Volume 64, Issue 4

The critique of C. H. Ratschow and Knud E. Løgstrup against the existential theology of Bultmann serves as starting point for asking the question about the possibility of thinking metaphysically within theology. Various forms of critique of metaphysics are mentioned, in particular the one of Jürgen Habermas, who’s characterisation of Martin Luther’s theology as „fideistic“ is rejected. After a short presentation of the concept of time in Luther’s De servo aritrio the creation philosophy of Løgstrup is presented as a plausible theological metaphysics.

The essay explores in four steps the question of whether the world needs an ex­planation and how it is to be explained in the case of its need for explanation. The first step argues that the principle of sufficient reason is valid and may be applied to the world as a whole. The three following steps examine different possibilities of explaining the world. It is shown that neither an immanent nor an axiogenetic explanation is possible, but that only an ontotheological explanation has a chance of success.

This article discusses the potential of Christoph Schwöbel’s relational theology for a reconsideration of Christian faith between church teaching and the dynamic praxis of love. Faith is approached as a relational phenomenon that is always already inspired by and confronted with shifting human expectations. At the interface between human expectations and God’s ongoing self-communication, theology reflects on both in a critical and self-critical manner. The future orientation of faith is then discussed in terms of God’s love, promise and faithfulness. Finally, the article argues for the need to develop a new concept of the soul as the relational centre of human beings.

The paper discusses the relationship between “atonement” and “reconciliation” in systematic theology, claiming that Hegel’s concept of reconciliation ( Versöhnung ) continues to influence contemporary English-speaking theology. It is argued that the so-called theories of atonement often tacitly assume “Hegel’s camel”, an idea consisting of three propositions as follows: (i) atonement is a consistent umbrella concept that pertains to the systematic explanation of the entire work of Christ, (ii) atonement contains both an overarching rational insight and a moral code of conduct that provide an apology for the truth of Christian faith, (iii) Anselm of Canterbury has seminal importance when this rational atonement is explained. The paper complements the author’s historical-critical discussion of “reconciliation” undertaken in St. Andrews Encyclopedia of Theology .

The first part of this contribution is devoted to my recollection of Christoph Schwöbel; both of us were pupils of Carl Heinz Ratschow, albeit at different times and in different roles. However, we both have been following a twofold counsel of our teacher, first not to restrict theology to value judgments but to strive for an ontology of Christian belief and second to work with a “Trinitarian definition of Christology”. Part two recounts the turmoil around Andreas Osiander in a turbulent time of a crisis of authority around 1550. He was in the end judged to be heretic and was excluded from “true” Lutheranism in the Formula of Concord 1577. Indeed, his doctrine of justification, influenced by humanistic Neoplatonism and even the Kabbala was contrary to the predominant position of the Wittenberg school. However, the crucial point was Osiander’s constellation of Soteriology, Christology and Trinitarian concept of God on a strictly exegetic basis. Part three offers a sketch of the interrelation of Osiander’s soteriological model of the believer’s ascension to God, his Christology of a mediator, and his concept of the divine Logos. In his time, Osiander in a way fulfilled Ratschow’s twofold counsel, in opposition to Christological functionalism and theological positivism. Even today, in view of the ecumenical debate on the doctrine of justification, his thought might give useful hints for revising the aforementioned tasks in fundamental theology.