Compendium Theologiae Dogmaticae Tomus I: De Christo Legato Divino, De Ecclesia Christi, De Fontibus Theologicis

Cf. S. Thomas, S. th. I, q. 1; his commentators, such as Gregorius de Valentia; Kleutgen, Theologie der Vorzeit tract. 5; J. Didiot, Logique surnaturelle subjective, Paris 1894.

1. Theology, as the very name indicates, is concerned with God, though not in such a way that God is its sole object, but in such a way that whatever is treated in theology is either God himself or something else insofar as it is referred to God as first principle and ultimate end. Therefore God is called the subject of theology, because in theology all things are predicated of God either directly or indirectly. In this it agrees with that part of philosophy which is commonly called natural theology or theodicy, from which it differs essentially by reason of its formal object.

2. Since in philosophy God is considered insofar as he is known from principles that are objectively and subjectively natural, the theology of which we are speaking here pertains to the supernatural order. Its objective principle, from which it proceeds, is divine revelation, once made to the prophets and apostles and handed down to the Church; its subjective principle, however, is reason illumined by divine faith. Accordingly, the formal object of theology is truth demonstrable from public divine revelation. The relation to God as subject makes things pertain to theology in the ontological order; the relation to public revelation as formal object makes it possible for things in the logical order to be known theologically. Thus theology is defined as the science of things that are demonstrable about God from revelation.

God, then, is considered in theology in two ways. a) God as God is the subject or, as some put it, the formal object of theology: that which theology treats, or that about which it speaks; b) God, insofar as by revelation he renders truths knowable theologically, is the principle and source of theology. Revelation is called the formal object by means of which theology knows. Theological knowability itself, resting on divine revelation, is sometimes called the formal aspect under which; but this designation is also applied to the supernatural illumination of the intellect that theology presupposes. Accordingly, different writers are accustomed to use these terms in different ways. For the present, therefore, it is simpler to retain only that distinction between the subject and the formal object of theology.

3. Is theology a science in the proper sense of the word? In science two things must be distinguished: knowledge of the principles from which one argues, and the certainty of the demonstrations drawn from those principles. Knowledge of principles, in turn, is derived either from their intrinsic evidence (immediate or mediate) or from authority. But the first principles of theology are not intrinsically evident to human beings; rather, they are made known by divine authority. Therefore, if one says it belongs to the notion of science that it proceed from intrinsically evident principles, one must deny that theology is a science in the strict sense. So Scotus says in the prologue to Book I of the Sententiae, n. 26 ff., and many others agree with him. If, on the other hand, one says that science is that which draws certain conclusions from known and certain principles, then one will regard theology as a science. So St. Thomas says in the first part of the Summa theologiae, q. 1, a. 2, and very many theologians agree with him.

This latter manner of speaking seems preferable, and theology must be called a science. For what constitutes the specific character of science considered subjectively—certainty acquired through reasoning—is found in theology, indeed more perfectly than in the other sciences, because it is founded on firmer principles. Science considered objectively is a body of certain propositions, connected with one another and gathered into a single system. Theology is such a body. The unity of theological science is evident from the unity of its subject and formal object.

Since theological science depends on divine science, it is commonly called a subalternated science (a subordinate science), while divine science is called a subalternating science with respect to theology. Theology is also commonly defined as the science of faith. In this definition, faith is taken either objectively, insofar as it is the complex of revealed truths, or subjectively, because faith is the principle from which theology proceeds, just as natural reason is the subjective principle of philosophy, which is therefore called the science of reason. Supernatural theology and natural theology, then, differ in species.

4. Theology differs from faith a) in its matter: in faith, this is all and only revealed truth, whereas in theology it also includes many other truths inferred by reasoning from revealed truths; b) in its form, because faith embraces its object on account of the authority of God revealing, whereas theology does so on account of scientific demonstration. «I believe in order to understand» (St. Anselm, Cur Deus homo 1, 2); c) in certainty, which in theology is of a lower order than in faith, since theology does not, as faith does, rest solely on divine authority, but also mingles in human considerations and conclusions.

