The department of religious literature, which is made up of histories
of individual conversions to the faith, has received of late years many
remarkable additions. This class of literature is regulated in its growth
by very peculiar conditions, and must be judged according to exceptional
laws. Its subject--the mysterious workings of grace in the soul--is
such as rather to impose a reverent silence than to invite fulness of
description; and so well do elevated souls appreciate the sacredness
of such silence, that, except for interests of religion or justice,
they are unwilling to bring before men those inner secrets of their
hearts. But when the interests of religion or justice have convinced them
that silence is no longer a duty, the history they consent to unfold can
rarely be other than attractive and profitable, seeing that it describes
a human soul's toilsome journey from error to truth. The very minuteness
of personal detail, which in any other composition would be a blot,
in this becomes a merit and a charm. Among the religious motives that
not unfrequently dictate such a history, a spirit of thankfulness for
the blessing of faith has its fitting place. The favoured soul looks
out from the shelter of its Father's house upon the perilous path it
has just traversed, and gratefully traces the Providence by which its
wayward feet were guided where so many strayed to their ruin; just as
the rescued mariner hangs up _ex voto_ a sketch of his frail bark in
the moment of her peril, when, but for heaven's help, she would have
foundered in the raging waves. Fruit of this pious gratitude is the
narrative[5] we are now engaged upon; a narrative which will interest
every Catholic, not only because it is the history of a remarkable
conversion, but because of the light it incidentally throws on the
present condition and future prospects of German Protestantism. But
before we set ourselves to trace the steps of the process which led
Dr. Laemmer from a many-faced Protestantism to the Catholic Church,
it will be useful to make a few preliminary remarks.
In Dr. Laemmer we have a witness who has had rare opportunities
of becoming acquainted with the very highest and best forms which
Protestantism has been enabled to assume in the country of its birth. He
is, above all things, the child of the German Protestant universities. Of
the twenty-six universities of which the learned nation is so proud, six
or eight are Catholic,[6] four are mixed,[7] and the remaining fourteen
are exclusively Protestant.[8]
Now, Dr. Laemmer was student successively at Koenigsberg, Leipsic,
and Berlin universities, that is to say, at the very universities which
at the present time are the chief seats of Protestant thought, both in
philosophy and in theology. The leading Protestant schools in Germany
are at present three in number, called respectively the neo-Lutheran, the
Mediation, and the Tuebingen, or historico-critical school; of these[9]
the neo-Lutheran, or Lutheran reaction school, has specially existed
in Berlin and Leipsic; the so called Mediation theology at Berlin;
and the Tuebingen school (now almost extinct in its native home, and
renewed by Hilgenfeld at Jena) has made its influence felt throughout.
Besides, at Koenigsberg, he came, as we shall see, under the influence
of one of the ablest defenders of Hegelianism. We should exceed our
limits, were we to enter upon a statement of the principles of these
schools. Be it enough to say, that the first-named school, by defending
the authority and credibility of the Scriptures, aims at re-constructing
the historical basis of Christianity, and insists on a return to the
Lutheran Confessions of the sixteenth century. Since the political
troubles of 1848, an ultra-conservative party, called the Hyper-Lutheran,
has arisen within this school, which goes back beyond the Reformation,
and insists on the principle of a visible authoritative church, a rigid
sacramental theory, and the doctrine of consubstantiation. Stahl, and
Leo of Halle, to whom Dr. Laemmer makes an important allusion, to be
hereafter quoted, belong to the most advanced of this party. Among the
representatives of this school with whom Dr. Laemmer was brought into
direct contact, were Hengstenberg and Kahnis.[10]
The Mediation school takes its stand between the Lutheran party on the
one hand, and the school of criticism on the other, and without going
back to the principle of authority, or forward to that of discovery,
proposes to unite the use of reason with belief in Scripture, and to
understand what it believes. Of the members of this very numerous school
Dr. Laemmer had intercourse with Twesten and Nitzch. The Tuebingen school
had for its leader Christian Baur, and starting from the principle that
the only portions of the New Testament undoubtedly genuine are four
of St. Paul's Epistles, viz.: to the Romans, to the Galatians, and the
two to the Corinthians, it comes to the conclusion that Christianity in
its present form is the result of the controversy between the Jewish,
or Petrine, and the Pauline Christianity of the apostolic and following
ages. All the other books of the New Testament it attributes to some
one or other of the contending schools. That this school, extravagant as
its conclusions may appear to us, is every day gaining ground in France
with a very numerous party, we have been lately assured by competent
authority.[11] That it has many advocates in England is well known.[12]
A critic in the _Home and Foreign Review_[13] speaks of "the importance of
those inquiries of Dr. Baur and his followers into primitive Christianity,
which have in some way modified the views of almost every one who has
become acquainted with them."
These are thy gods, O Israel! These are the shapes of Protestantism that
wander to and fro in the various universities of Germany. Dr. Laemmer,
speaking with full knowledge of the subject, sums up in one word the
result of all this unhealthy movement, and that word is--_chaos_. And
what heightens the confusion is, that, although the systems which form
this chaos are in absolute and perpetual conflict with each other, yet
does each professor claim for himself the exclusive possession of truth,
as if he and he alone had been gifted with infallibility.
The special feature of Dr. Laemmer's conversion appears to us to consist
in this, under the grace of God, that he approached faith through
its historic side. Sound and conscientious historical research has
been the means of his deliverance from bondage. His mind from boyhood
inclined towards things grave; the details he communicates concerning
his choice of authors reveal that sobriety of judgment which is the
first quality of a student of history. The bent of his mind in this
direction was strengthened by study of the fathers, of the history of
the Papacy, and of the Catholic theology of the Reformation period.
