(Opp. T. iv. p. 114). [Comp. Hilary in Ps. liii. 12: Passio suscepta voluntarie est, officio ipsa satisfactura pœnali: Ambrose de Fuga Sæc. c. 7: (Christus) suscepit mortem ut impleretur sententia, satisfieret indicato per maledictum carnis peccatricis usque ad mortem. Gieseler, Dogmengesch. 383, finds the basis of the later satisfaction theory in Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, and, though less fully drawn out, in Eusebius of Cæsarea, Gregory Nazianzum, Cyril of Alex., and Chrysostom. The points are: God threatened death to man as a penalty for disobedience. This threat could not be unfulfilled, if God be true. But, on the other hand, God's love to man forbade the destruction of all men. And so he adopted the expedient of allowing Jesus to die instead of man, so that both his truth and his love might be inviolate. Thomasius, Christi Person, iii. p. 191 sq., gives a full view of the theory of Athanasius, as the most important in the patristic literature— summed up (De Inc. Verbi, 13): "The Logos assumed a mortal body, in order thus to fulfill the law for us, to bring the vicarious sacrifice, to destroy death, to give immortality, and so to restore the divine image in humanity." His death was "the death of all, "the death of humanity," etc.]

• Cyr. Hier. 1. c.: Οὐ τοσοῦτον ἡμάρτομεν, ὅσον ἐδικαιοπράγησεν ὁ τὴν ψυχὴν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν τεθεικώς. Chrys. in Ep. ad Rom. Hom. x. 17 : Ωσπερ εἴ τις ὀβολοὺς δέκα ὀφείλοντά τινα εἰς δεσμωτήριον ἐμβάλοι, οὐκ αὐτὸν δὲ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ γυναῖκα καὶ παιδία, καὶ οἰκέτας δι' αὐτόν· ἐλθὼν δὲ ἕτερος μὴ τοὺς δέκα ὀβολοὺς καταβάλοι μόνον, ἀλλὰ μύρια χρυσοῦ τάλαντα χαρίσαιτο, καὶ εἰς βασιλικὰς εἰσαγάγοι τὸν δεσμώτην.... οὕτω καὶ ἐφ' ἡμῶν γέγονε· πολλῷ γὰρ πλείονα ὧν ὀφείλομεν κατέβαλεν ὁ Χριστὸς, καὶ τοσούτῳ πλείονα, ὅσῳ πρὸς ῥανίδα μικρὰν πέλαγος ἄπειρον. On similar ideas of Leo the Great, as well as concerning his entire theory of redemption, see Griesbach, Opuscula, p. 98, ss.

6

It is worthy of notice, that especially Augustine, on practical grounds, brought this ethical import of the death of Christ very prominently forward (to counterbalance, as it were, the theory of redemption so easily misunderstood): Tota itaque vita ejus disciplina morum fuit (de Vera Rel. c. 16). Christ died, that no one might be afraid of death, nor even of the most cruel manner of putting persons to death; De Fide et Symb. c. 6; De divers. Quæst. qu. 25 (Opp. T. vi. p. 7). The love of Christ displayed in his death. should constrain us to love him in return; De Catech. Rud. c. 4: Christus pro nobis mortuus est. Hoc autem ideo, quia finis præcepti et plenitudo legis charitas est, ut et nos invicem diligamus, et quemadmodum ille pro nobis animam suam posuit, sic et nos pro fratribus animam ponamus..... Nulla est enim major ad amorem invitatio, quam prævenire amando, et nimis durus est animus, qui dilectionem si nolebat impendere, nolit rependere. See, too, the extracts from his Sermons, in Bindemann, ii. p. 222. [Comp., too, Contra Faust. Manich. xiv. 1: Suscepit autem Christus sine reatu supplicium nostrum, ut inde solveret reatum nostrum et finiret supplicium nostrum, Cf. Comm. in Gal. iii. 13, cited in Thomasius (u. s.), iii. 211.] Comp. Lactantius Inst. Div. iv. 23, ss. Basil M. de Spir. S. c. 15.

7

Thus Gregory of Nazianzum says, Orat. xxiv. 4, p. 439: "He has ascended the cross, and taken me with him, to nail my sin on it, to triumph over the serpent, to sanctify the tree, to overcome lust, to lead Adam to sal

vation, and to restore the fallen image of God."......Orat. xlv. 28, p. 867. "God became man, and died, that we might live: we have died with him, to be purified; we are raised from the dead with him, since we have died with him; we are glorified with him, because we have risen with him from the grave." Ullmann, p. 450. Comp. Orat. xxxvi. p. 580, quoted by Munscher ed. by von Cölln, i. p. 435, and the passages cited there from Hilary, de Trin. ii. 24, and Augustine de Trinitate, iv. 12 [Athan. de Incarn. c. 44. Greg. Nyss. Orat. Cat. c. 16, 32].

