THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
and philosophical freethinkers was dogmatic in character from Agobard of Lyons to Savonarola's Triumphus cruris. Then came, in the sixteenth century, the controversy between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. The writings of the Jesuits especially were polemic. Alfonso de Castro wrote Adversus omnes hcereses libri quatuordecim (Paris, 1534), being followed by Franciscus Coster's Enchiridion controversiarum (Cologne, 1585) and Gregorius de Valentia's De rebus fidei hoc tempore controver sis (1591). The chief work here, however, was the Disputationes de controversiis Christiana fidei (3 vols., Rome, 1581-91) of Bellarmine (q.v.), who was followed by Martin Becan (d. 1624) with his Manuale controversiarum kujus temporis (Mainz, 1623). Jesuit polemics against Protestantism have continued without intermission, one of the most noteworthy works of this character in recent years being the II Protestantesimo e la regola di fede (3 vols., Rome, 1853) of G. Perrone (q.v.). More popular circles had already been reached by Bossuet' Exposition de la doctrine de I'eglise catholique sur les matieres de controverse (Paris, 1671).
The Protestants, in their turn, were no less active
polemically from the sixteenth to the eighteenth
century. Here special mention may
3. Protes- be made of Martin Chemnitz, Examen tant conrilii Tridentini (Frankfort, 1565);
Polemics. Konrad Schlusselburg, Havreticorum catalogus (1597-99); Nicolaus Hunnius (d. 1643), Diaskepsis de fundamentali dissensu doctrince Lutherance et Calviniance (Wittenberg, 1616); Abraham Calovius, Synopsis controversiarum (1685); and Johann Georg Walch, Einleitung in die polemische Gottesgelehrtheit (Jena, 1752). Interest in polemics ceased with Friedrich Samuel Bock's Lehrbuchfilr die neueste Polemik (1782). In the Reformed wing mention should be made of Rudolf Hospinian, Concordia discors (Zurich, 1607) ; Daniel Chanier, Panstratia catholica (4 vols., Geneva, 1626) ; Johann Hoornbeck, Summa controversiarum (Utrecht, 1653) ; Francesco Turretini, Institutio theologice elenchticce (Geneva, 1681-85) ; and various writings of Friedrich Spanheim, the elder and the younger (qq.v.).
Polemics entered upon a new phase with Schleiermacher, whose classification of polemics among the branches of theology has already been 4. The described. He was followed by Karl Modern Heinrich Sack, with his Christliche Phase. Polemik (Hamburg, 1838), who defined polemics as that branch of theology which detects and refutes errors that endanger Christian faith and the purity of the Christian Church; and by Johann Peter Lange, whose Christliche Dogmatik (3 parts, Heidelberg, 1849-52) calls polemics and irenics " applied dogmatics." Theoretically, since the middle of the nineteenth century, polemics has not been regarded as a distinct department of theology. Practically, however, a new era in polemics was begun by the sharp critiques of Protestantism by Roman Catholic scholars of recent times. This movement was inaugurated by Johann Adam Mohler's Symbolik (Mainz, 1832), essentially a polemic against Protestantism from an idealistic Roman Catholic point of view; and
this work was followed by the great historical polemic of Johann Joseph Ignaz von Dollinger, Die Reformation, ihre innere Entwickelung und ihre Wirkungen (3 vols., Regensburg, 1846-48). The ultramontane spirit there displayed was equally manifest in Johannes Janssen's Geschichte des deutschen Volkes seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters (8 vols., Freiburg, 1877-94; Eng. transl., Hist, of the German People, 12 vols., St. Louis, 1896-1907), and Heinrich Suso Denifle's Luther und Luthertum in der ersten Entwickelung (2 vols., Mainz, 1904-10). The Protestants replied vigorously to these attacks with Ferdinand Christian Baur's Gegensatz des Katholicismus und Protestantismus nach den Prinzipien und Hauptdogmen der beiden Lehrbegriffe (Tubingen, 1834), Carl Immanuel Nitzsch's Protestantische Beantwortung der Symbolik Dr. Mohlers (Hamburg, 1835), and a number of other works. While the books just mentioned are necessarily limited in scope, a thoroughgoing, though purely negative, discussion of the chief points of difference between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism was supplied by Karl August von Hase's Handbuch der protestantischen Polemik gegen die romisch-katholische Kirche (Leipsic, 1862, 7th ed., 1900, Eng. transl., London, 1906) which discusses the Church (clergy and papacy), salvation (faith, works, sacraments), and accessories (ritual, art, science, literature, politics, nationality). Paxil Tschackert followed this with his Evangelische Polemik gegen die romische Kirche (Gotha, 1885; 2d ed., 1888), which not only criticizes the Roman Catholic system in detail, but also affords a substitute for each point criticized by presenting the Protestant teaching on the tenet in question. Finally, mention should be made of the anti-Roman Catholic propaganda carried on by the Schriften des Vereins fur Reformationsgeschichte (Halle, 1883 sqq.) and by the Evangelischer Bund zur Wahrung der deutsch-protestantischen Interessen (founded in 1886). (Paul Tschackekt.)
In Great Britain and America polemics has taken a different course from that which it assumed on the continent. Several causes have contributed to this. Theological encyclopedia has 5. In Great been far less exact in its divisions, and Britain and where polemics has not been recognized America, as a separate discipline, it has been incorporated into the body of theological construction. There has, moreover, been but little interest in the history of this branch of theological discussion. Again, toleration has been a marked feature of English and American religious thought (cf. Milton, Areopagitica; and Jeremy Taylor, Liberty of Prophecying, which unfortunately he did not exemplify later). Still further, the edge of the controversial spirit has been dulled by the practical nature of the Anglo-Saxon mind, the disposition to compromise, the lack of thoroughgoing intellectual consistency, together with a rationalizing tendency which has tempered criticism of the positions of others. Polemics has appeared quite as often in apologetics as in doctrinal discussions. Only a few of the historical occasions of polemics and names of the chief persons involved are here indicated. (1) The deistic controversy (1648-1775; see Deism), in which among the pamphleteers and
Ill