CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY
Pleroma and Christology HAROLD A. MERKLINGER
The Relationship Between Dogmatics and Ethics in the Thought of Elert, Barth, and Troeltsch EDWARD H. SCHROEDER
A Checklist of Luther's Writings in English GEORGE S. ROBBERT
Homiletics Brief Studies Book Review
Vol XXXVI December 1965 No. 11 The Relationship Between Dogmatics and Ethics In the Thought of Elert, Barth, and Troelt sch
EDWARD H. SCHROEDER
INTRODUCTION espoused against Lutheran theologoumena) concern for dogmatics and a concern led him to say "no" to any independent A for ethics do not always go together. ethics and "yes" only to a Kirchliche Dog The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, matik. Some of the intellectual roots of for example, has always had a strong dog Troeltsch's answer ("yes" to ethics and matic tradition, but has in general been ethical Christianity, but little interest in uninterested in what is commonly called dogmatics) lie in his acknowledged kin ethics. But this is the opposite of the ship with the "left wing" of the Reforma situation in many other American de tion. Troeltsch's position - nondogmatic, nominations. To put the problem into a antiauthoritarian, ethically conscious Chris broader perspective, what is the relation tianity - has typified large segments of ship between dogmatics and ethics? American Christianity. A helpful approach is to study the dis WERNER ELERT 1 tinctive answers given by Werner Elert, Karl Barth, and Ernst Troeltsch, which PRELIMINARY DEFINITIONS prove to be distinctive not only because Elert carefully defines the four key con their personal theological convictions differ, cepts - dogmatics, ethics, dogma, and but also because they reflect quite clearly ethos. Dogmatics and ethics are separate the three major traditions which they theological sciences. They are separate be openly espoused: Lutheran, Reformed, and cause they investigate two different sub Enthusiastic-Spiritualist Christianity. ject matters, dogma and ethos. They are Elert's Lutheranism led him to say yes scientific in the same sense that other to both a separate dogmatics and a sepa rate ethics based on a specific understand 1 Werner Elert, a Lutheran theologian, was born Aug. 19, 1885, in Heldrungen, Sax ing of their relation to each other, and in ony, and died Nov. 21, 1954. Following his his lifetime he wrote one of each. Barth's education at the universities of Breslau, Erlan gen, and Leipzig (1906-1912) , he served as Reformed heritage ( often consciously pastor at Seefeld in Pomerania (1912-1919), director of the Lutheran Seminary at Breslau Edward H. Schroeder is associate professor (1919-1923), and Professor Ordinarius at Erlangen (1923-1954) . Among his chief at Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, Ind. works are Morphologie des Luthertums, 2 vols. This article is a condensation of a doctoral (1931-1932, Eng. [Vol. I]: The Structure of thesis which the author submitted to the Lutheranism, 1962) ; Der christliche Glaube theological faculty of the University of Ham (1940); and Das christliche Ethos (1949, Eng.: burg, July 1963. The Christian Ethos, 1957). 744 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 745 intellectual disciplines are scientific, as a formulations as "confessions," they are al critical (in the sense of kfisis - making ready indicating that the authority of the judgments) process of asking and answer confessions is secondary, for confessions ing the question of the "sufficient grounds" are responses to something prior and they (zufeichender Grund) for any subject also indicate that they are freely given. matter. All sciences - theological and The confessions are not coerced, but they nontheological - do this with their spe are the personal convictions and commit cific subject matters. Dogmatics does this ment of the confessors. The authority of with Christian dogma; ethics does this with the dogma does not consist in coercion the Christian ethos. The disciplines of dog to believe something but in the binding matics and ethics are separate and distinct obligation and commitment to preach and because dogma and ethos are distinct enti teach something. Neither the confessions ties. What is Christian dogma? It is "the nor the ancient dogmas preceding them required content of the kerygma" (Soll are original, nor is their obligating au gehalt des Kerygmas), the necessary mini thority primary. It is all derivative obliga mum - and maXimlu.11 - content of the tion. The original is the Gospel itself - kerygma required to keep it what it was or even the Gospel "Himself." The originally intended to be. What is Chris derivative dogma and are "con tian ethos? Ethos is a qualitative ~ __ bel. fessions to the C __ ..- ~t" 2 Christian ethos is that quality which a In seeking the sufficient grounds of this person has by virtue of God's own verdict. dogma, dogmatics is forced back behind Dogma is neither what you have to the confessions and into the Bible in order believe (C'fedetlda) nor what you have to to formulate the Sollgehalt of the kerygma. teach (docenda) , but what has to be Just because it is in the Bible is not "suffi preached (praedicanda) if the proclama cient grounds" for its being in the tion is to be Christian. The opposite of authorized praedicanda.3 Thus the dogma dogma is heresy - that which must not be tician himself must listen to the kerygma. preached under the guise of Christian This does not mean listening to the church, proclamation. In this sense dogma is also but to the Christ and the canonical books the maximum necessary content of the to which the church itself listens. The kerygma. The authoritarian connotations centrality of Christ's own person is that implicit in dogma are not derivative from He is the one absolute point, the irre the church but from the kerygma itself placeable center, in all the canonical docu which first brought the church into ex ments. He is both "the authorizer as well istence. In working with the basic ques as the content of the church's kerygma tion of dogmatics (What are the sufficient grounds for the church's dogma? What is 2 Werner Elert, Der Christliche Glattbe. the minimum required content of the Grundlinien der L1ttherischet~ Dogmatik, 4th kerygma, and why must this be so?) the ed. (Berlin: Furche-Verlag, 1940), pp. 3 Sf. Hereafter cited as GZalJbe. question of authority, at least in the sense 3 A favorite illustration of this fOf Elert is of authorization, is inevitable. the passage in Jude 9 about Michael and Satan When Christians refer to their dogmatic arguing over the body of Moses. Ibid., p.261. 746 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS since in him the formal and the material distinction and connection between the 'Sollen' of the proclamation coincide." 4 disciplines of dogmatics and ethics in However, when one gets all the way Elert's thought is easy to follow. Ethics is back to Christ as the necessary required basically theological anthropology. Dog content of the kerygma, then it is no longer matics is in the narrow sense thea-logy, Christ's own authority which stands be the sufficient grounds for what God Him hind the requirement (S ollen ). "But the self authorizes as the necessary core of His obligatory character of this Sollen, since own kerygmatic word. The fact that these it issues from Christ, is rendered even more two distinct disciplines are traditionally obligatory because it is perceived to be subsumed under "systematic theology" is a Sollen from God Himself. Here is the largely a formal consideration, the product ultimate and most profound point where of 19th-century intellectual history, and dogmatics must begin. Here and here not grounded in a material unity of both alone one can seek and find sufficient within the same "system" as this was un ground for the required content of the derstood under the hegemony of idealistic kerygma which is the church's dogma." 5 philosophy.6 For Elert their different sub The sufficient grounds of the church's ject matter makes such a "systematic" dogma has to be "Thus says the Lord." - treatment inappropriate. If some short God Himself authorizes this kerygma with hand description of their relationship need precisely this required minimum content. be given, it is not credendal agenda nor In defining ethics and its subject mat docendal agenda but doctrinal qualitas. ter, the Christian ethos, Elert says that The subject matter of the disciplines ethos is not descriptive of what Christians does, however, give them some common do, nor is it the prescriptions which they ground. 1) Both presuppose God's au seek to follow. It is not the corresponding thority to make judgments, as does all the agenda (what you must do) to the cre ology. In fact, in this way any discipline denda, which Elert has already rejected as becomes a theological one when God's ad the valid notion of dogma. Although the dress to men becomes audible in it. 2) Both Christian ethos is normative, it is not are dependent on Scriptures; however, not normative in terms of the laws that guide for the doctrinal statements of dogmatics one's daily life. Ethos is the quality, the nor for the moral regulations of ethics but value, which man has by virtue of God's rather for the content of the kerygma and verdict upon him. Therefore the central for the source of the ethos. 3) By virtue of task of theological ethics is the question their subject matter, both have a common of the sufficient grounds of the divine foundation in Christ Himself. 4) Both also judgment - what is it and how can we have contact with the same keryma, though ascertain the quality of the divine judg 6 An example of this is Theodor Haering, ment? whose systematic theology was centered on the With these definitions in mind, the principle of the kingdom of God. In his syste matics, then, dogmatics demonstrates how the principle becomes a personal quality for man, 4 Ibid., p. 51. and ethics demonstrates how t!"te Kingdom may 5 Ibid., p.52. be realized. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 747 in different ways. Apart from the kerygma God's revelation. Law/Gospel on the one of the church, of which dogma represents hand indicates the wrath/grace dialectic the mandatory content, there can be no in God Himself and on the other the Christian ethos. sin/faith dialectic in man. The dialectic In this sense "kerygma and ethos stand of Christian theology is not God vs. man, in the same relation to each other as cause but wrath/sin vs. mercy/faith, two anti and effect." 7 The dogma in dogmatics de thetical relationships. lineates what has to be preached, the Chris However, the revelations of God's wrath tian ethos of ethics is the quality of a man's and grace and the correlative revelations life that comes with his hearing and be of man's sin and faith are not the uncover lieving the kerygma. But the cause/effect ing of secrets, nor the transmission of previ- relationship is not automatic. The Chris 0usly unknown information, but the creation tian ethos is not the necessary consequence of a reality. Elert calls it the Geltung (to which must follow in a man when he has be paraphrased as "validity" in spite of ap encountered the kerygma. Instead Elert's parent paradoxes) of both Law and Gos emphasis is that when God's verdict about pel, God putting a particular word of His a man changes and thereby that man's into effect. Therefore the Law and Gospel quality and worth also change, it is because tension cannot be resolved by subsuming the man has come in coworj" m;t-h the the terminolog:, M
