The word Kenosis, used by Liebner about 1840, as an appropriate term to designate the field of discussion indicated above, is really the modern application of an old term which, if not nominally so extensively employed, was vir tually as widely used. The modern idea of the doctrine of the kenosis, which is Protestant, and especially Lutheran, is based on the statement of Paul, who said that Christ °being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation and took upon him the form of a servantx' (Phil. ii, 6-8).
Modern Doctrine. -As early as 1832 Ernst Sartorius and Johann KOnig each separately ap plied the expression of Kenosis, almost in the sense of a doctrine, to the Christ. Little by lit tle the term and what it stood for gained ground, especially among Lutheran theologists Until in 1845 it had assumed the form of a doc trine widely accepted in Protestant Germany. The ,position taken by those who adhered to the modern doctrine of Kenosis was that there is a perfect oneness in the person of Christ; since by his own will and in his divine form he laid aside the fullness of his divine nature in so far as all its external relations were con cerned, thus making it possible for him to be come fully incarnate, that is human, and capa ble of human existence and development. The doctrine of Kenosis, however, recognizes that Christ retained the use of his divine power for such special cases as were necessary for the re demption of his work. Reformed and United theologians followed the Lutheran leaders in their discussions and explanations of kenasir, which its defenders claimed was the natural out come of the previous development of dogma.
In this view they ate mistaken since early ortho dox exegesis was in no sense kenotic, nor were new theories, for a long time, kenotic. The idea that Christ left all his divine power behind him on his incarnation, obtained no hold in Christian theology previous to the 19th century. In fact the tendency of belief was to hold that, even on earth, the glory and the power of Christ were still intact and that a veil had been drawn over them. This veil might he partially drawn, revealing glimpses of the divine power. Even Calvin, the iconoclast in many other re spects, seems to have held this view.
The present doctrine of kenosis, which seemed, about the middle of the last century, as destined to incorporate itself firmly in Chris tian dogma, has been steadily losing ground. and the strenuous efforts of its champions have cnlv succeeded in bringing out clearly and defi nitely the fact that Christian ecclesiastical the ()logy has never admitted qr held the views pro pounded by the modern Kenotic creed.
Bensow, 'Die Lehre von der Kenose' (Leipzig 1903) • Dorner, 'History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Per son of Christ' (Edinburgh 1861-63) ; Frank, 'System der christlichen Gewissheit) (Erlan gen 1870-73) ; Gess, 'Die Lehre von der Per son Christi' (Basel 1856) ; Hall, F. J., 'The kenotic Theory Considered with Particular Reference to the Anglican 'Forms' (London 1898); Mackintosh, 'The Doctrine of the Per son of Jesus Christ" (New York 1912); Mor gan, R. C., 'God's Self-emptied Servant' (1906) ; Simon, 'Reconciliation by Incarnation> (Edinburgh 1898); Tosnasius, 'Christi Person and Werk' (Erlangen 1861).