We invite special attention to the happy result of historical studies
in his case, because we see in it a promise of much future good for
Catholic truth in Germany. The broad distinction between the German
method of the present century and that of the past, lies in this, that
the nineteenth century is the age of historical inquiry, whereas the
last century was that of critical thought. Even the Tuebingen school
is an improvement on the destructiveness of Strauss, for it admits and
calls attention to the historical value of at least some portion of the
Scriptures. In the other schools, above described, this tendency is of
course still more marked. The modern spirit tends not so much to examine
the ontological value of an opinion, as to investigate how men came to
hold that opinion. It was this spirit which suggested the questions of
concursus, which, as we shall see, changed the current of Dr. Laemmer's
life. Now we hold it very probable that as this spirit becomes more
extended, its fruits will be these: men will become familiar with the
teachings of Christian antiquity; and although this knowledge may be
sought not for the sake of the doctrine itself, but as a preliminary
to other studies, still, such is the divine power of truth, that, once
revealed to the soul, it creates therein a wondrous craving after itself,
which will dispose the soul for the grace of faith. There must be at this
moment many thoughtful men in Germany, who, in virtue of this spirit,
are engaged in the examination of the fathers and of the theologians of
the Catholic Church, and, who, finding themselves, like Dr. Laemmer,
between the ruins caused by Protestantism and the unbroken strength
of Catholic teaching, are even now turning their eyes towards Rome,
therein to seek her who was their mother of old.
Hugh Laemmer was born of a Protestant father and a Catholic mother,
at Allenstein, in Eastern Prussia, on 25th January, 1835. His mother
was a woman of most fervent piety, who, in almost unceasing prayer,
sought and found consolation under her many severe afflictions. It was
not given her to exercise much influence over the mind of her son, who,
long before her death, had gone to reside with his father's relatives,
by whom he was brought up as a Protestant. The lad, nevertheless, had
a tender love for his mother, and from his earliest years was conscious
of an indescribable leaning towards his Catholic friends in preference
to his Protestant kindred. This feeling was the natural growth of
observations made by the quickwitted boy regarding the piety, firm
principles, and good conduct of the Catholics. At the same time, the
devotion of the faithful in their processions and pilgrimages served to
put him on his guard against the bigoted prejudices which his Lutheran
cousins ever sought to instil into his mind against their Catholic
neighbours. When with the other schoolboys he went to church on Sunday,
the sermon made no impression on him, and no wonder, for the preacher
carried with him into the pulpit the chilling rationalistic principles
he had imbibed at the university. Even in those early years the boy's
heart tended towards the beautiful and spacious Catholic Church of his
native town. Once, when his father took him to Heiligenlind (a famous
resort of pilgrims), and the old sacristan showed him the rare treasures
of the church, he experienced an emotion so strong that it survived even
the rude trials of his after life.
In 1844 he entered the gymnasium of Koenigsberg. He brought with him
from home a good stock of elementary and grammatical knowledge; and
soon discovered that his tastes inclined him to the study of literature
more than to that of science. Ellendt, then rector of the gymnasium,
was a man who possessed in a remarkable degree the power of making
his lectures interesting to his pupils. Explained by such a master,
Homer and Herodotus became in a short time the favourite authors of
M. Laemmer, who, on the other hand, had no taste for what he calls "the
tedious narratives of the Anabasis, and the pedantic tirades of the
Cyropaedia". He preferred Caesar and Livy to Cicero, whose philosophy
especially he found to be commonplace. Modern French literature had no
attractions for such a mind as his; the contemporary romance writers
of that nation excited even his disgust. As Germany is considered by
many to be the very home of perfection in classical studies, it will be
interesting to hear the opinion Dr. Laemmer's experience has led him to
form concerning the special dangers which beset middle school education
at the present day:--
"I believe it to be a mistake", he says, "to make modern languages,
mathematics, and the physical sciences occupy very much of the
time appointed for the study of the classics; and as far as middle
class instruction is concerned, we have reason to be grateful to
the Raumer ministry for the prominence it has given in the new
educational plan to the wise principle _non multa, sed multum_.
It is highly dangerous to the young to distribute their faculties
simultaneously over many heterogeneous branches of knowledge.
_Ubique hospes, nusquam domi_: such a system is the sure path to
that half-learning, which, without giving a thorough knowledge
of anything, encourages young men to talk presumptuously of
a host of subjects of which they have but the barest surface
knowledge. What happens when the examination papers exact
from students a knowledge of science as well as of literature,
physics, chemistry, natural history, and the different branches
of mathematics? It is a well-known fact that, with the exception
of a few intended for certain professions, young men are careful
to forget as soon after examination as they can, the information
it has cost them so much labour to acquire. Against this it
is vain to urge the importance which the natural sciences have
now-a-days attained to--an importance so great that no one, save
at his peril, can remain a stranger to them; for, on no account
should we furnish new weapons to materialism. At most, it is
required that students should be supplied with such elementary
information as may enable them in the future to keep in sight
the true bearings of things, and in creatures recognize Him who
is proclaimed in the first article of the Creed. That extravagant
cultivation of the natural sciences, so often substituted by our
ministers in place of the lessons of Holy Writ, is as perilous as
is the undue exaltation of man and of man's pretended victories
over nature. The laws of nature have never acknowledged any
master save One--our Lord Jesus Christ--and in Him the saints
with whom it has pleased Him to share His sovereignty" (p. 13).
