we would not maintain with Baumgarten-Crusius (Dogmengeschichte, p. 12), that the History of Doctrines already comprises the essential part of Patristics; for the individual characteristics which are essential to the latter, can have only a secondary place in the former. Thus the object of the latter is to know Augustinianism, that of Patristics to know Augustine. How the system is related to the person? is a biographical (patrological) question: what is its relation to the doctrine of the church? is the inquiry in the History of Doctrines. The opinions, too, of individual theologians are of importance in the History of Doctrines, only so far as they have had an appreciable influence upon the formation of the doctrinal system, or have in some way acted upon it. Comp. Gieseler, Dogmengesch. s. 11. On the literature of this subject, see § 14.

§ 6.

RELATION TO THE HISTORY OF HERESIES AND THE GENERAL

HISTORY OF RELIGION.

Since the doctrines of the church have for the most part been shaped in conflict with heretical tendencies, it is evident that the History of Doctrines must also include the History of Heresies, giving prominence to those points which have had an influence in completing or adjusting the forms of the doctrine, because they contained essential elements of the doctrinal development; or, to such as have set the doctrine itself in a clearer light, by their very antagonism. To learn the formation and ramifications of heretical systems themselves appeals to a different interest, which is met either in the so-called History of Heresies' or in the general History of Religion. Still less is it the object of the history of doctrines to discuss the relation between Christianity and other forms of religion. On the contrary, it presupposes the comparative history of religion, in the same manner as dogmatic theology presupposes apologetie theology.3

1

In the ecclesiastical point of view, the history of heresies may be comFared to pathology, the history of doctrines to physiology. It is not meant by this that every heretical tendency is an absolute disease, and that full health can only be found in what has been established under the name of ecclesiastical orthodoxy. For it has been justly observed, that diseases are frequently natural transitions from a lower to a higher stage of life, and that a state of relative health is often the product of antecedent diseases. Thus the obstinacy of a one-sided error has often had the effect of giving life, and even a more correct form of statement, to the doctrines of the church. Comp. Schenkel, das Wesen des Protestantismus (Schaffh. 1845), i. p. 13. Baur, die christliche Lehre von der Dreieinigkeit, i. p. 112. Neander, Dogmengesch. s. 16. On the relation of heresy to orthodoxy in general, see Dorner, Lehre von der Person Christi, I. i. s. 71 Note. [See also Rothe's Aufäuge

d. christl Kirche, s. 333, for the difference between the church view and the heretical view of doctrines.]

The phrase History of Heresies, has been banished by a more humane usage; but not the thing itself, any more than Polemics. The very able publications of recent writers on the Gnostic systems, Ebionitism, Manichæism, Montanism, Unitarianism, etc., and the lives of some of the Fathers, are of great use to the historian of Christian doctrine; but he can not be expected to incorporate all the materials thus furnished into the History of Doctrines. Thus the first period of the History of Doctrines must constantly recur to the phenomena of Ebionitism and Gnosticism, since the problem of the church doctrine then was to work itself out between these two perilous rocks. But the wide-spread branches of the Gnostic systems, so far as they differ from one another (e. g., as to the number of the æons and the succession of the syzygies), can not here be traced in detail, unless, indeed, we are to seek in the slime of heresy, as it is collected e. g. in the Clementina, for the living germ of Christianity! Holding fast, on the other hand, to the Biblical type of truth, so far as heresy is concerned it will be sufficient to exhibit those forms in which it deviates from this type, and to delineate its physiognomy in general outlines, as they are given in church history. In the same manner Nestorianism and Monophysitism are of importance in the christological controversies of the second period. But after they have been overcome by the Catholic Church, and fixed in sects, which, in consequence of further conflicts, were themselves divided into various parties, it can be no longer the office of the History of Doctrines to follow them in this process. This must be left to monographs on the heresies. For as soon as a sect has lost its doctrine-shaping power, it falls simply into the department of sta

tistics.

Just as it is no part of the functions of systematic divinity to defend the truth of the Christian religion, since Apologetics (the Evidences) must do this work beforehand (see Hagenbach, Encyclop., § 81); so, too, the history of doctrines has nothing to do with the conflict of Christianity with polytheism, Islamism, etc. But the history of these religions is indispensable as an auxiliary study. The notions of the Jewish sects, the myths and symbols of polytheistic religions, the systems of Mohammed, of Buddha, etc., are still more foreign to the history of Christian doctrines than the heresies of the .church. Works of Reference: Creuzer, Symbolik und Mythologie der alten Völker, Darmstad, 1819-23, 6 vols. Stuhr, allgemeine Geschichte der Religionsformen der heidnischen Völker: 1. die Religionssysteme der heidnischen Völker des Orients. Berlin, 1836. 2. die Religionssysteme der Hellenen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwickelung bis auf die makedonische Zeit. Berlin, 1838. Grimm, J., deutsche Mythologie, Göttingen, 1835. 2. Aufl. 1844. Görres, Mythengeschichte der Asiatischen Völker. Richter, Phantasien des Orients. Eckermann, Dr. K., Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte und Mythologie der vorzüglichsten Völker des Alterthums, nach der Anordnung von Ottfr. Müller. Halle, 1845, 2 vols. [A. Wuttke, Gesch. des Heidenthums, 2. 8vo. Berl. 1852-3. Hegel, Phil. der Religion (Werke). Sepp, Das Heidenthum, 3 Bde. 1853. L. Preller, Griech Mythologie, 2. 8vo. 1854. J. J. I. Döllinger, Heidenthum und Judenthum, Regensb.

