Das Bekenntnis des Philosophen: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz als Philosoph und Theologe
This article takes up the Suggestion of C.H. Ratschow that in dealing with the "Cartesian dilemma" of modern theology there is much to be learned from Leibniz, who was an Opponent of Descartes and of Pierre Bayle. He is critical of the attempt to ascertain Leibniz* "Weltanschauung&quo...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | German |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
De Gruyter
2009
|
| In: |
Neue Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie
Year: 1986, Volume: 28, Issue: 1, Pages: 139-178 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | This article takes up the Suggestion of C.H. Ratschow that in dealing with the "Cartesian dilemma" of modern theology there is much to be learned from Leibniz, who was an Opponent of Descartes and of Pierre Bayle. He is critical of the attempt to ascertain Leibniz* "Weltanschauung", and attempts to demonstrate that Leibniz' System allowed him in the full sense to be both philosopher and theologian. For Leibniz "natural" philosophy and "revealed" theology correspond to each other in a qualified sense: they have similar theoretical and practical tasks to perform. Philosophy must deal with theoretical problems, which in the theological tradition come under the headings of predestination, providence, freedom, unfreedom, etc. That is what Leibniz consistently had in mind ("Confessio Philosophi", "Théodicée"). By means of its knowledge of revelation, theology is often able more effectively to foster a trust in God, which is at once satisfied with the world, and active in improving matters - which is also the practical goal of the philosopher. But it must accept its historical particularity. As Theologian, therefore, Leibniz battles for religious tolerance and theological irenicism in the tradition of the University of Helmstedt, but at the same time defends the right of the existing denominations to represent themselves not merely institutionally, but also theologically. His own position in dogmatics is clearly Lutheran, although it betrays heterodox elements, especially in soteriology and Christology. These derive on the one hand from the politics of reunion and are meant to make dialogue possible with the Roman Catholic Church ("Systema Theologicum"). These elements correspond on the other hand to his philosophy and philosophical theology: as philosopher Leibniz makes the modern claim to be able intelligently to explain the vérités historiques, that is the real world of experience. For this purpose he develops a monadological metaphysics which not only corresponds to the theological concept of creation, but also demonstrates christological and ecclesiological analogies. The most important consequence is that, without compromising philosophical rationality, Leibniz accepts for philosophy in concreto the same eschatological Vorbehalt which underlies theologia in via: its claims can be verified fully in the final vision of God. The two disciplines, therefore, no longer relate to each other as mistress and maid, but represent equally-ranked ways of dealing theoretically and practically with experience. They are also equal in that both philosophy and theology, with regard to God's intelligence, have the same privilege: both can and must carry out the critical task of recta ratio each discipline for itself, and by each in relationship to the respective assertions about what reality is. The way in which Leibniz does philosophy and theology, that is, presupposing the history of Christianity, makes the modern alternative between reverting to a "double truth" and the flight into the "concept" unnecessary, that is to say, into a speculative metamorphosis of Christianity. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1612-9520 |
| Contains: | In: Neue Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1515/nzst.1986.28.1.139 DOI: 10.15496/publikation-71578 HDL: 10900/130216 |