is closely allied to polfimios (q. v.), which, *in its true character, should be but a struggle for peace. For the avvdea/jLos r!ic tiplivin; or "bond of peace" (Eph.iv, 3), embraces all Christians, and the dXijS'tvHv iv uya-Ky, or "speaking the truth in love" (Eph. iv, 15), contains two commandments which cannot be separated. Hence we find in the Cliristian Church, from her earliest days up to our own times, attempts to secure peace and unity by conciliating all differences and by reuniting those who had separated from each other. Such was partic- ularly the case when schism occurred first between the Latin and the Greek churches, then between the Rom- ish and the Protestant, and, again, between the Luther- an and the Reformed. Irenical attempts accompanied each of these separations, see, is evinced by the large number of works known as Ireniciim, Unio, Concordia, etc. But the labor of dogmatical peace-makers, or, as some call them, the angels of peace upon earth, is so profoundly, so quietly, and unostentatiously done, that the general mass of professional theologians hardly be- come aware of it. As a regidar science, however, or systematic theory, these efforts at peaceful agreement on the points of difference could only spring from a well defined and developed state of Christian doctrine, and Christian life and its theory. Hence irenical theology is comparatively modem, and its system but little de- veloped as yet. No one can deny that in the N. T., in the works of the apologists, apostles, and fathers, and down through a long series of ecclesiastical writings, and particularly in those of the mystics and pious as- cetics, there are many pacificatory elements which might serve as material for an irenical system. After the Reformation we find such fragments side by side with the most violent polemical works. We might mention in this connection Erasmus {De aniabih eccle- sice concnrdi(i), George Wicel, H. Cassander, Fr. Junius, besides JFclaiicthon, Martin Bucer, etc. It was against one of these peace-makers, David Paneus (f 1615) that Leonliard llutter wrote liis Irotiriim vere Chrislianum (2d edit. Rostock, IGl',!), in which, however, he admits that the attainment of ultimate unity and peace is prob- lematical. Among the most active in the cause of union we find, in the Reformed Church, Hugo (irotius (+ 1045), and, in the Lutheran, George Calixtus (f 1G5(J). The Jesiuts, however, managed to interfere in all these attempts, and to render them abortive by proposing so- phistical and impossible bases of union. On the other hand, untimely propositions on both sides, dictated either by fear or worldly motives, threw discredit on ths cause itself. It was now decried as Babelianism, Samaritanism, neutralism, syncretism, etc. Still there contiiiue'd to appear persons who believed in the pos- sibility of union, and labored zealously for it. Among them were John Fabricius of Helmstadt (f 1720), a dis- ciple of Calixtus, and the Scotch divine, John Dury, or Duneus (1630-78), who, knowing the relation between the Protestant confessions, labored M-ith a truly Chris- tian spirit to scciu-e this end. His principal work, Iren- icoruin fnictatiiuin Prodromus (Amstelod. 1662, 8vo), is in itself a sort of irenical theory, as it treats of the man- ner of removing the obstacles to union, of the grounds suflicient for evangelical unity, of the causes and means of religious reconciliation, and of the true method of ac- complishing that result. Similar works, like the rice cul pitcem, etc., appeared in the Reformed Church, and also, though not so numerously, in the Lutheran. Among the Romanists even, we find some earnest peace-makers, but their efforts met with little success. Among the most prominent was the Spaniard, Christopher Roja de Spinola. appointed bishop in Austria in 1668; he made great efforts towards reconciling the churches, and was countenanced by the emperor Leopold and pope Inno- cent XI, but was afterwards disowned by the latter, and Spener himself was obliged to caution all against hold- ing secret intercourse with him. He gained to his views the Lutheran abbot ]Molanus, of Loccuin, in Han- over, wlio, in turn, found a zealous and distinguished
advocate of unity in Leibnitz. Correspondence was be» gun with Bossuet on this subject, and Leibnitz wrote a very ingenious Sysiema I'/wulocjice, which was only published in 1819, at Paris, and afterwards in German by the Roman Catholic Lorenz DciUer (Mayence, 1820), with a preface, in which he asserts that Leibnitz was at heart a Romanist. This brought an answer of (i. E, Schulze, Uebei- die Entdeckung das Leibnitz tin Kaihulik geweseu (Gotting. 1827). The negotiations in the mean time i)roved unsuccessful, and matters remained un- changed; but still the irenical tendency was clearly gaining ground. Soon after the impulse towards a liv- ing faith given by Spener and his school, there a]>pcared a large number of works for and against the union of the Protestant churches, which finally led, in Prussia, to some practical results. These, however, we shall not dwell upon here, our present object being only to show the development of irenical theology. John Christo- pher Kocher (f 1772) published a Bihliotheca ihcolof/ice irenicm (Jena;, 1764), which, though short, is valuable. He defines irenical theology (§ 3) as being " that part of controversial theology which inquires into the import of such doctrines and religious ceremonies as either whole ecclesiastical bodies or personal members contend about, with a view to preserve the peace and unity of the Church of God, or to restore them to the position which they first held." The tendency to unity now gradually became transformed into a general toleration ; nothing was done towards the actual settlement of the differences, though much preparation was made in that direction by the humanistic tendency, and the spirit of inquiry into all religious systems. (On the literature of the subject in that period, see Winer, I/andbuch dcr theol. lAteruturg. i, 356-60.) Among the works which advocated a union of the churches, but rather from a practical than a scientific jioint of view, are to be men- tioned first those of Joseph Planck (f 1833) and JSIar- heineke (f 1845) ; then those of J. A. Stark (f 1816) ; Theoduls Gastmahl, the crj'pto - catholic Protestant court-preacher of Darmstadt (7th edit. 1828, 8vo) ; the ChrisUiche Henohkon of Dr. C. F. Bohme (Halle, 1827) ; and Ideen h. d. iiuimi Zm^immenhang v. Glaubensi-eini- (jung V. Glnuheiis(:iiiiiiiiiiii in d. Evangel. Kii-che, by Dan- iel of Cologne (Leipzig, IH23).