§ 143. Character of this Period 144. The relation of the Systematical tendency to the Apologetical 416 145. The Polemics of this Period.-Controversies with Heretics 155. Practical Opposition.-The Forerunners of the Reformation 445 156. The Connection between the History of Doctrines and the 164. God as a Being which may be Comprehended 165. The Nature of God in general. (Pantheism and Theism.) 166. The Attributes of God.-a. The Relation of God to Time, INTRODUCTION. Comp. Hagenbach, Encyclopædie, 240, ss. [Pelt, Theologische Encyclop. p. 313, ss.] Kliefoth, Th. Einleitung in die Dogmengeschichte, Parchim 1839.] § 1.. DEFINITION. THE History of Doctrines (history of opinions, Dogmengeschichte)(') is that branch of theological science which exhibits the gradual developement of the doctrines (dogmas) (2) of the Christian church, the various aspects they have assumed in the course of time, and the changes they have undergone through the influence of civilization in different ages of the world. (3) (1) [Kitto (Cyclopædia of Bibl. Literat. vol. i. pref. p. xiii.) proposes the term Doctrine History, "since we have no corresponding term in the English language." Dr. Credner gives the following definition of the history of doctrines (Kitto, Cyclop. of Bibl. Lit. pref. p. xiii.): Doctrine History in a less limited sense than that in which the term is usually taken, points out the peculiar doctrines which have, from time to time, been received as articles of Christian belief. But as a variety of opinions with regard to the essentials of the Christian religion has arisen, not only among the various and different sects as separate bodies; but likewise at sundry times among the members of even one and the same sect or party, Doctrine History must necessarily include all the peculiar features of schismatic views, their origin and history, the causes of their rise and gradual developement, as well as their connection with the Scriptures, from which they all claim to be derived, and by which they must be tried. Comp. B also Tholuck, Theolog. Encyclop. and Methodol. transl. by Prof. Park, in Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. i. 1844, p. 556: It (the history of doctrines) exhibits to us the processes of thought, in which the scientific men of different ages have endeavoured to apprehend and to vindicate the doctrines of Christianity.] 2 On the meaning of the word diya (statutum, decretum, præceptum, placitum) v. Suicer, Thesaurus sub voce. Münscher, Lehrbuch der christlichen Dogmengeschichte, edit. by von Cölln, p. 1. Baumgarten-Crusius, Lehrbuch der christlichen Dogmengesch. p. 1. Augusti, Dogmengeschichte, § 1. Klee, Dogmengeschichte, Prolegomena. Nitzsch, System der christlichen Lehre, 5th edit. p. 50-52. Hagenbach, Encycl. p. 241. [Knapp, Lectures on Christian Theology, transl. by L. Woods, Lond. 1843, p. 24. Credner in Kitto, 1. c. p. xiii.: A dogma is understood to be the doctrine of a particular party or sect, etc.] The word a signifies in the first place: decree, edict, statute. Comp. (Sept. vers.) Dan. ii. 13; vi. 8. Esth. iii. 9. 2 Macc. x. 2; and in the New Testament Luke ii. 1, (where it has a political sense only), Acts xvi. 4, (used in a theological sense, denoting the apostolical decrees to the gentile Christians), Eph. ii. 15 ; Col. ii. 14, (in the latter passage it is also used in a theological sense, but has no reference to Christian belief and Christian doctrine, as some think; it rather relates to Jewish ordinances; comp. Winer, Grammatik des Neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms, 5th ed. 1836, p. 250.) Its use in the sense of doctrine, or gospel cannot be established from any passage in the N. T.; the words employed to express this idea, are : εὐαγγέλιον, κήρυγμα, λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ, etc. In the writings of the Stoics doyua, (decretum, placitum,) signifies: theoretical principle. Marcus Aurelius ei aut. 2, 3: Ταῦτά σοὶ ἀρκέτω, ἀεὶ δόγματα ἔστω. Cic. Acad. quaest. iv. 9: Sapientia neque de se ipsa dubitare debet, neque de suis decretis quæ philosophi vocant doyuara. The Fathers adopted simiδόγματα. lar language, and taking the word diyua (to which the predicate To 3 was sometimes applied) in a more comprehensive sense, understood it to imply all that is contained in the doctrines. The passages from Ignatius, Clement of Alex. (Paed. I. 1. Strom. viii. p. 924, edit. of Potter), Origen, Chrysostom, Theodoret, etc. are given by Suicer, Thes. sub voce. They also used it in reference to the opinions of heretics, with the epithet Mangá, or others of similar import, but not so frequently as the terms doğan, vonuara, comp. Klee, 1. c. Cyrill of Jerusalem, (Cat. 4, 2.) makes a distinction between doctrines and ethics, and understands by óya that which relates to faith, by gãs that which refers to moral actions: ̔Ο τῆς θεοσεβείας τρόπος ἐκ δύο τούτων συνέστηκε, δογμάτων εὐσεβῶν καὶ πράξεων ἀγαθῶν. The former are the source of the latter. We meet with similar expressions in the writings of Seneca; he describes the dogmas as the elements of which the body of wisdom is composed, as the seat of life, Ep. 94, 95. A peculiar and most curious definition of the word δόγμα is given by Basil de Spiritu s. c. 27 : "Αλλο γὰρ δόγμα καὶ ἄλλο κήρυγμα· τὸ μὲν γὰρ σιωπᾶται, τὰ δὲ κηρύγματα δημοσιεύεται (150teric and exoteric doctrine.) According to Nitzsch, it was only in consequence of the representations of Döderlein, that many writers explained yua to mean Sententia doctoris alicujus rather than ipsa doctrina, doctrinal opinion rather than doctrinal idea. The definition of the history of doctrines, its importance, and the mode of its treatment, are closely connected with the above definition of the term doua. In the one case, the history of doctrines will be considered as nothing but a collection of fanciful notions and opinions, which owes its existence to chance; in the other, it will be regarded as the organic developement of a vital principle, whose seeds already exist, (comp. § 10.) (3) It is necessary here to guard against a twofold error. There are some who perceive in every new mode of representing Divine truth, in every change of phraseology, an alteration or corruption of the doctrine of the church; they erroneously suppose, that none but biblical terms are to be introduced into dogmatic theology, and would make the history of doctrines a mere history of corruptions. There are others who will admit nothing but a progressive developement of the true doctrine. within the pale of the church, and seem to forget, that disorders and diseases often make their appearance in a strong and healthy body. True science has to consider both these conditions; religion, too, advances, comes to a stand, and goes back; it has its excellencies and its defects, its stages of purity, and its stages of corruption. (Thus it would be incorrect to reject the doctrine of the Trinity, of original sin, the sacraments, etc. because those terms themselves are not used in Scripture; but it is our duty to examine whether any thing extraneous has been mixed up with them, and how far the developement of a doctrine may become dangerous to the truth of the gospel.) |