEOLOGIE DOCTOR ET PROFESSOR P. O. IN CAPIT. CATHEDR. WIRCEBURG DECANUS DESIGN: DEFENSOR FIDEI. LITERARUM DECUS. ECCLESIÆ SOLAMEN. OBIIT MONACHII. PRIDIE IDUS. APRIL 1838. INTRODUCTION. PART I NATURE, EXTENT, AND SOURCES OF SYMBOLISM. By Symbolism we understand the scientific exposition of the doctrinal differences among the various religious parties opposed to each other, in consequence of the ecclesiastical revolution of the sixteenth century, as these doctrinal differences are evidenced by the public confessions or symbolical books of those parties. From this definition it follows: First, that Symbolism has directly and immediately neither a pole mical nor apologetical aim. It has only to give a statement, to furnish a solid and impartial account, of the differences which divide the abovementioned Christian communities. This exposition, doubtless, will indirectly assume, partly a defensive, partly an offensive, character; for the personal conviction of the writer will involuntarily appear, and be heard, sometimes in the tone of adhesion and commendation, sometimes in the tone of reproof and contradiction. Still, the mere explanatory and narrative character of Symbolism is thereby as little impaired, as that of the historical relation, in which the historian conceals not his own personal opinion respecting the personages brought forward and the facts recounted. The claims of a deeper science, especially, cannot be satisfied unless the exposition occasionally assume, in part a polemical, in part an apologetical, character. A bare narra. tive of facts, even when accompanied with the most impartial and most solid historical research, will not suffice; nay, the individual proportions of a system of doctrine must be set forth, in their mutual concatenation and their organic connection. Here, it will be necessary to decompose a dogma into the elements out of which it has been formed, and to reduce it to the ultimate principles whereby its author had been determined; there, it will be expedient to trace the manifold changes which have occurred in the dogma: but at all times must the parts of |