ON THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE SABELLIAN and AtHA

NASIAN METHOD OF REPRESENTING THE DOCTRINE OF THE
TRINITY.

By Dr. Frederic Schleiermacher, late Professor in the University of Berlin. Translated, with Notes and Illustrations, by M. Stuart, Prof. Sacred Lit. in the Theol. Sem. Andover.

INTRODUCTION BY THE TRANSLATOR.

[THE individual above named as the author of a comparison between the Sabellian and Athanasian Creeds, was beyond all doubt one of the most distinguished men in the walks of theological and philosophical literature, which Germany has of late years, or even perhaps at any time, presented to the notice of the public. His acquisitions, although exceedingly varied, and extending not only to the science and history of Christian doctrine, but also to the whole round of ancient philosophy, particularly the Platonic, as well as to much of the wide circle of Latin and Greek philology, were, in every department where he extended them, original and profound. He was one of the few men, who always thought and was able to think for himself; and consequently he was never a mere copyist or retailer of other men's opinions. Yet, as a general thing, he does not appear to have given way to the temptations which naturally beset a mind of this cast, and solicit it to indulge in singular and exVOL. V. No. 18. 34

cessive speculations, at the expense of sober reason and sound judgment; a characteristic which may, with much justice, be predicated of many distinguished writers in Germany, especially of many who have been conversant with philosophy and sacred criticism.

That the cast of Schleiermacher's mind was philosophic and speculative, will be admitted fully by his warmest admirers, and is indeed plain enough. That he undertook, in his leisure hours, to translate and briefly to comment upon Plato's works; and this from pure love of such study as the works of this distinguished philosopher invited him to engage in; of itself evinces a cast of mind in love with tenuous and refined speculation. The masterly version which he produced, in the course of his Platonic studies, has scarcely a parallel among modern translations of the ancient writers; so deeply did he drink in of the spirit of his favourite author, so thoroughly did he penetrate the deepest recesses of his meaning, and such an admirable power did he possess of transferring the original, body and soul, into his own vernacular language—a language which, of all those now spoken in Europe, seems to be the most capable of fully expressing the force of Plato's original diction. How weak, how diluted, how petit maitre like, for example, does the prince of Grecian philosophers appear, in the hands and in the vernacular of the French philosopher Cousin! How contemptible even, in those of the English Taylor! which, however, is more the fault of the translator than of the language.

The printed works of Schleiermacher, with the exception of his version of Plato, are not numerous. His principal one is his Glaubenslehre or Christliche Glaube, i. e. System of Christian Faith or Doctrine, to which he adverts in the commencement of the following Essay. There, from beginning to end, the intelligent and critical reader will find striking and original thoughts; worthy in general at least of being examined and weighed, if they are not entitled to reception. If however I might venture a single remark upon this book as a whole, I should say, that the author has aimed too much at system and theoretical perfection of orderly and logical analysis and development. That he is consistent with himself; that he carries through what he begins; and that his mind, granting him his premises, never falters as to logical deduction; will be conceded, I think, by all who read and well understand him. That he pursues his own way, independent of every preceding dis

cussion, and of every authority except what he deems to be reason and Scripture, will be doubted by no impartial reader. That his thoughts are powerful, acute, deep, learned, striking, worthy of much examination and reflection, will be as little doubted by any except hasty and superficial readers. Every where the grasp of a mighty mind, in search of a resting place among the simple and systematic elements of truth, appears upon the very face of his disquisitions. If he has failed, and in some respects it is my full conviction that he has, it seems to be owing, at least in part, to his too great love of perfect philosophical and theoretical system. In attaining to this, he appears occasionally to have left out of sight some of the plain and practical declarations of the Scriptures. This we shall have occasion hereafter to notice, in respect to some of his speculations with regard to the doctrines of the Trinity.

As a whole, his System of Christian Faith can hardly be said to be adapted to common use. The speculative parts of it, which every where abound, are beyond the reach of common readers, who can attain only to an imperfect understanding of the views which he means to present. One reason of this is, that he supposes a great deal of Vorkenntnisse (preparatory knowledge) in his readers; and this, in respect to a great variety of subjects. Indeed the reading of his System in an intelligent way requires so much of this, that it can scarcely be supposed his book will ever become popular, in the usual sense of this word.

