Abstract:
In this article it is argued that in actual systematic reflection on the Christian faith we cannot a priori assume that the dogma has the same content as Scripture, because it is strongly determined by its cultural-philosophical, its theological and its ecclesiastical-political contexts. Secondly, it is argued that the dogma is not a rule of faith or a hermeneutical rule for the interpretation of Scripture, but a grammatical rule for the use of the vocabulary of faith. Thirdly, Lindbeck’s concept of truth is discussed. Lindbeck rightly maintains a notion of ontological truth as correspondence, but wrongly reduces this correspondence to correspondence between the life of the believer and God and unnecessarily restricts ontological truth to the first order propositions of faith. Doctrinal propositions can claim ontological truth too (though they don’t need to do so). This criticism, however, does not affect Lindbeck’s clarifying analysis of the rule-character of doctrinal propositions.
