Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 15.djvu/39

 TRAJAN

15

TRAJAN

Fathers who toucli uijou tliis question defend the immediate creation of the soul. TertulUan, ApoUi- naris, and a few other heretics advocate Traducianism, but the testimony of Saint Jerome (Epist. exxvi, 1; that "the majority of Oriental writers think that, as the body is born of the body, so the soul is born of the soul" seems exaggerated, as no other writer of promi- nence is found to advocate Generationism as certain. Saint Gregory of Xyssa, iMacarius, Rufinus, Neme- sius, although their views on this point are not alwa,ys clear, seem to prefer Generationism. After the rise of Pelagianism, some Fathers hesitate between Gen- erationism and Creationism, thinking that the former ofTers a better, if not the only, explanation of the transmission of original sin. Among them Saint .\ugustine is the most important. Creationism is held as certain by the Scholastics, with the exception of Hugh of Saint Victor and Alexander of Hales, who propose it merely as more probable. In recent times Generationism has been rejected by all Catholic theologians. Exceptions are Froschammer who de- fends Generationism and gives to the generation of the soul from the parents the name of secondary creation; Klee and Ubaghs who leave the question undecided; Hermes who favours Generationism; Gravina who ad- vocates it; and Rosmini who asserts that the sensi- tive soul is generated by the parents, and becomes spiritual when God illuminates it and manifests to it the idea of being which is the foundation of the whole intellectual life.

From the jihilosophical point of view, the reasons alleged in favour of Generationism have little or no value. The jjarents are really generators of their off- spring even if the soul comes from God, for the gen- erative process is the condition of the union of body and soul which constitutes the human being. A nmr- derer really kills aman, although he does not destroy his soul. Nor is man inferior to animals because they generate complete living organisms, since the differ- ence between man and animals comes from the su- periority of the human soul and from its spiritual nature which requires that it should be created by God. On the other hand the reasons against Gen- erationism are cogent. The organic process of gener- ation cannot give rise to a spiritual substance, and to say that the soul is transmitted in the corporeal se- men is to make it intrinsically dependent on matter. The process of spiritual generation is impossible. Since the soul is immaterial and indivisible, no spir- itual germ can be detached from the parental soul (of. St. Thomas, "Contra gent." II, c 86; Sum. theol." I, Q. xc, a 2, Q. cxviii, a. 2, etc.). As to the power of creation, it is the prerogative of God alone (see

CRE.4TION', VI).

Theologicall}', corporeal Traducianism is heretical because it goes directly against the spirituality of the Boul. .\s to Generationism, it is certainly opposed to the general attitude of the Church. Froschammer's book, "Ueber den Ursprung der menschlichen Seelen ", was condemned in 1857, and Ubaghs's opinion ex- pres.sed in his "Anthropologiae philosophies' ele- menta" was reproved in a letter of Cardinal Palrizi written by authority of Pius IX to the Archbishop of Mechlin (2 March, 1866). Moreover, Anastasius II in a letter to the bishops of Gaul (498) condemns Generationism (Thiel, " Epistola^ Romanorum Pon- tificum", 634 sqq.). In the Symbol to be subscribed toby Bishop Peter of .\ntioch (10.5.3), Leo IX declares the soul to be "not a part of God, but created from nothing" (Denzinger, .348). Among the errors which the Armenians must reject, Benedict XII mentions the doctrine that the soul originates from the soul of the father (Denzinger, .WS). Hence, although there are no strict definitions condemning Gener.ation- ism as heretical, it is certainly opposed to the doc- trine of the Church, and could not be held without temerity.

Cdconnier, /.'dmc Au7nn- Phi-

losophic der VoTzeii tMunstcr. l'^', / (New

York, London, 1910); Mebcieh. . . i jjiu. 1903);

C. Pesch, Prctlectiones dogmaticfF, III J-r^.iburj;, 1>>9.3);T. Pesch. Institutiones psychologic^ (Freiburg, 1S90; Scheeben, Dogmalik (Freiburg, 1873) ; Bainvel, Parisot, Lamy in Diet, de thiologie CQ.tholique, s. v. Ame,

C. A. DUBRAY.

Trajan, Emperor of Rome (\.v>. 98-1 17), b. at Itahca Spain, IS September, 53; d. 7 August, 117. He was descended from an old Roman family, and was adopted in 97 by the Emperor Nerva. Trajan was one of the ablest of the Roman emperors; he was stately and majestic in ap- pearance, had a powerful will, and showed admirable consideration and a chivalrous kind- liness. He gained a large amount of territory for the empire and laid the foundations of civilization all over the provinces by the founding of municipal com- munities. He es- tablished order on the border.s of thf Rhine, built tln' larger part of Ihi' boundary wall (limes) between Roman and (!cr- manic territory from the Danube to the Rhine, and with great detei-- mination led two campaigns (101-2 and 105-7) against the Dacian king. Decebahis, who.-^e country he con- verted into a new province of the empire. Two other provinces were conquered, al- though neither proved of importance subsequently. The Governor of Syria conquered Arabia Petra^a and Trajan himself entered Armenia during the Parthian War (114-7). In his internal administration Trajan was incessantly occupied in encouraging commerce and industries. The harbour of Ancona was enlarged and new harbours and roads were constructed. Numerous stately ruins in and around Rome give proof of this emperor's zeal in erecting buildings for public piirposes. The chief of the.se is the immense Forum Traj:inum, which in size and s])lendour casts the forums of the other emperors into the shade. In the mi<ldle of the great open space was the colossal equestrian st;itue of Trajan; the free area itself was surrounded by rows of columns and nirhes surmounted by high arches. At the end of the structure was the Bib]io1hec;i Ulpia, in the court of which .stood the celebrated Trajan's Column with its reliefs represent- ing scenes in the Dacian wars. Later Hadrian built a temple to the deified Trajan at the end of the Forum towards the Canipus Martins.

Art and learning flourishcnl during Trajan's reign. Among his literary ('ontciiiporaries were Tacitus, .luvenal, and the younger Pliny with whom the em- peror carried on an anim.ated correspondence. This correspondence belonging to the years 111-3 throws light on the persecution of Christians during this reign. Pliny was legate of the double Province of Bithynia

Traja

Rome