When I read a book of this cast, I feel myself spontaneously moved to ask the question: Can this be Christianity in its simple elements-a religion beyond all doubt designed for "every kindred and tongue and people and nation?" I am constrained to answer this question in the negative. A religion designed by Heaven for all, must be intelligible to all, so far as it is to profit them. They cannot be profited by what they cannot understand. Does the System of Schleiermacher develope such a religion? I cannot think it does. I do not mean to say, that the elements, the great and essential truths, of religion are not contained in his system. On the contrary, I fully believe that they are. But what I mean to say is, that the world at large are shut out from them, by reason of their being removed to a region so elevated and speculative that but few minds can attain to them.

I will not say, that it is of no use to write such books. I am

far from believing this. But thus much we may say, viz. that it is of little direct use for the great mass of readers. Still, as philosophy so named has endeavoured, in a thousand ways, to embarrass religious truth, and to represent it as unreasonable and indefensible on the ground of argument and logic, it is of serious moment, at times, to shew that philosophy, in its legitimate and proper use, can never be made to bear witness against Christianity. In this respect such efforts as those of Schleiermacher may find a satisfactory apology.

The influence which some of his expositions and defences of divine truth may have, on those intelligent readers who peruse and understand them, may be indirectly of great use even to the multitude. If the teachers of religion are rendered more enlightened by this perusal, and become better instructed as to some highly important points of Christian doctrine, then inay those committed to their care and instruction as to things pertaining to religion, reap the benefit, though in an indirect way, of such works as those which Schleiermacher has left behind him. One may say of him: Ubi bene nemo melius; and even where we feel compelled to dissent from him, we are almost sure to get the best arguments that can be adduced against the opinions which we espouse; a privilege which all are not willing to accept with any thankfulness, and of which, it may truly be said, only a moderate number are skilled in making a right

use.

With regard to Schleiermacher's views as a Trinitarian, I can truly say, that I have met with scarcely any writer, ancient or modern, who appears to have a deeper conviction of, or more hearty belief in, the doctrine of the real Godhead of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This is the basis, on which the whole superstructure of his Christian system rests. No where can be found a writer more entirely alien from the views and speculations of Arians and Socinians; no where one who appears to contend more with his whole heart and soul for the proper, true, supreme Divinity of his Lord and Saviour. God manifest in the flesh seems to be inscribed, in his view, on every great truth of the gospel, and to enter as a necessary ingredient into the composition of its essential nature.

Yet Schleiermacher was not made a Trinitarian by Creeds and Confessions. Neither the Nicene or Athanasian Symbol, nor any succeeding formula of Trinitarian doctrine built on this, appears to have had any influence in the formation of his views.

From the Scriptures, and from arguments flowing, as he believed, out of Scriptural premises, he became, and lived, and died, a hearty and constant believer in the one living and true God, revealed to us as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Not content with receiving the formulas of ancient or of modern times, ast the dictates of inspiration in regard to this awful and important subject; and unwilling to occupy his time merely in arranging, illustrating, and defending the dicta of Councils, assembled in the heat of controversy to put down one party and set up another; he ventured to tread the same ground that such Councils themselves claimed the right of treating, and to survey it anew with his own eyes, and inquire, whether, in the vehemence of dispute and in the midst of philosophical mists, the former survey had been in all respects made with thorough and exact skill and care, and whether a report of it in all respects intelligible and consistent had been made out.

The result of such a survey on his part-of an examination conducted by a mind so powerful; a mind also deeply imbued with reverence to its Saviour and its God, gifted with the highest degree of acuteness, and enlightened by almost all the radiance which ancient or modern luminaries have shed abroad; by a mind so independent and fearless, yet connected with a demeanor that was remarkably unassuming-such a result the readers of this work will surely be curious to see. And this is what I propose to present them with, on the present occasion.

The author himself states, near the beginning of the following Essay, that it is to be considered as a sequel of what he had before published in § 190 of his Glaubenslehre, on the subject of the Trinity. It is necessary, therefore, in order to give the reader a view in any good measure complete of Schleiermacher's sentiments on the subject of the Trinity, that he should first be presented with those views, to which the following principal piece is intended as a sequel, and also as a vindication. This can in no way be done so well, as by translating the original section to which he refers, as the ground-work on which he builds the superstructure exhibited in the comparative view that follows.

After defending in various places, in the most explicit manner and with great ability, the doctrine of the Godhead of the Son and Spirit, and shewing that such a development of the Deity is demanded by our moral wants as sinners, in order that we may obtain peace and sanctification; he concludes his book by the