Si/mbolik'" (in English entitled Symbolism ; or the Doc- trinal Differences betiveen Catholics and Protesta7its, us represented by their Public Confessions of Faith, translat- ed by J. R. Robertson, 2 vols. London, 1843 ; New York, 1844 ; and since republished). D'Aubigne pronounced it "one of the most important writings produced by Rome since the time of Bossuet" {History of the Ref, iv, 326). It was first published in 1832, passed through five large editions in the next six years, was translat- ed into all the leading European languages, and drew forth numerous criticisms and rejoinders from the Prot- estant world, of which the most important are : Bauer, Gegensatz des Katholicismus u. Protestantismus, nach den Principien u. Ilauptdogmen der beiden Lehrbegriffe (Ttib. 1834, 8vo) ; Nitzsch, Prot. Beantwortung der Symbolik Mohlers (in Studien u. Kritiken, 1834-35, and later sep- arately reprinted) ; Marheineke, Recension der Mohler- scken Symbolik (in Jahrhuchfiir ivissenschaftliche Kri- tik, Berlin, 1833). To these— particularly, however, the attack by Bauer — Mohler replied in his Neue Unter- suchungen der Lehrgegensdtze (Mayence, 1834; 2d edit. 1835). The polemical bitterness evoked by these coi>- troversies made it desirable that Mohler should leave Tubingen, where Bauer then also lectured ; and after refusing various positions proffered him by different celebrated German universities, he accepted in 1835 a professorship at ]\Iunich, then in the first flush of its efficiency under king Louis. Mohler's first appoint- ment was nominally the chair of Biblical exegesis, but he really devoted himself to the department of Cluirch history, in wliich his opening course was eminently successful. His uninterrupted and severe labors, how- ever, had taxed him to the utmost, and, after refusing to accept a renewed and very tempting offer from Bonn, he reluctantly consented to change his place at the university for the deanery of Wiirzburg, which the king had urged upon him. Shortly after appointment to this new position he was completely prostrated, and died of consumption April 12, 1838. Mohler is not only generally acknowledged to have been a good and pious man, but is universally recognised also as the greatest theologian the Roman Catholic Church has produced since Bellarmine and Bossuet. He was certainly the most acute and the most philosophical of the modern controversialists of his Church. He helped Romanism again to self-consciousness, and breathed into it a new polemic zeal against Protestantism ; although he be- trayed the influence which the study of Protestant the- ology, especially that of Schleiermacher, and of modern culture generally, had exercised on his own idealistic apprehension and defence of the Roman dogmas and usages. He did not, indeed, write a Church history, or discuss the scriptural or traditional evidences of the pe- culiar doctrines of Roman Catholicism, but rather de- voted himself to the exposition of the points and the grounds of the doctrinal differences of modern sects; yet all his writings have more or less to do with the historical sphere, particularly with the history of doc- trines, and are remarkable for their freshness of spirit and a vigorous and animated style. Says Hagenbacli {Ch. Hist, of the 18th and 19?/* Cent, ii, 446), " Whatever vigorous vitality is possessed by the most recent Cath- olic theological science is due to tlie labors of this man, who was cut off early in the midst of his work." " He sent rays of his spirit," says Kurtz {Ch. Hist, from the Reformation, p. 391), "deep into the hearts and minds of hundreds of his enthusiastic pupils by his writings, addresses, and by his intercourse with them ; and what the Roman Catholic Church of the present possesses of living scientific impulse and feeling was implanted, or at least revived and excited by him. . . . His ' Sym- bolik' combats Protestant doctrines with tlie weapons of Proteistant science, and silently ennobles and subli- mates those of the Roman Catholic Church. Did the Protestants up to this time generally despise or ignore the contributions of Roman Catholic theologians, here a scientific power of the highest significance approached,'
MOIINIKE
430
MOIRA
them, to despise which would have been a sign of weak- ness. In fact, long as was the o[)position which existed between both churches, no work from the camp of the Koman Catholics produced as much agitation and ex- citement in the camp of the Protectants as this." Yet no work produced by a Komaiiist has been of greater service than this polemic. Written after a thorough study of the subject, it lias gathered a mass of material invaluable to the Protestant student, and in this Cyclo- pcedia we have not unfreciuently referred to Jlohler's " Symbolik" with great pleasure. The other principal works from Miihler's pen are : Die Eiuhtit in der Kirche oder das Princip des Kutholicismus (Tiibing. 1825, 8vo ; translated into French by Ph. Bernard) •.—Athanasius d, Grosse u. d. Kirche seiner- Zeit im Kanipje mii dem A rianismus (Mayence, 1827 ; 2d ed. 1844, 8vo : translat- ed into French, Paris, 1841, 3 vols. 8vo) : — Patroloyie oder cluMiche Literaturijeschichte (Itatisb. 1839,2 vols. 8vo; translated into French by Cohen, I'aris, 1842, 2 vols. 8vo). His Nachgelassene Sckriften were published by Dijllinger (Ratisb. 1839^0), and his rairolor/ie oder t'hrisll. Literaturgesch. bv Keithmaver (Kegensb. 1869). See lioda AVeber, Charaicterhilder (Frankf. 1853) ; D. F. Strauss, Kldne Schri/ten, etc. (Leips. 18(52); Hare, Vin- dication of Luther, p. 167-169 ; Schaff, Hht. of the Apos- tol. Ch. p. 60; Ffoulkes, Divisions in Christendom, vol. i, §53; ll&se, Protestant ische Polemik; Werner, Gesch.d. Kalholirismus ; and particularly the biographical sketch preceding the 5th edition of the " Symbolik." See also Hoefer, Xoiii: Jiiotj. Geitcrale, xxxv,734; Herzog, Peal- EncykhijK ix. iHiJ : /.'//'/. .Surra, Jan. 1850, p. 61 ; English Jiev. ii. 7: c/u-ls/un, /../-//,////«•, xxxvii, 119; Brit, and For. Er. J,; riru; July, I .S(iS, p. 591. (J. H. W.)