LOGBOSO
331
LOHEL
VII, 3, in P. G.. IX, 421; cf. "Strom.", VII, 2,
in P. G., IX, 408) ; elsewhere he very explicitly
afiBims the equally of the Father and the Son,
and the unity (** Protrtpt.", 10, in P. G., VIII,
228: "Paedag.", I, vi, in P. G., VIII, 280; I, viii, in
P. a, VIII, 326, 337; cf. I, ix, in P. G., VIII, 353;
III, xii, in P. G., VIII, 680). Origen, on the con- trary, frequently and formally defended subordina- tionist ideas (*' De Princip.'\ I, iii, 5, in P. G., XI, 150;
IV, XXXV, in P. G., XI, 409, 410; **In Jo.", ii, 2, in P. G., XIV, 108, 109; ii, 18, in P. G., XIV, 153, 156; ▼i, 23, in P. G., XIV, 268; xiii, 25, in P. G., XIV, 441- 44; xxxii, 18, in P. G., XIV, 817-20; " In Matt.", xv, 10, in P. G., XIII, 1280, 1281; "De Orat.", 15, in P. G., XI, 464; " Contra Gels., V, xi, in P. G., XI, 1 197) ; his teachin^concemin^ the Word evidently suffered from Hellenic speculation: in the order of religious knowledge and of prayer, the Word is for him an inter- mediarybetween God and the creature.
Amid these speculations of apologists and Alexan- drian theologians, elaborated not without danger or without error, the Church maintained her strict dog- matic teaching concerning the Word of God. This is particularly recognizable in the works of those Fathers more devoted to tradition than to philosophy, and especially in St. Irensus, who condenms eveiy form of the Hellenic and Gnostic theory of intermediary' beinf^ (Adv. Hser., II, xxx, 9; II, ii, 4; III, viii, 3; IV, vii, 4; IV, XX, 1), and who affirms in the strongest terms the full comprehension of the Father by the Son and their identity of nature (Adv. Haer., II, xvii, 8; IV, iv, 2; IV, vi, 3, 6). We find it again with still greater authority in the letter of Pope St. Dionysius to his namesake, the Bishop of Alexandria (see Athan., ** De decret. Nic. syn.", 26, in P. G., XXV, 461-65) : " They lie as to the generation of the Lord who dare to say that His Divine and inefifable generation is a creation. We must not divide the admirable and Divine unity into three divinities; we must not lower the dignity and sovereign grandeur of the Lord by the word crea- tion; but we must believe in God* the Father omnip- otent, in Christ Jesus His Son, and in the Holy Ghost; we must imite the Word to the God of the universe, for He has said: 'I and the Father arc one', and again : 'I am in the Father, and the Father in me'. Thus we protect the Divine Trinity, and the holy avowal of the monarchy [unity of Gotl]." The Council of Nicsa (325) had but to lend official consecration to this dogmatic teaching.
V. Analoot between the Divine Word and Human Speech. — ^After the Council of Nicsea, all danj^er of Subordinationism being removed, it was possible to seek in the analogy of human speech some fight on the mystery of the Divine generation; the Greek Fathers especially refer to this analogy, in order to explain how this generation is purely spiritual and entails neither diminution nor change: Dionvsius of Alexandria (Athan., *' De Sent. Dion.", 23, in P. G., XXV, 513); Athanasius C'De decret. Nic. syn.", 11, in P. G., XXV, 444); Basil ("In illud: In principio enU VeHmm", 3, in P. G., XXXI, 476-77) ; Gregor\' of Naiiansus (*' Dr.", xxx, 20, in P. G., XXXVI, 128-29) ; Cyril of Alexandria (" Thes.", iv, in P. G.. LXXV, 56— cf. 76, 80; xvi, ibid., 300; xvi, ibid., 313; *'De Trinit.", dial, ii, in P. G., LXXV, 768-69); John Damasc. ("De Fide Orthod.", I, vi, in P. G., XCIV, 804).
St. Augustine studied more closely this analogy between the Divine Word and human speech (see espedaUy "De Trinit.", IX, vii, 12 sq., in P. L., XLII, 967; XV, X, 17 sq., ibid., 1069), and drew from it teachings long accepted in Catholic theolog>'. He compares the Word of God, not to the word spoken by the ups, but to the interior speech of the soul, whereby we mav in some measure grasp the Divine mystery; engmdieTed by the mind it remains therein, is equal thereto, is the source of its operations. This doctrine
was later developed and enriched by St. Thomas, espe*
cially in "Contra Gent.", IV, xi-xiv, opusc. "De
natura verbi intellectus" ; "Qusest. disput. de verit."
iv; "De potent.", ii; viii, 1; " Summa Theol.", I-I,
XX vii, 2; xxxiv. St. Thomas sets forth in a very
clear way the identity of meaning, already noted by
St. Augustine (De Trinit., VII, ii, 3), between the
terms Son and Word: "eo Filius quo Verbum, et eo
Verbum quo Filius" ("Summa Theol.", I-I, xxvii,
2; "Contra Gent.", IV, xi). The teaching of St.
