RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Theology as a Science
than by Schleiermacher, and religious historical investigations will be of great service especially if coupled with religious psychopathology (for the relation of the confessional school of theology to Schleiermacher, cf. F. Kattenbusch, Von Schleiermacher zu Ritschl, 3d ed., Giessen, 1903). In the Erlangen school, the feeling of absolute dependence has been reinterpreted by the thought of " experience " of " regeneration." " Faith " as a special " organ " of the spirit reminds of De Wette. Finally, endeavors to press theology on the path of psychology can appeal to Schleiermacher (cf. W Vorbrodt, Zur Religionspsychologie: Prinzipien und Pathologie, in TSK, 1906, pp. 237 sqq.; W James, Varieties of Religious Experience, New York, 1902; J. O. Scheel, Die Moderne Religionspsychologie, in ZTK, xviii. 1 sqq., 1908; E. W- Mayer, Ueber Religionspsychologie, in the same, pp. 293 sqq.). (2) Over against the mere psychological conception of religion, A. Ritschl's can be conceived as merely historical. Ritschl's idea, however, orients itself not in one's own " feeling " or even " experience," but in a closed revelation, i.e., the objective content of the Gospel or the person of Jesus. With the making of the personal quality of God as strong as possible, there is affirmed a contact of the human spirit with a supramundane reality susceptible of personal experience but never universally demonstrable. Because rationalizing has been avoided, the reproach of idiosyncrasy has had to be met. The absoluteness of Christianity has gained a sharpness which is often conceived as a return of the old " dogmatism." The followers of Ritschl have tried to guard against misunderstanding of his thought (cf. W Herrmann, Die Religion im Verhaltnis zum Welterkennen und zur Sittlichkeit, Halle, 1879; idem, Der Glaube an Gott und die Wissenschaft unserer Zeit, in ZTK, 1905, pp. 1 sqq.; O. Kirn, Glaube und Geschichte, Leipsic, 1900; J. Kaftan, Die Einheit des Erkennens, Tubingen, 1908). (3) For Troltschit is a postulate of historical science to regard even religion as a steadily developing reality. Even Christianity will not be the final form of religion, but only a contribution to its history. The epochs of Christianity are more or less different aspects of it which have to be considered when one discusses its nature (cf. Die Absolutheit des Christentums und die Religionsgeschichte, Tubingen, 1902; idem, Psychologie und Erkenntnistheorie in der Religionserkenntnistheorie, 1905). All religions have an absolutely fixed point in mystical " experiences," but Troltsch attempts no formula for these as did Schleiermacher; to the pious it is a vital certainty of experience, but for others it is in itself irrational and debatable. God's influence on the spirit is always combined with the entire content of the spirit in contemporary culture. Christian theology has three essential tasks: (1) the purely historical psychological reception of Christianity in the frame of its development and of universal religious history; (2) the treatment of its experiences and notions in connection with all elements of the spiritual life, especially with the highest ideals and convictions to be reached in philosophy, therein confirming its right; (3) the thorough blending of its world-view with that of modern science. Troltsch's judgment concerning the Gos-
pel is not supported by an investigation which is due from a theologian. The next task of theology lies in a comprehensive consideration of the Gospel which naturally shall not be partial.
(F. Kattenbusch.)
III. British and American Theology: In Great Britain and America until a recent period Protestant theology followed the Reformation program both in its point of view and in its order of topics. The three doctrinal divisions have
i. Three been the Calvinist, the Arminian, and
Divisions, the Socinian. To whatever school of philosophy theologians belonged, they never doubted that metaphysics was a valid handmaid of theology. For the Calvinists and Arminians the Scriptures were the supreme authoritative source of doctrine and their principles of interpretation were in agreement. A secondary authority, often scarcely less than the first, was attributed to creeds and great names. Among the earlier Soeinians the Scriptures were accepted as authoritative, the difference between them and the Calvinists and Arminians being in the method of interpretation; gradually, however, the Trinitarian and other traditional views came to be regarded as extra-Biblical and greater reliance was placed on the reason as an independent source of religious truth. During the eighteenth century the previous distinction between Socinians and Arminians was obscured and Socinian notions appeared under the general name of " Arminian." During the last century these were again differentiated, the Socinians being gradually identified with the Unitarians and Universalists (qq.v.), the Arminians swinging back into the Evangelical ranks under the lead especially of the Methodist church, and becoming a powerful leaven even in the Calvinist bodies (see Arminians and Arminianism; New England Theology).
Two general characteristics of English and American theology are to be noted: first, lack of thoroughgoing systematizing or strict unfolding of doctrine from an ideal principle. This is due in part to a practical interest; the Anglo-Saxon mind cares less for absolute theoretic consistency than for the pragmatic value of ideas. Secondly, during the last three-quarters of a century perhaps the most quickening and influential contributions to theology have been not the systematic presentations of theologians but suggestions lodged in sermons or embodied in discussion of particular subjects (cf. works by F. W. Robertson, Horace Bushnell, Henry Drummond, John Fiske, and Joseph LeConte).
The past century, like other ages of the Church,
has been a transitional one. Many endeavors have
been made to unite the old and the new in varying
proportions in one presentation. Some
2. Tend- have indeed continued steadfastly in
encies in the traditional paths, making the least Dogmatics, possible concessions to modern thought and with only a polemic interest in its conclusions (C. Hodge, Systematic Theology, Philadelphia, 1865; W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, New York, 1888) . Others, although yielding a modified assent to evolution, to the sufficiency but not the inerrant infallibility of the Scriptures, and to some form of divine immanence, still represent
Theology as a Science Theology, Moral