Mittwoch, 29. Oktober 2008

AN ESSAY ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE

__________________

A Bookrevew

Presented to

Dr. M. Yarnell

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for SYSTH 3114

__________________

Heinrich Kehler

September 18, 2008

John Henry Newman. An Essay of the Development of Doctrine. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005. 445 pp. $19.75.

F. Schleiermacher and John H. Cardinal Newman are in general incomparable and totally different. However, both of them have a common inquiry concerning the development of doctrine. In §25.2, Schleiermacher introduces this discussion with the statement: "Let us then start from the facts that the system of doctrine in our Church all over is not a thing absolutely settled, and that it may indeed be asserted that its distinctive character has not yet become fully manifest in doctrine." But although they had this common inquiry both of them reach to a different conclusion.

John Henry Cardinal Newman (February 21, 1801 – August 11, 1890) grew up in an Anglican context and tradition. While being an Anglican priest and teaching at Oxford, he struggled with principles of ecclesiastical authority in the Anglican Church. Who is authorized to make doctrines? Has not the Anglican Church lost their authority to raise dogmas by leaving the Roman Catholic Church? This led him to write his work An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine in which he confirmed the tenability of the universal status of the Roman Catholic Church and all Catholic doctrines.

In this book Newman deals with his questions, whether a dogma changes and if it changes, which institution or by what authority to this change is allowed to take place. What are developments, and what are corruptions? How can we distinguish between heresy and development?

In the first chapters (I. – III.), Newman explains his method and some principles about the development of doctrines. After that, in chapter IV., he illustrates some of the developed doctrines like Infant Baptism, worshipping the Saints, the Papal Supremacy, etc. In chapter V., he establishes seven criteria to distinguish between genuine developments and corruptions before he explains them in detail. These criteria are as following: preservation, continuity of principles, the power of assimilation, logical sequence, anticipation of the future development, conservative action upon the past and the chronic vigour. In the following, I want to summarize the description of six of the seven criteria which are the content of chapters VII. – XII.

In chapter VII., Newman exposes his second criterion to distinguish a development from a corruption, the "continuity of principles". After mentioning nine principles (Dogma, Faith, Theology, Sacrament, Mysticism, Grace, Ascetism, Malignity and Sanctification), he goes deeper in four of them: Faith, Theology, Scripture, and Dogma. According to Newman, "the principle that doctrines are only so far to be considered true as there are logically demonstrated…" is opposed (antagonistic) to the principle of faith (p. 327). He argues against the assertion of J. Locke that whether a revelation is from God or not must be judged by reason. Newman does not want to assume that there should be no verifying of "the intellectual basis of Christianity". But one has not "to wait for logical proof before believing..." (p. 330). He desires to see the intellectual proof come as a reward. After shortly dealing with the principle of "Theology" he goes on by considering the principle of Scripture. The mystical interpretation of Scripture has to be preferred, and here one can see a continuing tradition of interpreting Scripture form the Church Fathers up the present. If someone condemns this method of interpreting Scripture, he condemns most of the antiquity (p. 346). Lastly, he deals with the principle of "Dogma". According to Newman, it is the duty of every Christian to witness "against all opinions which are contrary to what he had received in his baptismal catechizing…" (p. 348). If principles like these are respected then a changing of a doctrine is a development and not a corruption.

In the VIII. chapter, Newman expresses the "third note" of a true development of doctrine – the "assimilative power". Among the different opinions through different ages, the Church has the task to purify, assimilate, transmute, and take into itself "the many-coloured beliefs, forms of worship, codes of duty, schools of thought…" (p. 357). She has to reject "evil without sacrificing the good…" (p. 365). In this process the Church can change heathen superstitions into Christian superstitions, heathen appointments into spiritual rites and practices (379).

In a "logical sequence" one doctrine leads to another doctrine – this is the very essence of chapter IX. Here Newman expands six doctrines (Pardons, Penances, Satisfactions, Purgatory, Meritorious Works and Monastic rules), which are clearly a later development of the Roman Catholic Church. Defending their status as dogmas, he counts them as genuine and true developments as they come out of a logical progress from former doctrines.

From the argument of the "logical sequence" Newman, in chapter X., shifts to the argument of "anticipation of Future". A developing doctrine, while in its beginning stages, gives some idea of where it would end in the future. Here he gives some brought elaborated descriptions of those doctrines in the Roman Catholic Church which are not brought out of Scripture but are based on later developments such as worshipping the Saints, Relics and Angels, the nobility of a virgin life, and the role of Mary as the mother of Christ.

