St. Innokenty, Archbishop of Kherson and Tauride (+1857)
[For those unfamiliar with the work under review, it closely
followed the "scientific" scholastic method, without adhering
to the philosophy of Thomistic scholasticism, which subjugated divine revelation
to human logic and reason. This review also demonstrates how the Orthodox world
admired the precision and clarity of the scholastic method in the 19th
century, which is also reflected in some of the works of St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite and others.]
The work under our consideration
constitutes a rare and most consoling phenomenon in our theological literature,
the like of which it has not seen on its horizon for a long time and, in all
probability, will not see again soon. Even the foreign theological literatures,
despite their long development and centuries of refinement, do not present,
especially in the present time, a work with such merits as the Orthodox
Dogmatics of His Grace Macarius.
Theology, as a science, has been
advanced far by this erudite work and has already gained much by the very fact
that it has been entirely freed from scholasticism and the Latin language, and
thus introduced into the sphere of Russian literature and, so to speak, offered
for general use to all lovers of theological knowledge. But the greatest merit
of the author lies in this: that in his work, for the first time, those dogmas
and tenets by which the Orthodox Eastern Church is distinguished from all other
Christian confessions are presented with full force and persuasiveness, in a
scholarly yet accessible language. After this, a foreign theologian can no
longer say that in the Eastern Church they are accustomed to believe in their
doctrines unreflectively; for in the new Orthodox dogmatics there is such an
account of everything, the like of which has not yet been presented by the
majority of the non-Orthodox Churches, beginning with the Anglican.
In support of these opinions, let
the following indisputable references and considerations serve.
1. All theological works
published in our country up to now may be divided into two classes: some are
composed without a strict system, in the form of, so to speak, separate
treatises not closely connected by any general idea visibly expressed in the
book—similar to the manner adopted by the late scholastics in their works. To
this category belong the dogmatic works of Archimandrites Joseph Karpinsky,
Sylvester Lebedinsky, Macarius Petrovich, and Hieromonk Juvenaly Medvedsky. The
others—namely, His Graces Irenaeus Falkovsky, Theophylact Gorsky,
Protopresbyter Ternovsky, and Archimandrite Anthony—adhered to a known system,
following the plan once outlined by Theophan Prokopovich, who divided dogmatics
into two parts: the doctrine of God in Himself (de Deo ad intra) and the
doctrine of God outwardly, that is, in His actions (de Deo ad extra). A
plan quite commendable—only not in its application to Christian theology; for
it is in no way derived from the essence of Christianity, as it ought to be,
and thus does not readily lend itself to a systematic exposition of Christian
dogmas. According to this plan, the second part of theology ends up containing
far too many subjects compared to the first; and moreover, in this case, there
is no unifying idea by which all the included treatises could be connected and
penetrated.
His Grace Macarius was fully able
to discern and successfully avoid this common deficiency of theological works.
As the starting point for dogmatics, or its beginning, he adopted the very
concept of the Christian religion, which, in its essence, is not merely the
primordial religion or the natural union of man with God, as it was before the
fall of man, but religion in its form as completed through revelation and
corrected;—as the union of fallen man with God, supernaturally restored through
the mystery of redemption and grace; and therefore it consists of two kinds of
dogmas—some belonging to it as religion in general, others as restored,
supernatural, Christian religion. The first set presents the doctrine of God
and His relationship to man—natural and general—as God had to him still in the
primordial, natural religion, and as He has to all other beings of the world,
as their Creator and Provider. The second set presents the doctrine of God as
the Savior of fallen men and His special, supernatural relationship to the
human race, which God has exclusively toward us sinners in the restored
religion: as our Redeemer, having accomplished the work of salvation on the
Cross; as our Sanctifier, imparting this salvation to us through the grace of
the Holy Spirit; and finally as our Judge and Rewarder, Who will recompense
each after death according to how he made use of the salvation acquired for
him. Such a division of dogmas and of dogmatics, proceeding, one may say, from
the very essence of the Christian religion and marked by its naturalness,
corresponds entirely to its subject: here the inconveniences of the former plan
are absent; the parts of the system are equal, proceed from a single principle,
are penetrated down to the smallest details by one ruling idea, and thus truly
constitute a harmonious and self-developing work—a science. Such a division of
dogmatics, while fully satisfying the demands of logic, gains new value from
the fact that in this way an ancient method of presenting Christian dogmas is
brought forth from obscurity and returned to use—a method which, as the author
himself shows, was constantly followed by the Holy Fathers and ecumenical
teachers, and which fell out of use and was left in oblivion only because it
was not properly appreciated and given scholarly systematic development.
2. The dogmatics under our
consideration possesses even more advantages over all previous dogmatic works
with regard to the method or manner of presenting theological truths. Here each
dogma is examined and expounded from all sides by which it may usefully appear
within the scope of the science: the attentive reader, after reading each
treatise, is placed in a position to judge for himself concerning it (the
dogma)—both in its origin and foundations, in its historical development, in
its relation to the principles of reason, and in its practical consequences for
the heart and life.
