12. The church and the church dogmas.
If only the doctrina present in the Holy Scriptures is justified in the Christian church, as was explained in the previous section, then the question of what church dogmas are and what value they have is already answered in substance. We add a special section on this, because the question of dogmas is a much discussed topic in the church of the present day. Some argue very strongly for an "undogmatic" (creedless) Christianity. They reduce Christianity and the "proper" task of the Christian church to the "social gospel" (the social gospel). The "social gospel" is meant in such a way that the church forgets the "hereafter", including heaven and hell, or lets it recede into the background and instead focuses on the "hereafter", the happiness of mankind in this world. The "Social Gospel" considers "Boston as of equal importance with the New Jerusalem, because it takes, almost literally, the vision of St. John, who saw the ‘New Jerusalem coming down out of heaven’ to occupy this earth."394) Others hold that the Church cannot do well without dogma. But the old dogmas, which have outlived their usefulness, must be replaced by a new dogma, adapted to the present, about which, of course, the proceedings have not yet been concluded. Some have also said that
394) Winchester Donald, The Expansion of Religion, 1896 p. 125. The detailed exposition L. u. W. 1920, p. 270 ff: "The modern theology of this world." Also L. u. W. 1921, pp. 2 ff: "Christianity as an Otherworldly Religion." Here are also the bibliographical references. On the same subject go the doctrinal proceedings of the Michigan District, Report 1919, pp. 44 ff. [Rev. E. Berner]
109 ><w:t>The nature and concept of theology. [English ed. 97]
the old dogmas could very well be retained, only they would have to be "educated" or "liberalized".395)
We will not go further into "undogmatic" Christianity here. It renounces from the outset all church dogmas. If we turn to the other part, which considers dogmas necessary, we stand before the fact that various definitions of church dogma are presented to us.396) In order to point out which dogmas rightly deserve the predicate “church", we start from an insufficient definition. The proposal has been made to call such doctrines ecclesiastical dogmas as "seek or claim church recognition." This definition is much used, but it is insufficient because experience teaches that it is precisely “unchurchly” doctrines that claim recognition with the greatest determination. Some examples prove this. One of Rome's dogmas is that justification before God is not only by faith in the Gospel, but also by keeping the commandments of God and the Church.397) Rome also insists so vigorously on the recognition of this dogma that it pronounces anathema on all who trust in God's mercy in Christ alone, without works of the law, to attain justification before God.398) Nevertheless, this Roman dogma is not churchly, but so unchurchly that it excludes from the church all who believe it. "Ye have lost Christ (κατηργήϑητε άττό Χρίστον), who would be justified by the law, and are fallen from grace." "Those who deal with the works of the law (δσοι εξ έργων νόμον ειαίν) are under the curse."399) Rome also has the dogma of the supremacy and infallibility of the Pope."400) Rome also claims credit for this dogma to the extent that it curses all who
395) For literature on this point, cf. R. Seeberg, "Brauchen wir ein neues Dogma?" 1892; the same, Grundwahrheiten der christlichen Religion, 5 1910, pp. 61 ff; Theodor Kaftan, "Moderne Theologie des alten Glaubens,"2 , 1906; Loofs under "Dogmengeschichte RE.3 IV, 753 ff; Nitzsch-Stephan, Dogmatik, 3, pp. 2 ff. 47 ff; Horst Stephan, Glaubenslehre, 1921, pp. 19 ff.
396) In Scripture, the word occurs both of state and church ordinances, as can be seen in Luke 2:1 and Acts 16:4.
397) Trid. Sess. VI, sau. 10, 11, 12, 20.<w:t>398) A. a. O.
399) Gal. 5:4; 3:10; 4:21-31.
400) Cf. the evidence III, note 1639. In full detail in Günther, Symb.3 , p. 378 f. [sic: 3rd ed. 1898 p. 394; 4th edition 1913, p. 378 f.]. [sic: 3rd ed. 1898 p. 394; 4th edition 1913, p. 378 f.].
