CHAPTER VI.

CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT CHRISTIANITY.

From the time of the completion of the doctrine of the Incarnation,

Christianity steadily advanced towards Paganism. Gradually all the

characteristics of polytheism crept into the Church. Idolatry, embodied

specially in an important doctrine to be mentioned presently, was

embodied generally in the worship of images. The great principle of

local government in religion which distinguished Pagan polytheism

became Christian by the worship of saints. This was soon the chief

feature of ordinary Christianity. To the average Christian the local

saint appeared the representative of heaven, the appointed agent

through whom heavenly blessings were to be obtained. The Christian

doctrine of the soul’s immortality, originally derived from Judaism,

was Paganised into a resemblance to the ideas on the subject which had

vaguely entered into most forms of Paganism. The old belief of the

Jewish Church that dead Christians “slept” until the resurrection had

become heretical by the middle of the third century.[103] The doctrine

of purgatorial penance was introduced into Christianity. For this,

indeed, quite apart from Pagan influence, there was a very good reason.

In the early days of the Church, with the moral influence of Judaism

still strong on it, and the danger of persecution keeping it pure from

unworthy members, probably almost all Christians were fairly good.

Being good, they were fit for heaven or the heavenly reign of Christ;

and so there was no difficulty in making the simple acceptance of

Christianity the test of salvation. But when the Church became popular,

and especially when it became the acknowledged religious system of

the empire, it was plain that a large proportion of its members were

by no means fit for heaven. And yet, with its looser Pagan hold on

morality, it did not care to consign to damnation faithful believers in

its doctrines. The old ideas, latent generally in Paganism, and given

special expression in the mysteries, of penal purification from evil

exactly met the difficulty, and accordingly they were incorporated in

Christianity. As before in the case of the Incarnation, it was the

need of the Church that really created the doctrine; Paganism only

determined its form.

Christianity took all its supernaturalism of evil from Judaism, that

is, from the later developments of Judaism, with hardly the slightest

change. The belief in a chief devil, having subordinates under him, in

hell or some such kind of irrevocable punishment, characterized late

Judaism as much as Christianity. In general, this supernaturalism of

evil was less strongly developed in Pagan religions, or rather, to

speak more precisely, it was a feature of eastern far more than of

western theology. Still Christian Paganism, though mainly western,

had no difficulty in accepting it, and it afterwards became the chief

support of medieval superstition.

The decline and final ruin of the empire of Rome transformed the

outward structure of Christianity. The empire died under the hands

of northern barbarians, but it attained a resurrection in the shape

of the Papal Church. After the separation of the Eastern and Western

Churches, the line of Christian development passed through the latter

alone, the former remaining stagnant in consequence of its union with

political despotism. The free Church of the west, becoming the real

representative of Christianity, gradually embodied in itself all the

attributes of imperial power. The Pope succeeded the Emperor; bishops

succeeded the provincial legates; the religious tyranny of Catholicism

succeeded the political tyranny of Cesarism. The pomp and ceremonial

of the empire were transferred to the Church. The spirit of sensuous

worship latent always in Christian Paganism of course was encouraged

by this, and expressed itself in a complex ritual. But most of all

Catholic imperialism exalted the clergy above the laity.

This exaltation of the clergy was the direct result of the transference

of the imperial power to the Church. The long reign of despotism in the

empire had unfitted the people of it for any approach to freedom. Just

as formerly they had submitted to the material power which had had its

centre in Rome, so now they submitted to the spiritual power which had

its centre in Rome. Only by the slow training of many centuries was

part of the population of Europe prepared for resistance to clerical

tyranny. The Reformation rested on the political development of the

peoples among whom it was successful. The clergy were the guardians,

for good or for evil, of the childhood of the modern world.

The complicated system of sacraments which now arose in Christianity

was largely the expression of priestly power. The distinction made

between clergy and laity in the celebration of the Eucharist showed

this in its clearest form. But most of all the power of absolution gave

the priest an unlimited supremacy. Holding the keys of heaven and of

hell, he was the master of the Christian’s soul. The foundation of this

doctrine, as well as that of the general recognition of an authority

peculiar to the clergy, was laid in the willing reverence felt by

the early Church for the apostles, for the men who had actually seen

its founder. Clerical despotism cannot be ascribed to the spirit of

Paganism as distinguished from the spirit of Judaism. But still, in its

extreme development under the pressure of changes in the Pagan world,

it was a Pagan feature of Christianity.

A most important distinctly Pagan doctrine was connected with this idea

of clerical sanctity. I have already referred to the belief of the

early Church that the body and blood of Christ were really present in

the elements of the Eucharist. It is quite clear from the language of

St. Paul that this belief in the real presence was not a belief that

the elements were actually changed into Christ’s body and blood.[104]

By the faith of the communicant the sacrament was accomplished, and

without faith it had no existence. The Eucharist was evidently then

regarded as a constantly recurring sacrament of the once offered

sacrifice of Christ’s death, which it commemorated and declared until

he came again. That this was an exceedingly delicate doctrine which

could be easily misinterpreted is obvious. It naturally developed into

a grosser form when Paganism, with its leaning towards idolatry, became

paramount in the Church. The elements were then formally consecrated,

and were regarded as the actual flesh and blood of Christ. As his body,

they were laid on the altar and made an object of worship. This, of

course, was simple idolatry. United with the dogma of the Incarnation,

it enabled the Christian to adore God as visibly present in a material

shape. The doctrine was connected with the exaltation of the clergy,

as the power of consecration was confined to them. Thus the sacrament

of the Eucharist became the sacrifice of the mass. The elements being

actually changed into his flesh and blood, Christ was again made a

victim; his sacrificial death was repeated as often as the ceremony;

and so the Jewish dogma of the Atonement was linked with ideas utterly

antagonistic to Judaism.[105]

The deification of the Virgin Mary was another wholly Pagan development

of Christianity. Female divinities were common in Pagan polytheism,

and female saints replaced them in Christian Paganism. After Christ,

as man, had been made the God of Christianity, this tendency to give

both sexes divine representatives produced the exaltation of the Virgin

as his female correlative. She became the goddess of Christianity,

the real third person of the Trinity, as Feuerbach calls her.[106] As

mother and wife of God, she satisfied the human instincts of Pagan

religion; and so the Church ultimately put all heavenly power into her

hands. The asceticism of later Christianity at the same time created

the dogma of her perpetual virginity. At last, as a divine being, she

was encircled with an atmosphere of miraculous privilege even from

before her birth.

The most striking feature of Pagan Christianity, monasticism, was due

to a variety of causes. In part it had its origin in the personal

character of Christ. His insistence on inward purity was not far

removed from asceticism. But though monastic asceticism may have had

some of its roots in later developments of Judaism, it was foreign

to Judaism as a whole. Judaism was remarkable for its clearness and

balance; it pushed nothing too far. Monasticism in reality was chiefly

derived from eastern Paganism, from the tendency towards asceticism

so common in Oriental religions. The same tendency produced another

important effect on western Christianity, namely, the celibacy of the

regular clergy. When this became an accepted doctrine, the finishing

touch was given to clerical power. Henceforth the Roman Church was the

most highly organized ecclesiastical system the world has ever seen.

With no recognized interests outside his calling, every priest belonged

body and soul to a vast disciplined mass which moved and acted like

one man.

Thus highly organized, the Church plunged into the darkest period of

the Middle Ages. For the evils of this period Christianity cannot

fairly be held responsible, except in so far as it contributed to the

ruin of the Roman empire. Throughout it, on the whole, the Church

was a centre of light, keeping alive the embers of civilization, and

softening the barbarous tendencies of the time. But in passing through

it Christianity suffered fearfully. The ignorance and harshness and

corruption of the age were stamped ineffaceably upon it. And this was

inevitable. In every civilized country at almost every time there are

sure to be two forms of the general religion, one popular, the other

that of the more educated classes. The popular religion, resting on

ignorance, is always a mere superstition; the other religion, kept

clear by partial knowledge from offensive crudities, is the recognized

form. But during the worst period of the Middle Ages there was no

such distinction; all religion was popular; even the highest classes

were hopelessly lost in superstition. The gloom of this superstition,

the shadow of the wretchedness of the age, left a lasting mark on

Christianity. The terror of life was transferred to death; death was

associated with the most repulsive images, and closely connected with

hell. The fear of hell became the motive power of religion; to escape

hell was to the Christian the end of life.[107] The superstitious

elements from which Christianity is now struggling to release itself

were mainly developed in its passage through this period.

During it the moral corruption of Christianity was enormous. The Church

laid stress, not on righteous conduct, but on orthodox thinking.

Heresy was irremediably damnable, but crimes and sins could be easily

compounded for. The immorality of the clergy, due partly to the general

corruption of the time, and partly to their legal celibacy, was closely

connected with the toleration of sin shown in the action of the Church.

Rotten itself, the ecclesiastical power was ever ready, in return for

material benefits, to open the gates of heaven to secular sinners.

The whole course of medieval Christianity was a progress towards the

doctrine of indulgences which immediately provoked the Reformation.

The moral decline of Christianity was the mark of its progress towards

Paganism. It receded further from its original basis in Judaism as its

dogmas became more complex and its hold on morality more uncertain.