Whether the authorities at the gymnasium shared these views or not, we
are not in a position to state. One thing, however, is certain,--much
attention was paid there to the study of the German language and
literature; much of our student's time was passed in the excellent library
of German authors provided for the use of the scholars. What an eventful
moment that is in which a youth, in the flush of the early vigour of his
mind, finds himself for the first time in a library where the treasures
of human thought are gathered before him clothed in the language he has
learned from his mother's lips! Then begins for him that daily contact
of mind with the mind of others, which will infallibly colour for good
or evil the history of his future. He who, without an enlightened and
friendly guide, adventures inexperienced upon this commerce,
"Voyaging through strange seas of thought, alone",
runs no little risk of being caught unawares by error where his generous
ardour looked only for truth. In the world of books as in the world of
men, evil lies very close to good, and wears its garb and mien; and how
shall the inexperience of youth be able to see through the disguise,
or how avoid becoming captive to its snares? And from such captivity,
how harassing the toil of escape! Of that toil let him make light who
has never had experience of the almost ceaseless influence erroneous
principles exercise on the mind with whose growth they have grown.
From reading Newton on the Prophecies in 1816, Dr. Newman, then a boy
of fifteen, became convinced that the Pope was Antichrist; and his
imagination was stained by the effects of this doctrine up to the year
1843.[14] Nor did M. Laemmer come away safe. His random reading brought
him both good and evil, so intermingled each with each, that his unripe
judgment could no more discern between them than the hand can disjoin
the sunshine from the shadow that follows after it. After ransacking the
bulk of German literature, he selected from out the rest certain writers
to be his prime favourites. The choice he made reveals at once the bent
of his mind, and the dangers to which that very bent exposed him. The
schools of German poetry and taste are divided in Vilmar's _History of
German Literature_ into five classes. First, that which preceded Lessing,
subdivided into the Saxon school, and the Swiss school of Wieland in
his early manner; to which was akin the Goettingen school of Klopstock
and Voss; second, that of Lessing and the writers influenced by him;
third, the Weimar school with its three great names, Herder, Goethe,
and Schiller; fourth, the later schools, the romantic, represented by
the two Schlegels, Novalis, and the patriotic; fifth, the modern school
of reaction against absolute government, headed by H. Heine. Of these
schools, only the second and third gave M. Laemmer delight. There was a
hidden sympathy between the qualities of his own mind and the exquisite
critical genius and reasoning power of Lessing, which made him find
the writers of the first class insipid and trivial. He came under the
influence of Lessing to a remarkable degree, and if to that influence he
owes the gain of an important truth, to it must be attributed also his
acceptance of a most fatal error. That remarkable man, author, or, as it
now appears, editor of the _Wolfenbuettel Fragments_, in consequence of
that publication, had a warm controversy with the Lutheran pastor Goeze,
in which he forcibly showed, by historical arguments chiefly, that the
principle of _the Bible and nothing but the Bible_, was illogical and
false. M. Laemmer followed the course of the controversy, and found
to his dismay that the arguments of Lessing had brought home to him
the conviction that Lutheranism rested on a false basis. This was a
great gain; but it was counter-balanced by a great loss. The ardour
of his youthful admiration blinded him to the dangerous principles of
indifferentism and doubt contained in his master's works, and particularly
in his _Education of the World_. The third Fragment sets it forth as
impossible, that all men should be brought to believe revelation on
rational grounds. These principles, destructive of all faith and certainty
in belief, were adopted by the young student, and warmly defended by him
in a special dissertation.
Towards the end of his course he devoted himself to the study of Herder;
and here again vague reading brought to him gain and loss, truth
and falsehood together. He learned from this writer to believe in the
mysterious action of Providence in the world; but the view he was led to
form of the Divine plan was confined, superficial, and vague. He also
gave much time to the reading of Schiller, in whose works he found an
assault on the frigid deism then predominant in Germany. But, the deity
which that poet brought so near to men was not the Blessed Trinity, but
the gods of Olympus; and whilst his strains rebuked the philosophy which
never rose above the laws of gravity, he himself did but serve the cause
of epicureanism by his praises of the pleasures of the earth.
From Goethe M. Laemmer learned to appreciate, in some measure, the
Sacraments of the Church, and to think kindly of the Church itself. But
what solid advantage could he gain from the man who wrote to Lavater
of the chief gospel miracles that "he held them for blasphemies against
the great God and His revelation in nature"?