Nevertheless, theology is intimately connected with faith, because the revealed truths from which it proceeds are held by faith alone, and because it uses reason illumined by the light of faith. Hence the habit of theological science, although acquired in itself, may nevertheless be called radically supernatural, since «sacred doctrine is, as it were, a kind of imprint of divine knowledge» (St. Thomas 1, q. 1, a. 3 ad 2).

Hence it is clear how great is the dignity of this science: its principles are from God supernaturally revealing; it treats of God, who is knowable supernaturally; it is directed to God as its supernatural end; and it is a kind of foretaste of the beatific vision. Consequently, theology is also wisdom in a singular way. For «sacred doctrine most properly treats of God insofar as he is the highest cause, because it treats not only of what can be known through creatures, but also of what is known to God alone about himself and communicated to others through revelation. Hence sacred doctrine is called wisdom in the highest degree» (St. Thomas 1, q. 1, a. 6).

5. Theology is divided into theology in the general sense and theology in the special sense. Theology in the special sense is the doctrine of God himself, one and triune. The Greek Fathers often call this theology exclusively, and contrast it with economy, that is, the doctrine of the works of divine providence directed toward the salvation of human beings, especially the Incarnation (e. g. Gregor. Naz. orat. 45, n. 4). Although this way of speaking is no longer in use, it must nevertheless be kept in mind so that the sayings of the Fathers may be understood. Theology in the general sense treats not only of God but also of the relation of creatures to God.

6. By its subject matter, theology is divided into speculative or dogmatic theology, which considers truths only as things to be believed or held, and practical or moral theology, which considers truths insofar as human acts are directed by them and morals are rightly formed.

Dogmatic theology becomes polemical theology when it is treated in such a way that errors opposed to it are refuted and attacks by adversaries are repelled above all. Bellarmine's controversies may serve as an example.

Ascetical theology, which instructs the faithful in Christian virtues, and mystical theology, which is the science of divine things acquired through intimate communion with God, may be assigned to moral theology. Likewise, that more recent discipline called pastoral theology belongs to practical theology. It is not distinguished from the other theological disciplines by definite boundaries, but gathers from them what helps pastors of souls to perform their office rightly and for the spiritual good of souls. Nevertheless, some contend that it is a special science, namely, a scientific exposition of the pastoral office of Christ and the Church.

7. Dogmatic theology is divided into positive theology and scholastic theology. Positive theology gathers revealed truths from Sacred Scripture, the Holy Fathers, and the other sources of revelation, and thus lays firm principles for theological conclusions. Scholastic theology, which is also called speculative in the strict sense, does three things: a) it draws theological conclusions from revealed truths; b) it defends sacred doctrine against adversaries; c) with the aid of the human disciplines (especially philosophy), it illustrates and explains revealed truths, confirms them, shows their connections, and brings them all into one system. It is called scholastic theology because, from the twelfth century onward, this way of teaching theology held the foremost place in the schools of theology. From the sixteenth century onward, however, most of the greatest theologians were accustomed to join positive theology to scholastic theology in such a way that they prefaced speculative expositions with positive arguments drawn from Scripture, the Fathers, and the Councils. This practice still prevails, insofar as the brevity of a course in theology permits; for a more exact study of positive theology, if it is to be pursued securely and fruitfully, presupposes someone well trained in scholastic theology.

Besides the names just explained, other designations are sometimes found. Symbolic theology (that is, comparative theology) compares Catholic dogmas with the tenets of non-Catholic Christian groups (e. g. Moehler, Symbolik). Biblical theology is the name given to the discipline that gathers doctrine from Sacred Scripture alone and arranges the scattered sayings of Scripture under definite headings. If theological sayings are gathered and arranged in this way from the Holy Fathers, the result is patristic theology. The names synodical theology, liturgical theology, and so on are to be explained in the same way.

8. For theology, understood in the objective sense, to be one science, all its parts of doctrine must belong to one common subject. That subject is God. Therefore, it must be shown how everything in theology is referred to God. Since this is a moral organism, not a physical one, the connection among its individual parts is not so invariable that various questions cannot be treated in different places. Nevertheless, everything is subsumed under certain headings, which are these:

1. On God himself, one in nature and three in persons;

2. On God the Creator;

3. On God as the last end;

4. On God the Redeemer;

5. On God the Sanctifier;

6. On God as the Consummator.

It is clear how, in this system, everything is referred to God as its subject. It remains only to explain this arrangement briefly.

