THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
others continued in the steps of Daub and Marheineke, the Hegehan left threateniKl in Strauss (Christlichc Glaubenslehrc , 1840) to dissolve the Christian views, but the Hegelians Biedermann and Pfleiderer opposed him. Kant influenced anew Lipsius and, above all, A. Ritschl. 6. Bitscbl. Kaftan, a follower of Ritschl (cf. his Wesen der christlichen Religion, 1881), was also attracted by the positivism of Comte. Ritschl has been since Schleiermacher the most effective factor in the development of dogmatics. His basal characteristic is his emphasis upon the ethical, upon the will, as against the metaphysical. At the same time Christianity as the only true religion is expressly derived from revelation, from the objective manifestation of God and his will in the person of Christ. All " mysticism " is abhorred. It can not be known in what inner relation of life and essence Christ stood to God, though by virtue of his work as revealer he may also be called " God." The conception of the kingdom of God reminds of Kant, as also the peculiar dogmatic juxtaposition of the kingdom of God and redemption as two foci of an ellipse. Ritschl never built his dogmatic ideas into a complete and homogeneous system. Among his pupils the chief progress was made in the direction of a decided recognition of the immediacy of the Christian experience; especially in Herrmann who, though in a lesser measure than Kaftan, makes room for mysticism. The school has developed opposing parties (cf. G. Ecke's Die theologische Schule A. Ritschls, Berlin, 1897).
With reference to their attitude to the Biblicoecclesiastical body of doctrines modern dogmatists may be divided into two classes, the more conservative and the more radically critical, though the line of division can not be sharply drawn. Prominent among the former are K. F 7. Con- Nitzsch (System der christlichen Lehre, servative 1529^ ^hich also embraces ethics); School jyjj^g (tiiough he pubhshed no
Modern dogmatics); H. Voigt (Fundamental- Dogma- dogmatik, 1874); Rothe, more specticians. ulative, though not basing the convictions of faith upon speculation {Zur Dogmatik, 1863, which makes the science a historical critical discipline); J. P. Lange (Christliche Dogmatik, 1849-52, more suggestive and fantastic than strictly philosophic); Martensen {Christlichc Dogmatik, 1850, mystical, more attractive than acute); I. A. Dorner (System der christlichen Glaubenslehre, 1879, 1886, among other peculiarities a basing of the certitude of faith upon an inner immediate perception); Runze (Grundriss der evangelischen Glaubens- und Sittenlehre, 1883); and H. Plitt (Evangelische Dogmatik nach Schrift und Erfahrung, 1863). In connection with the Biblicist Beck already mentioned stand his fellow countrymen Reiff (Christlichc Glaubenslehre ah Grundlage der christlichen Weltanschauung, 1873- 1876) and W Gess (Christ i Person ^indWerk, 1870- 1887). In North Germany this tendency is best seen in fVcmer (DogmcUisrhe Prinzipienlehre, in Zockler's Handbuch der theologischen Wissenschaften, iii., Nordlingen, 1885) and Zockler, whose academic labors, however, pertain more to history than dog-
matics (System dor Glaubenslehre, in the same volume, a scientific reproduction of the doctrine of the Lutheran Church). Here, too, belong M. Kaehler (Wissenschaft der christlichen Lehre, 1883, 1893, a concise systematic treatment of the Christian doctrines as the content of the self-evidencing Biblical revelation), W Schmidt (Christliche Dogmatik, 1895-98), and F. A. B. Nitzsch (Lehrbuch der evangelischen Dogmatik, 1892, 1896; critical yet conservative). Of all these only Lange belonged to the Reformed Church. To this same confession belonged Ebrard (Christliche Dogmatik, 1852), who, however, took an independent attitude toward confessional differences. This is even more the case with Bohl (Dogmatik auf reformiert kirchlicher Grundlage, 1887). Specifically Lutheran and specifically polemic against the Reformed theology and against the Union are Philippi (Kirchliche Glaubenslehre, 1854 sqq. ), Vilmar, Thomasius (Christi Person und Werk, Darstellung der evangelischlutherischen Dogmatik, 1852 sqq.), Luthardt (Kompendium, 1865), Kahnis (Die lutherische Dogmatik historisch-genetisch dargestellt, 1861-68; 1874), F. H. R. Frank (System der christlichen Gewissheit, 1872; System der christlichen Wahrheit, 1878-81, 1885). At the same time Thomasius and the rest of this group have no hesitation in departing from the Lutheran orthodoxy; Gess, e.g., in respect to kenosis, Kahnis in trinitarian subordinationism and in an approximately Reformed view of the Lord's Supper; and least of all does A. von Oetlingen in his Prinzipienlehre (1897) reproduce Lutheranism in the sense of the old orthodoxy.
In the other more critical group — though its members are not to be charged offhand with the guilt of a " negative criticism " — • 8. The stands the Reformed theologian A. R^d^jal ^'''^^^i^^i' (Christliche Glaubenslehre School of ^'^'^^ protestantischen Grundsdtzen, Modern 1863-72, 1877, to be distinguished Dogma- from his Glaubenslehre der evangelischticians. rejormierten Kirche, 1844-47). Schenkel in his Christliche Dogmatik vom Standpunkte des Gewissens aus dargestellt (1859) does not clearly show the difference between his " conscience " and Schleiermacher's pious " selfconsciousness." His Grundlehren des Christentums (1877) is more rationalistic. Close to De Wette stands Hase, more eminent in historical theology than in dogmatics (Evangelische Dogmatik, 1826, 1870). Against Strauss and in behalf of Hegelianism labored Biedermann (Dogmatik, 1869) and Pfleiderer (Grundriss, 1880, 1886), although the former abandoned Hegel's attempt to deduce the content of truth from thought itself. Lipsius (Lehrbuch der evangelischen protestantischen Dogmatik, 1876, 1893) rejects the Hegelian claim of a dialectic knowledge of the absolute, and also the validity of the church doctrines; but as against Ritschl's protest against metaphysics he regards some declarations about God and supramundane realities as possible and necessary, and goes back to self-consciousness and the immediacy of the mystic elements in religion and faith. At first sight, indeed, the content of the faith of the Church thus seems seriously threatened; but he shows an