1857.

C. C. J. Bunsen, Gott in d. Geschichte, 3. 8vo. 1857-8. Schelling, Phil. der Mythologie, 2. 1857. C. O. Müller, Mythology, transl. by Leitch. Lond. 1844. Chs. Hardwick, Christ and other Masters, four parts, Cambridge, 1855-9.]

§ 7.

PELATION TO THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, THE HISTORY OF CHRIS-
TIAN ETHICS, AND THE HISTORY OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY.

Although the History of Doctrines has elements in common with the history of philosophy,' yet they are no more to be confounded with each other than dogmatic theology and philosophy." The history of doctrines is also to be separated from the history of Christian ethics, so far as systematic theology itself is able to make a relative distinction between dogmatics and morals. And even to the history of scientific theology, it has the relation, at the utmost, of the whole to the part, since the former may indeed have its place in the history of doctrines (in the general portion), but can by no means be supplanted by it.*

This is the case, e. g. with the Alexandrian school, the Gnostics, the scholastics and modern philosophical schools. Still the object of the history of philosophy is distinct from that of the history of doctrines. Comp. Baumgarten-Crusius, i. p. 8. Critica Philosophiae, Lips. 1742-44, 5 vols. 4to.; 2d edit. 1766, '67, 6 vols.

ito.

of

Works of Reference: Brucker, J. Historia

[The History of Philosophy drawn up from

Brucker's Hist. Crit.

Philos., by William Enfield, Lond. 1819, 2 vols.] Tennemann, W. G., Geschichte der Philosophie, Leipzig, 1798-1819, 11 vols. [The "Lehrbuch" the same author is published in English under the title: "A Manual of the History of Philosophy, translated from the German, by the Rev. Arthur Johnson, Oxf. 1832; revised edition by Morell, in Bohn's Library.] Reinhold, E., Geschiehte der Philosophie, Jena, 1845, 3d edit. 2 vols. Ritter, H., Geschichte der Philosophie, Hamburg, 1829-53, 12 vols. [The Ancient Phil. translated into English, by Alex. J. W. Morrison, Oxf. 1838

vols. 8vo.]

Fries, Geschichte der Philosophie, i Halle, 1837.

Schleiermacher, Geschichte der Philosophie, edit. by H. Ritter. (Complete works, iv. 1), Berlin, 1839. [T. A. Rixner, Handbuch d. Gesch. d. Phil. 3

Bde.

chen.

1829; Gumposch, Supplement, 1850. E. Zeller, Die Philos. d. Grie3 Bde. 1846-59. J. E. Erdmann, Gesch. d. neueren Phil. 3 Bde. (6 K. Fischer, Neuere Phil 2 Bde. 1853-4. Albert

Theile) 1834-53.

Schwegler, Hist. of Phil., transl. by J. H. Seelye, New York, 1856. J.D. Morel1, Phil, of the Nineteenth Century. New York, 1856. H. M. ChalyAndover) 1856. H. Ritter. Die christl. Philosophie... in ihrer Geschichte, 2Bde Göttingen, 1858-9.

båts,

Hist. Entwickelung von Kaut bis Hegel. Trans. (Edinb. and

2.1 865.]

2

By

Erdmann, Grundriss, 2. 1866. Ueberweg,

the obliteration of the distinction between the History of Philosophy

and the History of Doctrines, the essential nature of Christianity is funda

mentally obscured." Dorner, Person Christi, i. s. 108; comp. Neander, Dog. mengesch., s. 9:-["Philosophy develops conscious reason of and by itself; theology is employed upon data historically given the truths that repose in the divine word, and have passed over into Christian consciousness."] 8 Comp. Baumgarten-Crusius, p. 9.

4 Comp. § 11: Neander, Dogmengesch., s. 6: Gieseler, s. 16.

§ 8.

AUXILIARY SCIENCES.

Although the branches of theological science above enumerated are strictly distinct from the History of Doctrines, they are, nevertheless, connected with it as auxiliary sciences.' Archæology,' and, in the second line, the sciences auxiliary to church history,' may be added to their number.