The reader will have observed that this course of reading made several
important additions to M. Laemmer's religious views. And yet the books
among which his reading lay were either not at all, or not directly
religious. We are now to inquire how far his ideas were modified by any
directly religious training. The answer to this question opens up such
a view of the condition of Protestantism in the country of its birth, as
well deserves our careful study. Let M. Laemmer tell us what fruits it
has produced at Koenigsberg. First of all, in the various schools where
he resided during his stay in that town, there was no common practice of
religion: the religious exercises of the gymnasium were limited to the
singing of a few stereotyped chants. The religious instruction of the
students was attended to by an aged professor, who was one of the leaders
of the Freemasons, and whose religion was the religion of pure reason. He
was assisted in the religious training of the students by a younger man,
whose doctrines were kindred with his own, and whose lectures, though
erudite, were arid. Fortunately for himself, M. Laemmer had learned
from his mother the habit of night and morning prayer. This habit he
retained, although for want of fixed principles it became a work of
mere routine. Such was the state of religion in the gymnasium. In the
city itself things were still worse. From the orthodox Lutheranism of
Superintendent Sartorius, down to the absolute Rationalism of Rupp,
every intermediate stage of error had its exponents and followers in the
city of Kant. In the eyes of Sartorius, Catholicism, which he knew only
from Luther's caricatures, stood on the same level with Rationalism; he
assigned to the Confession of Augsburg almost the same authority which
Catholics claim for tradition, and together with Baur, Nitsch, and Winer,
made an unsuccessful attempt to refute Moehler's _Symbolism_. Rupp, on the
other hand, denounced all symbols, even that of St. Athanasius, which he
declared to be incompatible with Christian doctrine; his system was based
on Indifferentism of the lowest kind, and conceded to women as well as to
men the right of deliberating and of teaching in religious matters. And
yet, these two men, so diametrically opposed to each other in doctrine,
preached for a time in the same church and from the same pulpit. And,
whilst Sartorius, who revered Luther as a man of God, preached to empty
benches, Rupp found assembled around him a crowded audience, composed of
the highest as well as the lowest in the land. The different churches
at Koenigsberg had preachers of every shade of doctrine. During the
course of his studies M. Laemmer made trial of them all, but found not
satisfaction in any. At length, in the midst of this Babel, he became
acquainted with the man who was destined to exercise a most salutary
influence on his life. That man was Lehnerdt, Superintendent-General
of the province of Saxony. Born in Brandenburg, and educated at Berlin,
in the school of Schleiermacher and Hegel, he escaped the pernicious
influence of his masters by a profound course of historical studies. On
the one hand, he combated the rationalistic exegesis of Paulus, and on
the other, devoted himself with all his might to the study of the Fathers.
He was a man of great piety; and in preparing M. Laemmer for confirmation,
spoke with such unction of God and the world, man and sin, Christ and
salvation, that his words wrought in the young student's soul a blessed
reaction. An intimate and affectionate relationship sprang up between the
two, which was interrupted in the middle of 1851 by Lehnerdt's departure
for Berlin, where he succeeded Neander as professor of history, but was
resumed again at a later period in that city.
M. Laemmer passed from the gymnasium to the university of Koenigsberg
at Easter, 1852. He remained there but one year, during which time he
acted as secretary to Voigt, whose able _History of Gregory VII._ was the
beginning of a new epoch for ecclesiastical history in Germany. One of
the professors of philosophy was Rosenkranz, the pupil and biographer
of Hegel. This able man was an eloquent partisan of Hegelianism, and
by the poetic colouring he contrived to throw around its doctrines,
exercised an extraordinary influence over the youth of the university.
M. Laemmer tells us that during a fever which at this time brought him
to death's door, one of his keenest regrets was his inability to attend
Rosenkranz's lectures. He made up for his absence from lecture by a
careful study of his professor's writings, and completely adopted the
views expressed therein. It was long before he was able to shake off
the yoke of Hegelianism which he then assumed. In the university,
Biblical literature was treated altogether from the rationalistic
point of view. One of the fruits of this method is the isolated and
independent study of various parts of Sacred Scripture. "It was reserved
for Protestantism", says M. Laemmer, "to cultivate in minute detail
what is called Biblical Theology, and to write volumes upon the doctrine
of such and such an apostle in particular.... This anatomical process,
this study of atoms, has led many to apply those fine theories to various
periods of Church history, and, like certain heretics of the middle ages,
to speak of the Christianity of St. Peter, and of the Christianity of St.
Paul, not excluding by any means that of St. John" (pp. 47, 48).
At the Easter of 1853 M. Laemmer passed from the university of Koenigsberg
to that of Leipsic, on a burse founded in the old Catholic times by a
Catholic priest of his native town. His departure from Koenigsberg marks
the close of the first period of his university career, and it will be
interesting to stop and take a comprehensive view of the phases of thought
through which he passed during that time. As far as religious opinions
are concerned, this first stage of his life may be subdivided into two
periods: one of demolition, the other of reconstruction. In the former
he lost his belief in Lutheranism and its central doctrine of the _Bible
and nothing but the Bible_; that is to say, he lost hold of the only
dogmatic principle he held. Being thus deprived of a fixed belief, he was
more open to the action of Lessing's principles of universal tolerance,
which amounted to the coldest indifferentism and doubt. These principles
he made his own for a season. The spectacle of division and discord which
was exhibited daily under his eyes at Koenigsberg, helped to complete
the work of destruction. Even his very prayer became a dry form, lacking
all influence for good. The period of reconstruction commenced with the
friendship that bound him to Lehnerdt, by whose influence were sown in
his mind the seeds of a reaction, which, by the play of intellectual
as well as moral causes, was afterwards developed into the fulness of
Catholic belief. The intellectual cause that led to this happy result was,
as we said before, the spirit of historical inquiry; the moral cause,
under God's grace, was the deep religious sentiment which formed part
of his original character, and which, once aroused by Lehnerdt's words
about justice and the judgment to come, never allowed any antagonism of
feeling to stand long in the way of his acceptance of the truth. Not that
the action of these causes was at all times unimpeded. The Hegelianism
which he imbibed from Rosenkranz far a long time seriously crippled his
mind in its exertions after truth.
In these dispositions M. Laemmer came to the University of Leipsic.
