THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
and confesses to have been derived from divine revelation. Its content, accordingly, embraces all Christian truth so far as it exists in 4. Dogr- the Church in the form of doctrine; or matics, ^j^g ^ijole doctrine of the life in God, as it is mediated by Christ — of the re- '^and^ lation in general in which we and all Content, world about us stand to God;
of the relation which subsists between him and us by virtue of sin; of redemption and real communion with God effected by Christ, and of the nature of this God who determines us for his fellowship; of the person and efficacy of the Redeemer, Christ, and of the future acts of God which are to" bring about the perfection of that life for humanity and the world. To this content, however, belong also the basal declarations concerning the aims and tasks which are set for us by virtue of the vocation given by God, concerning the ethical attitude of soul that God demands of us and that fits those living in God— in general, the truths concerning the ethical and the ethically good. To this discipline, therefore, belongs, as a subject for scientific treatment, that whole domain which the catechism treats in a non-scientific fashion. It is, however, usual in present terminology to make a fundamental distinction between dogmatics and ethics; the former pertains to God and the relation in which he places himself toward us, to the redemptive facts and the ordo salutis appointed by him, and to the future completion promised by him; whereas ethics pertains to one's own personal relation, that is to say, the relation of one's will to God and his requirements of us. The name theologica dogmatica, or " dogmatics," arose only after this division of the sciences had begun — after the middle of the seventeenth and especially after the first half of the eighteenth century — in harmony with the more definite sense that then prevailed of the distinction between the science of dogmas and that of ethics or morals. Schleiermacher gave his influence in behalf of the term Glaubenslehre. [The term Glauhenslehre, however, implies that the basis of authority has been changed from an objective to a subjective source, i.e., the Christian consciousness, the characteristic of which is faith.]
But the conception and task of dogmatics must be still more precisely fixed in an essential particular in accordance with the prevailing usage of the term. If it is the task of the dogmatist to set forth that which according to the conviction of a religious body constitutes religious truth and is recognized as such by it, it might still be possible to leave out of account the dogmatist's personal 5. The faith or conception of truth. But the Indi- Christian Church demands that its
vidual Element
dogmatists shall give only such reprein Hog- mentations of its faith as can serve for matics. the further proclamation of Christian truth. Such a task, however, can be performed only by one who agrees with the faith of the congregation and shares its religious life. " Christian dogmatics," therefore, commonly means specifically such a treatment as purports to set forth what is religious truth not only for a Church,
but also for the writer. Accordingly, it can not properly be subsumed under "historical theology" (as is the case in Schleiermacher, although in Der Christliche Glaube he aimed not only at " a historical, but at the same time at an apologetic " treatment). But taking the term in the stricter sense, the question may still be raised, whether the dogmatist, while standing with conviction for the doctrinal views of his Church, may not and should not at the same *ime labor for a development and purification of the church doctrine. The answer will depend upon the double question, how far a Christian Church can find itself justified in the opinion that it has already completely appropriated and developed the truth, and how far its individual members are bound to ascertain and express the truth of religion independently; or, as Roman Catholicism requires, to submit to the authority of the Church. Thus it is possible for a dogmatist, besides reproducing the doctrines of his Church's symbols, to exhibit that which actually constitutes at a given time the content of the Church's faith. [For an able and satisfactory discussion of this subject, setting forth the Christian Church as the " subject " of dogmatics, but not the faith of the Church as the " object " of dogmatics, see A. Kuyper, Encyclopcedia of Sacred Theology (Eng. transl., by J. H. de Vries, London, 1898).] Again, the question may be asked at the outset, whether dogmatics in the sense of declarations of doctrinal truths belongs to Christi- 6. Dog- anityat all; and, in particular, whether mas Es- ^ ^^^^ must be still maintained.
Chris answer be negative, dogmatics
tianity. continues to have justification only as a historic science; that is, no longer as an exhibition of the actual faith of the Church, but only as the exhibition of that which Christian Churches once upon a time established and think they must to a large extent still maintain. The question has become a pressing one only in recent years. It is indisputable that the words of Jesus and his apostles aimed to present with special emphasis objective truths concerning God, the Redeemer, the way of salvation, etc.; to have them apprehfended by the religious subjects by reason of the influence upon the inner life; and upon the basis of this apprehension to build up a Church and plant new life. What a summary of such truth is to be found even in the simple testimony that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, and that in his name there is salvation and life. The Roman Catholic and old Protestant orthodoxy had no doubt about the right and obligation to formulate what it recognized as the content of divine revelation into declarations and confessions of faith and doctrinal propositions, and claimed for them unconditional validity. The old rationalism demanded the right of freely criticizing at all times the doctrinal deliverances the Church had sanctioned, and challenged also the supernatural character of the Biblical revelation. But it, too, admitted that the perception and recognition of objective truths belongs to the very essence of religion, and of Christianity in particular; that at least certain basal truths concerning God, man, and the world must,