9. This system was not devised a priori but drawn from the sources of revelation. For God revealed certain things about himself and certain things about his works. Of what he revealed about himself, some things pertain to the unity of the divine nature, others to the Trinity of persons. Therefore, since theology considers God with respect to himself, while it considers other truths according to their relation to God, theology begins with the treatise on the one and triune God.

The first relation of created things to God consists in their having proceeded from God as the first efficient cause. Hence the treatise on God himself is followed by the treatise On God the Creator, which treats 1. creation in general, 2. the making of the world, 3. the human being, 4. the angels. But since rational creatures were not produced in a purely natural order but raised to the supernatural order, the treatise also treats, 5. God as the one who elevates, or the state of original justice. Since human beings soon lost this state through sin, a treatise on original sin is added.

The other principal relation of creatures is to God as the last end, because God is not only the efficient cause but also the final cause of all things. And since lower things were made proximately for the sake of the human being, while the human being was made immediately for the sake of God, God must be considered especially as the last end of the human being, toward which end the human being tends through human acts; hence the treatise on human acts is closely connected with the treatise on God as the last end.

Yet after committing sin, the human being could no longer attain his last end unless God mercifully rescued him from the state of sin. God did this by sending Jesus Christ the Redeemer, who is the second person of the most holy Trinity. Hence we must treat God the Redeemer. This treatise has two parts: a) the Redeemer himself, which part is called Christology; b) the work of redemption, which part is called soteriology (in Greek soteria, in Latin redemption).

The fruit of redemption is applied to individual human beings through sanctifying grace, by which a human being is joined to God supernaturally, or sanctified. Hence we must treat God the Sanctifier. Certain accompaniments of grace are the virtues infused supernaturally and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Hence there are two treatises, on grace and on the virtues. A treatise is added on what is opposed to the virtues, that is, vices and sins, by which a human being is separated from God.

God, in turn, infuses grace and virtues through certain rites instituted by Christ, which are called sacraments. Therefore, the treatise on the sacraments also belongs to the treatise on God the Sanctifier.

Finally, the course in theology ends with the treatise On God the Consummator, which considers the consummation of individual human beings and the consummation of the whole world. This treatise is also called eschatology (ἔσχατα = last things).

10. St. Thomas divides the Summa theologiae into three parts: the first treats the one and triune God and God the Creator; the second is divided into two parts, one of which treats the last end and virtues and vices in general, law, and grace, while the other treats virtues and vices in particular; in the third part (which he did not finish), he treats God the Redeemer, the sacraments, and God the Consummator.

This division almost coincides with the one we proposed above. But in the Summa St. Thomas has many questions that are now assigned either to philosophy or to moral theology. He joins the treatise on original sin not to the treatise on original justice but to the treatise on sin; therefore, the treatise on original sin is found not in the first part but in the First Part of the Second Part.

The parts of the Summa are subdivided into questions and articles. Hence, for the sake of brevity, the Summa is usually cited without a special title, by indicating the part, question, and article. E. g. I, q. 79, a. 5, or I, 2, q. 3, a. 2; that is, question 79, article 5 of the First Part, or question 3, article 2 of the First Part of the Second Part. Sometimes c. or ad I, 2, 3 is added. The meaning is: in the body of the article, which always begins, “I answer that,” or in the reply to the first, second, or third objection. Other works of St. Thomas are cited by adding a special title.

Cf. Hurter, Nomenclator literarius theologiae catholicae; Grabmann, Geschichte der scholastischen Methode I, Freiburg 1909; II, 1911; Scheeben, Handbuch der katholischen Dogmatik I, n. 1027 sqq, where other sources are indicated.

11. On the period of the Holy Fathers. Those theological writers who are outstanding both in antiquity and in holiness are called Fathers of the Church. The period of the Holy Fathers is reckoned up to and including St. John of Damascus and St. Gregory the Great. Some extend it more broadly.