anthropological qualities of these judg Christ's ministry is the special effort which ments of God. brought it into existence, and subsequently This includes considering under the where it is not proclaimed by Christ's legal ethos such questions as creature people in correspondingly "special efforts," hood, existence, responsibility, guilt, in it is not present and operative. But God dividuality, and relationships with others really does want this, His last and final in the created orders. In the ethos of word, revealed to men. Therefore He has grace there arise the questions of the role instituted the church for this role of of Christ, the tangibility and empirical ambassadorial communication. (2 Cor. perceptibility of the new quality, the 5:19f.) dilemma of the two qualities in one man, As God's ambassador the church does the change with respect to the old ethos, not function "creatively" in producing her the new elements of the new ethos, etc. message, but she passes on what she has After these two major units Elert un been commissioned to speak by Him who expectedly adds a third part called "objec authorized her. Not only in her life but tive Ethos." The term "objective" here is also in her message, the church is "follow used in contrast to the "subjective" indi ing after" (Nachfolge). She speaks God's vidualized ethos of Parts I and II. Elert's Word after Him so that her theology is section on "Objective Ethos" considers the not her word about God, but her com church as a whole, the community which munication of God's Word about Himself. is "still something other than the sum The church does not communicate how she "feels" about God, but she announces total of all Christians." 19 The community as a whole is also subject to the judgment God' s Word about Himself and about how of God. In this section Elert says "the Lu He "feels" toward man. The unveiling of theran character of this ethics becomes God always results in an unveiling of man. apparent," and he expects that it will "In executing the ambassadorial role, be "unacceptable to other Protestant however, the church is not simply "on her groups."20 own." God is personally present in the church, His church, supervising the work CONSEQUENCES FOR THE CHARACTER the church does for Him. This personal OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY presence is the Spirit. The Spirit functions Since the Law will be operative even as the "plant director" for the church's if it is not proclaimed, God does not operation. Consequently the church's the "need" the church to get this word of His ology comes under the jurisdiction of the communicated. The wrath of God and His Third Article. The Third Article tells the justice upon the sinner happen "naturally." theologian about His place and work. The But the Gospel does not happen "naturally." Spirit (Paraclete) with His paraklesis is It is not operative except by special effort. the presupposition and the subject matter for the theologian. "Being touched by the 19 Ibid., p. 19. Evangel . . . is a prerequisite for theo 20 Ibid. logical thinking. . . . It is theological THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 751 thinking only if it is thinking the evan Dogmatics is concerned with the "that" gelical speech of the Paraclete after him." 21 (Dass) and the "what" (Was) of the The Spirit is God Himself present in divine speech. Ethics is concerned with the church promoting God's own Gospel. the actual "quality" that a human life takes This is the paraklesis of the Paraclete. In on when the man is the recipient of that speaking the paraklesis of the Spirit "after particular divine speech. Him," the theologian must remember that Elert calls the relation between dogma his subject matter is paraklesis. It is not and ethos the relation between cause and merely divine information. As paraklesis effect. The essential Gospel content of his subject matter is essentially exhorta the church's kerygma produces in the man tion, and if the theologian is to handle it who trusts it the new descriptive qualifica scientifically, he will have to do justice tion "forgiven sinner." The essential con to its "paracletic" character and not tent of the other message, Law, whether smother that which makes it most distinct. consciously perceived or not, produces the According to this perspective if the theo equally genuine qualification smner. logian no longer is handling the pataklesis Dogmatics investigates what God says men of the Spirit, he is no longer engaged in are, together with the need, the grounds, Christian theology. and the urgency of the communication. It is a science ori... .1ted to and focused on CONSEQUENCES FOR DOGMATICS the kerygma, past and present. Ethics, on AND ETHICS the other hand, investigates what men are In Elen's mind dogmatics is the science by virtue of that proclamation. It is investigating the Sollgehalt of the church's oriented toward the man who is the object proclamation. By virtue of her ambassa of the proclamation, describing what hap dorial role, the church's kerygma is God's pens "qualitatively" to him and in him. kerygma. Consequently the dogmatician One might ask whether the common in reflecting (Nachdenken) on his subject focus on Law and Gospel might not estab matter is not reflecting initially on his own lish some common bond between dog faith in God, his "verdict" about God, but matics and ethics, in addition to the cause he is reflecting on God's own "self-reflec and-effect connection already mentioned. tion" about him, the dogmatician, as this The answer is obviously "yes," but not in is communicated in God's kerygma. One the sense that we could assign either Law might still call this "faith's self-reflection," or Gospel to one or the other discipline. if faith were clearly defined as "receiving Insofar as both Law and Gospel are God's God's verdict about man." 22 speech, both belong in dogmatics. Insofar The church's proclamation of God's as both have an operative effect on people message is distinct from the "quality of qualifying their actual existence, both be man" which results from that message, long in ethics. For BIen, the common con whether the message is Law or Gospel. cern with Law and Gospel is the common concern of all theology - historical, exegeti 21 Elert, Glattbe, p. 199. cal, practical, etc. In fact, what makes any 22 Ibid., p. 226. history, any philology, any systematics, theo- 752 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS logical is that God's verdicts are being be Christ is to "let the Law be Law." The heard in, with, and under it, and there are Law dare not be "evangelized." Only only two verdicts from God, judgment and Christ has taken the sting and strength grace, Law and Gospel. Tertium non datur. out of the law with His death. Any There is another way to see how Elert's attempt to manipulate the Law into some understanding of Law and Gospel leads to sort of merger with the Gospel is finally his distinction between the disciplines of a vote of "no con.6.dence" in Christ. In dogmatics and ethics. One can approach his monograph on Law and Gospel, Elert this by asking for the sufficie1Zt reason be speaks precisely in this fashion when he hind the Lutheran passion for the radical criticizes the peaceful coexistence of Law distinction of Law and Gospel. The suffi and Gospel in Calvin's theology. He says: cient grounds for this distinction are not "Thereby the Law is actually disarmed ... Biblidstic ("That is the way it is in the which carries with it the consequence that Bible"), nor traditional ("That has always the Gospel also is similarly reduced 10 been the Lutheran position"), but soterio power." 24 logical and pastoral. The Lutheran Con To keep the Gospel distinctive and to fessions, to which Elert is admittedly let Christ be Christ for people is the suffi committed, criticize the "mixing" of Law cient grounds for inSIsting on the dis and Gospel in medieval Roman theology tinction betvveen La J and Gospel. The on precisely such soteriological and pas serious heresies in the history of the church toral grounds, which eventually become have been those aimed at the distinctive christological and doxological. The con ness of the Gospel. One way of seeing fessions call for keeping Law and Gospel that Elert's separation of dogmatics and distinct, because if they are mixed the re ethics into distinct disciplines stems from sults are: a concern for keeping the Gospel distinc 1) the merits and benefits of Christ are tive is to examine the anti-Donatist and reduced, and Christ is dis-graced; anti-Pelagian motifs inherent in the sepa 2) the gift character of the Gospel is ration. turned into performance-demanding THE ANTI-DONATIST MOTIF IN Law; and SEPARATING DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 3) disturbed sinners are robbed of the Elert's anti-Donatist position on the genuine comfort which God wants nature of the church is centrally involved them to have.23 in his division between dogmatics and Law and Gospel must be kept distinct ethics. It is a distinctive characteristic of from each other for the sake of the Gos his ecclesiology that "the church is not pel, for Christ's sake. It is not enough for dependent upon the ethos of men," 25 as Christian theology to insist, "Let God be the Donatists maintained. This means that God." It must also insist, "Let Christ Be the empirical ethos of the proclaimer, in- Christ." The corollary to letting Christ 24 Elert, Zwischen Gnade und Ungnade, p.168. 23 Cf. Apology to the Augsburg Confession IV, 18, 81,110,120,150,157,204£. 25 Elert, Glaube, p. 400. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 753 cluding his "faith," or the empirical ethos is the quality of man under God's judg of the person addressed do not add to nor ment as factual reality. The ethical inquiry detract from the content of the message. into the nature of Christ is the question Such-and-such is the content of the of His importance for God's judgment of church's message simply because God says men or - and this definition amounts to so. This is so even if no one in the world the same thing - it is the question about believed it and even if no one's ethos even the quality of man. The purpose of its suggested it. This applies both to man's inquiry is not the formulation of a correct ethos under law where the empirical be Christology;out the elaboration of the fact havior of a man might be so "good" that that the Christ-encounter endows human it would suggest that this man cannot be ethos with a new quality [,If any man is a sinner, and also to man's ethos under in Christ... .'}" 27 grace, where a Christian's empirical be The anti-Donatist stance asserts that havior might be so "bad" that it would a man's faith is ethos, not dogma. Thereby suggest that this man cannot be a saint. from another angle the proposed credenda/ Ethics "portrays man as God perceives agenda scheme for dogmatics/ethics is in him." 26 Insofar as this theological an validated. This credenda/agenda scheme thropology is part of the necessary con views dogmatics as concerned with God tent of the kerygma, it, too, will appear man relationships and ethics as concerned in dogmatics. But the extent of the ethos with man-man relationships. But this is of the earthen "vessel" does not affect the invalid since the man who exists in either nature, extent, or genuineness of the of the two possible God-man relationships "treasure." (Law or Gospel) is always at the same In terms of his favorite passage (2 Cor. time already in a multitude of man-to-man 5), Elert might well have said that dog relationships, and his actual ethos is mani matics is concerned with the "God was fested in both his relationship to God and in Christ reconciling the world. . . . Be his relationships to other men. The quality reconciled to God" (Bericht and Anrede) , of his ethos (either under Law or under while ethics is concerned with the "If any the Gospel) includes his "attitude" and one is in Christ, he is a new creation." actions toward God as well as his attitude When Elert discusses the role of each dis and actions toward his human fellows. cipline in connection with Christ, his re Ethics treats the quality of human life marks tend in this direction. He says that as it is lived. Under the Law it is life lived both dogmatics and ethics address them for ourselves, in rebellion against God and selves to the same question: Who is in enmity against our neighbor. Under the Christ? "But there are differences. Dogma Gospel, "precisely by virtue of the re is doctrine. When dogmatics raises the demption we live our earthly life in free question 'Who is Christ?' it seeks to un dom for others. To make this clear is the derstand what the church teaches concern task of theological ethics." 28 Since "faith" ing him ['God was in Christ... :} Ethics 27 Ibid., p. 177.
26 Elert, Ethos, p. 7. 28 Elert, Glaube, p.514. 754 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS towards God is one quality of man's life become a sinner or a forgiven sinner by when he is under the Gospel, and unfaith producing, achieving, capturing, learning, or sin the corresponding quality of life or being taught the qualities. The work under the Law, both of these concepts be of God, God's verdict, creates the qualities. long primarily in ethics and not in dog In the dogma, the core content of the matics, For in the Sollgehalt of the kerygma, we hear what God's creative kerygma there is no section on either work is and, insofar as He has revealed "faith" or "sin," even though it is ad this, why He is doing it. Ethos is the an dressed to sinners and produces the faith thropological manifestations of that work ful. Elert is true to this formal commit of God. It is the concrete theologically ment in that he does not have a section "tangible" life that really follows ( Gel devoted to either sin or faith in his dog tung) from this work of God. matics, despite its title, Der Christliche There is no absolute break between dog Glaube, but he does have a chapter on each matics and ethics, since the revelation of in his ethics. The content of the word ( s ) what God is (OfJenbarung Gottes) is al of God as treated by dogmatics is Law or ways correlative to the manifestation of Gospel; the consequence, the realm of what man is (OfJenbarung des Menschen) . ethics, is unfaith and its sinful manifesta Nor does Eien posit any absolute dichot tions or faith and its faithful manifes omy. As we noted above, he sees their tations. The church lives and grows by common ground at several points. His virtue of what God says, and not by virtue basic assertion is that they cannot be of the ethos of her people. To contradict joined together in one and the same this is to affirm Donatism. system. Faith and works, of course, are joined in one and the same Christian, just THE ANTI-PELAGIAN MOTIF IN as unfaith and its works are joined in one SEPARATING DOGMATICS AND ETHICS and the same unforgiven sinner. But Dogmatics concentrates on the core con dogma cannot be coupled with ethos for tent of the church's kerygma as it is this reason. This is especially so because preached and taught. Although one can ethos is never empirically clear and defi teach the core content of the kerygma, one nite, but always partially hidden, whereas cannot teach the subject matter of ethics. what God says about Himself and me in Ethos as a quality is not taught, it is pro Christ (dogma) is clear and must be clear duced by God revealing His Law and His if faith is to exist at all. For faith is al Gospel. It cannot be produced even by ways faith in that message and never faith teaching people what ethos is, what quality in the qualities I have learned to produce they would have if they believed, or what or even such as I see God producing quality they will have if they do not. As in me. Luther's apple tree bore apples because Elen seeks to keep the disciplines sepa it was an apple tree and not because it rate not because he wants an "independent had been taught to do so, so man's life has ethic" which will allow for the autonomy specific qualities because he is either a (Eigengesetzlichkeit) of the orders of sinner or a forgiven sinner. He does not creation free from any specific dogmatico- THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 755 theological connections (the charge fre SUMMARY quently made against the Lutheran tra The "sovereignty and certainty" of the dition) , but because he wants to Christian church is to be found in her preserve faith in Christ from every relationship to the Gospel. The greatest nomism inimical to this life-center of "danzer" to the Gosne! is the Law. One Christianity. In short, it is an anti-Pela form~ of the "dang;r" is "pre-Christian gian motif that comes to the fore here. minimalization" of the law. It occurs in Elert wants to demonstrate formally that the non-Christian naturally, and the situa materially it is "the Gospel of Christ" tion is made worse when the church in its which solves man's personal theological preaching to him concurs with him in the problem, justificatio coram deo, and not the minimalization of it, so that he does not Gospel plus human qualities. hear its radical call to him to justify him Christian ethos is the actualization of self before God. Or, on the other hand, God's verdict about man. But this actuali he hears it but not in its radical condem zation is not the grounds of the church's nation; therefore he believes that he has kerygma. This is true in the anti-Donatist succeeded in justifying himself coram deo sense: the validity of the kerygma does not but without the Gospel. Another form of depend on the ethos of the keryx. It is the "danger" of the Law is "post-Christian also true in the anti-Pelagian sense: the maximalization." This happens in the ethos of the recipient does not determine third use of the law (tertius usus) or any the truthfulness of God's verdict about similar attempts to rehabilitate the Law him. What God says, however, regardless into some combination with the Gospel of the extent of its actualization in empiri for the Christian.s1 Both simations are cal ethos, is the ground of the kerygma. instances of mixing dogmatics and ethics. Therefore "everything that dogmatics has Elen's separation of dogmatics and to say wishes to be understood as coming ethics into relative independence from from God," 29 if for no other reason than each other is thus related to (though not to keep the Gospel as Gospel, that is, God's identical with) his basic and central dis good Word to men who do not have a tinction between Law and Gospel. very godly ethos.so Man has a theological ethos apart from 29 Ibid., p. 398. the Gospel. It is the ethos of a sinner. 30 The operation of these anti-Donatist and Although there is a theological ethos apart anti-Pelagian intentions can be seen in two of from the Gospel, there is no dogma apart Elect's arch-Lutheran theologoumena, (1) his opposition to any form of the tertius usus legis from the Gospel, since without the Gospel in "subjective ethos" and (2) his ecclesiology there is no kerygma to proclaim, and with its "objective ethos." The tertius usus is rejected because it invariably becomes a crypto dogma only comes into existence as the Pelagian competitor to Christ. The anti-Dona Sollgehalt of the kerygma. Since there is tist ecclesiology focused on Article VII of the the theological ethos of "sinner" apart from Augustana deals with Elert's point that "the ethos of the church's members or her clergy the kerygma, there could be a theological does not constitute . . . the essence of the church. The essential element in her . . . is 31 Formula of Conc01"d, Thorough Declara the activity of God's Spirit." (Ibid.) tion, VI, 11,20,22-23. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS
ethics, an investigation of the sufficient instance is also a mixing of Gospel and grounds of that ethos, without any dog Law. Instead of implanting the indwelling matics. To be sure, this is only the ethos Christ anew, it is evicting Him. It is seek and the ethics of a sinner, but it does indi ing to implant God's written code, or cate the relative "independence" of theo worse yet, the preacher's own code, in lieu logical ethics from dogmatics. of the living "mind" of Christ. Because the living Christ - one might The "informational" notion of the Law even say Christ's own ethos - is present in all forms of the tertius usus stems from in the kerygma, there is no place for man's the notion that men generally do not know ethos, his own biographical qualifications, what they ought to do. The more realistic to be part of the saving message. In fact, truth of the matter is that they do indeed man's ethos dare not be part of the know what they ought to do, but the kerygma. For if it were, it would become trouble is, they do not want to do it. Such a competitor to Christ's exclusive claim. an "ethical" dilemma can only be solved When the early church rejected Pelagia by the subject matter of dogmatics, the nism, it was acknowledging Christ's ex kerygma, and not by ethics. clusive claim. In effect, it was also sepa rating dogmatics from ethics by excluding KARL BARTH 33 man's ethos from the kerygma. In defining dogmatics and ethics Barth This does not, however, exclude the begins with the problem of all theology "preaching of good works" from the as he came to understand it during his kerygma. But it does exclude the legalistic days as a parish preacher. The problem preaching of good works. Christian preach of theology is the problem of preaching ing of good works means reconnecting - the Word of God. Speech that is ob men to Christ so that they can be free to viously the word of man claims to be the be Christ's people under His Lordship and Word of God as the preacher wrestles to then to do in faith what the indwelling unite the Word of God with human life. Spirit with His imperatives of grace "The task of dogmatics is . . . investigat prompts them to do.32 Because such ing church proclamation as to its agree- preaching is the preaching of Christ, it is 33 Karl Barth, Swiss theologian, was born kerygma and belongs in the province of May 10, 1886, in Basle, Switzerland. Educated dogmatics and not ethics. On the other at the universities of Berne, Berlin, Tubingen, hand, legalistic preaching of good works and Marburg, he began his career as a minister in Geneva (1909-1911) and then became tells people what good works they ought pastor at Safenwil in Aargau Canton (1911 to to do, now that they are Christians. It 1921) . He was Professor Extraordinarius at Giittingen (1921) and then professor at mixes dogma and ethos, which in this Munster in Westphalia (1925) and Bonn (1930). Expelled by the Nazis (1935) he be 32 The terms mentioned in this sentence came professor of theology at Basle (1935 to (freedom, Christ as Lord and Master, life "in 1962). Barth has received honorary doctorates faith," the Spirit as living leader, the grace im from the universities of Glasgow, Oxford, peratives) are what Elert sees as the evangelical Munster in