Among the professors at Leipsic Winer was beyond doubt the most
remarkable. His labours on the idioms of the New Testament Greek, his
lexicological and bibliographical works, and even his reply to Moehler's
_Symbolism_, with all their defects, give proof of solid study. But
he permitted himself in his lectures to launch sarcasms against the
rites of the Catholic Church. Indirectly he was the occasion of much
good to M. Laemmer, who read Moehler's and other Catholics' works in
order to test the statements advanced by Winer. It was Winer too who
first suggested to him the idea of devoting himself to teaching in the
university. Tischendorf, so famous for his studies on the Bible texts,
and Wachsmuth, who has rendered immense services to truth by his Roman
history, written in refutation of Niebuhr, were among the professors
whose courses he followed at Leipsic. Two resolutions taken at this period
by M. Laemmer reveal the gradual change which was taking place in his
convictions, owing to the action of the causes mentioned above. First,
he determined to assist no longer at the lectures of Theile, on account
of his grossly rationalistic treatment of the doctrine of the Word in
the Epistles of St. John. Theile died shortly after. "He was a man of
rectitude", says M. Laemmer, "and conscientious: I cannot think of him
without a feeling of deep sorrow. You might read on his brow the painful
and fruitless efforts he had made to attain to the fulness of truth
and to that peace which the world cannot give" (p. 65). Daily more and
more disgusted with rationalism, and wearied with ineffectual efforts to
reconcile the contradictions which everywhere appeared in theology, he now
began to entertain serious thoughts of confining himself exclusively to
philosophical studies. But these thoughts were put to flight on occasion
of his first sermon, which he preached in a suburban village where
one of his friends was pastor. The subject of the sermon was charity,
as described by St. Paul; and its treatment had the effect of reviving
in the preacher's heart his old love for religious questions. He was
now approaching the crisis of his life. While he was bewildered by the
endless variations of Protestantism, and endeavouring to form out of
them a religious system such as would satisfy his reason and conscience,
the first rays of the grace of faith began to dawn more nearly upon his
soul. In what manner this came to pass we shall allow himself to tell:
"I said before that during my stay at Leipsic, the study of a
question proposed for concursus exercised a powerful influence on
my religious views, and that to it is to be attributed my first
step towards Catholicism. The subject chosen for the concursus
of 1854, by the Leipsic Faculty of Theology, was the exposition
of the doctrine of Clement of Alexandria on the Word. This theme
made upon me a most vivid impression. At once, and with great joy,
I resolved to become a candidate. I will now state the motives
of this resolve. The conflicting theological systems which I had
observed, both in books and in oral instructions, occasioned me
extreme torture. I was too independent to follow the example of
so many others by attaching myself blindly to a party; I wished
to examine for myself the successive phases undergone by the
Protestant principle, and with full knowledge of the subject to
make my own selection. All those systems, whether confessional or
non-confessional, could not satisfy me long; on the other hand,
the distraction caused by philological and philosophical studies
could not give peace to my heart, which only in God could find an
end to its unrest. _Inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat
in te._ I felt I must escape from the chaos of modern theology,
and I most eagerly availed myself of this opportunity to draw
from the spring of Christian antiquity. I procured a copy of
Klotz's portable edition, and set myself to the study of my author.
Pen in hand, I began my task by reading him through and through
before I took any account of what others had written about him.
"A new world opened on my sight as I read the earliest master of
the Alexandrian Catechetical School--the teacher of Origen. What
treasures lie hid in these three works, the _Exhortatio ad
Graecos_, the _Paedagogus_, and the _Stromata_! _The Exhortatio
ad Graecos_ is a masterpiece of Christian controversy against
Paganism, considered in its popular mythology, its poetry,
and its philosophy. The _Paedagogus_, written for catechumens,
sets before them a magnificent portrait of the true and only
Master--the eternal Word of the Father--who has created man to His
own image; who alone can provide a fitting remedy for fallen and
guilty humanity; who, though man had become of the earth, earthly,
yet enables him to attain to his heavenly destiny; who, in fine,
confides him to the maternal yet virginal love of the Church.
Then came the eight books of the _Stromata_, an unpretending
mosaic, in which the loftiest problems of philosophy and theology
are treated with great learning and rare penetration. These
three works were, without doubt, connected together in the
author's mind. The idea of the Word is the central point of
Clement's entire demonstration; and in that idea we must seek
the essential unity of his system. It is the Word which tenderly
invites man; which instructs him; which guides him to his end
by leading him to see the things of God in their profundity;
and thus the idea of the Word embraces in one same circle all
philosophy, dogmatic as well as moral" (pp. 85, 88).
The monograph on Clement of Alexandria was prefaced by prolegomena,
containing a sketch of Clement's life, an analysis of his doctrine,
and an inquiry into the historical sources of his doctrine on the Word.
For this the author had to examine the relation in which Clement stood in
philosophy and theology towards classical antiquity, Alexandrine Judaeism,
the Apostolic Fathers, and the first Christian apologists. The subject
proper of the essay was divided into two parts: the first treated of the
relations of the Word with God; the second considered the Word as the
Revealer. The work was well received by the faculty of theology, and its
author was declared the successful candidate, 31st of October, 1854. By
the advice of Winer and others, and by the kindness of Tischendorf,
it was published in March, 1855. Wachsmuth, dean of the faculty of
philosophy, advised M. Laemmer to stand his examination for the doctorship
in philosophy, and backed his advice by the offer of a burse to enable
him to meet the expenses. The young student obtained this degree after
having presented a dissertation on the religious philosophy of Clement
of Alexandria, and having passed a successful examination.