The Fathers who lived soon after the apostles are called Apostolic Fathers. Among these are counted St. Clement of Rome (pontiff 90–99?), St. Barnabas (whose epistle is held by most not to be genuine), St. Ignatius of Antioch († at the beginning of the second century), Papias (of whose books only a few fragments survive), Hermas (around the middle of the second century), and the anonymous author of Epistula ad Diognetum.

There are certain other writings that bear the names of apostles and, although they do not have apostles as their authors, are nevertheless of great importance for judging the customs of the first centuries: «Doctrina duodecim Apostolorum», «Didascalia Apostolorum» (ed. Funk, 1905), «Constitutiones Apostolorum» (in M 1, where they are attributed to Clement of Rome), «Canones apostolici» (in volume I of the collections of councils, Hardouin, Mansi, etc.), the Eastern «Canones Apostolici», to which the «canones Hippolyti» may be added.

12. Certain Fathers who defended the Christian religion in the second century against the attacks of Jews and pagans are called Apologists. Among them the most distinguished are St. Justin Martyr († around 167), St. Theophilus of Antioch († 182), and Minucius Felix († after 166). Aristides and Athenagoras also wrote apologies.

As soon as Gnosticism and other false doctrines arose, Catholic truth had to be defended against heretics. St. Irenaeus († 202) accomplished this above all; his principal work consists of five books and is usually cited as «Contra haereses». Tertullian published the precious little work «De praescriptionibus haereticorum», but later (c. 202) became a Montanist († c. 240). St. Cyprian († 258) chose him as his teacher and model of writing; Cyprian’s letters in particular are very useful.

13. The adherents of the Alexandrian school began to develop a system of Catholic doctrine. From this school came Clement of Alexandria († c. 217) and Origen († 254), the father of scientific exegesis, who in his work «De principiis», that is, on fundamental doctrines, attempted to give Catholic doctrine the form of a discipline, but without success. Origen’s disciples were St. Gregory Thaumaturgus († c. 270) and St. Dionysius the Great († 264 or 265)¹.

Just as the Alexandrian school loved allegorical interpretations of Sacred Scripture, so the Antiochene school, founded by the martyr Lucian († 311), adhered to a literal interpretation of Scripture. The greatest exegete of this school is Theodoret († c. 458), while its greatest orator is St. John Chrysostom († 407). Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia († c. 428), however, anticipated Nestorianism.

14. From the beginning of the fourth century, errors arose against the mysteries of the Most Holy Trinity and the Incarnation. Arius, an Alexandrian presbyter († 336), denied the divinity of Christ. This heresy was condemned by the Council of Nicaea, the first of the ecumenical councils (in 325). St. Athanasius († 373) fought the Arians with remarkable courage; among the Westerners, St. Hilary of Poitiers († 366) and St. Ambrose († 397) did so as well. Eusebius Pamphili († c. 340), the father of ecclesiastical history, does not present Catholic doctrine with complete fidelity. After the Council of Nicaea, above all two Cappadocians, Aëtius and Eunomius, propagated Arianism. Three other Cappadocians resisted them: men of the highest distinction and learning, St. Basil the Great († 379), his brother St. Gregory of Nyssa († 395), and St. Gregory Nazianzen († c. 390). In the same fourth century St. Epiphanius († 403) attacked not only Arianism but other heresies as well. St. Optatus of Milevis wrote against the Donatists, African schismatics. St. Cyril of Jerusalem († 386), through his catecheses, and St. Ephrem († after 378), a Syrian deacon, through his orations and poems, shed light on Catholic doctrine.

15. Just as Arius denied Christ’s divinity, so Nestorius denied the personal unity of Christ, saying that in Christ there are two persons, one divine and the other human, joined to one another morally. This heresy was condemned by the Council of Ephesus (in 431). St. Cyril of Alexandria († 444) was Nestorius’s most formidable adversary; several councils approved his Christology.

Another adversary of Nestorius was Eutyches. But he fell into the opposite error, that is, into Monophysitism, by denying that there are two natures in Christ. This error was condemned at the Council of Chalcedon (451). St. Leo the Great, pope († 461), spoke and wrote admirably against the heresy of Eutyches. Monotheletism is related to Monophysitism. The Monothelites did not admit two wills and operations in Christ. St. Sophronius († after 637) and St. Maximus the Confessor († 662) resisted them. Monotheletism was condemned by the Third Council of Constantinople (680).

16. While Christological questions were being debated chiefly in the East, a heresy arose in the West at the beginning of the fifth century, called Pelagianism after its author, Pelagius. He denied original sin and the necessity of grace. St. Jerome († 420), called the “greatest Doctor” in exegetical matters, and above all St. Augustine († 430), who has no equal among the Fathers of the Church for acuity of intellect, defended Catholic doctrine against him. St. Prosper of Aquitaine († c. 463) and St. Fulgentius of Ruspe († 533) follow in Augustine’s footsteps. St. Prosper also fought vigorously against Semipelagianism, which is a kind of mitigated Pelagianism. Among the Semipelagians, who were never heretics, John Cassian († c. 435), otherwise an excellent man, stands out. Vincent of Lérins († 450), who published the most celebrated «Commonitorium pro catholicae fidei antiquitate et universalitate», and Faustus of Riez (at the end of the fifth century) were also touched by Semipelagianism. In the same century St. Gregory the Great († 604) was an illustrious light of the Church; he is usually considered the last of the Latin Fathers. The ecclesiastical orators of that age included St. Peter Chrysologus († 450) and St. Maximus of Turin († after 465). The last of the Greek Fathers is considered to be St. John of Damascus († before 754), who gathered into a kind of theological Summa the works written by the ancient doctors, a work usually cited as «De Fide orthodoxa».

In the fifth century the works of the so-called Dionysius the Areopagite came to light. Since people in the Middle Ages considered Dionysius, the disciple of the apostle Paul, to be the author of these works, they regarded them as worthy of the greatest veneration and often illustrated them with commentaries. Scholastics likewise often expounded the works of Boethius († c. 525), a Roman senator.

17. The age of the Holy Fathers was succeeded by the period of the compilers. Their great merit is that, during the migrations of peoples, they preserved the literary treasures of Christian antiquity for posterity. Those especially worthy of mention are St. Cassiodorus († c. 570), St. Isidore of Seville († 636), and the Venerable Bede († 735). This practice of working “through the ancient masters, which could not be accomplished through newcomers” (Cassiod., De inst. divin. litter. praef.) continued almost to the end of the eleventh century.

18. On the period of the early scholastics. St. Anselm, bishop of Canterbury († 1109), is considered the father of scholastic theology. Not content with knowing what the Holy Fathers had handed down, he undertook to explain it speculatively. “Faith seeking understanding” is his motto. With this aim, he treated the principal dogmas in such a way that they could readily be brought together into a single system. Hugh of St. Victor († 1141) and Richard of St. Victor († 1173), as well as William of Auvergne (of Paris; † 1249), followed the same path. In that age many began to compose «Summas Sententiarum», that is, to arrange in certain headings and interpret speculatively the sayings of Sacred Scripture and the Holy Fathers pertaining to the dogmas of the Church. In this genre no one achieved greater success than Peter Lombard († 1164), the «Master of the Sentences», whose «Sententiae» remained the “textbook” in almost all theological schools until the sixteenth century. Alexander of Hales, a Franciscan, the “Irrefutable Doctor” († 1245), published a «Summa theologiae» according to the dialectical method. Together with St. Bonaventure, the “Seraphic Doctor” († 1274), he was the father of the old Franciscan school. In addition to commentaries on Lombard’s Sentences, Bonaventure published the notable «Breviloquium veritatis theologicae» and most beautifully joined mystical theology with scholastic theology. Henry of Ghent († 1293), a man of extraordinary talent, is called the “Solemn Doctor.”

19. When, in the thirteenth century, Aristotelian philosophy began to spread in the West through the Arabs, Blessed Albert the Great, of the Order of Preachers, the “Universal Doctor” († 1280), purified it of Arab corruption and enlisted it as a most useful handmaid of theology. The greatest disciple of this great master was St. Thomas Aquinas, the “Angelic Doctor” († 1274), the greatest of scholastic theologians. Among his works, besides the Summa theologiae and commentaries on the Sententiae, those especially relevant to dogmatic theology are «Compendium theologiae», «De veritate catholicae fidei contra gentiles», and «Quaestiones disputatae», in which many matters of dogma are treated more fully than in the Summa. Giles of Rome, of the Order of the Hermits of St. Augustine, the “Most Well-Founded Doctor” († 1316), follows in St. Thomas’s footsteps.

