Bushnell and Dorner: Protestant Middle Ground Theology
This paper compares the theological approaches of Horace Bushnell and Isaak August Dorner, two nineteenth-century Protestant thinkers who each sought a middle ground between conservative orthodoxy and liberal theology. Bushnell, a Congregationalist, attempted to reconstruct doctrines such as the Person of Christ and atonement for the modern consciousness while preserving supernaturalism. Dorner, a Lutheran, argued that the Protestant Reformation remained incomplete and pursued a relational rather than immutable conception of God, explicitly rejecting Hegelian panentheism. The paper argues that both theologians shared a commitment to personal, relational understandings of God that stopped short of reducing God to a human construct — a position that satisfied neither strict conservatives nor committed liberals.
- Introduction: A Progressive Orthodoxy: Bushnell's middle way between liberal and conservative theology
- Bushnell's Congregationalist Approach: Bushnell's emphasis on feeling and modern doctrine
- Dorner's Lutheran Reformation Vision: Dorner's relational God and incomplete Reformation
- Rejecting Hegel and Panentheism: Both thinkers reject Hegel's dependent, projected God
- The Tightrope of the Middle Ground: Middle-ground theology scorned by both theological camps
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It frames the theological positions of Bushnell and Dorner through a clear organizing metaphor — the "middle ground" or "tightrope" — that gives the comparison conceptual unity throughout.
- The paper grounds abstract theological distinctions (immutability vs. relationality, supernaturalism vs. liberalism) in concrete thinkers and specific doctrinal debates, making the argument accessible.
- The closing image — that middle-ground theologians were treated like the "lukewarm" of Revelation — is a rhetorically effective and thematically apt conclusion that synthesizes the paper's argument.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses comparative theological analysis: it identifies a shared structural problem (the tension between tradition and modernity) and shows how two thinkers from different confessional traditions (Congregationalist and Lutheran) responded to it similarly, while also noting their differences. This method of parallel comparison allows the student to illuminate both figures more clearly than a single-subject treatment would.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by situating Bushnell's progressive orthodoxy within the liberal-conservative spectrum, then introduces Dorner as a distinct but parallel figure. It proceeds to develop their shared rejection of Hegelian panentheism as the key doctrinal boundary that kept both thinkers from crossing into liberal theology, and concludes by reflecting on why such middle-ground positions tend to attract scorn from both sides of the theological divide.
Introduction: A Progressive Orthodoxy
Bushnell put forward a progressive orthodoxy as a middle way between conservatism and liberalism (Olson 2013). However, the fact that he is typically classified as a liberal Protestant theologian suggests the degree to which he deviated from traditional orthodoxy. Bushnell attempted to reconstruct certain doctrines — such as the Person of Christ and atonement — by updating them to appeal to the modern consciousness. At the same time, he upheld supernaturalism and biblical mystery. This middle ground did not really appease liberals who wanted a total reform with respect to theology, or conservatives who wanted to maintain traditional orthodoxy. That is why the middle ground between the two, and the theologians who tried to reach it, tends to be viewed with such scorn.
Bushnell's Congregationalist Approach
Bushnell ministered to the Congregational churches of Connecticut and emphasized religious feeling as the foundation of theological understanding (Olson 2013, 246). He wanted to explore God from the perspective of the modern mind without abandoning the basic fundamental beliefs that still rang true. His project was one of reconstruction rather than rejection: he sought to make Christian doctrine intelligible to a modern audience while preserving its supernatural core.
Dorner's Lutheran Reformation Vision
Dorner was a Lutheran — "more Lutheran than Reformed" — and so not very similar to Bushnell in confessional background (Olson 2013, 246). Dorner believed the Protestant Reformation had not yet been fully accomplished, arguing that Protestant orthodoxy remained too rooted in classical traditions. He sought to describe a God who is more relational than immutable, while at the same time avoiding the Hegelian panentheistic conception of God, which posits that "all is in God" — meaning that God is related to the world as the soul is to the body (Cooper 2006, 3).
References
Cooper, J. W. (2006). Panentheism — the other God of the philosophers: From Plato to the present. Baker Academic.
Olson, Roger E. The Journey of Modern Theology: From Reconstruction to Deconstruction. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2013.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.