We have seen that M. Laemmer qualifies this episode in his studies as
the first step he made towards Catholicity. It may be asked, what was
the special fruit derived by him from these patristic studies? The
answer is, that it enabled him to shake off the influence of the
Tuebingen theories, which had hitherto held sway over his mind. The
whole work of that school simply amounts to an attempt to submit to the
all-powerful action of critical caprice the canon of Scripture and the
most remarkable works of Christian antiquity, and to affirm all their
own theories as indisputable facts, while they treat as fables the most
authentic facts of history. Now, the more clearly it is proved that the
historical origin of Christianity is able to resist the crucial tests to
which it has been submitted, the more shadowy and insubsistent do these
capricious theories become. Hence, the study undertaken by M. Laemmer
did in reality, by occupying him with the objective side of patristic
teaching, most powerfully contribute to destroy in his mind the authority
of Baur, Hilgenfeld, and the others of the Tuebingen school.
Soon after the publication of his work, M. Laemmer was invited to the
University of Berlin by his kind friend Lehnerdt, who had never lost
sight of his promising pupil, and now wished him to prepare himself for a
professor's chair by a solid course of theologico-historical studies.
On arriving at Berlin the youthful doctor of philosophy was appointed
to hold for two years the Evangelical Centenary Burse, founded by the
city of Berlin in commemoration of the three hundredth anniversary of
the Reformation. After his conversion many persons demanded that he
should make restitution to the burse fund, which, according to them,
he had employed against the intentions of the founders.
"But (asks Mr. Laemmer), for what reasons was I chosen in
preference to the other candidates? I contented myself with
presenting my memoir on the Alexandrine Clement's doctrine on
the Word; the examiners of the Leipsic faculty of philosophy
testified that I had successfully passed the examination:
the faculty of theology of the same city said, amongst other
flattering things, that I had applied myself to the studies of
theology with equal ardour and success. As to the two memoirs
presented for the concursus of 1853 and 1854, it was said that in
them I had given proof of solid classical studies, of a remarkable
knowledge of theology, of sound judgment, and penetrating mind,
and that my work on the Word showed great aptitude for historical
investigations. These were beyond doubt the reasons why the
committee preferred me to the other candidates; and the sole
condition imposed upon me--namely, that of becoming a licentiate,
I complied with within the appointed time. Why then all this
outcry? Why these demands for restitution, with which even a
Hengstenberg has been associated? Herein consists the head and
front of my offending, that the use of private judgment, or, to
speak accurately, the secret inspirations of God's grace, led me
to see the truth and to betake myself to the bosom of the true
Church. If, instead, I had become an unbeliever, the slightest
murmur of complaint would not have been heard; but when there
is question of Catholicism, pietism the most honeyed often makes
common cause with the grossest infidelity: the great point then
is to form a compact body against the mighty foe" (p. 105, 106).
We cannot linger over the account given by M. Laemmer of the different
tendencies he found in the theological faculty of Berlin, nor on the
present state or future prospects of the Union.[15] But the name of
Hengstenberg[16] is so well known to most Catholics that the description
given of him by one who has known him so well, is sure to excite interest.
"The reputation which Hengstenberg had acquired by his numerous
works brought him frequently before my mind. The impression he
made on me when I saw him at Berlin, did not modify the notion I
had long formed of him. It is well known that he passed through
many phases of doctrine before he reached the point at which, for
some years, he has remained stationary. He left the University
full of the pietism of the day, and was immediately appointed
professor at Berlin, where, as professor and author, he bent all
his energies against the rationalistic criticism, the application
of which to the Holy Scriptures had produced such disastrous
consequences. It must be admitted that, in this respect,
he has brought back to better ways a certain number of his
contemporaries; that he has arrested the progress of extravagant
criticism; that in his works on the Pentateuch, the Psalms,
and the Messianic Prophecies, he has won for sound views the
consideration long refused them. But it was impossible that his
ablest scholars should not see the weak side of his hermeneutical
and theological principles; hence, many of them have abandoned
his method for one altogether different. His _Commentary on
the Apocalypse_ is assuredly his most characteristic work. To
comprehend his stand-point in this work, we must remember that he
composed it in 1848 and 1849. In it he frequently and unreservedly
favours the chiliastic tendencies of Irving.... He has endeavoured
to remove some of the Protestant prejudices against the Catholic
Church, such as Luther's blasphemy of the Roman Antichrist. He
admits (as Luther did, when under the influence of the Christian
idea) that Catholicism is in possession of the word of God, the
true sacraments, and the power of the keys. He is clearer and
more straightforward than his predecessor Bengel in the _Gnomon
Novi Testamenti_. But he halts in his march, laying himself open
to the charge of Catholic tendencies, and could but be silent
when reproached by Schenkel, who told him that Romanism was more
honourable than the vacillating and intermediate position he had
assumed. He resembles Stehl, Kliefoth, and others, who would
wish to place in the same setting the jewels of Catholicism
and those of Wittemberg; who rank together the theory _nothing
but the Bible_, and the principle of authority; who are but half
acquainted with Luther, and almost ignorant of Rome; who, in spite
of their pretended adhesion to principle, would be disposed to
all kinds of compromises; who lack the courage and the humility
requisite to comprehend that the fragments of truth possessed
by Luther have been borrowed from the immense and indivisible
treasure of the Church. The Church has nothing to hope from
men of this class; they lack a thorough and absolute thirst for
truth; they are self-complacent; they imagine themselves to have
received from heaven an extraordinary mission like the prophets;
they assume the right to dictate to the infallible authority of
the Church; to satisfy them, we must become syncretists, and ask
them in what is it their pleasure that the Catholic Church should
modify in its doctrines, its ceremonies, and its discipline; men
of fine phrases, and not of action; more of show than of reality"
(p. 117).
