Haresie und akademische Theologie

摘要

The aptitude to become a university theologian is based on the presumption that the scientist concerned has taith. A theologian without faith would misinterpret the very nature of this science and would desecrate it, creating a secular form of religious science. 1 he theological laculties therefore, are the concern ol both the State and the church. Accordingly, on the one hand, theology is subject to the necessary confessional restrictions and on the other hand there are individual theology professors who enjoy scientific and religious freedom. Their status as civil servants, the inviolability of their official professional position and the consideration of their scientific freedom within the self-de termination oi the church must mean that even if the professor has a loss ol faith and with it the consequent loss of suitability he would still be given the possibility of being able to continue working at a university. The double aptitude demands of faith and science that every academic theologian must fulfil ultimately becomes the basis lor the development of practical concordance because those concerned do not offend against constitutional rights but only disappoint in regard to the ecclesiastical characteristics. According to Art. 4, par 1 GG (i.e. Grundgesetz = German Constitution) nobody can deny the theology professor the right to give up a measure of his taith, and according to Art. 5 par 3 GG and Art. 33 par 5 GG this move does not repudiate his position as a scientist - only as a theologian. The State allows the university lecturer to stay in his legally binding status even though he is not employed as a theologian - and only as such can he work -and ultimately it is more than likely that he is no longer "required". The liberality of this ruling based on the principle of freedom shows that the practical concordance called lor becomes apparent the moment the scientist is called on to carry on working. Whilst claiming to deviate Irom the teachings ol the church, constitutionally the modern theologian endangers neither his civic nor his scientific existence.