(G. UHLHORNf.)
Bibliography: Rich lists of literature are to be found in ANF, Bibliography, pp. 30-33; in O. Gebhardt and A. Harnack, Patrum apostolicorum opera, iii., pp. xl. sqq.; and in Kruger, History, pp. 38-40. Modern editions of the Greek text are: R. Anger and G. Dindorf, Leipsic, 1856; A. F. C. Tischendorf, ib. 1856; A. R. M. Dressel, ib. 1857, 1863; Gebhardt and Harnack, ib. 1877; A. Hilgenfeld, ib. 1881, 1887; F. X. Funk, Tubingen, 1887. Of the Latin text: A. Hilgenfeld, Leipsic, 1873; Gebhardt and Harnack, ut sup. Of the Ethiopic: A. dAbbadie, in Abhandlungen der deutschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft, ii. 1, Leipsic, 1860. Eng. transls. are: W. Hone, in his Apocryphal New Testament, London, 1820; C. K. J. Bunsen, in his Hippolytus, i. 185-208, ib. 1854; C. H. Hoole, ib. 1870; in ANF, ii. 1-58; and C. Taylor, ib. 1901; K. Lake, Facsimiles of the Athos Fragments of the Shepherd, New York, 1907.
Prolegomena and discussions of high value are to be found generally in the editions given above. Consult: J. Donaldson, Hist, of Christian Literature, i. 254-311, London, 1864; idem, Apostolical Fathers, pp. 318-392; E. Gaab, Der Hirt des Hermas, Basel, 1866; T. Zahn, Der Hirt des Hermas untersucht, Gotha, 1868; G. Heyne, Quo tempore Herman Pastor scriptus sit, Konigsberg, 1872; H. M. T. Behm, Ueber den Verfasser der Schrift welche den Titel " Hirt " fiihrt, Rostock, 1876; J. Nirschl, Der Hirt des Hermas, Passau, 1879; M. du Colombier, he Pasteur d'Hermas, Paris, 1880; A. Brull, Der Hirt des Hermas, Freiburg, 1882; J. Haussleiter, De versionibus Pastoris Hermas Latinis, Erlangen, 1884; S. P. Lambros, A Collation of the Athos Codex of the Shepherd of Hermas, transl. and ed. by J. A. Robinson, London, 1888; A. Link, Die Einheit des Pastor Hermas, Marburg, 1888; P. Baumgartner, Die Einheit des Hermas-Buches, Freiburg, 1889; E. Hiickstadt, Der Lehrbegriff des Hirten, Erlangen, 1889; Spitta, Zur Geschichte und Litteratur des Urchristentums, ii. 241- 437, Gottingen, 1896; Schaff, Christian Church, ii. 678- 692- Harnack, Geschichte, i. 49-58 et passim, ii. 1, pp. 257 sqq., 437-438, ii. 2 passim; DCB, ii. 912-921; KL, v. 1839-44.
HERMENEUTICS. See Exegesis or Herme-
NETJTICS.
Hermes Hermogenes
THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
HERMES, her'mes, GEORG: German Roman Catholic theologian; b. at Dreierwalde, near Tecklenburg (20 m. n.n.e. of Munster), Life. Westphalia, Apr. 22, 1775; d. at Bonn May 26, 1831. He graduated in philosophy and theology at Munster, was appointed teacher in the gymnasium there in 1798, and advanced to the priesthood the following year, although he continued teaching. In 1807 he began lecturing on theology at the academy of Munster, particularly on the introduction to theology, which he considered of great importance, because its object was to show the reasonableness and necessity of Christianity. In 1819 he was called to the University of Bonn as professor of dogmatic theology. His activity and success reached their climax here, and he formed a school of his own. Toward 1830 his influence was dominant in the theological faculty at Bonn, in the seminaries at Culm, Treves, and Ermeland, and extended even to Breslau and Braunsberg. He had followers in the other faculties, too, e.g., P. J. Elvenich (1796-1886), in philosophy, who became professor in Breslau in 1829, and became an Old Catholic in 1870. Some of his followers among theologians were J. W J. Braun (q.v.); Johann Heinrich Achterfeld (1788-1877), who became professor of theology at Braunsberg in 1818 and professor at Bonn in 1826; and Johann Baptista Baltzer (1803-71), who became professor of theology at Breslau in 1830. When Count Spiegel was made archbishop of Cologne the influence of Hermes became more powerful, since the archbishop appointed him honorary canon and examining chaplain. The latter position furnished him the opportunity to raise the educational level among the clergy, and to keep out of influential positions men who did not share his views. Dollinger's appointment as professor of church history is said to have been prevented by him. The bishops of the Rhine provinces favored his pupils, since they made studious, earnest, and diligent priests.