During his residence at Berlin, M. Laemmer entered upon a careful
preparation for the degree of doctor of divinity. He devoted himself
more and more to the study of the Fathers; the works of St. Hilary of
Poitiers on the Trinity left him an humble and firm believer in that
august mystery. In 1856 his mind received a fresh and more decided
impulse in the direction of the Church. In that year the Berlin faculty
of theology gave as the subject of the concursus, _Give an exposition
(from the documents) of the Roman Catholic doctrine, contained in the
memorial presented to Charles V. at the Diet of Augsburg, in as far as
it appears to throw light on the true Evangelical doctrine set forth in
the Augsburg Confession._ This subject was chosen for the concursus by
Lehnerdt, who felt that Catholic theology, from the beginning of the
Reformation to the Council of Trent, was almost entirely unknown.
M. Laemmer having resolved to become one of the competitors, at once set
about the necessary study. He first examined the Protestant confessional
books, in order to fix the points at issue between them and their
adversaries. If he were to trust these authorities, nothing could be
clearer than the stupid ignorance of the Catholics, and the wisdom of the
Protestants. But the declamation with which this was urged appeared to
him to be the language of passion. He determined to learn from their own
writings the character of the Catholic theologians so soundly abused by
their opponents. He first examined the _Official refutation of the Augsburg
Confession_, the joint work of the flower of the Catholic theologians,
Eck, Faber, Wimpina, etc.; next he came to the various works published by
them, before and after 1530, against the various successive developements
of Protestantism; then came the German theology of Berthold Chiemsie; the
Confession of Cardinal Hosius; Erasmus; Tetzel; Henry VIII.; Fisher, Bishop
of Rochester; Ambrosius Catharinus; the Sorbonne; Sadoletus; Contarini; the
minutes of the conferences held at that epoch in Germany and Switzerland;
the Pontifical instructions in Rainaldi and Leplat, and last, the acts of
the Imperial Diet, as far as they touched on religious and ecclesiastical
questions. In all, he had to study seventy Catholic works of the period.
"God knows", he tells us, "how I was moved as I read them,
and how violent were the struggles in which I was engaged. I
endeavoured to resist the force of the arguments before me, but
I could not. I would not permit myself to call in question that
great axiom of Protestants, that the Reformation was right and
necessary. The humility required to correspond with the motions
of grace was wanting to me; scientific pride still insisted on its
pretended rights. I had only arrived so far as to understand that
the opinions pronounced by the reformers on their adversaries
were frequently partial, erroneous, and malevolent; that the
intellectual power of these latter was not so contemptible as
it had been represented; and finally, that their principles had
been frequently travestied at the pleasure of the fathers of
Protestantism" (p. 139).
Having completed his study of these sources, he arranged his materials
in the following order: The first chapter treated of the Church, the
Primacy, the Scripture, Tradition, the Councils; the second, of the
state of innocence, of the fall, of original sin and its consequences;
the third, of free-will and grace; the fourth, of justification, of
the fulfilment of the law, and of the evangelical counsels; then came
the sacraments _in genere et in specie_; finally, the saints and the
worship due to them. The title of his manuscript was _De Theologia
Romano-Catholica quae Reformatorum aetate viguit, ante-Tridentina_.
The work was successful, and received high praise from the faculty of
theology. It was said, however, that the author was too impartial--_nimis
justus_--towards Catholicism. This qualification was added at the request
of Hengstenberg, who did not like too well the favourable notice given of
Catholic writers. And yet notwithstanding all this, Dr. Laemmer was still
far from being a Catholic. He himself tells us that at most he had arrived
at the position held by Leo. On the 3rd of August, 1856, he received the
prize, and had the satisfaction of learning at the same time that his
memoir was accepted as the dissertation required for the license. In
a few days he passed the _rigorosum_, and in the same month made his
public disputation, taking for the theme of his introductory discourse
St. Bernard's work, _De consideratione_. He received his license,
and immediately left Berlin for the country to recruit his shattered
health. In the country he preached frequently, wrote an analysis of
G. Voigt's _Pius II. and his age_, and a dissertation on the doctrine
of justification, held by the Catholic theologian, Contarini, in which
he now admits he was mistaken as to his estimate of the sentiments of
that divine. Returning to Berlin with renewed health, he was appointed
to give religious instruction, and to teach Hebrew in the Frederic
Gymnasium. It must have been a difficult task for one perplexed in mind
as M. Laemmer was, to undertake the religious instruction of a body
of young men at the very doors of the University of Berlin. Among his
youthful hearers he found open infidelity, rationalism, the doctrines of
Schleiermacher, Pietism, confessionalism, in one word, each class was
a miniature copy of the Protestant world around. But he did not swerve
from the path of duty. He boldly set before them, as the central truth
of religion, the Man-God dying on the cross for the world. In vain did
his hearers bring forward the pretended results of modern criticism,
and natural explanations of supernatural facts; M. Laemmer insisted
with energy upon the credibility and the inspiration of S. Scriptures,
and on the miracles and prophecies narrated in them. He also made it his
duty to lead his charge to love and practise prayer. In spite of their
resistance he obliged even the higher classes to recite the Decalogue and
the Apostles' Creed; and he was consoled by seeing his firmness rewarded
by the happiest results. At Easter, 1857, he passed his examination
for the doctor's degree, having chosen for the subject of his theme
Pope Nicholas I. and the Court of Byzantium. Again he was successful:
Lehnerdt, to whom he had dedicated his thesis, observed to him with
great gentleness that he was not far from Hurter's idea of the Papacy.