8

Comp. in its connection the passage quoted from Athanasius in note 4. Gregory of Nyssa also says (Orat. Catech. c. 27), that not alone the death of Christ effected the redemption of man, but also the circumstance that he preserved an unspotted character in all the moments of his life:...poλvv0eíσης τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης ζωῆς τὸν Χριστὸν ἐν ἀρχῇ τε καὶ τελευτῇ καὶ τοῖς διὰ μέσου πᾶσιν ἔδει διὰ πάντων γενέσθαι τὴν ἐκπλύνου σαν δύναμιν, καὶ μὴ τῷ μέν τι θεραπεῦσαι τῷ καθαρσίῳ τὸ δὲ περιϊδεῖν ȧ0εрáπενтоν. Augustine, De Vera Rel. c. 26, represents Christ as the second Adam, and contrasts him as the homo justitiæ with the homo peccati; as sin and ruin are the effects of our connection with Adam, so redemption is the effect of a living union with Christ. Comp. De Libero Arbitrio iii. 10; De Consensu Evang. i. c. 35, where he places the real essence of redemption in the manifestation of the God-man. In like manner the redemption work is summarily stated by Gregory the Great, Mor. xxi. 6: Ad hoc Dominus apparuit in carne, ut humanam vitam admonendo excitaret, exemplo præbendo accenderet, moriendo redimeret, resurgendo repararet; comp. Lau, p. 435. Hence Baur says, 1. c. p. 109, 10: "That the reconciliation of man to God, as effected by the incarnation of God in Christ, and the consequent consciousness of the union of the divine with the human, constitutes the higher general principle, including all particulars, which was adopted by the theologians of that age.... Thus was formed a theory of the atonement, which we may term the mystical, inasmuch as it is founded on a general comprehensive view of the subject, rather than on dialectic definitions." [Baur, Dogmengesch. p. 190. The chief contrast to this mystic view was found in the Arians and Apollinarists; the former putting the reconciliation in the bare proclamation of the forgiveness of sins (no real mediation between God and man), and the latter in likeness to Christ. Both the mystic and moral views are united in Theodore of Mopsuestia; redemption is the completion of human nature-what in Adam is found only ideally (in idea), is in Christ perfectly realized. It consists not so much in removing sin and guilt, as in a participation in what Christ, through his resurrection, has become for us-immortality and an absolutely unchangeable divine life, through union with Christ. Comp. Fritzsche, Theod. Ep. Mops, p. 55 sq.]

Thus Gregory of Nazianzum, Orat. xxxiii. p. 536, numbered speculations on the death of Christ among those things, on which it is useful to have correct ideas, but not dangerous to be mistaken, and placed them on the same level with questions concerning the creation of the world, the nature of matter and of the soul, the resurrection, general judgment, etc. Comp. Baur, p. 109.-Eusebius of Cæsarea (Demonstr. Evang. iv. 12) merely enumerates various reasons for the death of Christ, without bringing them into connec

tion. Christ died, 1. In order to prove that he is the Lord over both the quick and the dead; 2. To redeem from sin; 3. To atone for sin; 4. To destroy the power of Satan; 5. To give his disciples a visible evidence of the reality of the life to come (by his resurrection); and 6. To abrogate the sacrifices of the Old Test. dispensation.

The more anxious theologians were to adduce the reasons which led Christ to suffer, the more natural was it to ask, whether God could have accomplished the work of redemption in any other way. Augustine rejects such idle questions in the manner of Irenæus; De Agone Christi, c. 10: Sunt autem stulti, qui dicunt: Non poterat aliter sapientia Dei homines liberare, nisi susciperet hominem, et nasceretur ex femina, et a peccatoribus omnia illa pateretur. Quibus dicimus: poterat omnino sed si aliter faceret, similiter vestræ stultitiæ displiceret. [Aug. de Trin. xiii. 10. Greg. Naz. Orat. ix. p. 157. Greg. Nyssa, Orat. Cat. c. Basil the Great (Hom. in Ps. xlviii. § 3) maintained that the death of the God-man was necessary to accomplish the salvation of mankind.] On the other hand, Gregory the Great concedes that the death of Christ was not absolutely necessary, since we could have been delivered from suffering in other ways; yet God chose this way, in order at the same time to set before our eyes the highest example of love and self-sacrifice; Moral. xx. c. 36; Lau, p. 445. [But compare Moralia, xxii. 40.] Further particulars may be found in Münscher, Handbuch, iv. p. 292, ss.; Baur, p. 85. Rufinus gives a mystical interpretation of the various separate elements of the passion of Christ, Expos. Symb. ap. p. 22, ss. Concerning the extent of the atonement, it may be observed, that Didymus of Alexandria (on 1 Peter, iii. 22, in Gallandii Bibl. PP. T. iv. p. 325: Pacificavit enim Jesus per sanguinem crucis suæ quæ in cœlis et quæ in terra sunt, omne bellum destruens et tumultum), and Gregory of Nyssa, in some degree (Orat. Catech. c. 25, where he speaks of rioa Kтioiç), revived the idea of Origen, that the effects of Christ's death were not limited to this world, but extended over the whole universe; Gregory also asserted that the work of redemption would not have been necessary, if all men had been as holy as Moses, Paul, Ezekiel, Elijah, and Isaiah (Contra Apollin. iii. p. 263). [Cyril of Jerusalem, De Recta Fide; the injustice of the sinner was not so great as the justice of him who gave his life for us. Chrysost. Ep. ad Rom. Hom. x.; Christ paid far more for us than we were indebted, as much more as the sea is more than a drop.] The opposite view was taken by Augustine, who, in accordance with his theory, thought that all men stood in need of redemption, but limited the extent of the atonement; comp. the former sections on the doctrine of original sin, and on predestination; and Contra Julian vi. c. 24. Leo the Great, on the contrary, enlarged the extent of the atonement, Ep. 134, c. 14: Effusio sanguinis Christi pro injustis tam fuit dives ad pretium, ut, si universitas captivorum in redemptorem suum crederet, nullum diaboli vincula retinerent.-According to Gregory the Great, redemption extends even to heavenly beings; Moral. xxxi. c. 49. Lau, p. 431.

A dramatic representation of the Descensus ad Inferos (first found in the ecclesiastical confessions, in the third Sirmian Formula, 359), in imitation of the Evang. Nicodemi, is given in the discourse: De Adventu et Annunciatione Joannis (Baptistæ) apud inferos, commonly ascribed to Eusebius of Emisa; comp. also Epiphanius, in Sepulcr. Christi. Opp. ii. p. 270; Augusti's edition of Euseb. of Emisa, p. 1, ss. On the question whether the system of Apollinaris caused the introduction of the said doctrine into the Apostles' Creed, as well as concerning the relation in which they stood to each other, see Neander, Church Hist. (Torrey), ii. 433, note; and particularly Hist. Dogm. (Ryland), p. 323. [This assertion involves an anachronism. "It is certainly difficult to perceive how Apollinaris could give his assent to it; yet we are not justified in asserting that he did not acknowledge it, although Athanasius does not specially refer to it."] This is a striking remark of Leo the Great (Serm. Ixi. in Perthel, p. 153, note), that for the sake of the disciples the duration of this intermediate state was contracted as much as possible, so that his death rather resembled sleep (sopor) than death.

Lastly, the statements about the subjective appropriation of the merits of Christ on the part of the individual Christian were made to conform to the above views, and to the anthropological definitions (§ 107-114). Comp. Münscher, Handbuch, iv. p. 295, 319. This much is certain, that the benefits of the atonement are chiefly referred to the consequences of original sin, and that, consequently, they accrued in the fullest measure to the baptized. How far, now, sins committed after baptism are atoned for by the death of Jesus, or whether this satisfaction must be found somewhere else -on this there is no satisfactory answer. Comp. Lau, Greg. d. Grosse, p. 430, 458.

4. THE CHURCH AND ITS MEANS OF GRACE.

§ 135.

THE DOCTRINE ABOUT THE CHURCH.

Two causes contributed to determine the doctrine about the Church: 1. The external history of the church itself, its victory over paganism, and its rising power under the protection of the state. 2. The victory of Augustinianism over the doctrines of the Pelagians, Manicheans,' and Donatists,' which in different ways threatened to destroy ecclesiastical unity. The last mentioned puritanic and separatistic system, like that of Novatian in the preceding period, maintained that the church was composed only of saints. In opposition to them, following Optatus of Mileve, Augustine asserted, that the church consists of the sum total of all who are baptized, and that the (ideal) sanctity of the church was not impaired by the impure elements externally connected with it.' The bishops of Rome then impressed upon this catholicism the stamp of the papal hierarchy, by already claiming for themselves the primacy of Peter. But however different the opinions of the men of those times were respecting the seat and nature of the true church, the proposition laid down by former theologians, that there is no salvation out of the church, was firmly adhered to, and carried out in all its consequences.'

