Volume 27, Issue 2

This paper describes the process of reception of Catholic Modernism in Poland as well as the Polish contribution to this movement. It shows the Polish antimodernist perspective on modernistic thought. The neglect of Polish modernism was caused by the nationalistic character of the Polish theology and has resulted in absence of historical studies of Polish Catholic Modernism. Based on the results of archival and literature research the paper presents a variety of Polish Catholic Modernists and non-Catholic supporters of the modernist thought. A unique place among Polish modernists belongs to Marian Zdziechowski (1861–1938) who was the only Polish participant of the international intellectual debate on the “modernisation” of Roman Catholicism. The paper analyses the development of Zdziechowski’s thought and shows that his main demand throughout the modernist debates was to create a new, more efficient apologetics, which would be grounded in the religious experience of the individual.

The monthly magazine Hochland was probably the most influential Catholic cultural periodical in Germany in the Weimar Period. According to Georg Cardinal von Kopp’s assessment in 1911, it was “unfortunately the most read periodical in all of the educated circles of Germany, Austria and German Switzerland”. Moving beyond the simple rejection of modern culture in Germany, the journal tried to follow a new program of mediatory engagement, although it did continue to hold to traditional positions in many regards. In this article the reception of modern, Enlightenment-affirmative philosophy of religion in the journal is introduced with reference to reviews and essays from the later 1910s to the early 1930s. The journal’s treatment of a few critical subject areas is given close interpretive analysis, including the journal’s treatment of Gertrud Simmel’s Über das Religiöse , individually conceptualized forms of personalist moral theory, and the general shift to phenomenological discourses and the individual in the philosophy of religion. The fundamental rejections of these ideas and these schools of thought in reviews and essays, which are also found in the journal at this time (as in most all German language Catholic cultural journals of the period), are not addressed in this article. The article thus sheds light on an often-forgotten and relatively small minority phenomenon in German Catholic intellectual circles of the Weimar Period, namely the positive embrace of Enlightenment-oriented modern thought. By promoting these ideas at this time, this group made themselves highly vulnerable to disciplinary measures by the Catholic Church. (The journal was put on the Index in 1911.)

In 1850, Jacob Frerichs produced the first and until now the only edition of Friedrich Schleiermacher’s important lectures on Practical Theology. It is a mix and compilation of students’ transcripts from six different semesters, redundant and at times contradictory, which doesn’t correspond to Schleiermacher’s actual lectures. Most of the transcripts used by Frerichs are still preserved and have now been evaluated for a new edition of Schleiermacher’s Practical Theology. This article disassembles Frerichs’ edition into its components giving evidence for every text passage from which source Frerichs took it.

Between 1819 and 1832 Friedrich Schleiermacher was giving lectures on the life of Jesus at the University of Berlin. The following article includes two partial editions, which document the introductory parts of the lectures from 1819/20 and 1829/30. Both are based on manuscripts written by Schleiermacher’s listeners. Especially to explore the development of Schleiermacher’s conceptual considerations this two partial editions should be a useful addition to the new critical edition of Schleiermacher’s Vorlesungen über das Leben Jesu published in 2018 by Walter Jaeschke (KGA II/15).

This is a new (and for the first time complete) edition of a speech about Buddhism by Rudolf Otto from 1913. This speech is his first academic reflexion of his journey around the world and his most detailed explanation of his view on this religion. In the first part of his speech Otto compares Buddhism with Christianity and finds a lot of parallels. In the second part he defines differences between these two religions and proclaims – from a Christian perspective – Christianity as more valuable than Buddhism. The preface puts the speech into its context: Otto’s relationship to and his knowledge of Buddhism (1), the history of publication of this speech (2), Otto’s specific view on Buddhism in comparison to his contemporaries (3), the meaning of this speech in his œuvre (4) and explanations about the edition (5). The editor has the opinion, that this speech is an important transition from Ottos philosophy of religion to his main work The Idea of the Holy . It further is a good example of what Otto means when speaking about the comparison of religions.