History of Dogma, Volume 2 | Page 6

into doctrines. Here they undoubtedly learned very
much from the Gnostics and Marcion. If we define ecclesiastical
dogmas as propositions handed down in the creed of the Church, shown
to exist in the Holy Scriptures of both Testaments, and rationally
reproduced and formulated, then the men we have just mentioned were
the first to set up dogmas[8]--dogmas but no system of dogmatics. As
yet the difficulty of the problem was by no means perceived by these
men either. Their peculiar capacity for sympathising with and
understanding the traditional and the old still left them in a happy
blindness. So far as they had a theology they supposed it to be nothing
more than the explanation of the faith of the Christian multitude (yet
Tertullian already noted the difference in one point, certainly a very
characteristic one, viz., the Logos doctrine). They still lived in the
belief that the Christianity which filled their minds required no
scientific remodelling in order to be an expression of the highest
knowledge, and that it was in all respects identical with the Christianity
which even the most uncultivated could grasp. That this was an illusion
is proved by many considerations, but most convincingly by the fact
that Tertullian and Hippolytus had the main share in introducing into
the doctrine of faith a philosophically formulated dogma, viz., that the
Son of God is the Logos, and in having it made the articulus
constitutivus ecclesiæ. The effects of this undertaking can never be too
highly estimated, for the Logos doctrine is Greek philosophy in nuce,
though primitive Christian views may have been subsequently
incorporated with it. Its introduction into the creed of Christendom,
which was, strictly speaking, the setting up of the first dogma in the
Church, meant the future conversion of the rule of faith into a
philosophic system. But in yet another respect Irenæus and Hippolytus
denote an immense advance beyond the Apologists, which,

paradoxically enough, results both from the progress of Christian
Hellenism and from a deeper study of the Pauline theology, that is,
emanates from the controversy with Gnosticism. In them a religious
and realistic idea takes the place of the moralism of the Apologists,
namely, the deifying of the human race through the incarnation of the
Son of God. The apotheosis of mortal man through his acquisition of
immortality (divine life) is the idea of salvation which was taught in the
ancient mysteries. It is here adopted as a Christian one, supported by
the Pauline theology (especially as contained in the Epistle to the
Ephesians), and brought into the closest connection with the historical
Christ, the Son of God and Son of man (filius dei et filius hominis).
What the heathen faintly hoped for as a possibility was here announced
as certain, and indeed as having already taken place. What a message!
This conception was to become the central Christian idea of the future.
A long time, however, elapsed before it made its way into the dogmatic
system of the Church.[9]
But meanwhile the huge gulf which existed between both Testaments
and the rule of faith on the one hand, and the current ideas of the time
on the other, had been recognized in Alexandria. It was not indeed felt
as a gulf, for then either the one or the other would have had to be
given up, but as a problem. If the Church tradition contained the
assurance, not to be obtained elsewhere, of all that Greek culture knew,
hoped for, and prized, and if for that very reason it was regarded as in
every respect inviolable, then the absolutely indissoluble union of
Christian tradition with the Greek philosophy of religion was placed
beyond all doubt. But an immense number of problems were at the
same time raised, especially when, as in the case of the Alexandrians,
heathen syncretism in the entire breadth of its development was united
with the doctrine of the Church. The task, which had been begun by
Philo and carried on by Valentinus and his school, was now undertaken
in the Church. Clement led the way in attempting a solution of the
problem, but the huge task proved too much for him. Origen took it up
under more difficult circumstances, and in a certain fashion brought it
to a conclusion. He, the rival of the Neoplatonic philosophers, the
Christian Philo, wrote the first Christian dogmatic, which competed
with the philosophic systems of the time, and which, founded on the

Scriptures of both Testaments, presents a peculiar union of the
apologetic theology of a Justin and the Gnostic theology of a
Valentinus, while keeping steadily in view a simple and highly
practical aim. In this dogmatic the rule of faith is recast and that quite
consciously. Origen did not conceal his conviction that Christianity
finds its correct expression only in