This evaluation gives a brief summary on the socioeconomic environment of Walter Rauschenbusch and Martin Rade and of the liberal theological background of these two social propagandists. Rauschenbusch was the most prominent representative of the “social gospel,” while Rade was one of the leading figures of the “Evangelical Social Congress.” Both theology professors made names for themselves as publicists—Rauschenbusch as the author of several important books, and Rade especially as the editor of the “Christian World,” which he led as editor-in-chief for 45 years. Of central importance to the overall study proved to be the discussion about the gospel of Jesus and the associated “Kingdom of God,” which, from Rauschenbusch’s perspective, was to be understood both individualistically and socially, and therefore also to be regarded as a social and political task, whereas Rade understood the Kingdom of God more as inwardness. The Kingdom of God turned out to be an important point of difference between Rauschenbusch and Rade. Overall, it is noted that the social idea is still as relevant today as it was in the time of Rauschenbusch and Rade. Finally, the question is raised about the significance of the two theologians for their own time and for the present, as well as the extent to which both protagonists failed to meet their expectations. In any case, both can still be taken seriously today as important sources of inspiration for a more just world.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Evaluation

  • Kurt Bangert

摘要

This evaluation gives a brief summary on the socioeconomic environment of Walter Rauschenbusch and Martin Rade and of the liberal theological background of these two social propagandists. Rauschenbusch was the most prominent representative of the “social gospel,” while Rade was one of the leading figures of the “Evangelical Social Congress.” Both theology professors made names for themselves as publicists—Rauschenbusch as the author of several important books, and Rade especially as the editor of the “Christian World,” which he led as editor-in-chief for 45 years. Of central importance to the overall study proved to be the discussion about the gospel of Jesus and the associated “Kingdom of God,” which, from Rauschenbusch’s perspective, was to be understood both individualistically and socially, and therefore also to be regarded as a social and political task, whereas Rade understood the Kingdom of God more as inwardness. The Kingdom of God turned out to be an important point of difference between Rauschenbusch and Rade. Overall, it is noted that the social idea is still as relevant today as it was in the time of Rauschenbusch and Rade. Finally, the question is raised about the significance of the two theologians for their own time and for the present, as well as the extent to which both protagonists failed to meet their expectations. In any case, both can still be taken seriously today as important sources of inspiration for a more just world.