Ecclesiastical history itself may be viewed in the light of an auxiliary science, since the history of forms of church government, of worship, of the private life of Christians, etc., are connected with the history of doctrines. In like manner Patristics, the History of Heresies, the General History of Religion, the History of Philosophy, and the History of Christian and Natural Ethics, are to be numbered among the auxiliary sciences.

From the connection between the doctrines and the liturgy of the church, it is obvious that Archæology must be considered as an auxiliary science, if we understand by it the history of Christian worship. This may easily be seen from the use of certain doctrinal phrases (e. g. OɛOTÓKOS etc.) in the liturgies of the church, the appointment of certain festivals (the feast of Corpus Christi, that of the conception of the Virgin Mary), the reflex influence of the existence or absence of certain liturgical usages upon the doctrinal definitions of the church (e. g., the influence of the withholding of the sacramental cup from the laity upon the doctrine of concomitance, comp. § 195), etc. Works of Reference: Bingham, J., Origg. s. Antiqu. Ecclesiasticæ. Hala, 1751-61. [Bingham, J., Antiquities of the Christian Church, and other works. Lond. 1834, ss. 8 vols.; a new edition by Richard Bingham. Augusti, J. Ch. W., Denkwürdigkeiten aus der christlichen Archæologie. Leipz. 1817-31, 12 vols. [Christian Antiquities, translated and compiled from the works of Augusti by the Rev. Lyman Coleman, Andover, 1844.] Rheinwald, F. H., kirchliche Archæologie. Berl. 1830. [Schöne, K., Geschichtforschungen über die kirchlichen Gebräuche und Einrichtungen der Kirche. Berl. 1819-22, 3 vols.] Böhmer, W., christlich-kirchliche Alterthumswissenschaft, Bresl. 1836-39, 2 vols. [Siegel, Handbuch d. christl. kirchl. Alterthümer. 4 Bde. Leipz. 1835-8. Guericke, Archäologie. Leipz. 1859. J. E. Riddle, Manual, Lond. 1839. William Bates, Lect. on Christ. Antiquities, 1854-7.]

These are, besides those already mentioned, Universal History, Ecclesiastical Philology, Ecclesiastical Chronology, Diplomatics, etc. [Comp. the introductions to works on ecclesiastical history. Gieseler, Text-Book of Church Hist., edited by H. B. Smith, New York, vol. I. pp. 19-20, 560-2.]

§ 9.

IMPORTANCE OF THE HISTORY OF DOCTRINES.

Ernesti, Prolusiones de Theologiæ Historicæ et Dogmatice conjungendæ Necessitate, Lips. 1759, in his Opusc. Theol. Lips. 1773-92. Illgen, Ch. T., über den Werth der christli chen Dogmengeschichte, Leipz. 1817. Augusti, Werth der Dogmengeschichte, in his Theologische Blätter II. 2, p. 11, ss. Hagenbach, Encyclop. § 69. Niedner, Das Recht der Dogmen, in his Zeitschrift f. d. hist. Theol. 1851. [Comp. Kling, in the Studien und Kritiken, 1840. Niedner, Zur neuesten Dogmengesch. in the Allg. Monatsschrift, 1851. Engelhardt, in the Zeitschrift f. d. historische Theologie, 1853. J. Murdock, in the Christ. Monthly Spectator, vol. ix. pp. 27 sq., 249 sq.]

The value of the History of Doctrines, in a scientific point of view, follows in part from what has already been said. 1. It helps to complete the study of church history in one of its most important aspects. 2. It is an introduction to the study of systematic theolIts moral and religious influence, its practical benefits, are result of its purely scientific worth. In general, it exerts a

ogy.

the

But

shaping influence, by bringing into view the efforts and struggles of the human mind in relation to its most important concerns. it is of special use to the theologian, preserving him both from a one-sided and rigid adherence to the letter (false orthodoxy), and from the superficial love of novelty which is characteristic of a contemptuous and impatient spirit (heterodoxy and neology).'

1

2

Comp. § 2.

Comp. $10. The importance of the history of doctrines in both these respects has frequently been overrated. Every theological party has appealed to it in support of its peculiar views, or dreaded its results, both equally unworthy of a scientific spirit. Comp. Baumgarten-Crusius, I. p. 16-20.

§ 10.

MODE OF HANDLING THE HISTORY OF DOCTRINES.

die Form der christlichen Dogmen- und Kirchenhistorie in Betracht gezogen, in

Baur's Zeitschrift fur speculative Theologie. Berlin, 1836. Parts 1 and 2. Kliefoth,
Einleitung in die Dogmengeschichte, Parchim und Ludwigslust, 1839.

But only that mode of treating the History of Doctrines leads to these beneficial results, which brings to distinct consciousness, not Only what is changeable in the doctrinal statements, but what is permanent in the midst of the changes; that which moves through transient with a revivifying energy: in a word, that which is

the

essential and unchangeable in the Christian system of redempOnly such a mode of handling the subject, viz.: historical

tion.