Thomas has been highly approved by the Church,
especially in the condenmation of the Synod of Pistoia
by Pius VI (Denzinger, "Enchiridion^ 1460). (See
Jesus Christ; Trinity.)
On tho Logos thooriea in jseneral see: A/iix, Geachichte der Logondee^ I: In der griechxBchen Philoaophie; II: In der christlichm Littcratur (Lcipsiff. 1896-99); Lebreton, Lea ortgineft du dogme de la Trtni<<? (Paris, 1910). On the Hellenic theories: Heinze, Die Lchre vom Logon in der grieehiachen Philosophie (Oldenburg, 1872). On the Memra of Palestinian Judaism: Webkr, JiidvKfte Theologie (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1897), l8(>-84; KoHLER in The Jewish Encyclopedia, s. v. Memra; OiNBBUROER, Die Anthropomorphiemen in den Targumim (Brunswick, 1891), 7-20. On the Alexandrian and Philo- nian theory of tho TiOgos: Drummond, PhiloJudttiUt II (London, 1888), 15CP-273; Brkhirr, I^a iddea philoeophiquee et reliqieuMa de Philon d^Alexandrie (Paris. 1908), 83-112. On the Johan- nine theory of the Ix>gos: Prat in Vio., Diet, de la Bible, s. v.; Calmes, UEvangile selon a. Jean (Paris. 1904), 92-100; LoiST, Le quatrihrne Evangile (Paris, 190:0, 98-101; 151-^; Scott. The Fourth Gospel (Edinburgh, 1900), 145-76; Grill, Unter- auchungen iiber die Enitiehung dea vier'en Evangdiuma (Til- bingen, 1902), 105-206. On the Ante-Nicene theol9gy of tho liOgos: Petavius, Dogmata Theologica, preface, ii-vifl, iii-vi; Newman, Causes of the Rise and Sueceaaea ofArianiam in Tracta theological and ecclesiaatical (London, 1902), 137-3(X); Fedeb, Justins des Milrtyrfrs I^hre von Jeaua Christua (Freiburg im Br.. 1906), 7^154; Poyiunicn,Dea ApologetenTheophxluaQoUee- una Logoslehre (Dresden. 1002); D'ALfes, Aa Theologie de TertuUien (Paris. 1905), 67-104: loEaf. La ThMogie de s, Hippoli/te (Paris, 1906), 8-35. (Jn tho Nicene theology of the logos: Atzbbroer. Die Logoslehre des hi. Athanaaiua (Munich, ISiSO); Zahn, Marcellua von Ancyra ((Jotha, 1867); db R^qnon, Etudes de thtologie poaitivc aur la aainte TrinitS, III (Paris, 1898), 381-463. On the Augustinian theology of the Logos: Gangauf, Dea hi. Auguslinue speculative Lehre von OoU aem dreieinigen (Augsburg, 1865), 209-95; see also Auoubtine or Hippo, Saint.
J. Lebreton.
Logrrofto. See Calahorra and La Calzada, Dio- cese OF.
Logue, Michael. See Ar>lagh, Archdiocese of.
Lohel (LoHKLius), Johann, Archbishop of Prague, b. at Eger, Bohemia, 1549; d. 2 Nov., 1622. Of poor parent£^e, he was piously brought up; at fifteen he was engaged as a domestic in the Norbertine Abl)ey of Tepl, but was allowed to follow the classes in the ab- bey school; he soon surpassed his fellow students, and in 1573 received the Norljertine habit. After a two- veArs novitiate, Lohelius went to studv philosophy at I'rague. He was ordained in 1576 ancl was recsdled to the abbey. The Lutheran lieresy having made inroads into Bohemia, he gave a course of sermons at Tepl, in which he gained the hearts of the heretics, and brought many back to the Church.
In 1579 he became prior of Mount Sion Abbey, at Strahov. The abl)ot and he strove, with some suc- cess, to lift the abbey out of the unfortunate state into which it had fallen; but Lohelius was soon called back to Tepl. However, he was in 1583 allowed to resume the office of prior of Strahov.
Lohelius was elected Ablx)t of Strahov in 1586. With him a new era of progress and prosperity dawned on the sorely tried Abl)ey of Strahov. The emperor and the magnates of Bohemia generously assistea him in restoring the church and abbey buildings; the ab- bot-general, John Despruets, named him his vicar- feneral and visitor of the circles of Austria, Bohemia, [ungar}', and Poland. In 1604 he was consecrated Bishop of Sebaste inpartibus, as auxiliary to the Arch- bishop of Prague. During the illness of Archbishop von Lamberg, Paul V created Lohelius coadjutor in May, 1612. At the death of von Lamberg on 18 Sept., 1612, Lohelius became Archbishop of Prague.