The examination always begins
with a thorough exposition on the subject of the Church’s teaching, as the
guardian of Orthodoxy— a condition without which Orthodox Theology, evidently,
would not be worthy of its name, and which, nevertheless, has been very little
fulfilled in all previous theological works. The author, on the contrary,
fulfills it with full consistency and diligence, not only in relation to each
treatise, but also to each chapter, and even at times to each paragraph. Thus,
in his work, the very teacher of the dogmas is the Church herself, and he
serves her only as a faithful interpreter and obedient instrument. This very
thing many had long desired to see in dogmatics, and had not seen until now:
now this desire is fully satisfied. For the author did not confine himself in
this regard to presenting only the main points of the Church’s teaching
concerning the principal dogmas, but set it forth with clarity also regarding
all others—even with respect to certain particular truths. In this way, the
unfortunate necessity is entirely eliminated of having to ask, after reading
some theological treatise: “But is this exactly what the Holy Church teaches?”
Following the exposition of the
Church’s teaching, the author always provides its confirmation from Holy
Scripture: for the Church does not teach us her own doctrine or anything from
herself, but transmits only that which has been revealed by God Himself through
the prophets and apostles in their Writings or Traditions.
This exposition of the biblical
teaching on the dogmas was undertaken by all previous compilers of dogmatics,
and the majority of them limited the entire work to this alone. Nevertheless,
even this aspect of dogmatics appears in His Grace Macarius to be superior to
how it was presented in earlier works. Not only the abundance of texts, but
also their selection—especially their interpretation and application to the
subject being demonstrated—deserve full praise and leave nothing more to be
desired. Something similar could previously be found only in Theophan
Prokopovich, and even then to a lesser extent and not with such skill.
The exposition of the dogmas
according to the meaning of Holy Scripture is elevated and always gains new
value in His Grace Macarius by the fact that, following the indication of their
presence in Holy Scripture, it is always shown—and in detail—how these very
same dogmas have continuously existed in the Tradition of the universal Church.
For this purpose, in each chapter there appear whole series of witnesses to
this Tradition—the Fathers and teachers of the Church of the first six
centuries. Without this, there could always arise in the reader’s mind the
question: did the Ecumenical Councils and the early teachers of the Church
understand Holy Scripture in the same way as it is explained in the dogmatics?
His Grace Macarius (the first) fully answered this important question, with all
thoroughness and soundness, and thereby rendered an important service to
Theology as a science.
Not a little also contributes to
the clarification of the dogmas in the author’s work the fact that he—something
not done before, except in two or three instances by Theophan Prokopovich—calls
upon the aid of the history of the dogmas, which, due to its importance, has
long constituted a separate discipline in foreign literature, but among us had
remained in oblivion. Thanks to the author's broad historical knowledge,
samples of which had been demonstrated in his previous historical works, we see
in his Dogmatics, on every suitable occasion, how and why the Church’s
teaching concerning certain dogmas was defined in one way or another, and in
such, and not other, expressions—something that greatly aids in a deeper
understanding of the Church’s teaching.
Keeping in view the character of
the spirit of the age, the author also acted wisely by giving, in his Dogmatics,
a place for the impartial consideration of sound reason toward the Christian
dogmas. On the one hand, this serves to calm intellectual inquisitiveness,
especially in young students; on the other, it stands as a constant testimony
that faith and revelation fear no judgments or objections of reason, and in all
cases only transcend its (logical) comprehension, but never contradict its
principles—which themselves, when thoroughly examined in their source,
ultimately lead to belief in the truth of that which necessarily presents
itself as such in our consciousness. The author’s theoretical reflections on
the truths of Christianity are always distinguished by maturity, clarity,
soundness, and often by a richness of the most diverse knowledge—especially in
those places where he refutes the objections of those of unsound mind, drawn
from various fields of natural science, history, and other disciplines. In
these reflections, which in earlier Dogmatics were almost entirely
absent due to their very brevity, the author very successfully avoids two
deficiencies: the rationalistic tendency, prevailing especially now in Germany,
which—rejecting the authority of the Church and of the Bible itself—sets reason
as the supreme judge of faith and, consequently, rejects all that is
incomprehensible in Christianity; and the scholastic tendency, in which those
discussing dogmas according to the principles of reason would commonly indulge
in excessive dialectical subtleties and concern themselves with resolving
questions not only unrelated to the positive teaching of the Church and the
Bible, but also devoid of any true importance.
In the moral conclusions drawn
from the dogmas, with which each chapter of the author’s work concludes, there
is, of course, nothing novel—since this has often been done in our dogmatics
before; but in previous works, they were usually presented in the form of brief
and dry statements, whereas here they appear each time in appropriate fullness,
imbued with Christian feeling and, like a ripe and succulent fruit, make one
desire to taste them personally through experience.
Thus, the method which the author
followed is the most complete and comprehensive, satisfying the demands of even
the most inquisitive reader, and therefore most fitting for the academic chair
from which the author delivered his lectures.
