Hermes THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG 242
Hermogenes
HERMES, her'mes, GEORG: German Roman
Catholic theologian; b. at Dreierwalde, near Teck
lenburg (20 m. n.n.e. of Munster),
Life. Westphalia, Apr. 22, 1775; d. at Bonn
May 26, 1831. He graduated in phi
losophy and theology at Miinater, was appointed
teacher in the gymnasium there in 1798, and ad
vanced to the priesthood the following year, al
though 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 theol
ogy. 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. Eivenich (1796-1886), in philosophy,
who became professor in Breslau in 1829, and be
came an Old Catholic in 1870. Some of his fol
lowers 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 po
sitions men who did not share his views. D6l
linger'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
Untemuchungen ilber die innere Wahrheit des Chris
tentums
(MUnster,1805),
Philosophische
His
Einleitung in die chrmtkatholisehe Theo
Theology.
logie
(1819; 2d ed., 2 vols., 1831
1834), and
Christkatholische Dog
matik
(ed. Achterfeld, 3 vols., 1834-36). He ac
cepts, 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 evi
dence 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 acknowledg
ment of revelation and of tradition. But reason
plays, nevertheless, an important part, not by be
coming 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 per
taining 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
ism Con- as Hermesians. In 1835 a papal brief
demned. 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 scien
tific attitude as a whole. Their contention was,
however, that Hermes, if alive, would disown them
completely. They maintained in an article pub
lished in the
Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung
(1835)
that the teaching of their master had been -mis
represented at Rome, and that its condemnation
would be prejudicial to the best interests of the
Roman Catholic Church. In Apr., 1837, Braun 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 follow
ers 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 philosophyfrom 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 better
education. His successor, Droste-Vischering
(q.v.),