Recherche – Detailansicht
Ausgabe: | 1958 Nr. 7 |
Spalte: | 522-527 |
Kategorie: | Kirchengeschichte: Mittelalter |
Autor/Hrsg.: | Grunsky, Hans Alfred |
Titel/Untertitel: | Jacob Boehme 1958 |
Rezensent: | Pältz, Eberhard Hermann |
Ansicht Scan: | |
Download Scan: |
521
Theologische Literaturzeitung 1958 Nr. 7
522
ground of their authors' names, but on that of their content.
They are not biographies — four biographies would have been
harmonized; they are testimonies to the faith, in which one and
the same oral tradition is Seen from different points of view.
4. The Tradition is the weightiest piece in the book. The
Problem of Scripture and tradition is handled in three sections.
(a) In the New Testament the exalted Lord is regarded as
the direct author of the tradition of the apostles. There i s a
tradition in the New Testament analogous to, though also
different from, the rabbinic tradition; but Paul declares (1 Cor.
11.23) that he received this tradition 'from the Lord'. If this
is taken seriously it is Seen to mean that the tradition reaches
the Church from, and with the authority of, the Kyrios. The
tradition passed on to Paul by human means has the same authority
as the immediate revelation on the road to Damascus; as
apostle he transmits it.
(b) The conclusion just reached might seem to justify the
'Catholic' view of tradition; but this would be to ignore the
uniqueness of the apostolate and of the strictly a p o s t o 1 i c
tradition. The question involved here is that of the place of the
apostolic age within the Heilsgeschichte. In this there is a diffe-
rence between the 'period of the Church' and the 'central period'
out of which it grows. There is an essential difference between
apostle and bishop. The fourth gospel, which strongly emphasises
the continuation of the work of Christ in the Church, also
emphasises this distinction. True, the Holy Spirit is still active
in the Church, but his teaching office is formulated by (apostolic)
Scripture.
(c) 'The infant Church itself distinguished between apostolic
tradition and ecclesiastical tradition' (p. 87). This is the true
Interpretation of the Steps taken in the second Century towards
the fixation of the canon. They do not mean that the Church
is master of the New Testament, but rather that it recognized
in the New Testament the master of its own tradition.
5. The Kingship of Christ and the Church in the New Testament
is an important exposition of Dr Cullmann's views of New
Testament eschatology. The New Testament represents Christ
as the Lord, to whom a 11 authority has been given, and also
as the Head of the Church. How are these facts related to each
other? First, the kingship and the Church are 6nown to belong
to the same t i m e. Each begins with the death, resurrection,
and ascension of Jesus, and lasts tili, after the parousia, he hands
over the kingdom to the Father. (The kingdom of the Son and
the kingdom of God are, chronologically, to be sharply distinguished
). Secondly, however, the sphere of the Regnum
Christi and the s p h e r e of the Church are not identical. Christ
reigns over all things in heaven and earth, including for example
the State, even though the power of flesh and death persists;
but the Church holds a decisive, central place within the Regnum
. because it is the body of Christ. It is the human Community
, 'the people of the saints', which is the fulfilment of God's
purpose, and consists of men who know their own place, and
the place of others, within the Regnum Christi. Thirdly, within
the Regnum Christi, it is the Church's task to prociaim, by love,
suffering, and preaching, the lordship of Christ under which the
world — unknowingly — lives.
An appendix on the interpretation of Rom. 13. 1 f. follows.
6. The Return of Christ is a more populär treatment of
eschatology. We may Single out here Dr Cullmann's treatment
of the imminence of the parousia. Passages such as Mark 9, 1;
13, 30; Matth. 10, 23 must be interpreted in the light of explicit
Statements that the date of the end cannot be known. The de-
ductions drawn from them by Schweitzer and Werner are mis-
taken. 'It is the last hour' (l John 2, 18) because the decisive
eschatological event of the death and resurrection of Jesus has
already happened. 'The present is itself an eschatological period,
however long it is to last' (p. 157).
7. The Proleptic Deliverance of the Body according to the
New Testament surveys the evidence that the resurrection of
Christ has consequences for our bodies. An ethical principle,
based exclusively on the resurrection of Christ and the Holy
Spirit, naturally follows.
8. 6 ÖJtloco ftov lQ%6(ievoz handles the often-discussed
Problem raised by the priority of John the Baptist to Jesus. The
answer of John the Evangelist (John 1, 15) is that Jesus in fact
preceded John {ngönog fiov rjv); he was h> &QXÜ-
9. Samaria and the Origins of the Christian Mission makes
the Suggestion that in John 4, 38b the uXXoi, into whose labours
the apo6tles enter, are the Hellenists who were responsible for
the first evangelization of Samaria (Acts 8).