3. Through such scholarly
treatment and completeness, the work of His Grace Macarius has accomplished
precisely that which was lacking in our theological literature. Theophan
Prokopovich had begun, as is known, to set forth dogmatics on a large scale;
but he did not bring it even halfway to completion. The subsequent treatises,
completed according to his plan by others, are generally brief and not so
detailed; moreover, the size of the very first volume, especially that
belonging to Theophan, was due in part to the fact that he included in it
preliminary general treatises on the principles of Theology, whereas in His
Grace Macarius this formed the subject of a separate, extensive, and highly
learned work: An Introduction to Orthodox Theology. The works of His
Grace Irenaeus Falkovsky and of Sylvester are also fairly extensive, but they
are inferior to the work of Theophan, and even more so to that of His Grace
Macarius. As for others, still briefer attempts, there is no need even to
mention them.
Such completeness, in addition to
the breadth of the method by which the author also examined the dogmas of truth
from new, previously untouched perspectives, was due in part to the fact that
he included in his Dogmatics certain subjects that had not previously
appeared in it at all—such as a sketch of the gradual development of dogmas in
the Orthodox Church, the history of Dogmatics itself, and so forth; and
secondly, because he strove with particular thoroughness and force to expound
and affirm those dogmas which constitute the distinctive character of the
Orthodox teaching of the Eastern Church and which are rejected or distorted in
other Christian confessions—such as the doctrine of the eternal procession of
the Holy Spirit from God the Father, of the seven sacraments of the Church, of
the veneration and invocation of Angels and saints, of prayers for the
departed, and so on.
In general, the Dogmatics
of His Grace Macarius presents such a system of Orthodox Dogmatic Theology from
which anyone desiring may thoroughly and fully learn the truths of our Orthodox
faith—not only in relation to belief, but also in application to life.
4. This is all the more
convenient and easy, in that the entire system is written in a clear and
universally intelligible language. Of the earlier dogmatic works, the majority
were written, according to the custom of the time, in Latin, in textbook form,
and by a method more or less scholastic; thus, they could be accessible only to
those familiar with the Latin language and accustomed to scholastic forms, and
for society at large—for the entire Orthodox Russian people—they effectively
did not exist.
Other, later attempts, although
written in Russian, were likewise composed in the form of textbooks and
followed a more or less scholastic method, which is not easy or readily
comprehensible for everyone. Moreover, these works, due to their very brevity and
conciseness of style, do not everywhere present the truths with the clarity and
fullness that are necessary for the greater part of our Orthodox readers.
The Dogmatics of His Grace
Macarius has removed all these inconveniences. It is written in pure, correct,
contemporary Russian, which can easily be understood by any reasonably educated
and sensible Russian person; written not so much in the form of an academic
textbook as in the manner of a general guide for the study of Orthodox dogmas,
and thus freed from all the tedious and burdensome forms of scholasticism,
which are almost unavoidable in brief school manuals.
Finally, with the fullness the
author chose for himself in presenting the truths of the faith, and with his
special gift of expressing the most exalted subjects simply and clearly, he
succeeded in his work in attaining the highest degree of general comprehensibility.
It can be said with full justice that the science of Orthodox Dogmatic
Theology, which until now, as a science, was exclusively the possession of the
school, has been brought by the author out of its narrow academic walls into
the sphere of real life and offered for public use.
In general, the Orthodox
Dogmatic Theology of His Grace Macarius, which we are considering,
represents:
a) A work—the most complete of
all that have appeared among us thus far in the same field; and not only equal
in scholarly treatment to the best contemporary foreign works, but in many
respects far surpassing them.
b) A work independent and
original, because the author, neither in system, nor in method, nor in the
manner of presenting the truths, followed any of the native or foreign
theologians, but proceeded by his own path—deeply considered and deliberately
chosen—drawing information from primary sources, many of which were discovered
by him personally, and all of which were thoroughly developed by him; and thus,
through tireless labor, a harmonious and monumental whole was raised up, which,
despite every desire for similar works, will in all probability remain unique
for a long time.
c) A work that satisfies all
contemporary demands of science—by its coherent system and the derivation of
all parts and truths from a single principle; by the author's profound and
extensive erudition; by its prevailing historical orientation, so akin to
Theology as a positive science; by its excellent clarity and intelligibility in
the manner of presenting the truths; and even by its purely Russian style,
which consistently bears the mark of sound taste.
d) A work that constitutes an
important merit not only for the science of Orthodox Theology, which the author
has undoubtedly advanced very far, — not only for our spiritual education, in
the history of which the appearance of his Dogmatics will someday serve as one
of the most remarkable epochs: but also, in general, for the entire Russian
Church, for all Orthodox compatriots, who receive in this work, what they have
long desired — a possibly complete, coherent, well-founded, and universally
accessible presentation of the distinctive dogmas of their Church, so precious
to their mind and heart.
For all these merits, The
Orthodox Dogmatic Theology of His Grace Macarius, in my opinion, has the
full right to the full Demidov Prize [a Russian equivalent to the Nobel Prize], which had long been deserved already by
the previous historical-theological works of the author, which attracted the
attention of all who are engaged in the advancement of sciences and
enlightenment in our Fatherland.
Russian source:
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Innokentij_Hersonskij/razbor-sochinenija-episkopa-makarija-pravoslavno-dogmaticheskoe-bogoslovie/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.