110 ><w:t>The nature and concept of theology. [English ed. 98]
reject it.401) Nevertheless, it is not an ecclesiastical dogma, but expressly forbidden in the Christian church, because Christ is the sole ruler and the only teaching authority in his church.402) On Reformed church territory we encounter the dogma of the immediate divine revelation and effect of grace. Dux vel vehiculum Spiritui non est necessarium. "Efficacious grace acts immediately."403) This dogma, too, has striven and continues to strive so vigorously for recognition that the Lutheran doctrine to the contrary is rejected as injurious to the majesty of God and promoting a mere intellectual Christianity (intellectualism).404) Nevertheless, at this point we are not dealing with a church dogma, but with a human conceit, for which there is not even a semblance of Scriptural proof, 405) which rather directly contradicts the διά όγον, διά τον εναγγελίον, εξ άκοής, διά λοντρου παλιγγενεοίας, τω λοντρφ τον νδατος.406) Among the Arminian Reformed and the synergistic Lutherans we meet with the dogma of human cooperation to conversion and salvation. This dogma also urges recognition with no small energy. Its protectors claim that without "limitation" of sola gratia, forced conversion, gratia particularis, and other misfortunes are the necessary consequence.407) Nevertheless, synergism is not a church dogma because Scripture consistently teaches sola gratia.408) The more recent theologians, and indeed even those who are averse to dogmas, while disagreeing greatly in doctrine, advocate with great unanimity the thesis that Christian doctrine is to be drawn and standardized not from Holy Scriptures but from the inward, the "experience," etc., of the theologizing subject. This strange dogma, too, does not appear at all modest, but with the assertion that
401) The Decree of the Vatican Council, reprinted in Günther, op. cit. p. 379. [sic: 3rd ed. 1898 p. 394; ; 4th edition 1913, p. 379 f.; Engelder Popular Symbolics (1934), p. 162].
402) Luke 22:25; Matt. 23:8. 10.
403) Cf. the section "The Means of Grace and the Enthusiasts," III, 150 ff.; also the section "Summary Assessment of the Reformed Means of Grace Doctrine," III, 168 ff.
404) The Representatives of the Reformed Means of Grace on the War Path, III, 192 ff. 150 ff.
405) The Examination of Reformed Scriptural Evidence III, 175 ff.
406) Jn. 17:20; 1 Cor. 4:15; Rom. 10:17; Tit. 3:5; Eph. 5:26.
407) The detailed exposition II, 564-598.
408) Cf. the section "The Causing Cause of Conversion," II, pp. 546 ff.
111 ><w:t>The nature and concept of theology. [English ed. 98-99]
intellectualism, biblicism, dead orthodoxy, etc., would result if Scripture were recognized as an infallible work and used as the only source and norm of Christian doctrine. That this is not an ecclesiastical dogma, but one that overturns the foundation of the Church, has been amply demonstrated in the preceding section. We are therefore dealing with an inadequate definition of "dogma" when a doctrine "claiming ecclesiastical recognition" is placed among the "church dogmas."
In positive exposition it is to be said: Every dogma is ecclesiastical which is drawn from the "textbook" of the Christian church, the Holy Scriptures; and every dogma is unchurchlike which does not have its "arrival" (Luther's expression) from the Scriptures. The factual situation is, as was also explained in detail in the previous section, that the Christian Church has no doctrine of its own at all, but only Christ's doctrines, teaches and confesses. Luther: Ecclesia Dei non habet potestatem condendi ullum articulum fidei, sicut nec ullum unquam condidit, nec condet in perpetuum. To be sure, the Christian Church teaches, confesses, and approves (approbat) articulos fidei seu Scripturas, but not as overlord (more maioris sive auctoritate iudiciali), but as subject (more minoris), like a servant (servus) the seal of his lord.409) And this is true not only of local congregations, but also of all larger church assemblies, synods, councils, etc.410) The question has also been dealt with whether doctrinal determinations which are given in Scripture only in sense, but not in expression, are rightly called church dogmas. In concreto, the question is whether we could address, for example, a dogma of the "Trinity," of "homousia," etc. We will agree with Luther when he says with regard to the όμοούσιος: "It is true that one should not teach anything in divine matters apart from the Scriptures, as St. Hilarius writes, 1. De Trin. This does not mean otherwise than that one should teach nothing else [than the doctrines of Scripture]. But that one should not need more and different words, that cannot be kept, especially in disputes, and when the heretics want to make things wrong with blind grips and turn the words of Scripture upside down; then it was necessary that one put the opinion of Scripture, set with so many passages, into a short and summary word,
409) Opp. V. a. IV. 373. St. L. XIX, 958.
