Part 3

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: