Disputed term/author/ism | Author![]() |
Entry![]() |
Reference![]() |
---|---|---|---|
Democracy | Barth | Brocker I 234 Democracy/Barth: For Barth, a justification of modern constitutional democracy (theory) could only be given under the conditions of a revelation theology exclusively oriented towards the Bible (according to its own claim). >Democratic theory. BarthVsSecularization: Barth rejected any basic theoretical connection to classically modern human rights or contract theories as a "secular message" and the attempt to "build a church of human rights" (1). >Secularization/Barth, >Human Rights. Brocker I 245 In several texts which appeared more or less shortly after justification and law, Barth made the statements pro democracy, contra (Nazi) dictatorship, contained primarily in its final part, clearer and more concrete (cf. in particular Barth 1945a)(2). 1. Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht, in: Theologische Studien 1, Zollikon 1938. Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht, in: ders., Rechtfertigung und Recht, Christengemeinde und Bürgergemeinde, Evangelium und Gesetz, Zürich 1998,, S. 8. 2. Karl Barth, Eine Schweizer Stimme. 1938-1945, Zollikon-Zürich 1945 Georg Pfleiderer, „Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht 1938)“ in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018. |
Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
Justification | Barth | Brocker I 234 Justification/Barth: The mental-theological problem that Barth saw himself confronted with due to the aggressive totalization of the Nazi state, he brought to the formula of the theological determination of the relationship between "justification and law". Objectively, the question of the establishment of modern constitutional democracy (theory) under the conditions of a still (according to its self-expectation) exclusively Bible-oriented theology of revelation was posed. >National Socialism/Barth. BarthVsSecularization: Barth rejected any basic theoretical connection to classically modern human rights or contract theories as a "secular message" and the attempt to "build a church of human rights"(1). >Secularization/Barth. Brocker I 242 Justification/State/Christ/Barth: Context here: the Church's task is "to proclaim once and for all that God has taken care of sinful man in the person of the Messiah Jesus out of pure grace, made his sin and his death his own affair and thus not only acquitted this man, but released him for the life lost to him for time and eternity"(2). >Jesus Christ/Barth. Such execution of the justification of the ungodly, which is constitutive in Christ, exemplary and carried out with universal-inclusive intention, has itself a legal character, that is, the character of the setting of a new order. It sets (...) a Christ right as the "right acquired in his death and proclaimed in his resurrection" (3). Thus Barth can explain "that the preaching of justification as a preaching of the Realm of God already now and here establishes the true right, the true state" (4). 1.Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht, in: Theologische Studien 1, Zollikon 1938. Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht, in: ders., Rechtfertigung und Recht, Christengemeinde und Bürgergemeinde, Evangelium und Gesetz, Zürich 1998, S. 8. 2. Ibid. p. 27 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. p. 26 Georg Pfleiderer, „Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht 1938)“ in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018. |
Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
Secularization | Barth | Brocker I 233 Secularization/Barth: Barth's thesis: legitimate theological knowledge may derive exclusively from the self-revelation of God in Jesus Christ, as understood as a process of language, as it is testifyied in the Bible. Brocker I 234 BarthVsSecularization: Barth rejected any basic theoretical connection to classically modern human rights or contract theories as a "secular message" and the attempt to "build a church of human rights"(1). >Church/Barth, >State, >Rule of Law/Barth, >Rule of Law, >Society. Brocker I 235 State/Church/Barth: "church" and "state" are basically understood by Barth as two fields of (individual and above all) collective action, each following constitutive rules and thus generating two different forms of communitization. Church/Barth: Barth Thesis: In view of his concrete practice and form of execution, ecclesial action as a whole is to be thought of as "proclamation", that is, as the human, namely linguistic-performative correspondence to God's action, which necessarily aims at universal communication and free communitization. Brocker I 237 Two-Realms-Doctrine/BarthVsLuther/BarthVsReformers: a merely paratactic "two-realms-doctrine" of church and state, as it is represented in significant parts of modern Lutheran theology in Germany from Barth's point of view, would work into the hands of an autonomous modern state of power in the sense of Frederick the Great, Bismarck and finally Hitler, which dispenses with ethical self-commitment. See Barth, 1945 (2). 1. Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht, in: Theologische Studien 1, Zollikon 1938. Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht, in: ders., Rechtfertigung und Recht, Christengemeinde und Bürgergemeinde, Evangelium und Gesetz, Zürich 1998, S. 8. 2.Karl Barth, Eine Schweizer Stimme. 1938-1945, Zollikon-Zürich 1945 S. 113f, 382-413. Georg Pfleiderer, „Karl Barth, Rechtfertigung und Recht 1938)“ in: Manfred Brocker (Hg.) Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt/M. 2018. |
Brocker I Manfred Brocker Geschichte des politischen Denkens. Das 20. Jahrhundert Frankfurt/M. 2018 |
![]() |