The complexity of doctrine encouraged the decline in morality,

religious attention being drawn by it from practical conduct to the

consideration of nice points of theology. A reaction against this

tendency was inevitable. Christianity had shared in the descent of

European civilization, and when European civilization began to ascend,

Christianity had to ascend along with it. But the reaction, as it was

against a corruption which was inextricably linked with the Paganism of

the Church, could not fail to oppose itself to Paganism, that is, to

recoil back to Judaism. And this is the explanation of the Reformation.

It was the revival of Judaism in Christianity. As the revival of Jewish

Christianity, it was sure to occur sooner or later; once the thought

and knowledge of Europe awakened from their medieval slumber, the

revolt against Paganism was bound to begin. The renewal of intellectual

life involved the renewal of moral life. The restored conscience of

Europe would protest first against the later corruptions of Pagan

Christianity; but these were inseparably connected with earlier ones,

and so step by step reformers would have to ascend along the line,

until at last they would find themselves the champions of Jewish

Christianity, contending against the forces of Paganism.

Thus the great schism which the Reformation caused in Christianity was

inevitable from the first. Paganism could not be eradicated by the

revival of Judaism. The more ignorant and backward races were sure to

cling to it in opposition to the progressive spirit which revolted

from it. The schism in Christianity was as inevitable as the schism

which it occasioned in Judaism, the necessity of which was shown in

our second chapter. And just as the expansion of Judaism which Christ

made a practical success was in its main features quite independent of

the influence of his personal character, so the main features of the

Reformation were determined apart from the personal influence of the

Reformers.

From the time of the Reformation Jewish and Pagan Christianity stood

side by side. Protestantism revived the principles of the early Church;

Catholicism retained the principles of Paganism. Within the lifetime of

Luther the change was accomplished. He himself, because he assailed one

immoral doctrine of the corrupt Roman Church, was forced to travel back

along fourteen centuries of religious development.

Of course Protestantism cannot be exactly the same as the religion

of the Jewish Church. Just as Pagan Christianity was compelled to

retain Jewish dogmas, so Protestantism was compelled to retain Pagan

dogmas. It had nothing to rest on except the Canon of Scripture, and

part of the New Testament is Pagan in spirit. Accordingly, the dogmas

of earlier Paganism, which were developed while it was still mixed

with Judaism in the Church, were preserved in Protestantism. It kept,

for instance, the great Pagan dogma of the Incarnation. Still, so far

as general principle is concerned, Protestantism fairly represents

Judaism, and Catholicism Paganism in Christianity. This is evident if

they are fully compared with each other.

The Pagan character of Catholicism has already been shown. As

Catholicism—and this term covers more than the Roman Church—has

retained all the doctrines which we have examined as representative

of Paganism in Christianity, this is obvious. Similarly the non-Pagan

character of Protestantism is clear from its rejection of all the

later of these doctrines, from the worship of saints to the immaculate

conception. Its Jewish character must be shown by a reference to the

principles of our comparison of Judaism and Paganism.

The chief distinctive doctrine of Protestantism is justification

by faith alone. That in this it resembles Jewish Christianity, a

glance at St. Paul’s epistles is sufficient to show. It is also

plain that this doctrine is closely connected with the great Jewish

dogma of the Atonement. According to it, sins are washed away by the

blood of Christ, the victim offered to God. But the benefits of the

sacrifice are obtained solely by faith; the merits of the Christian

cannot enhance its value. Still more closely, however, is the

doctrine connected with the feature distinctive of Protestantism as

of Judaism, its loftier conception of God. This, as was pointed out

in our last chapter, is the peculiarity of monotheism, and it shows

the monotheistic character of Protestantism. Catholicism, having

inherited polytheistic ideas from Paganism, naturally recognizes the

value of man’s good works. In the saints whom he worships the Catholic

sees beings who, though they were once fallible like himself, have

yet obtained heavenly authority; and, as he is thus conscious of no

important difference between his divinities and himself, he is not

disposed to underestimate the worth of his virtue.

As a necessary consequence of its distinctive doctrine, Protestantism

is characterized by humility. It depresses human excellence and

heightens the sense of sin. In this it develops what were, as we saw

before, the essential tendencies of Judaism. And, curiously enough, the

phenomenon which appeared in Judaism—theological humility more than

counterbalanced by exclusive pride—appears also in the extreme forms

of Protestantism. The religion of the Puritans was ultra-Protestant in

its insistence on the utter sinfulness of human nature and the need

of faith; and yet no class of men were ever prouder than they. Like

the Jews, they felt their pride as the people, the elect of God, who

were honoured by him above the rest of mankind. The same phenomenon

can be observed at the present day among the extreme Evangelical sects

which keep the far frontier of Protestantism. In them we also find

theoretically religious humility, and practically the most intense

religious pride. And, indeed, both in these sects and in Puritanism

we see Protestantism fully developed in its likeness to its parent

Judaism, with the harshness and exclusiveness of Judaism thinly veiled

under a nominal Christianity.