From the Order of St. Francis came John Duns Scotus (usually cited simply as “Scotus”), a man of keenest intellect, the “Subtle Doctor” († 1308). He called the whole doctrine of Aquinas into question, departed from it in many respects, and began a new Franciscan school, which differs greatly from the older form of Alexander and Bonaventure. Among Scotus’s disciples, Francis of Meyronnes († 1327) should be mentioned, as well as Peter Auriol, the “Eloquent Doctor” († 1322), who vigorously attacked Thomistic doctrine. Against him arose the defender of St. Thomas, John Capreolus, the “Prince of the Thomists” († 1444). Thomas de Vio, commonly called Cajetan († 1534), furnished St. Thomas’s theological Summa with commentaries; Francis Sylvius, commonly called Ferrariensis († 1528), did the same for the Summa contra gentiles. Others continued to expound Lombard’s Sentences, such as Diego Deza, commonly called Hispalensis († 1523). From the Order of Preachers, Durand of St. Pourçain († 1334) was an adversary of St. Thomas. The principal commentators on Scotus are Francis Lychetus († 1516) and Peter Tartaretus († 1494).

20. The school of the Nominalists was founded by William of Ockham, the “Venerable Beginner” († 1349), who often attacked both the doctrine of St. Thomas and that of Scotus, his teacher. Among others, John Gerson († 1419) and Gabriel Biel, the “last scholastic” († 1495), are counted among this school. In the Carmelite Order, John Baconthorpe († 1346) founded a new school, but the Carmelites later adhered to the doctrine of St. Thomas. Thomas Walden († 1430), also from that Order, served Catholic theology well by defending it against the Wycliffites and Hussites. St. Antoninus († 1447) published a Summa theologiae full of learning, following practical rather than speculative principles. Dionysius the Carthusian (Ryckel; † 1471), however, encompassed the entire theology of medieval writers in a very great number of volumes and brought the period of the early scholastics to a fitting close. Thus, in the Middle Ages, the chief achievement was to gather all theology into one body, arrange it systematically, and explain it speculatively. Certain parts of theology were also first fully developed in that age with respect to their subject matter, especially the treatise on the sacraments

21. On the period of more recent theology. Theology entered an altogether new state through the Council of Trent (1543–1563). Already during the council itself, distinguished theologians flourished, such as Ambrosius Catharinus († 1543), Melchior Cano († 1560), whose most celebrated work is «De locis theologicis», Dominic Soto († 1560), and Peter Soto († 1563), all from the Order of Preachers, who, together with others, fought against the heresies then arising.

But theology reached its highest perfection after the council had ended. In the Order of Preachers flourished Dominic Báñez († 1604), author of the Neo-Thomistic school, or of the doctrine of physical predetermination; Bartholomew Medina († 1581); Peter de Ledesma († 1616); Diego Alvarez († 1635); John of St. Thomas († 1644); John Gonet († 1681); Antoine Goudin († 1695); Xantes Mariales († 1660); and others. Among the Carmelites, authors of the «Cursus salmanticensis in Summam S. Thomae» and Philip of the Most Holy Trinity († 1671), among others, joined the Thomists; so too did many from the Order of St. Benedict, such as Alfonso Curiel († 1609) and Augustine Reding († 1692). Most Franciscans champion the doctrine of Scotus, such as Francis de Herrera († c. 1600), Theodore Smising († 1626), Mastrius of Meldola († 1673), Philip Faber († 1630), John Bosco († 1684), and John Poncius († 1660).

22. Shortly before the Council of Trent (in 1540), the Society of Jesus was founded, and soon many great theologians emerged from it². To leave aside other branches of theology, the following stand out in dogmatic theology: Francis Toletus († 1596), who may be called the father of theological science in the Society of Jesus; then Luis de Molina († 1600), after whose name the proponents of “middle knowledge” are called Molinists; Gregory of Valencia († 1603); Francis Suárez, the “Eximious Doctor” († 1617); Gabriel Vázquez († 1604); Leonard Lessius († 1623); Adam Tanner († 1632); Ruiz de Montoya († 1632); John Martínez de Ripalda († 1648); John de Lugo († 1660); and many others. Robert Bellarmine († 1621) cultivated polemical theology above all, and Dionysius Petavius († 1652) positive theology.