Westphalia, and Utrecht. Among alternatives to the tertius usus legis as tangible his chief works are Der Romerbrief (1918) resources for the Christian "ethical life." and Die kirchliche Dogmatik (1932 if.). THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 757 ment with the Word of God." 34 But this life work has been a dogmatics, for dog is not simple comparison with the Scrip matics encompasses the entire field of the tures. Preaching must be congruent to the ology. All that belongs to the Word of revelation behind the Scriptures to which God belongs to the field of dogmatics as it these writings testify. This pre-Scriptural goes about checking the Word of God as revelation Barth calls 'Word of God in initial revelation, or as inscripturated testi its original form" (urspriinglicher Ge mony to that revelation, or as contemporary stalt) .35 Dogma (singular) is the agree proclamation. From this one can almost ment which exists between the church's guess what the role of ethics will be, preaching and the "Word of God in its namely, an auxiliary of dogmatics. This original form." Dogma is not an assertion has been Barth's constant position on the or a set of assertions (dogmas), but the relation between dogmatics and ethics.40 congruence (BeziehungsbegrifJ) between "The problem of 'ethics' is identical with the church's speaking and the original that of 'dogmatics': Soli deo glorial"41 form of the Word of God. Dogmatics Thus Barth asserted the unity of dog is the science of this dogma. The dogmas, matics and ethics in his commentary on venerable and worthy of respect though Romans of 1918. A decade later in his they be, are the word of man, separated lectures at Munster he said, "Ethics as an from the Ward of God "as the heavens independent discipline alongside of dog are above the earth." 36 They dare not be matics is impossible. The ethical question viewed as a final and perfect comprehen is the question of human existence. The sion of the Word of God. Instead the Word of God, the subject matter of dog dogma.r point to the dogma, the con matics, has precisely this htL'nan existence gruence, and then keep open the "inquiry as its own subject matter. Consequently after the Word of God." 37 ethics necessarily becomes an auxiliary The word "science" applies to dog discipline of dogmatics." 42 matics in the literal sense of the term, for dogmatics claims to be a "path to knowl In the first volume of his Kirchliche edge." 38 But this path to knowledge is the Dogmatik he indicated what the unity path that leads to knowledge of God, and 40 The oft-debated issue of any sharp break consequently the term dogmatics for Barth or basic change of direction within Barth's the finally covers the whole of theology, and ology over the years must be answered in the negative according to Barth's own evaluation he can use the terms dogmatics and the as well as that of such diverse and penetrating ology interchangeably.39 Thus Barth's critics as the Swiss Roman Catholic Hans Urs von Balthasar, the Dutch Reformed syste 34 Karl Barth, Chflf'ch Dogmatics (English matician G. C. Berkouwer, and the Swedish translation). (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, Lutheran Gustav Wingren. 1936ff.), I, 1, 286. Hereafter cited as CD. 41 Karl Barth, Der Romerbrie/. 2d. ed. 35 Ibid., p. 304. (Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1926), p. 417. 36 Ibid., p. 306. 42 From John Cullberg's summary of the 1928 lectures in 37 Ibid., p. 308. Das Problem der Ethik in der dialektischen Theologie, J, Karl Ba1·th, (Leipzig, 38 Ibid., p. 316. 1938), p.158. The lectures themselves exist in 39 E. g., CD, I, 2, 793. an "unofficial" mimeographed edition. 758 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMA TICS AND ETHICS of dogmatics and ethics would mean in theology, Barth observes that one cannot the trinitarian structure of his magnum say that "the unified treatment of dog opus. matics and ethics necessarily implies in Ethics so-called I regard as the doctrine itself an agreement with the reformers' of God's command and do not consider outlook. What we can say is that the it right to treat it otherwise than as an divorce between them involves a necessary integral [better: integrating) part of dog alienation from this outlook." 46 In 1946 matics, or to produce a dogmatics which Barth said that n ••• any such separation does not include it. The concept of the is deadly." 47 command [better: commandment) of God in general should in this dogmatics be dis The Reformation outlook which Barth cussed at the close of the doctrine of God. wants to have as his own outlook is that The commandment of God from the view the unity of dogmatics and ethics is cen point of Order will be dealt with at the tered in "the knowledge of Jesus Christ," close of the doctrine of Creation, from the or the "grace of God" or the "Gospel," or viewpoint of Law at the close of the doc his own favorite, "divine election," "pre trine of Reconciliation, from the viewpoint destination," which is "in one word the of Promise at the close of the doctrine of whole content of the Gospel, its sum." 48 Redemption.43 Electin~ c'. "_ also comn____ ..:: __ o o..cace.49 In the next volume, under the caption Electing grace unifies dogmatics and ethics. "Dogmatics as Ethics," he goes on to say: In the one image of Jesus Christ we have The ethical question, i. e., the question con both the Gospel which reconciles us with cerning right conduct, is the existential God and illumines us and consoles us, problem of man (memchliche Existenz and the Law which in contradistinction to fl'age). As we will, [so} we are; and what all the laws which we ourselves find or we do, we are. It is not as if man first fabricate really binds and obligates us. exists and then acts. He exists while he This is the Law to which theological ethics acts. He exists in that he acts. The ques clings. It is ethics of grace or it is not tion whether and how far he acts rightly theological ethics. For it is in grace - the is the question whether and how far he grace of God in Jesus Christ-that even exists rightly. And so it is ... the prob the command of God is established and lem of man's existence which theology or fulfilled and revealed as such. Therefore dogmatics makes its own when it raises the 'to become obedient,' 'to act rightly,' 'to ethical question . . . as its most charac realize the good,' never means anything teristic problem (eigenste Frage )." 44 other than to become obedient to the reve lation of the grace of God; to live as Barth sees himself allied with the re a man to whom grace has come in Jesus formers in this position. "The ethics of Christ. But this is the very reason why Luther and Calvin are to be sought and there can be no change of standpoint or found in their dogmatics and not else where." 45 After looking at the history of 46 Ibid., p. 787. 47 Karl Barth, Christliche Bthik, Bin Vortrag, 43 CD, I, 1, xiv. (Munich, 1946), p.15. 44 CD, I, 2, 793. 48 CD, II, 2, 5lO. 45 Ibid., p.783. 49 Ibid., p. 511. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 759
theme when dogmatics becomes ethics, or, to this. Other apparent goods are good rather, when it reveals its ethical content. only in dependence on this good." 54 It cannot live less, but must live wholly All signs point back to Barth's Chris and utterly, by the knowledge of the Word and work of God, by the knowledge of tology as the hub from which his state Jesus Christ." 50 ments about dogmatics and ethics radiate. But the form of that Christology is al Whereas the all-encompassing question ready conditioned by several theological of theology ( dogmatics) is: Who and opinions, some of which are intimated in what is God?, Barth sees man's ethical the citations above. 1) Man's personal question to be: What is the good, the right theological problem centers in his lack of action? Both questions are answered by knowledge of God, who is the Good, so God's revelation, and in both cases the that in his ignorance he must ask Who is answer is the same, Jesus Christ. Typical God? What is the Good? The task of arc such statements as "Jesus ... does not dogmatics and ethics, and theology as a give the answer, but by God's grace He whole for that matter, is primarily an is the answer to the ethical question." 51 epistemological one. Man needs God's Barth frequently opts for Micah's short revelation, Jesus Christ, as the answer and answer (6: 8) to the question of the good: solution to this personal theological prob "He has showed you, 0 man, what is good; lem. The revelation that does come in and what does the Lord require of you Jesus Christ is primarily a communica ..." 52 In Barth's own words the answer tion of the predestinarian verdict of God, to the question of the good is: "Good in concerning which man is ignorant. Jesus the Christian sense is that behavior, that does not and does not have to achieve or action, of man which corresponds to the execute man's redemption. Rather He behavior and action of God in this history reveals to man the news that God and [of Jesus Christ} ... whereby man accepts God alone has done all this, and has done and not only accepts, but assents to God's so in His eternal decree of predestination self-humiliation on his behalf so that he, before the world began. man, might live and rejoice. . . . Good is 2) Related to this is Barth's notion of that behavior and action of man which the qualitative difference between God and corresponds to God's grace." 53 man. This gap is occasioned not by sin, Ethics is "necessarily and decisively" a but by the given ontological separation witnessing to that good which is the con between Creator and creature. No earthly tent of "the command issued to Jesus human action, even that of the faithful Christ and fulfilled by Him. There can be Christian, can qualify for the adjective no question of any other good in addition "divine." God and things divine are always totaliter aliter. No human action, nothing 50 Ibid., p. 539. in creation, can be more than a parable, a 51 Ibid., p. 517. testimony, a sign and pointer from the 52 E. g., Ibid., p.537, 566, 572, 574, and earthly temporal realm into the heavenly throughout the Barth corpus. 53 Christliche Ethik, pp. 9f. 54 CD, II, 2, 518. 760 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS realm which is truly godly. It has signifi 3) The qualitative opposition between cance and value only insofar as it fulfills God and man and man's personal theo the function depicted by Gruenewald's logical dilemma of not knowing God, not figure of John the Baptist in the Isen knowing the Good, correspond to a char heimer altar - as it points away from acteristic concept of "faith" in Barth's self to the wholly other grace of God in theology. Faith is essentially knowledge, Jesus Christ.55 Barth has developed a whole man's knowledge of the divine reality, the vocabulary, which Prenter calls sign "grace-full God," on the other side of the language" (Zeichensprache) , to discuss divine-human gap. Faith "has no creative, this relationship of human to divine action but only a cognitive character. It does not and reality. 56 Such terms as correspond, alter anything. . . . It is simply the con reflect, demonstrate, represent, copy, imi firmation of a change which has already tate, symbolize, indicate, point, parable, taken place." 58 In Prenter's words: analogy, mirror, reproduction are used to "A transformation of the est into a sig relate the Sein of man to the Sein of God. nificat in the ontic sphere corresponds The predicament of man's language or any consequently with the tr-,sformatlon of human activity is like that of a creature credo into an intelligo in the noetic ~11 an ;i.u.ag;11ed tw u-cl;fLlcnsional world sphere." ~9 Man's lU1belief is his theologi when faced with the task of constructing cal ignorance. Faith i: :he solution to the three-dimensional figures. De facto this is problem of unbelief. aith is knowledge impossible because of the ontological to replace ignorance. Thus the real con structure of two- and three-dinlensional trast between church and world is the "con worlds. But it is possible in a two-dimen trast between the church's awareness sional world to indicate, reflect, imitate, [Wissen} and the worldos terrible ig symbolize, a three-dimensional world - norance [Nichtwissen}.6o The main theo as a painter does, for instance, when by logical terms related to faith - baptism, shadows, foreshortening, and perspective justification, sanctification, sin, repentance, he "creates" a three-dimensional landscape preaching - undergo under Barth's hand on a two-dimensional canvas.57 the basic transformation indicated by the formula credo = intelligo.61 55 For Barth, Gruenewald's Isenheimer altar plays a similar role in painting as Mozart does is still this same est. Barth's entire theology of in music. It is constantly cited, as for example, creation (Prenter was reviewing Kirchliche Dog in "Evangelium und Gesetz," Theologisebe Ex matik, III, I} stands under the rubric significat" istenz Heute, xxxii, (1935). The exclusive role (Prenter, p. 180). Already in 1922 Barth ad which John the Baptist plays as model preacher mitted that "as a Reformed theologian I of in the New Testament for Barth is not without course have the duty to maintain a certain final significance for Barth's theological system. distance in the face of the Lutheran est," (Das 56 Regin Prenter, "Die Einheit von Schiip Wort Gottes find die Theologie [Munich, fung und Erlosung. Zur Schiipfungslehre Karl 1925], p. 178) Barths," Theologische Zeitschrijt, II (May/June 58 CD, IV, 1,751. 1946), p. 170. 59 Prenter, p. 17L 57 Prenter draws a parallel between Barth's "sign language" and the est vs. signified con GO CD, III, 2, 607. troversy in past Protestant history. "At stake in 61 Very important at this point is Barth's the debate between Barth and Lutheran theology book Anselm: Fides Qftae-rens inteUectttm. An- THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 761
Thus we can see that the formal unity question of the good in human life. He is of dogmatics and ethics in Barth's theology true man. This includes His life of perfect has its roots in (1) the identification of obedience to the Father's will, but also the God and the Good, (2) the noetic con true and good humanity that constantly ception of man's theological problems of points beyond itself to the One alone who sin, as a problem of knowledge which in is truly good. turn is rooted in man's ontic separation Man's theological problem of separa from God, (3) the predestinarian character tion from God and ignorance of God is of grace and the subsequent informational solved by the person and work of Christ. character of revelation, (4) an intellectu Barth's preferred term for Redemption is alized notion of faith (notitia of and Reconciliation. The message of recon ass emus to God's predestinarian verdict) ,62 ciliation, the heart of the Christian mes and (5) the "sign" character of human sage, is Immanuel. With this phrase Barth language and human action in pointing is incorporating Old Testament covenantal beyond to God's word and action. patterns into his Christology; he even has In Barth's presentation of Christology a 45-page section on the covenant as the presupposition of reconciliation.64 .. 'Rec these roots became apparent. Jesus is the onciliation' is the restitution, the resump answer both to the question 'l).7ho and what tion of a fellowship which 0 l but is God? and What is the Good? Jesus was then threatened by dissolution." Jesus Christ is true God. He is Immanuel, God Christ is "God in the work of reconcilia with-us. "The truth of God is exactly this tion." 65 What happens in this reconcilia and nothing else." 63 God is with us, not tion is that the gap between the tvw against us. God is graciously disposed covenant partners is bridged. "Reconcili towards man; He does not demand that ation ... [is} a sovereign act of God.... man merit His favor. God is reconciled God's crossing the frontier to man." 66 with man. Jesus is also the answer to the "The frontier is a real one. On the one side there is God in His glory as Creator selm's Proof of the Existence of God in the con text of His Theological Scheme (Richmond, and Lord, and also in the majesty of His Va.: John Knox Press, 1960), in which he exe holiness and righteousness. And on the gesizes Anselm's thesis indicated in the title, and which verbally parallels Prenter's formula. other side there is man, not merely the Barth asserts of Anselm's influence on him: creature, but the sinner ... in opposition "I believe I learned the fundamental attitude to Him. It is not merely a frontier, but to the problem of the knowledge and existence a yawning abyss. Yet this abyss is crossed, of God . . . at the feet of Anselm of Canter bury." (CD, II, 1, 4) not by man, not by both God and man, but 62 There is little place for /iducia in Barth's only by God. . . . That is the insoluble GlaubensbegrifJ because there is no genuine mystery of the grace of God enclosed in reality in the world (sin, death, devil) in the the name Jesus Christ." 67 face of which the Christian needs to trust in God. There also is no actual verdict of con demnation from God against which to trust 64 CD, IV, 1, 22-66. God's verdict of forgiveness. 65 Ibid., p.22. 63 Karl Barth, Humanity of God (Richmond, 66 Ibid., pp.81£. Va.: John Knox Press, 1960), p. 49. 67 Ibid., pp. 82f. 762 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS
For Barth the original "sovereign act" Cross and resurrection are extensions of is predestination in God's eternal (i. e., the original obedience shown by the Son pretemporal) decree. Jesus Christ is cen of God in becoming man.70 Cross and tral to the work of reconciliation, but more resurrection are additional revelations, con in an illustrative than a causative way. clusive and final, concerning the "true God Therefore reconciliation as Barth views it and true man" of the incarnation. Revela is centered in the incarnation, where one tion here answers the ethical question; here body bridged the gap between the two Christ reveals how a "true" man of God sides of the abyss.68 Bethlehem becomes obeys God. This work of Christ does bring the key event in his Christology. Every about "the alteration of the human situa thing after that is somewhat an anticlimax, tion," 71 but it must be kept in mind that the automatic consequences of God's hav what is central to the human situation as ing stepped over the boundaries to reveal Barth views it is man's erroneous concept His gracious predisposition toward man. that God is not gracious and therefore As a result, in Barth's Christology Good must be placated. Thus for Barth recon Friday and Easter play a subordinate role ciliation entails changing man's verdict in the reconciliation. Although Barth about God rather than God's verdict warns against separating the person and about man. work of Christ in the sense that what we The est - significi ation :l the do is what we are, and vice versa, it clearly "sign language" that accompanies it ex seems that the "work" of Good Friday and pose some of the implications of Barth's Easter is subordinated to the "person" Christology for ethics. In the Christian's incarnate at Bethlehem.69 ethical life of discipleship (Nachfolge), Jesus is the "true man." His humanity is 68 Despite this concentrated focus on incar nation ("The central mystery of Christian proc the prototype, the "original" ( U rbild) , lamation is the incarnation": Gottes Gnadenwahl and that of his followers is the "copy" [Geneva, 1936], p. 15), Barth has problems right here by virtue of the "abyss" between the (Abbild).72 However, the truthfulness of human and the divine, which, in Wingren's Jesus' own humanity is that in all things words, "remains unbridged even in the incarna He constantly signified and pointed toward tion. This is the idea, presented especially in CD, III, 2, that the humanity of Jesus Christ the divine realm and the graciousness of mirrors the divine in Jesus Christ. The idea of God on the other side of the abyss. Con a mirror or a reflection . . . appears also in Christology and extends therefore to . . . the sequently the Christian's ethical life as humanity of Jesus Christ." "The statement, Abbild of this humanity is typified in 'the word became flesh', ought to be rendered Gruenewald's John the Baptist, viz., a 'tbe word assumed flesh.''' Gustav Wingren, Theology in Conjlict (Philadelphia: Muhlen demonstratio, a significare that points be- berg, 1958), pp. 30£. 