410) Cf. the further exposition under the section Ecclesia Repraesentativa III, 496 ff.
112 ><w:t>The nature and concept of theology. [English ed. 99-100]
and to ask whether they held Christ homousion, as the opinion of the Scriptures is in all words." 411)
What is true of synods and councils and of all large and small church assemblies is of course also true of the individual theologian and his theology and especially of the "dogmatist" and his "dogmatics". The theologians, and especially also the dogmatists, are churchly only in so far as they recognize in principle of only Scripture as the source and norm of theology, and the practical result, the doctrine, is not a mixtum compositum of Scripture doctrine and human thought, but theologia έκτυπος, only reproduction of the doctrine present revealed in Scripture. All merely human teachers, even if they present the doctrine according to Scripture, the theologian and especially also the dogmatist does not use as source and norm of the doctrine, but only as testes veritatis, "as witnesses, in what form after the apostles' time and in what places such doctrine of the prophets and apostles has been preserved."412) The truly Lutheran dogmatists refer this also to the symbols of the Lutheran church; for they confess "first of all to the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments as to the pure, clean fountain of Israel, which alone is the one, true guide by which all teachers and doctrines are to be judged and discerned."413) In passing, a good word is to be said here for "ancient dogmatics." It is fairly commonly asserted that the old Lutheran dogmatists did not set forth their doctrine from Scripture, but used Scripture only as "a collection of proof points" for the ready-made church doctrine. This assertion is historically incorrect and, where it occurs bona fide, is based on ignorance of the facts. In the old dogmatics, as represented by Quenstedt, for example, the Christian doctrine is not only proven by Scripture, but also presented from Scripture. Anyone can convince himself of this who takes the trouble to read up in Quenstedt's Systema Theologicum, in the case of the individual doctrines, the εκϑεσις and ϑέσεως βεβαίωσις. What an incomprehensible thought we are asked to accept in "the whole of Scripture," with which modern theology pro domo struggles and eliminates Scripture as the source and norm of theology, is to be set forth later.
411) St. L. XVI, 2212. Erl. 1 25, 292.
412) Formula of Concord. M. 568, 1. [Trigl. 849, 1 🔗]
413) Formula of Concord. M. 568, 3 [Trigl. 851, 3 🔗].
113 ><w:t>The nature and concept of theology. [English ed. 100-101]
The "ecclesiastical dogma", that is, the doctrine drawn from the Holy Scriptures, is also the factor that preserves the internal coherence between the theological disciplines and secures their theological character, if we divide theology, for example, into dogmatic, historical, exegetical and practical theology. Historical theology is the prowess, wrought by the Holy Spirit, not only to present events with historical accuracy, but also to judge the events and conditions established by documents according to the Holy Scriptures, that is, to place them under God's own judgment, which we possess in the Holy Scriptures. This judgment according to Scripture makes church history a theological discipline. Judging events according to the subjective view of the person engaged in church history or according to some other extra-biblical standard destroys the theological character of church history. A Christian church history tells us "how the dear gospel has fared in the world," as Luther occasionally puts it. Therefore, where things are done properly in the church, the election of a professor of church history is based on the fact that the person to be chosen must be well versed in the doctrine of Scripture in all its parts, so that the teaching of church history will not be confusing, but rather Christianly instructive. The teacher of church history should not aim at "reverence for history", as we recently read, but should, like any specialized theology, convey and strengthen reverence for Word of God. — Exegetical theology is the Holy Spirit-given prowess to hold students to the meaning expressed in the words of Scripture and to point out erroneous expositions as contradictory to text and context. Lest exegesis compromise its theological character, the exegete must hold fast Scriptura Scripturam interpretatur and Scriptura sua luce throughout. All extra-biblical material, whether it concerns language or historical circumstances, must not be decisive in exegesis. This is especially true with regard to historical circumstances. Any exposition is to be rejected which interprets the words of Scripture according to a "historical background" not given in Scripture itself, but taken wholly or in part from contemporary profane writers. All historical background necessary to understand Scripture is given in Scripture itself. This subject is to be taken up again with the teaching of the Holy Scriptures under the section "Scripture and Exegesis". —
114 ><w:t>The nature and concept of theology. [English ed. 101-102]
Practical theology is the ability of the Holy Spirit to practically apply the pure Christian doctrine recognized from the Holy Scriptures in all functions of the public ministry, i.e. in public sermons and in private pastoral care, in the catechetical instruction of young and old, in the government of the congregation, etc. It is obvious how the theological character is quite directly endangered in the practical field as soon as extra-biblical things gain space here.