Other distinguished theologians of that age are Thomas Stapleton († 1598), a controversialist; André Duval († 1637) and Nicolas Ysambert († 1642), doctors of the Sorbonne; and Louis Thomassin († 1695), an Oratorian.

23. After the middle of the seventeenth century begins the “period of the epigones,” which is reckoned up to the end of the eighteenth century. In this age, too, not insignificant dogmatic works were published. Thus, from the Thomistic school came Charles René Billuart († 1757), Louis Gotti († 1742), and Bernard de Rubeis († 1775); from the Scotist school, Claude Frassen († 1711) and Thomas ex Charmes († 1765); from the Society of Jesus, Theophilus Raynaud († 1663), Jacques Platel († 1681), Dominic Viva († after 1710), Paul Antoine († 1743), and, after many others, a crown worthy of them all, the «Theologia wirceburgensis», whose authors were Udalricus Munier († 1759), Henricus Kilber († 1783), Thomas Holzklau († 1783), and Ignatius Neubauer († 1795). From the Augustinian school, Laurence Berti († 1766) published a great work. Among the doctors of the Sorbonne, Honoré Tournély († 1729) stands out.

24. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, scholastic theology lay almost buried, while vulgar rationalism reigned nearly everywhere, with which certain Catholic theologians too had been infected. The best known among them are Georg Hermes († 1831) and Anton Günther († 1863), whose systems the Church rejected because they did not subordinate reason to faith but wanted to dominate faith. The Traditionalists fought against rationalism unsuccessfully, for they unduly diminished the power of human reason to know religious and moral truths. Such were Louis Bautain († 1867) and Augustin Bonnetty († 1879). The Church rejected their errors as well, as it did the error of the Ontologists, who taught that human beings have an innate, though confused, immediate knowledge of God. Vincenzo Gioberti († 1852) and Antonio Rosmini-Serbati († 1855) belong to this group.

Yet there were men endowed with learning and talent who strove to restore theology to its former dignity. These included Bruno Libermann († 1844), Heinrich Denzinger († 1833), and above all Johann Perrone († 1876) and Joseph Kleutgen († 1883). Through the works of these and other theologians, scholastic theology recovered new strength and has been bearing new and excellent fruit day by day, especially after the Supreme Pontiffs Pius IX and Leo XIII celebrated it with the highest praise and commended it to all Catholic theologians for study and cultivation.

25. Most recently a false doctrine has arisen which had long prevailed among Protestants, but gradually infected the minds of certain Catholics too by its contagion. This disease is called “Modernism.” It consists in a certain extreme subjectivism, according to whose tenets religion, revelation, and faith are grounded not so much in the objective truth handed on by Christ to the Church as in the inner experience of individual people, through which a person has a kind of mystical intercourse with God, who cannot be known intellectually. This inner and subjective relation to God alone is an essential element of the whole of religious life. Everything else—the Church, dogmas, and sacraments—is a set of secondary aids that can be useful for stirring religious feelings, provided they continually adapt themselves to subjective developments and needs. Hence in religion nothing is stable; everything flows.

This system, since it overturns the Christian religion and is hostile to the Church instituted by Christ, has rightly been condemned. Yet this poison still spreads. Therefore a Catholic theologian needs great vigilance and diligent care, lest he allow this plague to penetrate sacred doctrine through any fissure. “Guard the deposit, avoiding profane novelties of words and the contradictions of knowledge falsely so called, which some professing have erred in the faith” (1 Tim 6, 20). But you should “know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth” (ib. 3, 15). Faithfully, soberly, devoutly, and in Catholic fashion! Cf. Caes. Carbone, De modernistarum doctrinis, Romae 1909; Ful. Bessmer, Philosophie und Theologie des Modernismus, Freiburg 1912; A. Gisler, Der Modernismus², Einsiedeln 1912; I. M. Piccinelli, De catholico dogmate universim, Neapoli 1811.