基督宗教分別在十一世紀和十六世紀經歷了兩次歷史性的大分裂，從此變成為東正教、天主教與新教三足鼎立的局面。然而，自1948 年普世基督教協會在荷蘭的阿姆斯特丹成立以來， 各種有關「基督宗教合一」的呼聲、對話與神學不絕於耳。美國耶魯大學的歷史神學教授，喬治林貝克就在這種氣氛的驅使下，投入基督教「合一運動」的行列。林貝克終其後半生致力於推動一種有別於基本教義派的「認知一命題」論，和新教自由派的「經驗一表現」論之「文化一語言」的教義 (宗教) 觀，盼望能購在這個所謂的「後自由時代」中促成基督宗教之間的合一。對他而言，宗教的教義猶如語言中的文法規則。例如，凡是要使用法文的人就必須遵守法文的文法規則。同樣地，要成為基督徒必須學習基督教的文化用語 (教義) 才能與其他基督徒交談，分享經驗；除了扮演信徒之間的溝通規則之外，沒有實質的意義。他相信，只要大家都能明暸這一點，必能屏除自己的偏見，邁向合一的大道。筆者認為林貝克為合一所付出的努力固然值得稱許，但是，平心而論，教義的本質在他的筆下並沒有得到彰顯， 反而被嚴重地「貶值」。因為他否定了云云大眾接觸、認識基督宗教的主要途徑之一。如此做法必不能見容於教義體系均很健全的基督教三大教會，所以無助於基督宗教的合一。筆者無法認同他將教義「庸俗化」的做法。因此，本文強調，宗教的教義雖然不是真理本身，但是卻是終極真理的指標。 康德曾經提出一句認識論的名言：「沒有內容的思想是空的，沒有概念的直覺是盲目的。」就宗教而言，筆者認為，「沒有內容的宗教是空的，缺乏教義的信仰是盲目的」。對基督教而言，教義絕不是食之無味，棄之又覺得可惜的冷飯菜，而是對上帝一真理本身一有力的見證。唯有透過該真理，實質的「合一」才有可能。

　　　　　Christianity experienced two serious and historic split in the 11 th and 16th centuries. As a result, there stand three major churches within the Christian religion, i.e., the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church and the Protestant Church. However, ever since the establishment of the World Councils of Churches in Amsterdam in 1948, there has never fallen short of ecumenical-related claims, dialogues, councils and theologies. It is in such an atmosphere that George Lindbeck, a professor of historical theology at Yale University, embarks upon the ecumenical movement. Lindbeck devotes the second half of his life launching a "cultural- linguistic" theory of doctrine with the intention of reuniting the three long-split churches in the so-called "postliberal age". In Lindbeck's eyes, the function of religious doctrines is similar to the rules of grammar. For example, to speak French requires that a person learn and act upon rules of French grammar. In a similar manner, to become a Christian also requires that an adherent study and obey Christian doctrines in order to live and communicate with other Christians. Hence, the value of doctrines is entirely epistemological and pragmatic rather than ontological and essential. He believes that if Christians realise this fact and unanimously accept it, they will be willing to deconstruct their own prejudices and march hand in hand on the boulevard leading to unity. Undoubtedly, Lindbeck deserves general applause for his effort. Nevertheless, instead of revealing the genuine nature of doctrine, he downgrade it by trivialising the important role that doctrine plays within the Christian community. In so doing, Lindbeck is no less than closing one of the main doors for non-Christians' knowledge of the Christianity. On epistemology Immanuel Kant once remarked, "thought without content is empty, and intuition without concept is blind." As for religion, the present writer believes, "religion without essence is empty, and faith without doctrine is blind. " For Christian doctrines are by no means tasteless rechauffes, but vigorous testimonies to God the living Truth per se. Only by the aids of the Truth can real unity be possible.