69 The preferential treatment of Christmas Christian kerygma that man's sinfulness is not over Good Friday and Easter running through so drastic as to prevent God from covenanting out Barth's work is consonant with his unwill with him. ingness to see the latter events as the ones which 70 CD, IV, 1, 313. "produced" the forgiveness of sins and reconcil 71 Ibid. latIon. Instead of an Easter kerygma that sin, death, and wrath are dead, Barth prefers the 72 CD, III, 2, 50. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 763 yond the temporal and human to the esse been chosen and actualized for him." 77 of God's predestination. The Christian "What is involved in ethical decisions is lives his life alert for God's clue as to how the matter of divine predestination." 78 As he can live each moment "demonstra a new being, the man of faith searches out tionally." His ethical actions are "a kind God's predetermined will and strives in of silhouette of the elective, free, and total his self-determination to correspond to it.79 activity of God Himself ... characterized by the will to seek God and to find Him, SUMMARY that is to inquire concerning His com Dogmatics and ethics as sciences are mandment, to be guided by His decisions both human activity. The faith and works and attitudes, and to follow His direc of a Christian which dogmatics and ethics tion." 73 Distinctive of a Christian's ethical investigate concerning their congruence action (Handeln) is that in it "he now with the Word of God are also human ac lives as one who seeks God," 74 enacting on tivities. All human actions have their his own ethical stage (is it drama or panto highest value when they point men to God, mime?) the script written for and about when in this sense they are an imitatio him in predestination. Christi, a demonstratio ad gloriam Dei.
This ties in W~U.l LU!".. '-'-,c;~u - NbH.::,:ligo This happens w:"_"" .:._ J rJim man away equation. The role of faith for ethics is from man, his history, and his world to not to create that kind of new being who is the wholly other Word of the living God. "free" from concern about the divine con The person and work of Jesus Christ as sequences of his ethical actions as much the central event in human history is the as it gives him knowledge of the pre revelation (exposition, not execution) of destinarian verdict for his existence. Faith God's reconciliation with man. Although and love are two forms of the new Sein. unredeemed man ought to be living a Both are intellectually defined. As faith, life that points toward God, he does not the new being is "man's recognition, ac know where to point. After reconciliation knowledgment, and acceptance of this ver has been made known, he does know where dict [andJ the making of his own subjec to point. Jesus Christ is both revealer and tion to this verdict." 75 As love "it consists prototype of the true God as well as in the fact that he accepts the divine direc revealer of true man. Christian Nachfolge tion (Weisung) ." 76 In ethical decisions is imitatio Christi when it, too, points men and actions the Christian "follows the de to the glory and grace of God. Dogmatics cision already made and the act already and ethics are finally united in this N ach accomplished by God, confirming them in folge. his own human decision and act; [soJ that Thus dogmatics and ethics can only be he, for his part, chooses what has already "church" dogmatics and ethics. For only
73 CD, N, 1, 104. 77 Ibid., p. 100. 74 Ibid., and CD, I, 2, 370. 78 Barth's mimeographed lectures on ethics, 75 CD, IV, 1, 93. vol. I, p. 75. 76 Ibid., p. 99. 79 Cullberg, pp. 143f. 764 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS the church, as the gathering of those who distinctively Christian elements. Neo know about the grace of God, can point Protestantism, for which Troeltsch was out God's truth to the world. Thus the both prophet and apostle, was working for church must destroy the world's illusions such a synthesis, a consciously pursued about both God and man and replace the Kulturprotestantismus. ignorance with knowledge of the truth. The effect of the modern situation on This truth is the knowledge of the "true" dogmatics and ethics is the recession of God and of the "true" man. Thus Barth dogmatics and the supremacy of ethics. can say that it is supremely the knowledge In the modern world "... we do not ask: of Jesus Christ. How can I find a gracious God? Instead our question is: How can I recover the ERNST TROELTSCH 80 soul and love?" (dieSeele und die Liebe) 81 Troeltsch agonizes about the modern Troeltsch himself produced neither a world and the modern breakdown of all dogmatics nor an ethics, although a post past syntheses between Christianity and humous volume of his lectures on tradi culture. All past syntheses, including the tionally dogmatic themes was published Reformation, were theologically "medi under the substitute label significantly eval," horit::~ian, supram and favored by Troeltsch, Glaubenslehre.82 He miraculous, and ecclesiastically patriarchal. Fovisioned his own m~; __ rQ!1trib\uinn ~o This is in contrast to modern man's in be the preliminary historical studies of tellectual commitment to the autonomous, the modern temper and the religious-philo the immanent, and the scientific, and his sophical propaedeutics 83 necesssary for organizational commitment to the rubrics both the Glaubemlehre and the ethics of of personal decision, democratic individu N eo-Protestantism. ?Jism, and internal Gesinnung. What is The philosophical propaedeutics to the needed for the modern world, characterized ology contained answers to the following as it is by the new components mentioned questions: Is there any place for religion in part above, is a new synthesis, a Weiter and religious experience at all in the mod e11twicklung of the synthesis which his ern world? If so, why prefer Christianity torical Christianity has always been above other world religions? The former between foreign cultural elements and question is answered affirmatively by two
80 Ernst Troeltsch, German theologian and means, the religious psychology of idealism philosopher, was born in Augsburg, Feb. 17, 1865, and died Feb. 1, 1923. He taught at the 81 Ernst Troeltsch, Gesammelte Schri/ten universities of Gottingen (1891-1892), Bonn (Tiibingen, 1912-25), II, 522. Hereafter (1892-1894), and Heidelberg (1894 to cited as GS. 1915). He was Professor of History of Philoso 82 Troeltsch, Vorlesttngen Ueber Glattbe17S phy and Civilization at Berlin from 1915 to leh1'e (Munich, 1925). Retrospectively, he his death in 1923. Among his chief works are stated in his GS (IV, 13): "Understandably Die Bedeutung des Pl"otestantismuJ fiir die Entstehung der modernen Welt (1906), Die enough I was unable to convince myself to write a dogmatics." Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen und Grup pen (1912), and Christian Thought: Its History 83 Walter Bodenstein, Neige des Historismtts and Application (1923). (Giitersloh, 1959), pp 49ft THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 765 and neo-Kantian categorical epistemology.84 summarizes its characteristic elements in The second question bothered Troeltsch to his article "Dogmatik" in Die Religion the end of his life as he wrestled unsuc in Geschichte und Gegenwart: ( 1) sur cessfully with the issue of the Absolutheit render of naive supranaturalism and ac des Ch1'istentums. ceptance of the historicity of Christianity Such propaedeutics have the following together with other religions; (2) exten consequences for dogmatics and ethics: sive and open cooperation with philo ( 1) Christianity is one form, to be sure sophical idealism; ( 3) allowance for re the highest and most universal form, of the ligious pluralism while accepting the general category "religion," that is, an ex modern Weltbild; (4) resulting change in perienced encounter with the divine. (2) substance and not merely in the form of Kantian epistemological categories supply theological content ("de-mything and re the criteria for judging the validity and my thing" ); (5) nevertheless, a close tie-in truth of this experience. (3) Theology is with the prophets, the person of Jesus, and therefore primarily a science of the re the Bible, which are essential and central; ligious experience of man who is as such (6) a dogmatics that is no longer norma homo religiosus. Thus Troeltsch prefers tive, but an advisory, inspirational Glau the j rate label n ,.~. )/ZSphiloso !JemIe,' _, designed ~~~ .:._ congregativ.l phie for this science instead of theology. and the proclamation.86 ( 4) In view of this anthropocentrism of Although Troeltsch did not produce an Religionsphilosophie, ethics moves for ethics to parallel the Glaubenslehre, ethics ward and dogmatics recedes. "The moral "actually were of central importance" to is the meaning of the religious" 85 is what him.87 For ethics, too, Troeltsch begins Troeltsch means with one of his favored with philosophical propaedeutics to answer hyphenated terms, religios-sittlich ("re the first question: What is the ethical (das ligio-ethical"). (5) The remaining role Sittliche)? Then comes the second ques of dogmatics, especially in its traditional tion about the Prinzip of Christian ethics, authoritarian and transcendental elements, and the subquestion of the Prinzip of is sharply modified to correlate with this Protestant Christian ethics. Finally there individualism, which, although always in is "applied ethics," the practical formu herent in the genuine essence (Prin lation of the principles in terms of the ziP) of Christianity, now necessitates even current situation and the exigencies of a more modification by virtue of the modern given historical epoch. autonomous and immanent characteristics Troeltsch's answer to the first question of this individualism. of the essence of the moral is largely The effects of these principles upon Kantian. It is the experience of an impera a Neo-Protestant "dogmatics" is to be seen tive (Sollen) in human consciousness, the in the posthumous Glaubenslehre. Troeltsch experience that something necessarily
