Volume 30, Issue 2

The study examines for the first time Ernst Troeltsch’s discussion of Johann Salomo Semler and Gotthold Ephraim Lessing in the reviews and criticisms and thus makes a contribution to the historicization of his Enlightenment interpretation and his reflective historicism. The analyzed reviews show Troeltsch as an intimate connoisseur of the 18th century history of theology, who did not let his differentiated concept of modernity become one-sided in contemporary diagnostic interest, but developed it in a critical examination of cultural-historical Enlightenment research. The analysis shows in an exemplary way how Troeltsch critically and in his own language makes historical sources and literary studies his own, in order to locate himself in the analyzed cultural-historical overall picture with this appropriation. An in-depth section highlights the reflection of his review work in the different text versions of his Kant and Protestantism studies, including insightful handwritten notes.

This article examines the early career of E. L. (Eric) Mascall, Anglican Catholic priest, theologian and philosopher of religion, late of Christ Church Oxford and King’s College London. Mascall spent the years between 1937 and 1945 teaching at Lincoln Theological College, in a time of acute political and intellectual unsettlement and (in due course) world war. Mascall rebelled against the previously dominant liberalism of the 1930s while also rejecting both Barthian Protestantism and certain currents in Orthodox theology, both of which were products of the same turmoil. The article documents his turn instead to the natural theology of Thomas Aquinas, and examines both its sources and its particular articulation in Mascall’s work. Even though relatively few in England followed Mascall down this particular path, his formation in the 1930s and 1940s reveals much about the temper of the moment.

Gegenwart is a German word which can be translated into English with the words Presence and/or Present in the “here and now,” but it can also imply the notion of “timelessness.” Different philosophers and theologians have used this word but I will argue that the richness of this word has often been “lost in translation” and thus the connotations of this German term need tobe explored in more detail to fully grasp what the authors intended to express when they used this word. As a case study, I will focus on how the famous thinker Hans Jonas uses this word in his writings showing the strong correlation with his understanding of good human actions performed before God, in agreement with his ethical approach built on the principle of human responsibility. This article also aims to illustrate the historical development of the concept of Gegenwart . This task will be achieved by analysing how several scholars (contemporaries of or preceding Jonas) have used the concept of Gegenwart over different periods of time and how this ultimately influenced Jonas.

Saint Justin Popovićis well known as a key protagonist of the patristic revival in Serbian theology of the twentieth century. This paper explores the way that this revival took place in his theology by analysing his patristic works, basic features of his patristic hermeneutics and discussing possible influences which enabled him to participate in what was, at the time, the emerging theological trend. His two key patristic works on St Macarius of Egypt and St Isaak the Syrian are analysed as they provide valuable information on Fr Justin’s approach to the patristic texts. Focus is also laid on his dogmatic works which reveal his understanding of the role of the patristic legacy in Orthodox theology, as well as on his exegetical works in which patristic authors are often and substantially engaged with. Three basic features of Fr Justin’s patristic hermeneutics are discussed: (1) his synthetic approach, founded on his understanding of catholicity ( sobornost ); (2) his emphasis on spiritual experience; and (3) his focus on the obtaining of sainthood as the ultimate goal of the patristic investigations. Three key streams of Russian religious thought, it is claimed, had a crucial impact on Fr Justin’s theological reasoning in general, and on his understanding of the patristic revival, in particular. Besides the theological influences, as evidenced in Russian philokalic tradition and theological figures among which Metropolitan Khrapovitsky plays a major role, the substantial contribution of Russian religious philosophy is also emphasized. In conclusion, it is argued that although Fr Justin’s turn to the patristic tradition exhibits some of the qualities of the neo-patristic synthesis, it lacks the programmatic character as evidenced in the case of Georges Florovsky’s theology. I show that Fr Justin participates in the “patristic turn”, a phenomenon which may be perceived as analogous to the “linguistic turn” that happened in the 20 th century philosophy, and not necessarily in neo-patristic theology as such.

This article provides an English translation of Ernst Troeltsch’s 1907 essay titled “Prädestination” in its entirety, accompanied by a concise introduction to Troeltsch’s articulation of the doctrine of predestination and the salient features of the article. Readers can also trace adaptations between the 1907 and 1913 version of “Prädestination” via the footnotes. This translation provides Anglophone readers access to the only essay in which Troeltsch addresses the question of predestination directly. Significantly, predestination provides the foundation to his understanding of that which drives the development of all of history and therefore is crucial to understanding his thought.

In 1977, the terror of the Red Army Faction (RAF) reached its climax during the so-called German Autumn. A few days after the liberation of the Lufthansa plane „Landshut“, the Protestant theologian Traugott Koch, who was teaching at the University of Hamburg at the time, took the opportunity of a lecture hour to offer the students present ethical-theological orientation in view of the recent events. The manuscript of this interesting contemporary document is published here for the first time in public. An introduction places Koch’s remarks in the contemporary debate context.