The sixth principle of a genuine developed doctrine is that it "conserves actions on its past". Newman writes that "… a true development is that which is conservative of its original, and a corruption is that which tends to its destruction…" (p. 419). That is, although a doctrine develops through the time, in its development it always conserves and preserves the original idea.

In the last chapter, chapter XII., Newman characterizes a development as genuine if it has chronicle vigor and survives through all the attacks and offenses which have come up from time to time. Newman defends the Roman Catholic Church by arguing that she endured although there were hard times where she was nearly wrestled down. Newman writes that "… her wonderful revivals, while the world as triumphing over her, is a further evidence of the absence of corruption in the system of doctrine and worship into which she has developed." (p. 444). He continues, "She pauses in her course, and almost suspends her functions; she rises again, and she is herself once more; all things are in their place and ready for action." (p. 444).

Critical Evaluation

As I mentioned in the introduction, Newman and Schleiermacher found their answers in total different ways. While the question on the development of doctrines drove Schleiermacher into the modern philosophical direction, Newman decided to answer the question out of the Roman Catholic perspective.

First of all, Newman, in his observation that doctrines truly develop through time, is right. No one can ignore that doctrines from the first churches up to the present have changed. In fact, it is a great challenge to deal with this phenomenon because the next arising questions are very crucial. Are these developments inspired like the Holy Scriptures? Is not only Scripture inspired and are the later developed doctrines, weather good and useful or not, a product of human fallible theological thinking which has to be revised from time to time? Newman sees the developments of doctrine as part of the inspiration by the Holy Spirit just as the Bible is inspired. However, not everyone in the Roman Catholic Church is infallible in his teaching. By counting only the Pope as inspired, if declaring doctrines ex cathedra, he limits infallibility only to the Pope. Furthermore, only the true Church, the Roman Catholic Church in Newman's opinion, is the place where true developments can occur. In this way Newman gets to be very exclusive. True development of doctrines cannot take place outside the Roman Catholic Church because all the protestant and other Churches have separated themselves from her and thus separated from the original Church. From a protestant point of view Newman's exclusive attitude should be doubted. Claiming that still up to the present we have infallible inspiration, like Scripture, and asserting that the Roman Catholic Church is the only place for it, is very venturous.

Another point in which Newman should be impeached is that in most of his argumentations he deals mainly with the early church fathers and not with the Bible. Surely, in his concept of defining development with the argument of ongoing inspiration beyond the Scriptures of the NT it all does make sense. But this whole concept should be distrusted since the canon of the inspired Scriptures was approved in the fourth century – in a time where the Church was still one Church and later became the Roman Catholic Church.

Third, for the argument of "chronic vigour" Newman should be complimented as well as scrutinized. Newman is right to assert that the genuine doctrines until the present have always overcome various assaults through history. However, the question is whether false doctrines, or corruptions, as he names not genuine developments of doctrines, always cease to exist during the time? Are old doctrines right only because they survived during the time? Is the ceasing existence of a doctrine always an evidence for being corrupt?

Lastly, the argument of "assimilating power"
should be revised critically. Undoubtingly, there are some elements in Christian tradition which have their origin in non-Christian cultures (for example, diverse philosophical concepts which were adopted into Theology). Maybe these elements are not always wrong but are at times helpful. Yet the process of assimilating things from Non-Christian origins is very hazardous. Often developments assimilating foreign elements go in wrong directions and so they remove Christian doctrines from their origin. Out of such assimilating developments there came doctrines like Purgatory, worshipping Angels, Saints and Relics, praying to Mary, etc. It is a tragedy that the Roman Catholic Church counts these developments as genuine and defends them as an inspired development.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Newman's thoughts and arguments should be highly respected because he faces a very crucial subject and seeks to answer hazardous questions. It should also be highly regarded that Newman's questions arose out of the earnest attempt to find the real origin of Christian Doctrine in order to prove whether developments were genuine or corrupt. To my regret, Newman took a wrong direction in his questioning. On the one hand, however, Newman in his thoughts should be honored. Yet on the other hand they should be reviewed with great caution.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Schleiermacher, Friedrich. The Christian Faith. Translated by H. R. Mackintosh. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1956.

DIE DEUTSCHE EVANGELIKALE BEWEGUNG:

GRUNDLINIEN IHRER GESCHICHTE UND THEOLOGIE

__________________

A Book Review

Presented to

Dr. M. Yarnell III.

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for SYSTH 3114

__________________

Heinrich Kehler

October 23, 2008

Friedhelm Jung. Die deutsche Evangelikale Bewegung: Grundlinien ihrer Geschichte und Theologie. Bonn: Verlag für Kultur und Wissenschaft, 2001. 378 pp. €30.00.