84 Ibid., pp. 18£. and pp.22-28. BU Die Religion ilZ Geschichte und Gegen wart 1st ed. (Tiibingen: B. Mohr, 1909 85 Quoted by Heinrich Benekert, Ernst J. c. Troeltsch und das ethische Problem (Gottin to 13), II, cols. IDS£. Hereafter cited as RGGI. gen: Vandenhoeek & Ruprecht, 1932), p.16. 87 Benckert, pp. 13 ff. 766 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS ought to be, and if it is not, then man promoting the whole." 89 Thus Protes ought to bring it about. tantism's principle is actually a delegalized Troeltsch's answer to the second ques moral law, a ". . . completely free and tion of the particular Sollen in Christian autonomous explication of the Christian ethics is found in his historical study, The notion of goals by means of personal con Social Teachings of the Christian Churches. science and its free application to life." 90 In his concluding summary he lists four On the question of "applied ethics" items as the distinctly Christian ethos of Troeltsch's creativity "stood in a certain what ought to be. disproportion to the amazing riches of his speculative (i. e., analytical) historical 1) The Christian ethos alone possesses, in virtue of its personalistic theism, outlook." 91 Nevertheless he did talk about a conviction of personality and indi the necessary task in contemporary ethics, viduality, based on metaphysics. but even this is handled rather intellec 2) The Christian ethos alone, through its tually, perhaps from Troeltsch's perspective conception of a divine love which the most practical thing he could do. His embraces all souls and unites them all, description of the required task was "com possesses a socialism which cannot be bining the subjective ethics [of Kant} shaken. with the objective ethics [of Schleier 3) Only the Christian ethos solves the macher}," 92 or combining "the morality problem of equality and inequality, of personality and conscienCe" with the recognizing differences as the inscru "ethics of cultural values." 93 table will of God and then transform The ethics of cultural values in societies, ing this condition by the inner up peoples, and mankind as a whole is not building of the personality. a system that can be consciously worked 4) Through its emphasis upon the Chris out, but its individual constituent parts de tian value of personality, and on love, velop under the accidental conditions of the Christian ethos creates something the historical process. When, however, a which no social order can dispense with entirely - charity.ss given constellation of cultural values has become a system which is actually in effect, The Prinzip which is the essence of the individual moral man goes to work Protestant ethics is "the Christian con with his own moral reason to refine, con sciousness of blissful trust in God and lov centrate, liberate, and direct it. Here is ing service of the brother, which animates where "subjective ethics," individual moral the system of natural callings by putting conscience in its freedom, creativity, and such loving service of neighbor into prac tice primarily in the form of fidelity to 89 RGG1, IV, col. 1915. one's vocation and thus maintaining and 90 RGGl, II, col. 1386. 91 Cited by Friedrich von Hugel in his in 88 Troeltsch, Die Soziallehren der christlichen troduction to Troeltsch's posthumously pub Kirchen und Gruppen (Tubingen: ]. c. B. lished lectures, Christian Thought, (London, Mohr, 1911). Eng. trans., Olive Wyon, The 1923), p. xxii. Social Teachings of the Christian Churches (New York: Macmillan, 1931); reprinted Har 92 Troeltsch, GS, II, p. 623. per Torchbook (New York, 1960), pp.1004£. 93 Troeltsch, Christian Thought, pp.39-99. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 767 decision .finally come into play in shaping highly autobiographical production of the the objective ethics of cultural values.94 thoughts and feelings of the believer. Troeltsch is not trying to establish either For Troeltsch, ethics is the fundamental a personal morality or a cultural one (al discipline (Fundamentalwissenschaft) of though World War I revealed unmis theology, and dogmatics is its helpmeer. takably the catastrophic crisis in cultural Thus he can say that dogmatics and ethics values), but he is rather trying to find are related as "knowledge and practice" the possible connection between the two. within the ethisch-religios personality, Actually this is just the ethical form of his yet even this knowledge is "practical, reli lifelong problem of relating the absolute gios-ethisch."96 Dogmatics in the form with the historically conditioned and rela of a Glaubenslehre is an auxiliary science tive, or reason with nature, in this case, (Hilfswissenschaft) to the ethics of the moral reason, the individual Sollen, with man who is already Christian. It stands in supra-individual namre or historical cul the service of completing the ethical man. ture. It is "ultimately only a catalyst to produce Because of the practical identification of one's own insights about faith, which then the religious with the ethicat Troeltsch are to be the basis of Christian practice." 97 would say that dogmatics and ethics are The chief consideration in a Glaubenslehre one. '7:':.~.~~~ for Barth they dIe united is "whether it edifre~ the people" 98 by in their common concern with w\Y\7ord of mediating the needed power of God's God," for Troeltsch their common object Spirit for man's own internal and external is the Christian religios-sittlich man in moral life. his internal consciousness (Gesinnung) Troeltsch's intellectual roots can be and his external actions. But even the in found both in philosophical idealism ternal Gesimzu1zg is not the private domain and in the "left wing" of the Reformation. of dogmatics, since this Gesinnung is Troeltsch's admitted affinity to idealism where the ethical S olle1z is to be found. has been apparent above. The following Because dogmatics and ethics are describ elements of idealism are relevant to his ing the Christian self-consciousness of one thought on dogmatics and ethics: (1) the and the same believing man, Troeltsch's dualism of spirit and nature, of intelli hyphenated term religios-sittlich is in gence and the senses, of God as rational fact testifying to the identical subject spirit and the world as sensitory nature; matter in both dogmatics and ethics. (2) the possibility of the phenomenal be Therefore Troeltsch shifts away from the ing a vehicle for the numinous; (3) man term dogmatics to a Glaubenslehre, which as the prime paradox; fully Geist and he calls the "practical guidelines for pre fully nature; (4) "redemption" via imma senting the basic thoughts of Christian nent "revelation" - the presence of the faith for congregational practice," 95 a historically conditioned, "semiscientific," 96 RGGl, II, col. 1438. 97 Troeltsch, Vorlesungen iiber Glaubens 94 Ibid., pp. 96ff. lehre, p.4. 95 Bodenstein, p. 31. 98 Ibid., p. 17. 768 ruE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS divine in the human soul; (5) "redemp History itself and the conditions of his tion" as the supremacy of spirit in control torical existence are a constant threat to over nature; (6) the notion of evolu the life of the spirit. What is needed is tionary development in the progressive an overcoming of history (Ueberwindung education of the human race. der Geschichte) .100 The second root goes back to the 16th Christianity offers an encounter with the century. Because in his judgment Luther's numinous, changeless, gracious, and loving personal theological search for a gracious supreme Spirit who is the source of all God was essentially a medieval quest, and historically incarnate spirits. The redemp because the later Luther remedievalized the tion offered by Christianity, like that of young Luther's discovery of Christianity as other religions, is eventual escape of the a religion of faith (Glaubensreligion) or spirit from the confining and strangling a religion of grace ( Gnademeligio11 ) , strictures of existence in the world of na Troeltsch could not utilize Luther for his ture under the conditions of history, into own thought. However, he publicly pro the "freedom of the Spirit." It is God's claimed his kinship to the left wing of the creative will returning to itself.101 "The Reformation which Luther had rejected dialectic of God's self-transformation into as enthusiasm (S cinIJarmerei) . Although creatures is i(self transformed into the re Troeltsch could not accept their uto!Jia turn transformation of the creature into God." 102 nism, legalism, or naive mythology, he viewed the left-wing Reformers as the :first The modern world itself requires that "modern" Christians. They were the fore ethics be the Fundamentalwissenschaft. In runners of Neo-Protestantism because of the ancient and medieval worlds dogmatics their piety, which was interior, anti dog could be the cutting edge in Christianity'S matic, committed, active in love, and above mission to the world, because the world all a genuine spiritual experience, and their itself already operated automatically with polity which he described as "free church," a transcendentalist1c frame of reference. nonauthoritarian, democratic, simple. But in an immanentistic world, Christianity can only operate immanentistically. That These twO sources, idealism and Refor means latching on to man in terms of mation spiritualism, help shape Troeltsch's what he automatically acknowledges, viz., theology into the pattern of the gnostic man's ethical self-consciousness. It means pneumatic ttadition, wherein Christianity beginning with ethics. From here it may presents the redemption drama for freeing be possible to bring man to experience the the spirit of man from its creaturely im Christian faith, and then to come in con pediments in nature. The life of faith is tact with a Glaubenslehre, which could not the religios-sittlich process of freeing the be meaningful to him before that. In the creaturely spirit from its conditionedness in nature so that it may progressively grow 100 The phrase is Walther Koehler's from into the life of the divine spirit toward his book, Ernst Troeltsch (Tiibingen, i941), p.374. the goal of "a complete union with God." 99 101 RGG1, II, coL 484.
