Ferdinand Christian Baur, History of Christian Dogma, trans. Peter C. Hodgson and Robert F. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), xiv + 402 Pps., $125.00.
Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792–1860) was a German Protestant theologian was a German Protestant theologian within the Tübingen School of Theology. Notably, he critically appropriated elements of Hegel’s dialectic, arguing in the process that second century Christianity represented a synthesis of sorts between Jewish Chirstianity and Pauline Christianity. This text is edited by two theology scholars from North America: Peter C. Hodgson and Robert F. Brown. Hodgson is Emeritus Professor of Theology, Divinity School, Vanderbilt University. Brown is Emeritus Professor of Philosophy of religion and history of philosophy, University of Delaware.
This text, History of Christian Dogma, is a translation of the second edition of Baur’s Lehrbuch der christlichen Dogmengeschichte from 1858. The Lehrbuch summarizes in 400 pages his lectures on the history of Christian dogma, which was published post-humously in four volumes. Within it, he applies Hegelian categories to his historical studies in New Testament, church history, and history of Christian dogma. According to Baur, “dogma” is the rational articulation of the Christian idea that God and humanity are united through Christ and reconciled in the faith of the community. Following an introduction on the concept and history of the history of dogma, the Lehrbuch treats three main periods: the dogma of the ancient church; the dogma of the Middle Ages; and dogma in the modern era. This history is a progression in the self-articulation of dogma through conflict and resolution, which moves gradually from objective to subjective forms, as well as to the mediation of subject and object by the philosophers and theologians of the early nineteenth century.
Baur is a consummate theologian of history, as this text illustrates. However, he is as much a historian of theology as he is a theologian of history, meaning that he gives a theological interpretation to the historical process. Baur had manifold influences. For example, Schelling and Hegel influenced him to a significant degree. He was also heavily influenced by Schleiermacher, although he was critical of Schleiermacher’s failure to connect the ideal Christ to the historical figure of Jesus. When Baur’s interpretation of the historical process is examined, the full extent of Hegel’s influence upon him is evident. For Baur, history is the central theological category and theology is the key to the nature of history. In fact, the self-actualization of God is the ground of the historical process. History exists because God as absolute spirit explicates himself historically.
In sum, Baur herein presents the theory of historical knowledge as an interplay of authentic objectivity and authentic subjectivity. He sees the church as a historical institution by which the ide of divine-human reconciliation achieves concrete actualization in the world. Baur’s text is to be highly recommended to those with interests in historical theology.
Bradford McCall
Holy Apostles College and Seminary