Search

The article analyzes from the case of Friedrich von Hügel what the special interest of Roman Catholic Modernism in mysticism was about. Different from major tendencies in modernist research, it places his work in the framework of the discourse on “religious experience” around 1900. This way it becomes visible that von Hügel’s account of mysticism was shaped to a great extent by scholars from a liberal Protestant background, such as William James, Rudolf Eucken, and Ernst Troeltsch. In engaging these scholars, von Hügel was able to develop his own concept of the “mystical element” of religion from the perspective of a Catholic believer. The case of von Hügel suggests that Roman Catholic Modernism in general should be studied more in connection with its scientific setting outside Catholic theology.

Although the ‘mystical’ character of Ernst Troeltsch’s theological programme is controversial, the fact that ‘mysticism’ played an eminent role in his analysis of modern Christianity can hardly be denied. This article first spells out the different aspects of Troeltsch’s concept of mysticism (Mystik) against the background of contemporary theological and religious developments. On the one hand, the highly critical discourse on mysticism of the dominant Ritschl School is highlighted and on the other hand, the proliferation of all sorts of ‘mystical’ religiosity in Germany around 1900 is discussed. Secondly, it is shown that Troeltsch distanced himself to a large extent from the critics of mysticism. In fact, he takes the concept of mysticism to denote a typical, modern, individualistic form of piety and theology. Thirdly, attention is given to the fact that Troeltsch adopts the mystical terminology to describe his own position and uses it to develop his ecclesiology. Fourthly, Troeltsch’s view of the relationship between (individualist) mysticism and ethics is discussed. In his view, mysticism does not imply quietism, but an active engagement in church and worldly matters. All in all, this contribution underscores the importance of Christian mysticism for Troeltsch’s personal belief and piety as well as for his ‘mystical’ conceptualization of religion.

In the German Kaiserreich the University of Heidelberg was known as a liberal academic institution, with internationally well-known professors and many students from foreign countries. Young and innovative scholars in the institution included the Protestant theologian and philosopher Ernst Troeltsch (1865-1923), the sociologist Max Weber (1869-1920) and the Professor of Public Law Georg Jellinek (1851-1911) who studied the origins and driving forces of capitalism and of modern occidental rationalism. These scholars were interested in the ‛cultural significance’ of religious beliefs and their ethical implications. They saw religion as a relatively autonomous cultural force sui generis. In close intellectual interaction they focused on the religious roots of modern human rights and the strong ethical differences between Lutheranism and Calvinism.

Ernst Troeltsch (1865 - 1923) is well known for his studies on the history of Christianity and as a leading representative of the Kulturprotestantismus, but his importance as the first great theoretician of historicism is still quite unfamiliar to many researchers. In this small essay, we stress this last side of his work, showing how Troeltsch tried to connect the Hermeneutic (Schleiermacher, Dilthey) and of Neo-Kantian (Windelband, Rickert, Weber) theories of humanities in order to regain their lost ethical moment. Ernst Troeltsch (1865-1923) é mais conhecido por seus estudos sobre a história do cristianismo e como importante representante do Kulturprotestantismus do que como historiador das ideias e primeiro grande teórico do historicismo. Neste pequeno artigo, procuramos ressaltar esta última faceta de sua obra, mostrando como Troeltsch buscou construir uma ponte entre as teorias da história hermenêutica (Schleiermacher, Dilthey) e neo-kantiana (Windelband, Rickert, Weber). Em especial, interessa-nos seu esforço de recuperação do momento ético numa teoria das ciências humanas.