99 Ibid., p. 381. 102 Ibid., col. 1471. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 769 modern world dogmatics as Glaubenslehre Dogmatics as the disciplina arcana is ad is incomprehensible to the outsider. It is dressed to the insiders who are no longer a hidden discipline (disciplina arcana), in real danger. It is part of their culric necessarily mythical, meaningful only to life, deepening their insights after they such as have had the faith experience. have been redeemed. Ethics speaks directly Even within the Christian community it to the outsiders, those who are still in is not "universally valid," since in every mortal danger from nature and history. It case it is highly autobiographical, "cor portrays the via salutis. It is absolutely responding to the individual scientific and necessary. It is the Fundamentalwissen religious convictions" of the author.1°3 schaft. Even these stated intramural, inner SUMMARY churchly tasks for a dogmatics fade some Inherent in Gnosticism is a depreciation what, since Troeltsch has difficulty finding of history. Strange as it may sound for a necessary role for the church itself. Be such a prominent historian, history was for cause of the individualistic notion of re Troeltsch the great nemesis, the threat to demption and the overall internalization Geist and knowledge, to all the great ab and spiritualization inherent in the gnostic solutes. Once he called raw history the pattern, Troeltsch confronts the externally bellum omnium contra omnes.l04 He tangible redeemed community more as an himself could not be content to remain embarrassing historical fact than as an within it.l05 The absolute realities, e. g., integral component of redemption. Theo the kingdom of God, he said, "lie outside retically the church is superfluous. all history. In history itself, there are only Ethics is the fundamental discipline in relative victories." 106 History, like na yet another way. In Troeltsch's thought ture, terms which he can use interchange ethics is the locale where actual redemp ably, is a nemesis which must be dammed tion takes place. Not past history, but up and controlled, mastered and sub present history is the stage for redemption, dued.l07 The absolutes of the world of and it takes place not by relating oneself Spirit, because they "transcend history, to some past redemption-myth, but by cannot limit or shape history." 108 practical and personal execution of the uni Therefore even if man should seek to versal redemption-myth in one's own life. apply his own small share in the absolute, Ethics is the guideline for executing the his own Geist, to history, he cannot hope redemption. Thus ethics compels one to to overcome the threat. At best he can for plunge into his own present history, but curiously enough does so with a view 104 Troeltsch, Cht'istian Thotlght, p. 167. toward redemption from this history. It is 105 See Hans-Georg Drescher, "Das Problem "overcoming history with history," my der Geschichte bei Ernst Troeltsch," Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche, LVII (1960), 186 natural history with my spiritual history, to 230. my Naturleben with my Geistesleben. 106 Troeltsch, Christian Thollght, p. 129. 107 Ibid., pp. 93, 128. 103 T roeltsch, V orlesungen iiber Glaubens lehre, p. 4. 108 Ibid., p. 68. 770 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS
a time impede its speed or modify its direc place in the history of Jesus of Nazareth. tion. So finally the flight from history is History is also the place where ethics is also a flight from ethics. Although the focused; the Christian as a member of the Christian is sent back into the world to new historical Christ-community actually care for the "divine and the good in it," he lives the "divine" life in his own per "finally grows up away from this world, sonal biography. God's own "quality" of since in his worldly work he is only seek life lives within him. Thus "incarnation" ing that which leads him beyond the is Elert's focus, not only with reference world back to the world's own ground, to Christ, but in all of history where the God Himself." 109 divine verdicts are operative as both Law Ethics is the bridge by which Troeltsch and Gospel. The church's special ethos is sought synthesis with the modern world, that the life of God incarnate in Christ is since traditional dogmatics (and even up continued in Christ's church. Christ's in dated dogmatics) were incapable of the carnation is the subject matter of dog task. Yet even ethics offers no absolute, matics, the incarnatio continua of the unless that absolute is man himself. In church is the subject matter of ethics. seeking to work out a modern synthesis The Reformed tradition in Barth's the wherein the Absolutheit des Christentums ology emphasizes the First Article and might be expressed without necessary re seeks to interpret the rest of Christian the course to the Absolutheit Christi, the end ology from that vantage point. This is re product is a "transformation of Christianity flected in Barth's words about dogmatics into a profoundly Christianized religion and ethics. The deity of the Creator and of humanity." 110 the creatureliness of man arc the para meters into which Barth's theology is CONCLUSION sketched. History is one facet of the crea The understanding of history is crucial turely world. The Creator, by definition in each of the three theologies we have "wholly Other" than His creation, cannot surveyed. £lerr's Lutheranism with its focus be fully present and at work within crea on the Second Article operates throughout tion and history. The concern for the maj with the notion of God at work in, with, esty and deity of God renders the role of and under historical existence, especially human historical life negligible. Thus in the time of the life and ministry of there is no place within Christian theology Jesus and continually so in the life and for ethics, ethics means serious attention ministry of the church that develops geneti to human historical life. Such serious con cally from His history. Of the three centration on man the creature is danger models, Elen's Lutheranism allows for the ously near to idolatry, a turning away from most positive evaluation of history. His total concentration on the Creator. Every tory is the place where dogmatics is fo theologically legitimate enterprise comes cused; God's actual work of salvation took under the rubric of dogmatics, the science devoted to studying the congruence of the 109 RGG1, II, col. li86. word and work of man with the word and 110 Bodenstein, pp. 51ff. work of God. The theologian's apologetic THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOGMATICS AND ETHICS 771 task is to see to it that God's rights are not Christian theology coalesces into ethics. infringed upon anywhere in the process. Dogmatics has no place or function since Whereas for Elert the theologian must be the eschaton is already present in the Spirit on guard to see to it that the Second Article existence of every man. The completion (Christus manet mediator) does not suffer of redemption is all that is lacking. Only distortion, Barth's theologian is determined a third Article is needed, an ethics to help to let God be God and to keep the creature men pick their way like Dante in the being the creature. Whatever commerce Divine Comedy through the world back there may be between God and His crea to the paradiso where they all already now tures by virtue of His initiation, this First belong. Article distinction sketches the ontological Whereas Troeltsch's spiritualized Chris boundaries within which it must remain. tianity recurs to a spiritualized eschatology The left-wing tradition presented by of the Third Article, Barth's depreciation Troeltsch is a form of absolutizing the Third of history comes via his focus on predesti Article, the doctrine of Spirit. Although narian protology, a spiritualized First Arti it takes on idealistic contours, this pneumat cle. Just as Troeltsch ultimately seeks to icism incorporates and subordinates the be operating already beyond the Third First and Second Articles into itself, reduc Article, so Barth's theological starting poin.1: ing them to some intellectual or ontological is actually before the First Article. Both relationship with the eternal spirit. Thus operate primarily outside of history. Al although Troeltsch is, so to speak, at the though Barth draws the conclusion that other end of the creed from Barth, the dogmatics is everything, and Troeltsch that consequences of both of their theologies ethics is everything, the internal opposition merge at important points, e. g., in their between them is not at all as great as the attitude toward history. Troeltsch's radi initial difference suggests. calized Third-Article theology is a radi If the Absolutheit of Christianity does calized eschatology wherein all history is indeed reside in whatever claim to Abso relativized even though it continues to lutheit Christ himself made, then letting exist. Theologically all history is hell, the the Second Article set the parameters, as nemesis to the life of the Spirit. But it is Elert does, would appear closer to the heart a conquered hell, having no absolute power of the matter than any absolutizing of the over the life of the Spirit, although it may First or Third Article before treating the cause trouble, e. g., guilt feelings, in given Second. individual spirits. Therefore everything in Valparaiso, Ind.