The Pelagians were in so far unchurchly as, in their abstract mode of looking at things, they considered only the individual Christian as such, and overlooked the mysterious connection between the individual and the totality. Their strict ethical ideas led necessarily to Puritanism; hence the synod of Diospolis (A. D. 415) blamed Pelagius for having said: ecclesiam hic esse sine macula et ruga; Augustine de Gestis Pelagii, c. 12. Before this time some Christians in Sicily, who, generally speaking, agreed with the Pelagians, had asserted: Ecclesiam hanc esse, quæ nunc frequentatur populis et sine peccato esse posse; August. Ep. clvi.

The Manicheans, by separating the Electi from the rest (Auditores), gave countenance to the principle of an ecclesiola in ecclesia; and besides the great body of the Manichean church itself formed, as the one elect world

ness.

of light, a dualistic contrast with the vast material (hylozoist) mass of dark"The Manichean church is in relation to the world what the limited circle of the Electi is in relation to the larger assembly of the Auditores; that which is yet variously divided and separated in the latter, has its central point of union in the former." Baur, Manich. Religionssystem, p. 282.

"On the external history of the Donatists, comp. the works on ecclesiastical history [and especially F. Ribbeck, Donatus und Augustinus, oder der erste entscheidende Kampf zwischen Separatismus und d. Kirche. Elberfeld, 1857. A. Roux, De Augustin Adversario Don. 1838]. Sources: Optatus Milevitanus (about the year 368), De Schismate Donatistarum, together with the Monumenta Vett. ad Donatist. Hist pertinentia, ed. L. E. Du Pin, Par. 1700, ss. (Opp. Aug. T. ix.) Valesius, De Schism. Donat. in the Appendix to Eusebius. Norisius (edited by Ballerini brothers), Ven. 1729, iv. fol. Walch, Ketzergeschichte, vol. iv. Concerning the derivation of the name (whether from Donatus a casis nigris, or from Donat M.?) see Neander, Church History, ii. 187. The question at issue, viz., whether Cæcilian could be invested with the episcopal office, having been ordained by a Traditor, and the election of another bishop in the person of Majorinus, led to further dogmatic discussions on the purity of the church. In the opinion of the Donatists, the church ought to be pure (sine macula et ruga). It must, therefore, exclude, without exception, unworthy members (1 Cor. v. and especially passages from the Old Test.). When the opponents of the Donatists appealed to the parable of the tares and the wheat (Matth. xiii.), the latter applied it (according to our Saviour's own interpretation) to the world, and not to the church. Augustine, however, asserted, mundum ipsum appellatum esse pro ecclesiæ nomine.

Concerning the opinions of Optatus (which are stated in the second book of his treatise: De Schismate Donatistarum) see Rothe, Anfänge der christlichen Kirche, p. 677, ss. He developed the views of Cyprian. There is but one church. It has five ornamenta or dotes: 1. Cathedra (the unity of episcopacy in the Cathedra Petri); 2. Angelus (the bishop himself); 3. Spiritus Sanctus; 4. Fons (baptism); 5. Sigillum, i. e., Symbolum catholicum (according to Sol. Song, iv. 12). These dotes are distinguished from the sancta membra ac viscera of the church, which appear to him of greater importance than the dotes themselves. They consist in the sacramenta et nomina Trinitatis.

5

Augustine composed a separate treatise, entitled: De Unitate Ecclesiæ, on this subject.-Comp. contra Ep. Parmeniani, and De Baptismo. He proceeded, no less than the Donatists, on the principle of the purity of the church, and advocated a rigorous exercise of ecclesiastical discipline; but this should not lead to the depopulation of the church. Some elements enter into the composition of the house of God which do not form the structure of the house itself; some members of the body may be diseased, without its being thought necessary to cut them off at once; though the disease itself belongs no more to the body than the chaff which is mixed up with wheat forms a part of it. Augustine makes a distinction between the corpus Domini verum and the corpus Domini permixtum seu simulatum (de Doctr. Christ. iii. 32), which stands in connection with his negative view concerning the