Bu çalışmanın amacı Ernst Troeltsch'un düşünsel birikiminde din ve toplum hakkındaki görüşlerini ortaya koymaktır. Bu konuyu şekillendiren düşünürün metodolojik beklentileri de açıklanmaya çalışılmıştır. İlk bölümde, Ernst Troeltsch'un din ve toplum değerlendirmelerine yön veren metodolojik duruşu ve düşünsel arka planı üzerinde durulmuştur. Düşünürün sosyal teori ve metodoloji tartışmalarındaki yeri irdelenmiştir. Buna ek olarak, Troeltsch'un tarihselciliği bir metodoloji olarak ele alma biçimi değerlendirilmiştir.İkinci bölümde, tarihselcilik metodolojisinin belirleyici olduğu din ve toplum kavramlarına bakışı ve bunları değerlendirme biçimi mercek altına alınmıştır. Belirtilen iki kavram çerçevesinde özellikle Avrupa toplumu merkezinde incelemeleri değerlendirilmiştir. Din ve toplumun karşılıklı etkileşimi düşünürün perspektifinde değerlendirilmeye çalışırken kavramsal ve tarihsel oluşumların uyumuna dikkat çekilmiştir.Buna bağlı olarak din ve toplum çerçevesinde erken 20.yüzyıl teorik birikimi ve sosyolojik durumu Troeltsch düşüncesinde ele alınmıştır.Anahtar Sözcükler: Ernst Troeltsch İdeal tip Din Toplum Tarihselcilik Mistisizm The main goal of this study is to exhibit Ernst Troeltsch's aspect of religion and society in his intellectual accumulation. The thinker's methodological expectations that shapes the subject has attempted to be explained.In the first chapter of this study, Ernst Troeltsch's methodological stance and his intellectual background that shapes his religion and society evaluation is focalized. Furthermore, the thinker's place in social theory and methodology debates are discussed. In this part, his way of adressing historicism as a methodology is evaluated. In the second chapter, his perpective on religion and society that is affected by methodology of historicism and his evaluation towards these phenomena are examined. Moreover, his sociological study based on European culture in the framework of religion and modern society are analyzed. When interaction between religion and society was tried to be portrayed, harmony between epistemological and historical formation has been highlighted.Consequently, theoretical knowledge articulation and social status of the early 20th century in the framework of religion and society are analyzed.Key Words: Ernst Troeltsch Religion Society Mysticism Historicism Ideal type 83

Christianity today. According to Ernst Troeltsch, the most important intellectual challenge to Christianity was the grow­- ing lack of appreciation of the essential content of the Christian message: the ethos of love, the view of the human person, the com­ munitarian cult, and the centrality of Jesus Christ. If we reformu­- late these challenges for today’s secularized and secularizing world, they are: the intellectual hegemony of values and cognitive assump­- tions that make the love ethos of Christianity unintelligible; an un­ derstanding of personality that contradicts the Christian understand­- ing of the uniqueness of the person; an increasingly individualistic perception of spirituality; and the loss of the idea of Transcendence without which the notion of Jesus Christ as mediator between hu­ man and divine is impossible. The author holds that the Catholic Church is best equipped to face all these challenges. But for that it must come out of its defences which is the case in many countries or it has withdrawn from public life. The Church must show that it can articulate its message afresh, the message about the Holy, the Messiah, the Prophet, etc. Only then will it continue to be relevant morally and spiritually. If the task of the Church is to accompany people on their pilgrimage as they search for the True, the Good and the Beautiful, in every age and place, there is no way of doing this without believing in reason,and reasoning together, posing difficult questions and searching for new answers. &nbsp

Temporal orientation. Philosophy of history in the Netherlands, 1860-1940. David Carr recently argued that philosophy of history in the Hegelian tradition was practical in the Kantian sense of that word: it provided temporal, moral, and political orientation by locating present-day experience on a large-scale historical canvas. This article extends Carr's claim by arguing that much the same was true for positivist philosophy of history as practised by Henry Thomas Buckle and Herbert Spencer, for neo-Kantian philosophy of history in the Baden School, and for early twentieth-century debates over Oswald Spengler's The decline of the West (1918-20) and Ernst Troeltsch's Historicism and its problems (1922). Through the prism of the Dutch reception of these philosophies of history, which includes, of course, Dutch contributions to the genre, this article shows that philosophy of history in the decades between 1860 and 1940 was primarily valued for its practical dimension. Even such apparently technical issues as the nature of value-relevance in Heinrich Rickert's understanding of historical interpretation almost invariably served as arguments in debates charged with moral, political, and/or religious implications.