10. Early Christianity and Civilization. Here Dr. Cullmann
first establishes the complex attitude of the early Church, which
regarded the present world as bound to pass away and therefore
as of no ultimate value, yet was obliged to use it as the frame-
work of its activities and indeed to see in it an institution under
the rule of Christ, and then illustrates both the practical work-
ing out of this attitude, and the compromising and ascetic
heretical variations of it.
Most of these essays are of course already familiär to those
who read German and French; but a wider circle of English
readers will be grateful to Dr. Higgins for making them more
generally available. In his Preface, Dr. Cullmann notes that the
writings here published make use, in different ways, of the theme
of Heilsgeschichte, which is characteristic of his thought. This
is certainly true; and equally there is no doubt that by his in-
sistence on this theme Dr. Cullmann has made a noteworthy
contribution to New Testament theology. It may be, however,
that in his application of the theme Dr. Cullmann writes in
terms that are too rigid to do füll justice to the variety of New
Testament thought. It may be right from the dogmatic point of
view to describe all New Testament eschatology in the light of
the stage it had reached at the end of the first Century, but a
historical account calls for different treatment. This criticism is
perhaps not unimportant; but it does not diminish the reader's
gratitude for Dr. Cullmann's stimulating and provocative work.
Durham C.K.Barrett
KIRCHENGESCHICHTE: MITTELALTER
G r u n s k y, Hans: Jacob Böhme. Stuttgart: Frommanns Verlag 1956.
348 S., 1 Titelbild, 1 Taf. 8° = Frommanns Klassiker der Philosophie,
begr. v. R. Falckenberg t- Bd. 34. Lw. DM 17.50.
Der philosophus teutonicus steht in Relation zur Geisteswelt
der Kabbala1, Luthers2, Paracelsus' und Weigels3, doch ist
seine Denkstruktur* niemals aus Bildungsvermittlung zu erklären
. Die hier anzuzeigende Monographie verzichtet auf eine Untersuchung
motivgeschichtlich-genealogischer Art; sie verweist
auf die Werke der B.-Forschung auch hinsichtlich der geistes-
') W. (A.) Schulze, J. B. und die Kabbala, Judaica 11, 1955, 12-29,
dass. (wenig verändert) in: Zeitschrift f. philos. Forschung, hrsg. v. G.
Sdiisdikoff, IX, 1955, 447—60. Außerdem: dcrs., F. Chr. Oetinger und
die Kabbala, Judaica 4, 1948, 268—77; ders., Der Einfluß B.s und Oetin-
gers auf Schelling, Blätter f. Württemberg. KG, NF 56, 1956, 171—80;
ders., Schelling und die Kabbala, Judaica 13, 1957, 65—99, 143—170.
210—232; dcrs. „Das Auge Gottes", ZKG 4. Folge VI, 68, 1957, 149
bis 52; ders., Oetingers Beitrag zur Schcllingschen Freiheitslehre, ZThK
54, 1957, 213—25.
s) H. Bornkamm, Luther und Böhme, Arb. z. KG, 2, 1925; ders.,
Mystik, Spiritualismus und die Anfänge des Pietismus im Luthertum,
1926 (Forechungsbericht); ders., J. B. in: Evangel. Kirdienlexikon I, 1956,
543—45 und: Die Religion in Gesch. u. Gegenwart, 3. Aufl., I, 1957,
1340—42 (Lit.-verz.).
*) Vgl. neben den Biographien vor allem Grunsky (Register), W.-E.
Peuckert, Pansophie (1936) 19562; ders., im Vorwort zu J.B. Sämtliche
Schriften. Faksimile-Neudruck der Ausgabe von 1730 in elf Bänden, z.B.
Bd. IV, S. 14; VI, S. 5 ff.
4) Das Buch von G. stellt die Frage nach B.s Denkform besonders
eindringlich (vgl. dazu: Hellmut Stoffer, Die modernen Ansätze zu einer
Logik der Denkformen, Zeitschr. für philos. Forschung, hrsg. von G.
Sdiisdikoff, X, 1956, 242—66, 601-21); seit G. dürfte m. W. deutlich
sein, daß B. die „mystische Denkform" mit der „dialektischen Denkform
" verbindet. B.s Denkstruktur wird wohl überhaupt niemals sche-
matisdi, sondern nur konkret, d. h. in der Weise der von G. vollzogenen
gründlichen Einzelinterpretation bestimmt werden können. Zur Denkform
B.s vgl. insbes. G. S. 94.