Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 15.djvu/650

 590

WESSENBERG

Wesley, John and Ch.uiles, and Wesleyanism.

Si'o Methodism.

Wessel Goesport (Gansfort), John, a fifteenth- century Dutch theologian, b. at Groningen in 1420; d. there on 4 Oct., 14S9. He was educated at Zwoile and hved in the seminary of the Brothers of the Common Life. From 1449 he studied at the Univer- .sity of Cologne, and gi-aduated master of arts there. In 14.56-7 he was temjjorary professor of arts at the University of Heidelberg. About the beginning of 14.58 he went to Paris, intending to induce two cele- brated teachers from the Netherlands, then lecturing at Paris, to change from Formalism to Realism, which he advocated zealously. He himself, however, was converted to Formalism, and then adopted Nominal- ism, to which he afterwards adhered. His stay at Paris lasted probably until 147.3; he left very likely because of the edict issued in that year by Louis XI against Nominalism. He then spent some time in 1474 at Venice, and apparently at Basle, after which he returned home and devoted himself in quiet to learning. He spent the greater part of his last years alternately in several monasteries. Though he re- mained a layman, he was interested mainly in theo- logical questions. A selection from his writings, " Farrago rerum theologicarum", was issued at Zwoile, probably in 1.521 (reprint at Wittenberg, 1522, and Basle, 1522, this latter containing a commendatory preface by Luther). The Baste edition included several letters to and from Wessel. Shortly after 1521 Wessel published at Zwoile; "De Sacra- mento EucharistiEB et audienda missa"; "De oratione et modo orandi " ; " De causis incarnat ionis ". A com- plete edition of his works appeared at Groningen in 1614, with a biographical sketch by the Protestant preacher Albert flardenberg.

Protestants usually regard Wessel as a precursor of Luther. The first publication of the "Farrago rerum theologicarum" was the work of Protestants, who presented in it a collection of extracts which seemed to favour Protestantism. This judgment, maintained in modern times by L^Umann, is one-sided and exaggerates Wessel's deviations from the teaching of the Church. True his theology contains dogmatic errors, some of which were taught later by Luther. He denies the infallible office of teaching of the Church, and the infallibility of the pope and the oecumenical councils. He disputes the right of ecclesiastical superiors to give commands that bind under sin. He emphasizes too strongly the subjec- tive activity of the faithful in sharing the fruits of Communion and of the Sacrifice of the Mass (opus operantis), so that the objective working of the sacra- ment (opus operatum) seems to be impaired. In the Sacrament of Penance he acknowledges the priestly ab-solution, but denies its judicial character. He rejects satisfaction as a part of the sacrament, holding that with the remission of sins the temporal punish- ment is also remitted. He regards an indulgence as a merely external release from canonical punishments and censures; in his opinion, purgatory serves not to punish temporally sins remitted in this world, but only to purify souls from inordinate desires, and from venial sins. Yet in those jioints which touch the fundamental doctrines of the Reformers, We.ssel stands entirely on Catliolic ground. He teaches the freedom of the will, justification not by faith alone but by faith active in love, the meritorious character of good works; the rule of faith as formed by the Scrip- tures and Tradition; he acknowledges the primacy of the pope, the efficacy of the Sacraments ex o/)crc operalo, Transubstantiation by the priestly con.secra- tion, the sacrificial rliaractcr of the Holy KucharisI, and holds firmly to the veneration of the Bles.scd Virgin. Such being the char.-iclcr of his theology, he cannot be regarded as a i)recursor of the Reforma-

tion. He never thought of separating from theChurch and he died a Catholic. During his lifetime he was never taken to task by the Inquisition. In the six- teenth century his writings, however, were placed on the Index of forbidden books on account of their errors.

Ullmann, Reformaloren vor iler Reformation. II (Gotha. 1866). 235-557, partisanlv Protestrmt; FniFDRirH, Johann Wessel (Ratisbon, 1S62) ; PAHLns. Ueh.r W, .'(,, ■■ffLebcnvndLehre in Der Katholik, II (1900), 11-J ', I o I '. 1 , -'.'iJ-247.

llilKLlUlCH LaUCHERT.

Wessenberg, Ignaz Heinrich von, Vicar-General and Administrator of the Diocese of Constance, b. at Dresden, 4 November, 1774; d. at Constance, 9 August, 1860. He studied at Augsburg, Dillingen, Wiirzburg, and \'ienna. At the age of eighteen he was already canon at Con- stance, A u g s - burg, and Basle, and in 1S02. when still a sub- deacon, he be- came Vicar-Gen- eral of Prince- Primate Dalbcrg for the Diocese of Constance. Not until 1812, when he was thirty- eight years old, did he accept priest's orders. \\'essenberg was entirely unfit for the position. Though a man of extensive knowl- edge, he was not a profound scholar and his theological training was very deficient. Imbued from his early youth with Joseph- inistic and Febronian principles, he ad\ocated a Ger- man National Church, somewhat loosely connected with Rome, supported by the State and protected by it against papal interference.

Before he became vicar-general he had ventilated his liberaUstic views of religion and the Church in a work entitled "Der Geist des Zeitalters" (Ziirich, 1801). In 1802 he founded the monthly review " Geistliche Monatsschrift ", which he edited and used as a medium to spread his ideas of false religious en- lightenment. The protests against this review were such that Dalberg ordered its suspension on 25 May, 1804. It was replaced by the "Konstanzer Pastoral- archiv", which was less offensive and continued to be published annually in two volumes till 1S27. For the realization of his pet plans of a National German Church Wessenberg made futile efforts at the council which Napoleon convened in Paris in 1811 and at the Congress of Vienna in 1815.

In the Swiss portion of the Diocese of Constance Wessenberg's innovations aroused great dissatisfac- tion. His abolition of v;irious holy days of obligation in the cantons of Aargau and St. Gall in 1806; his co- operation with the (Jovernment of Lucerne in the suppression of mona.steries; his orders in case of mixed marriages (1808) to permit the male offspring to be brought up in the religion of the father, the female in the religion of the mother; and especially his many matrimonial anil other dispensations that exceeded his competence induced Testiferrata, the papal nun- cio at Lucerne, to call him to account, but Wessenberg insisted that nothing had been done which exceeded tlie jurisdiction of the Bisho|> of Constance, giving Testiferrata at the same time to understand that he did not recognize the papal nunciature of Lucerne. After various requests from the Catholics of Switzer-

Ignaz Heinrich von Wessenbekq From a contemporary print