Friedhelm Jung is a professor of Systematic Theology and the director of the MATh program at the German extension of the SWBTS in Bonn. After finishing his M.Div. in St. Chrischona Theological Seminary in Basel (Switzerland) in 1984, he received his Dr. theol. in Marburg (Germany) in 1991. The title of his dissertation, which he published after his promotion, was Die deutsche Evangelikale Bewegung: Grundlinien ihrer Geschichte und Theologie (The German Evangelical Movement: Basics of its History and Theology). In his dissertation Jung deals with the conservative evangelical movement in Germany by laying the focus on the twentieth century.

However, in order to review Jung's work, one should consider that the German term "evangelikal" does not have the same meaning as the English term evangelical. This is the reason for defining the term evangelikal before evaluating Jung's work. As M. Yarnell III. notes in his book, The formation of Christian Doctrine, the word evangelical has different connotations. Therefore, Yarnell distinguishes between classical evangelicalism and modern evangelicalism. However, in the beginning of the first chapter, Jung offers five points to characterize the German term evangelikal: a) believing in the inspired Scriptures as the Word of God; b) conversion and being born again; c) spiritual community of the believers; d) sanctification and mission; e) a visible parousia of Jesus Christ in the future (25-6). Due to these five criteria the definition of Jung comes close to the term conservative evangelicals (contrary to protestant evangelicals). After a consultation with the author, the term 'conservative evangelical movement' for the German term evangelikale Bewegung will be used in the following.

Generally, Jung's work could be placed in the field of church history as he describes the development of the evangelical churches in Germany from the nineteenth to the twentieth century. In this respect, one can observe that there are some developments of doctrines during the period of time. Nevertheless, focusing on doctrinal developments is not the purpose of the book. Jung's intention is simply to delineate the developments of the free churches in Germany in the twentieth century.

In the first chapter (22-49), Jung describes the origins of the German conservative evangelical movement. According to Jung, most of the conservative evangelicals in Germany had their origins in the pietist-movement in the seventeenth century in Germany as well as in the spiritual revivals in England and North America during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Two types of church groups came out of the pietistic origin: the community-movement (Gemeinschaftsbewegung), which is still in the German Protestant Church, and the classical free churches (Baptists, Brethren churches, Free Evangelical Churches, etc). Additionally, these churches were impacted by the American fundamentalist movement in the beginning of the twentieth century. A third type of church group had its origin in the Confessing Church, which was founded as an underground-church during the time of Adolf Hitler. The Confessing Church was a group of people (mostly theologians) in the German Protestant Church, who wanted to oppose the ideologies of the Nazis. After World War II., the Confessing Church almost ceased to exist, yet was renewed in the 60s to oppose liberal theology in the German Protestant Church. However, renewing the Confessing Church they changed its name to Confessing Movement 'No Other Gospel' (Bekenntnisbewegung 'Kein anderes Evangelium). In conclusion, these three German conservative evangelical movements form the main group of conservative evangelicals in Germany: a) the German pietism; b) the German free churches; c) the Confessing Movement 'No Other Gospel'.

In the second chapter (50-173), Jung describes four main associations of the conservative evangelical movement in Germany, which operate independently. The first association is called Deutsche Evanglische Allianz (German Evangelical Alliance – [GEA]) and is a voluntary association of conservative evangelical churches including protestant and free churches (51-94). The GEA was founded in 1846 as an outcome of the revivals in the eighteenth and nineteenth century and was based on a common confession of faith. However, while the period of the Third Reich was hard for the GEA, the time afterwards was very reproductive. Especially the spiritual and material support from the USA and other countries helped the GEA to grow after World War II. During the next few decades many organizations and great significant events were launched through the GEA (for example a Christian television company, the ERF; a conservative evangelical journal, idea – Spektrum; the World Congress of Evangelism 1966; the International Congress for Worldevangelism in 1971 in Amsterdam; different revival campaigns with Billy Graham; Christian schools; etc). As a result, up to the present the GEA develops qualitatively as well as quantitatively.

The second association of the conservative evangelical movement in Germany is called the Confessing Movement 'No Other Gospel' in the German Protestant Church (94-153). As previously mentioned, the Confessing Movement was some sort of a succession of the Confessing Church in the Third Reich. It was re-formed in the 60s as a response as well as an opposition to the liberal theology since it became stronger in the protestant theology. However, this movement chose to stay in the German Protestant Church, for the leaders decided to operate from within the German Protestant Church. Similarly, they started to oppose the WCC, which became increasingly stronger, too. Additionally, in the 70s and 80s, the Confessing Movement went over to fight on political ground for moral values (for example against abortion, homosexuality, and the decay of morality). Lastly, it started to fight against the charismatic and pentecostal movement in the 80s and 90s.