Hermes developed his theological views in his Untersuchungen uber die innere Wahrheit des Christentums (Munster, 1805), Philosophische His Einleitung in die christkatholische Theo- Theology. logie (1819; 2d ed., 2 vols., 1831- 1834), and Christkatholische Dogmatik (ed. Achterfeld, 3 vols., 1834-36). He accepts, without any question, every doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. " A man can believe, however, only that which he has recognized as true from evidence furnished by his reason." This evidence compels us to acknowledge the existence of God, and of his attributes. From God man receives the supernatural truths which make up the content of Christianity; they are contained in the Bible and in tradition; the Church, as teacher, explains both correctly and infallibly.
This system seems to imply a full acknowledgment of revelation and of tradition. But reason plays, nevertheless, an important part, not by becoming the judge of the truths of revelation, but by proving that they are true per se and historically; as soon as this evidence is furnished, reason must, of course, submit to their authority in matters pertaining to salvation. Suppose, however, that reason
doubts the truths of revelation and does not feel compelled to consider them as a higher authority In that case the avenue to revelation is blocked and the organ by which it is understood is lost'. The system of Hermes is, thus, prejudicial to the principle of authority in the Catholic Church. It is, moreover, objectionable from another point of view. If a clearly thinking man must necessarily arrive at Christian faith, he can prove its truth to any one who is able to think logically. The process of reasoning would, consequently, suffice to make a Christian.
After his death the teaching of Hermes was
attacked by a number of men, and stanchly de-
. fended by his pupils, who were known
km Con-" as Hermesians- In 1835 a papal brief
demneiL aPPeared condemning as unorthodox the teaching of Hermes concerning the nature of faith, the Bible, tradition, revelation, the proofs for the existence of God, the necessity of grace, and original sin. His followers did not deny that the sentences, mentioned by the brief, if taken singly, were to be condemned, as indeed the scientific attitude as a whole. Their contention was, however, that Hermes, if alive, would disown them completely. They maintained in an article published in the Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung (1835) that the teaching of their master had been misrepresented at Rome, and that its condemnation would be prejudicial to the best interests of the Roman Catholic Church. In Apr., 1837, Braim and Elvenich went to Rome to convince the pope that the papal brief did not present the doctrines of Hermes; but the attempt failed, since most of the German theologians were now against Hermes' teaching. They remained in Rome till Apr., 1838, and wrote in defense of their position Meletemata theologica (Hanover, 1838), which the pope refused to permit them to publish at Rome. All attempts to show that the doctrine of Hermes differed from those condemned in the papal brief failed. The system of Hermes stood condemned, and his followers were debarred from ecclesiastical offices; Braun and Elvenich were retired from their professorships, although honorably and with full stipends. The Prussian government, too, yielded in a number of ways for the sake of peace; for instance, in the matter of granting the bishops the right to take the initiative in removing a theological professor with the consent of the government. The archbishop of Breslau, Forster, was the first to use this right against Boltzer in 1860.
The explanation of the favorable reception of Hermes' works and their condemnation afterward lies in the change of attitude toward philosophy— from the Wolff-Kantian rationalism to Schelling's romanticism. Windischmann, the first man to attack Hermes, had made this change, and his following was increasing constantly in the Roman Catholic Church. Closely connected with this change in philosophy is the reactionary tendency which set in about that time against the liberal ecclesiastical policy of the bishops along the Rhine, particularly of the archbishop of Cologne, Spiegel, who had endeavored to give his clergy a bettor education. His successor, Droste-Vischering (q.v.),