And in truth this last labour had brought him much nearer to the Church
by reason of the brilliant light it cast on the character and office of
the Papacy in Christianity. In 1857 he found time to publish a new edition
of St. Anselm's _Cur Deus homo_, and to write a paper on the conversion
of Herman of Kappenburg. In June 1858 he revised for the press his
treatise on the ante-Tridentine theology. In preparing the revision he
made a study of modern Catholic works on history, dogma, moral and canon
law. He became familiar with the Roman Breviary, to which his attention
had been called by the attempt made by a Protestant minister to form a
Lutheran Breviary. He also read and admired Cardinal Wiseman's _Fabiola_.
"I now understood the _Memorare_ and the _Sub tuum_; I began
to recite the _Ave Maria_, to salute together with the angel
the Mother of my God, to seek her compassion, that she might
obtain for me grace to be completely enlightened, and to enter
into the Saviour's one fold. The sting of doubt tormented me
unceasingly; on my knees, before my crucifix in my lonely chamber,
I experienced the most painful struggles. As I had ever preserved
such fragments of Christian truth as the Reformers had spared,
and as for many long years I had occupied myself with the solution
of the leading questions in philosophy and theology, it appeared
to me very hard to submit my reason to the yoke of faith. But
prayer removed all these obstacles, and when soon after I came
to knock at the door of the Church, I found it easy to assent
to all the truths that were proposed to my belief" (p. 163).
With many other Protestants, he assisted at the exercises of a mission
given at Berlin by the Jesuit Fathers, and reaped therefrom much
benefit. In July, 1858, he received permission from the minister of
worship to explore the libraries of Germany and northern Italy, to
collect such manuscripts of Eusebius as might be found, with a view
to a new revision of the text of that historian. He visited Leipsic,
Dresden, Vienna, Venice, Padua, Milan, and Munich. At Dresden, Wolfgang de
Goethe took him to be a Catholic priest. At Venice he met with F. Ignazio
Mozzoni, of the order of St. John of God, author of a remarkable history
of the Church, and was edified by the piety and the literary activity of
the Mechitarists. The intercourse he had with Catholic ecclesiastics, and
the sight of Catholic ceremonies and rites, were of signal service to him
by removing unfavourable impressions. Among other details he tells us:
"I shall never forget a certain Irish Dominican, the very type of
a perfect religious, who aroused in me profound emotions by the
account he gave me of the sad condition of his fellow-countrymen,
crushed by English rule" (p. 191).
His scientific mission was finished at Munich, whither he returned from
his long journey still a Protestant. But the end was at hand, and we must
allow him to describe it in his own words:
"After leaving Munich, I continued for some weeks to suffer
great anguish of mind. At length the decisive hour came, and
the sun of grace had completed the work of my enlightenment. I
decided to become a Catholic on the 14th of October, 1858, the
feast of St. Theresa, whose powerful intercession strengthened
my weakness. I communicated my resolutions to the minister
of worship and to the faculty of theology of Berlin, and I
requested my bishop--the Bishop of Ermland--to receive me into
the bosom of the Roman Catholic Church, in which, after long
and painful struggles, I had at length recognized the depositary
of the truth, and the legitimate spouse of the Son of God: thus
would my heart be at peace. 'Glory and praise', said my letter,
'to our Lord Jesus Christ, who has enabled me to surmount all
obstacles, who has graciously heard my prayers, who has had pity
on me, who has broken my chains, who has scattered the darkness
that hung over me, who has shown me the path to the fold. Since
conscientious investigations have proved to me that the so-called
Reformation of the sixteenth century has but disfigured the type
of the true Church of Jesus Christ, and that its principles,
far from being salutary, are essentially destructive and the
necessary cause of the effects which history has registered
during three centuries--that the Protestant confessions and their
apologists, instead of attacking the Church's genuine teaching,
do but distort it to insure an easy victory; since I am convinced
that the Reformers had neither the duty nor the right to attempt
a reform apart from and against the head of the Church and the
episcopate; that the religious divisions of our age are caused
by the refusal to submit to the Church and return to the centre
whence we departed in the sixteenth century; since the historical
development of the Church has been proved to me unbroken down to
the present day; since I have learned to justify and love her
doctrine, her morality, and her worship; from the day on which
the grace of God has permitted me to be convinced of these truths,
my return to the Catholic Church has become a matter of necessity,
and it is only by a public confession of my faith that I can hope
to regain tranquillity of conscience, that peace of the heart
which the world cannot give, nor yet, in spite of all its fraud
and anger, can ever take away'".
It is needless to add that the Bishop of Ermland acceded to this
touching request. On St. Catherine's Day, during the jubilee of 1858,
Dr. Laemmer made his profession of Catholic faith, and received the
sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist. Towards the end of the same year
he was admitted to the diocesan seminary of Ermland, where he received
confirmation, tonsure, and holy orders. Soon after his ordination he
was sent to Rome. Several valuable works on subjects of ecclesiastical
history have since appeared from him, and much is still expected at his
hands.[17] In the bosom of the Catholic Church, his doubts dispelled,
his heart at peace, well indeed may he love to repeat with joy and
gratitude--_Misericordias Domini in aeternum cantabo!_--(Ps. xxxii., 21).