The third association of conservative evangelical churches described by F. Jung is the charismatic and pentecostal movement (153-166). Jung briefly illustrates their early development in the beginning of the twentieth century (pentecostal movement) and in the 60s of the twentieth century (charismatic movement). However, they, too, are part of the conservative evangelical movement, since their beliefs are suitable to the five points mentioned in the beginning of Jung's work. Nonetheless, he points out some difficulties to view them as normal conservative evangelical churches.

The last association of conservative evangelical churches is the group of independent churches in Germany, which fit into the concept of the five criteria of being a conservative evangelical church but do not want to join any association. Here Jung mentions the Russian-German churches in Germany, which are mainly Baptists and Mennonites. From the 1970s up to the present, Russian-German churches have been growing in quantity and quality as they have launched their own mission boards as well as their own theological seminary (the Bibelseminar Bonn) and are currently developing in their areas.

In the last two chapters, Jung first provides some basic theological positions of conservative evangelicals in Germany. The basic theological standpoints for conservative evangelical theology are Missions, inspiration of Scripture, the eschatological position, and lastly some moral viewpoints. Most of the conservative evangelicals in Germany agree in these theological issues. Finally, in the last chapter, Jung shortly discusses some critical remarks, which came up against the conservative evangelical movement in Germany during the last decades.

Critical Evaluation

The book of F. Jung is a great contribution to the field of conservative evangelical studies in Germany – a field which is almost neglected by German theological studies. However, one has to consider that the conservative evangelical movement in Germany is not as powerful as for example in the USA. This is the reason for the great importance of this work concerning the future conservative evangelical studies in Germany. Nevertheless, some points should be critically evaluated.

First of all, the well developed concept of arguments of the book should be admired. The origins as well as the following developments of the German conservative evangelical movement along with the focus on the developments in the twentieth century are very well elaborated. However, it could be critical remarked that Jung might be focusing too much on the German Evangelical Alliance rather than elaborating different evangelical denominations like the German Baptists, the Free Evangelical Churches, or the German Brethren Churches, which are part of the GEA. Instead, Jung focuses on the umbrella association of the different evangelical denominations, the GEA.

Further, the description of the Confessing Movement 'No other Gospel' seems to be too broad if one looks at the influence of this group of churches on the whole conservative evangelical movement in Germany. Without a doubt, the focus of the Confessing Movement lies rather on the German Protestant Church than on free churches. However, in comparison to the pentecostal and charismatic movement and their importance to the whole conservative evangelical movement in Germany the Confessing Movement 'No other Gospel' seems to be less meaningful.

Lastly, one has to keep in mind that this book is not really up to date since it was written 1991. Revising it in 2001, Jung added the Russian-German churches to his work. However, since the Russian-German churches constitute at least a third of the entire conservative evangelical movement in Germany, their importance and influence is still growing. For this reason, a broader description of the Russian-German churches would be eligible.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the book as well as the effort of F. Jung should be held in high regard. The very well developed concept as well as the helpful appendices provide a brought overview on the German conservative evangelical movement in the twentieth century. However, since time is progressing, in order to give a more detailed picture of the German conservative evangelical movement today, a more updated work is needed. Nevertheless, this book is recommendable for those who are interested in the present situation of the conservative evangelical movement in Germany.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Yarnell, Malcolm B. III. The Formation of Christian Doctrine. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2007.

PATTERNS IN HISTORY - A CHRISTIAN VIEW

__________________

A Book Review

Presented to

Rev. Malcolm B. Yarnell III, DPhil Oxon

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for SYSTH 3114

__________________

Heinrich Kehler

October 7, 2008

David W. Bebbington. Patterns in History: A Christian View. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1979. 221pp. $19.46.

David W. Bebbington was born in 1949 and is currently a professor of history at the University of Stirling in Scotland since 1976. His research field is history in connection with politics, religion, and society. Additionally, one of his special subjects making him a well-known person is the history of the global evangelical movement. One of his works is Patterns in History which deals with the question of historical interpretation. In the following I want to summarize and evaluate briefly the first four chapters.