From this it follows that the theological disciplines cannot be separated from each other. Just as the dogmatist must be at the same time exegete, historian and practical theologian, so also the exegete, historian and practical theologian must be at the same time good dogmatists in the sense that they know the doctrine of Scripture exactly in all its parts. The desire for an "undogmatic" Christianity has been countered by the dictum: "Only dogmatics is edifying." This is quite true if by dogmatics is understood the doctrina divina which is present revealed in Scripture and which alone is to be taught in the Church of Christ. In the Christian Church everything depends on doctrine, as is evident from Christ's general instruction of Matt. 28: "Teach them to observe all that I have commanded you!" Theological teachers as well as practical pastors should never forget this. All theologians who reject the direct communication of "supernatural truths" from Scripture, that is, the doctrine of Scripture, as promoting "intellectualism," thus reveal that they have forgotten what is their office. As for the practical pastors, they should not forget that they have to preach above all doctrines, the divine doctrine found in the Holy Scriptures. Their sermons must be, as we usually express it, "doctrinal sermons." About doctrinal sermons, what they are, how they work and why they are often refrained from, we would like to let Walther have his say. He writes:414) "No matter how rich a sermon may be in exhortations, punishments and consolations, if it is without doctrine, it is an empty, meager sermon, whose exhortations, punishments and consolations float as if in the air. It is impossible to say by how many pastors and how much is sinned in this respect. No sooner has the pastor touched upon his text and subject of teaching than he begins to admonish or rebuke or comfort. His
414) Pastorale, p. 81 f.
115 ><w:t>The nature and concept of theology. [English ed. 102-103]
sermon consists of almost nothing but questions and declamations, beatitudes and woeings, requests to examine and work on the mind and conscience, so that the listener, always touched in mind and conscience, cannot come to any calm reflection. But far from such preaching being particularly heartfelt and bringing about true life, it is rather designed to preach people to death, to kill any hunger they may have for the bread of life, and to methodically cause weariness and disgust with the Word of God. It must be repugnant to every listener if he always sees himself admonished or rebuked, or even comforted without salt, without the foundation having been taken by doctrines. It is, of course, easier to do this extemporaneously in such a way that the sermon nevertheless has the appearance of being lively and powerful than to present a doctrine clearly and thoroughly. And that the latter is easier may be the main reason that some preach so few doctrines that they usually choose such topics themselves, which already presuppose the knowledge of the matter in the listeners and therefore promise only practical application of the subject. In many cases, however, the reason for this is undoubtedly that, because they themselves do not have a thorough knowledge of the revealed doctrines, they are naturally unable to explain them thoroughly to others. Still others, however, may finally do so little doctrine in their sermons because they stand under the delusion that detailed presentations of doctrine are too dry, leave the listeners cold, and do not serve for revival, conversion, and a true living and active Christianity of the heart. But this is a big mistake. It is precisely the eternal thoughts of God's heart revealed to us men for salvation in the Scriptures, precisely these truths, counsels and mysteries of faith, which have been concealed from the world but made known to us through the writings of the prophets and apostles, that are the heavenly seed that must be sown in the hearts of the listeners if the fruit of true repentance, uncolored faith and sincere, active love is to grow in them. True growth of a congregation in Christian character is not possible without sermons rich in thorough doctrines. He who lacks this is not faithful in his office, even though he may, by his constant zealous exhortation, severe punishment, or comforting, which is intended to be especially Evangelical, have the appearance of being consumed with faithful care for the souls entrusted to him."
116 ><w:t>The nature and concept of theology. [English ed. 103]