Meaning of confession and doctrine in this context?

What is the difference between the meaning of ‘**confession**’ and ‘**doctrine**’ in this context, and what their ‘**unity**’ is supposed to mean. I know based on my searches that ‘confession’ might mean something like *belief* or *system of beliefs*, and ‘doctrine’ might mean *principles* or *teaching*. But I want the meanings in the context of Christianity. > It is important to note that Kant did not deny ‘the preeminent > importance of its [theology’s] subject’, but that his problems with > this discipline were twofold. First, in his view theology falls > outside the scope of what can be established by means of human > rationality alone. As we have seen, this principal argument was not > new, since late medieval nominalists like Ockham had already claimed > that the principles of theology cannot be supported by natural > reason.30 Second, what was new was Kant’s political argument against > the way in which theological orthodoxy was used by the state for its > own interests. In fact, such (mis)use had become widespread ever > since the Peace of Augsburg in 1555 with its famous maxim *cuius regio > cuius religio,* which had turned religion into a means to bolster the > identity of the newly emerging nation states. From now on **unity of > confession and doctrine** often came to be enforced by the state, and it > was in this context that the notion of theology as queen of the > sciences got its most articulate meaning (one should note that a queen > was, first of all, a political figure). Apparently, it was this > political constellation that, quite understandably, sparked Kant’s > deep dissatisfaction with the academic status quo in general and the > role of theology in particular. > > *How Theology Stopped Being* Regina Scientiarum—*and How Its Story Continues* Gijsbert van den Brink [Studies in Christian Ethics](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0953946819868092) 13 August 2019