No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In the Age of Enlightenment, the pragmatic method prevailed in church historiography. Church history and history of dogma were explained by human factors, and thus came into conflict with the dogmatic claims to timeless truth. To preserve such claims in the face of the increasing historicization of knowledge in the nineteenth century, theologians pursued various strategies. In the Vormärz period from 1815 to 1848, one can distinguish three currents: 1) one could try to assert the supra-temporal identity of the inner Christian experience of faith despite all external change; 2) one could try to recognize a necessary process of development a priori behind the seemingly coincidental process of change (theological Hegelianism); or 3) one could finally be of the opinion that historical change does not go so far as to make it impossible to recognize in it the true faith and the true church, which have remained identical in their essence. All three response strategies were advocated by both Protestants and Catholics. Furthermore within Protestantism, mediating theologians attempted to reconcile the core principles of Protestantism with the results of modern scientific and historical study.

No abstract