Von der "fides historica" zur "historischen Religion": die Zweideutigkeit des Geschichtsbewußtseins der theologischen Aufklärung
From the outset Protestant theology was conscious that its scientific objects were in one respect historical phenomena. In the 18th century, however, and against the background of ist growing knowledge of history, theology had to renounce its traditional distinction of divine “dogma” and human “hist...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | German |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Wiley-VCH
1985
|
| In: |
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte
Year: 1985, Volume: 8, Issue: 3, Pages: 147-160 |
| Further subjects: | B
Theology
B Doctrine B Eklektik B Historiography B XVIII Jh B Enlightenment B Historical criticism B XVII Jh B History B Philosophy |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | From the outset Protestant theology was conscious that its scientific objects were in one respect historical phenomena. In the 18th century, however, and against the background of ist growing knowledge of history, theology had to renounce its traditional distinction of divine “dogma” and human “history”. Even the eclectic method, developped around 1700 (in order to relieve historical research of dogmatical claims but to leave dogma unquestioned in its own field:J. F. Buddeus, Chr. M. Pfaff, L. von Mosheim), became insufficient when dogmatic interest itself began to move away from traditional dogma. A new mentality which saw itself as both religious and enlightened, demanded a historical criticism of dogmatic tradition; a criticism which would consequently reach the Bible, making the revealed canon a historical source (the “neologists”, e. g. J. J. Spalding, J. W. F. Jerusalem, J. S. Semler, also G. E. Lessing). In this critical “history of dogma” and “history of the Old and New Testament” theology handed over its traditional role as the basic science (Leitwissenschaft) to philosophy and became itself a positive discipline. The measure of its criticism, however, was admittedly only religious subjectivity, grounding itself on the dogmatic construction of an “essence of Christianity” and in the historical construction of a divine “education of mankind”, and trying to prove the “perfectibility of Christianity” in the course of human history. Founded only on subjectivity, the historical consciousness of enlightened theology was therefore ambiguous; it was continually forced to ignore its own historical (and social) determination. Only the realization of the historicity also of the subjective principle of theology resolved this ambiguity (J. G. Herder, F. Schleiermacher); that meant that the theological enlightenment in the first sense had been overcome. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Literaturverzeichnis: Seite 158-160 |
| ISSN: | 1522-2365 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1002/bewi.19850080304 DOI: 10.15496/publikation-71579 HDL: 10900/130217 |