Again, Protestantism resembles Judaism in its higher morality.

Protestants as a whole are certainly more moral than Catholics as

a whole. At first sight this seems remarkable, as morality is not

encouraged by the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone.

But, as a matter of fact, the priestly absolution of Catholicism is

a much more immoral doctrine. In practice, as might be expected, the

belief in justification by faith alone does less mischief than the

belief that sins can be got rid of by a visit to the nearest church.

Of course, in addition to this, the higher theology of Protestantism

favours morality, just as the higher theology of Judaism did. So far as

it is purer and more rational than Catholicism, it naturally is more

moral, and allies itself less easily with ignorance and animalism.

Protestantism, too, is like Judaism in having for its basis a written

revelation. The Bible is to Protestants what the law and the prophets

were to Jews. This feature of Protestantism is obviously connected with

its depreciation of human excellence. It makes men simply vessels for

the reception of a finished system of religious truth. Catholicism, on

the other hand, by its assertion of a continuously inspired Church,

which in every generation may develop new dogmas, plainly assigns a

higher position in religion to man.

As regards simplicity of thought and worship, there is clearly the same

opposition between Protestantism and Catholicism that there was between

Judaism and Paganism. Catholicism is remarkable more than Protestantism

for complexity of doctrine and sensuousness in worship. We will now

consider how far this opposition shows itself in their treatment of the

great dogmas which nominally are common to them both.

The Atonement being the chief Jewish dogma of Christianity, we should

expect it to be more prominent in Protestantism than in Catholicism.

And this is strictly the case. Catholicism lays no stress on the

doctrine. In a very able work by Mr. S. Baring-Gould, which presents

the religion of Catholicism in its truest form, the Atonement is made

simply symbolical, and the death of Christ is regarded as hardly

necessary to his work.[108] Protestantism, on the other hand, makes

the Atonement its primary dogma. “The blood of Jesus,” is its central

cry. It links the dogma with its distinctive doctrine; justification

by faith in the reconciling death of Christ is the essence of its

theology, and sums up its multitudinous preaching.

We also find the great Pagan dogma of Christianity, the Incarnation,

more prominent in Catholicism than in Protestantism. That God became

man is the central assertion of Catholicism, on which it bases its

higher estimation of human dignity. This can plainly be seen in the

work last referred to, where the Incarnation is regarded as the

condition of theistic religion.[109] But it is still more evident

in the tendency of Catholic theology to exalt the divinity at the

expense of the humanity of Christ, for manifestly the doctrine of the

Incarnation is expanded and made more important in proportion as the

difference between it and the original Jewish belief in the simple

humanity of Christ is increased. The Athanasian Creed is thoroughly

Catholic, and its definition of the nature of Christ involves the

destruction of his human personality. Catholic theologians have boldly

adopted this conclusion, and assert that his personality is wholly

divine.[110] Instinctively the Catholic always thinks of Christ as God.

Protestantism, on the contrary, never dwells on the Incarnation. The

extreme Evangelical sects, in which its principles are fully developed,

are perpetually drifting towards Unitarianism. But, as in the case

of Catholicism, its interpretation of the doctrine best reveals its

tendencies. It exalts the humanity at the expense of the divinity of

Christ. It holds him up as an example in a manner which implies his

human personality. Instinctively the Protestant always thinks of Christ

as man.

In their treatment of the Eucharist the respective characteristics of

Catholicism and Protestantism are also evident. We have already seen

the Paganism of the Catholic doctrine of the real presence. Equally the

two Protestant doctrines show the influence of Judaism on Christianity.

The first, the Evangelical doctrine, which allows the Eucharist no

sacramental value, and makes it simply a commemoration of the sacrament

which accompanied the sacrifice of Christ’s death, was probably the

belief of the Jewish Church at its very beginning; the second, and more

general one, which asserts the real presence, but only in a spiritual

sense through the faith of the communicant, we know to have been the

belief of the later Jewish Church in the time of St. Paul. If it were

not for the pressure of Catholicism, it is likely that the second would

be the doctrine of all forms of Protestantism. But when Catholics have

so exaggerated the real presence, Protestants, by a natural reaction,

are tempted to deny it altogether.

Thus the two systems of religion which Christianity seemed to unite

have plainly parted again. The Judaism in which it was born, and the

Paganism in which it reached its maturity, stand once more side by

side. And not merely does Christianity reveal so manifestly that great

opposing forces met in its history, but in reality every important

feature of the long course of development which has been the subject

of our survey, is recorded as clearly in its present structure as

the chief conditions of the past evolution which has produced it are

recorded in the structure of an animal organism.

The Origin and Development of Christian Dogma: An essay in the science of history · 第 6 / 7 章