Page:Readings in European History Vol 2.djvu/82

 44 Readings in European History The theolo- gians set themselves above St. Paul and the apostles. Finally, the theologians are at their best when they are explaining (in their own opinion) such deep mysteries as : How was the world founded and brought into order ? How is original sin transmitted to posterity? . . . How can the accidents subsist in the eucharist without their substance ? Nay, these are trite and easy questions. The great and illustrious theologians, as they dub themselves, will only awaken when something like the following is proposed : Does supernatural generation require time for its accom- plishment? Has Christ a double relation of sonship? Is the proposition possible, " God the Father hates the Son " ? Might God have chosen to assume the form of a woman, a devil, an ass, a gourd, or a stone? . . . St. Paul, they admit, was distinguished for his faith, but nevertheless when he said, " Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen," he denned it but inaccurately. He may have excelled in charity, yet he fails to limit and define it with dialectic precision in his first letter to the Corinthians, Chapter xiii. The disciples administered the eucharist reverently, and yet had they been asked about the terminus a quo and the terminus ad quern of transubstantiation ; as to how a body can be in two places at the same time ; of the differences which exist between Christ's body in heaven, on the cross, and in the holy wafer ; or at what point does transubstantiation occur, since the prayer through which it is effected is, as a quan- titas disereta, in a state of flux, — asked of these matters the apostles would not have replied with the acuteness with which the followers of Scotus distinguish and define these subtleties. The apostles knew the mother of Jesus, but who of them could philosophically prove how she was preserved from the sin of Eve, as do our divines ? Peter received the keys, and from one who would not commit them to unworthy hands, but whether or not he knew how one could have the key of knowledge without knowledge itself, he certainly never dis- cussed the matter. The apostles baptized, but never taught the formal, material, efficient, or final cause of baptism, nor do they mention delible or indelible characters. . . . The