Folgt man den Theologen der Krise um Karl Barth, dann zeigt das Manifest An die Kulturwelt von 1914, dass eine Historisierung des Gottesbegriffs zur theologischen Unterstützung von Imperialismus und Militarismus führt. Ernst Troeltsch (1865-1923) galt und gilt als der Theologe des Historismus. Obwohl er das Manifest nicht unterschrieben hat, wirft es seinen langen Schatten auch auf Troeltschs Bestimmung(en) des Gottesgedankens.Ausgehend von einer Analyse ausgewählter Kriegs- und Nachkriegsschriften Troeltschs argumentiere ich, dass Troeltsch eine politische Theologie formuliert, die kulturellem Relativismus wie kulturellem Absolutismus entgegenwirken kann, gerade weil sie den Gottesgedanken historisiert. Troeltschs Historisierung des Gottesgedankens verhindert, dass Gott für die Zwecke dieser oder jener Kultur instrumentalisiert werden kann. Seine politische Theologie kulminiert in der Begriffsbestimmung des Europäismus, auf dessen Potential für die intra- und die interkulturelle Kommunikation im heutigen Europa ich abschließend zu sprechen komme. Um dieses Potential zu nutzen, muss man aber die Theologie(n) beleuchten, auf die das Manifest seinen Schatten geworfen hat.For theologians such as Karl Barth the support for Germany’s militaristic ambitions and actions voiced in the manifesto An die Kulturwelt, published in 1914, was a consequence of the historicization of theology. Ernst Troeltsch (1865- 1923), whose interdisciplinary thinking revolved around the significance of history for theology, was labeled the theologian of historicism. Although he had not signed the manifesto, it continues to throw a smokescreen over Troeltsch’s theology.Examining a selection of both his war writings and his post-war writings, I argue that Troeltsch conceptualized a political theology which led him to turn from a clash of cultures to a conversation of cultures. Troeltsch’s historicization of the concept of God allowed him to resist cultural relativism as well as cultural absolutism. Culminating in the concept of “Europeanism (Europäismus)”, Troeltsch’s political theology is instructive for a variety of intra- and inter-cultural conversations in Europe today. But in order to unlock its potential, the smokescreen which the manifesto has thrown over Troeltsch’s theology needs to be lifted.

In Ernst Troeltsch’s view, Christian ethics, more than any other religious ethics, achieves a synthesis between religious group and moral ideas. The main difficulty of this synthesis is attempting to harmonize the relationship between unworldly goods and values and worldly goods and values. The history of Christian ethics, especially in its dimension of social ethics, it may, therefore, as the history of forms in which it is represented the “including opposition” of the religious purpose with the worldly purposes. In this essay, we’re trying to retrace, even if in broad terms, this history whose reconstruction Troeltsch constantly devotes his attention as the necessary way to determine the content and tasks of Christian social ethics appropriate to the needs of complex modern society.

W artykule tym postawiony zostaje problem w jakim stopniu wyznanie baptystyczne okresu międzywojennego w Polsce odwołując się do znanej typologii Ernsta Troeltscha kościół/sekta wykazywało cechy organizacji kościelnej, a w jakim sekciarskiej. W tym celu została zekonstruowana baptystyczna duchowość okresu międzywojennego obejmująca postawę jednostki wobec Boga, innych ludzi i społeczeństwa. W konkluzji autor stwierdza niewystarczalność dychotomicznego rozróżnienia Troeltscha do charakterystyki baptyzmu, który posiadał zarówno cechy kościoła jak i sekty w rozumieniu niemieckiego badacza.