Summary

In the first chapter Bebbington deals with the question, "What is history?" (1-20). One has to distinguish between 'historiography' and 'historical process'. While the 'historical process' is the subject the historian deals with, the 'historiography' is what a historian sets out to attempt. Bebbington emphasizes: "Between the historian and the people about whom he writes there is a great gulf fixed." (2). However, by considering history there are some other problems, namely, the problem of evidence and the problem of the historian himself. The problem of evidence is expressed in the difference between the written history and the actual past. The subject-matter, i.e. the past, is not available for investigation because the historian is separated from it by time. The other problem, the historian himself, means that every historian looks at history from his own (unique) perspective. Bebbington infers that "[i]t may seem to follow that nothing can be known about the past." (8) Hence he sees probability as one of the guides of history. However, this includes that every historian can only make assumptions on and about history. Concluding the first chapter, Bebbington summarizes five philosophies (patterns) of history. These five patterns are: the cyclical view, the linear view (Christian view), the idea of progress, historicism, and the Marxist view.

In the second chapter Bebbington gives an outline of the cyclical view of history. The idea behind this concept is that one can observe different processes which are repeated over and over (for example days, months, seasons, years, generations, and civilizations). There are three main variations of the cyclical view. The first variation is the rising up and falling down of dynasties and civilizations. The second variation is that "even the universe is passing through a cycle" (22). The third variation is that "the past is a time of steady decline from a lost golden age to the decadence of the present" (22). One could have thought that this view occurs only in the Chinese civilization. In fact, this view also existed in Indian and ancient Middle East civilizations. However, all of them had a different view on history as a cyclical process. Concerning the Chinese cyclical view history was written "to serve a practical purpose" (22-3). Telling history was to them a guide for the officials as well as for the normal population. The Indian cyclical view of history was unlike since their thinking about history aimed to escape history. True life is only beyond history in an eternal sphere. In the ancient Middle East the Persian idea of cyclical history "symbolized a progressive decadence" (26), and in the end of time there will be a judgment. But also in the concepts of ancient philosophers and historians the cyclical view is somehow visible. With Friedrich Nietzsche, Oswald Spengler, and Arnold Toynbee, the cyclical view came up again after the enlightenment as it was almost forgotten in the Middle Ages. Evaluating the cyclical view of history Bebbington asserts that at least this view could not be held up against the linear view of history. "The rises and falls of history show no consistent pattern" (41), he assesses.

The third chapter is an abstract about the linear view of history. This view comes out of the Jewish-Christian tradition and is totally different from the cyclical view. The very important point is that history is heading towards a goal. Christians, therefore, in general have three convictions about history: "God intervenes in it; [...] he guides it in a straight line; and [...] he will bring it to the conclusion that he has planned" (43). This is "…the core of the Christian doctrine of providence" (43). In the OT one can see that God was active in history. The purpose of these interventions was "…to bring judgment or mercy" (44). In fact, the whole historical process, and not only parts of it, was and is under his guidance. Just like Jesus Christ came into this world, and so into history itself, this concept was implemented throughout the NT, too. The coming of Jesus was clearly an intervention in history and a bringing of blessings as well as judgments. The actions of the apostles were a continuing intervention of God in history, but "…the historical process would come to an end" (50). This is the apocalyptical part of the linear view of history. God will be victorious in the future. For this reason Christians should have confidence in the future. Yet the linear view changed somehow. When Christianity became an undisputed (unchallenged) religion in the Roman Empire the thought grew that that was the millennium of peace. Further, through the Middle Ages this idea was increasingly developed. Bebbington diagnoses: "The mediaeval Christian world-view was remarkably static" (57). In the modern period the Christian linear view of history was hardly challenged. However, still up to the present this view is still present in most of the Christian conceptions on history. "A God who guides the course of history but who is opposed on the way will surely bring the process to a triumphant conclusion" (65), Bebbington concludes the third chapter.

In the fourth chapter Bebbington abridges the third pattern, The idea of progress. The idea of progress is a product of the Christian linear view of history and the ideas of the enlightenment, so that it has elements of both concepts. "It is linear, offers confidence in the future and entails acceptance of unchanging moral values" (68). However, the difference is that history is a progress and moves towards a future where man becomes perfect. Just like ever developing technology, man's intellect is developing, too. However, the starting point is not creation and, vice versa, the ending place is not judgment. Further, the idea of progress offers a high expectation of the future. Human happiness and its rationality are the explicit criteria about progress. Cultural change is a key concept in the idea of progress. Additionally, the developing science of man is another concept of the idea of progress. Bebbington describes it as follows "The aim of history is to create a science of man" (78). Another goal of history is a time when liberty of man will be fully realized. To assess this concept Bebbington writes that "[T]he idea of progress has suffered vicissitudes in the twentieth century. The First World War struck a blow at more facile versions of popular optimism" (88). Then he goes on and says: "The second war struck a second blow" (89). That is the result when humanity thinks it can make progress on its own, without God!