Volume 32, Issue 1

This paper explores Gottfried Thomasius’s impact on nineteenth-century dogmatic development, with a particular focus on his pivotal work, Die Christliche Dogmengeschichte . By comparing Thomasius’s theological viewpoints with those of his contemporaries, such as Ferdinand Christian Baur, the study underscores Thomasius’s unique contributions to Christian doctrine. Key themes include his engagement with the Erlangen School’s emphasis on experiential faith and organicism. The paper places Thomasius within the wider context of the era’s theological debates, highlighting his divergence from other prominent theological figures of the nineteenth century.

This essay examines the influences of the mid-nineteenth century German theologian August Tholuck on the American Social Gospel, focusing on his connection with the Harvard theologian Francis Greenwood Peabody (1847–1936). Usually, the historiography of the Social Gospel locates it exclusively or almost exclusively in an American context, removing it from its trans-Atlantic dialogue in favor of a narrative of it as a wholly American  fin-de-siècle  phenomenon. Rather than emphasizing its relative newness or distance from European theology, however, members of the Social Gospel relied on German theology as an authority that could justify their theological and social interventions. Through a ‘case study’ of Peabody and his mentor the German August Tholuck, this essay highlights the theological side of a movement usually discussed mainly in light of its sociological components and highlights a much older tradition of German ‘mediating theology’ that was crucial for how Peabody contributed to a Christian ‘social ethics’ located within the Social Gospel.

This article analyses how Hermann Wolfgang Beyer’s interpretation of diaconia in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT) was influenced by Nazi ideology, emphasizing sacrificial service and obedience to the leader, reflecting the authoritarian values of the time. In contrast to Wilhelm Brandt’s dialectical approach, which maintained a balance between leadership and service, Beyer’s perspective removed leadership from the concept and emphasized submission. The study underscores the significance of critical theological analysis, illustrating how ideological frameworks shape doctrinal interpretations. It also calls for reevaluating contemporary views on diaconia, recognizing historical influences, and applying methodological rigor in theological research.

This essay discusses the remarkable renaissance of the doctrine of the Trinity in 20 th century Protestant theology. First of all, it is Karl Barth who used this doctrine to show the rule of the triune God in his revelation. The following generations of theologians adopted Barth’s objective doctrine of revelation. Wolfhart Pannenberg and Jürgen Moltmann, for example, use Trinitarian theological arguments to criticize modern, secular society. In contrast, Falk Wagner defines the theme of the Trinity as God’s fundamental openness to otherness (world and human beings). Overall, it is shown that the reception of the doctrine of the Trinity in the 20 th century represents such a modern theory that has a pointed anti-modernist remark.

Grümme (1997) in particular has criticised Karl Rahner’s relationship to Judaism. Based on Rahner’s Sämtliche Werke , this criticism is re-examined here and placed in the wider context of his work. The article concludes that the previous theses on the dominance of the New Testament over the OT, on the Christocentric doctrine of grace, etc., largely hold up. What is new is the explicit clarification that Rahner was not a racist anti-Semite. This is evident both biographically and in his statements after Auschwitz. His theological position on Judaism is based on (Christocentric) lines of tradition, which he never completely escaped throughout his life. He functionalised Judaism by means of illustrative anti-Judaism as a comparative salvation factor to Christianity. There is hardly any explicit engagement with Judaism. It is therefore not possible for Karl Rahner to develop an independent theology of Israel („Israeltheologie“). His position is relevant to the history of research and can contribute in future scholarship as a point of reference in Rahner research, in the Catholic approach to Judaism and to the historical reappraisal of (everyday) Christian Jew-Hatred resp. theological antisemitism.

In December 1931, Harper & Brothers Publishers, who are located in New York and London, published a monograph by Wilhelm Pauck which is titled Karl Barth. Prophet of a New Christianity? . Pauck, a student of Adolf von Harnack, Ernst Troeltsch and Karl Holl, was originally from Germany but taught in Chicago. Through the publisher Pauck sent the book to Barth and introduced himself in a letter to the Swiss Systematic Theologian who was, then, teaching in Bonn. He also briefly explained the goal of his book. Barth was shocked and appalled. He felt completely misunderstood by Pauck. Their brief correspondence is now being edited for the first time here. The introduction provides a brief overview of Pauck’s theological biography. This is followed by a sketch of his book and its discussions by Edwin Ewart Aubrey, H. Richard Niebuhr and Henry N. Wieman.