scholarly journals HEINRICH MEIER E LA SFIDA DELLA TEOLOGIA POLITICA

Il Politico ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-116
Author(s):  
Marco Menon

This paper offers a short overview of Heinrich Meier’s books on Carl Schmitt’s political theology, namely Carl Schmitt und Leo Strauss, and Die Lehre Carl Schmitts. These writings, published respectively in 1988 and 1994, and recently translated into Italian by Cantagalli (Siena), have raised both enthusiastical appraisal and fierce criticism. The gist of Meier’s interpretation is the following: the core of Schmitt’s thought is his Christian faith. Schmitt’s political doctrine must be unterstood as political theology, that is, as a political doctrine which claims to be grounded on divine revelation. The fundamental attitude of the political theologian, therefore, is pious obedience to God’s unfathomable will. The hypothesis of the paper is that Meier’s reading, which from a historical point of view might appear as highly controversial, is essentially the attempt to articulate the fundamental alternative between political theology and political philosophy. Meier’s alleged stylization of Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss is a form of “platonism”, i.e., a theoretical purification aimed at a clear formulation of what he means by “the theologico-political problem”.

Author(s):  
Bruno Irion Coletto

RESUMO: O artigo busca explorar as críticas e os comentários lançados por Leo Strauss acerca de um dos principais livros de Carl Schmitt, intitulado O Conceito do Político. Sob o pressuposto da existência de um “diálogo escondido” entre os dois filósofos, e sob o pano de fundo da disputa entre a Teologia Política e a Filosofia Política, primeiramente explorar-se-ão os aspectos fundamentais da obra schmittiana, enquadrando-a como a afirmação do âmbito político perante o projeto de um liberalismo individualista despolitizador moderno. Compreendidos os aspectos fundamentais do pensamento de Schmitt, analisar-se-ão as concordâncias e as críticas de Strauss, especialmente acerca do critério de existência da política, ou seja, do critério que separa os homens entre amigos e inimigos, fundando a política. Strauss, fazendo uma releitura daquilo que Schmitt chamou de “pergunta de vida e morte”, demonstra como a pluralidade interna à comunidade, diferentemente daquilo que pensava Schmitt, é proveniente da natureza humana. Strauss, portanto, faz uma releitura da pergunta de vida e morte, estabelecendo a diferença fundamental entre aquilo que chama de Filosofia Política e a Teologia Política de Schmitt. Palavras-Chave: Filosofia política; Teologia Política; Leo Strauss; Carl Schmitt; O Conceito do Político. Abstract: The article explores the critics and comments of Leo Strauss on one of Carl Schmitt’s main books, titled The Concept of the Political. Under the assumption of a "hidden dialogue" between these two philosophers, and with the background of the dispute between Political Theology and Political Philosophy, fundamental aspects of Schmitt’s work are explored initially, framing it as an assertion of the political framework before the project of a modern depoliticizing individualistic liberalism. Once the fundamental aspects of Schmitt’s thoughts are understood, Strauss’ concordances and critiques are analyzed, especially regarding the politics existence criterion, i.e. the criterion that separates men between friends and foes, founding the politics. Strauss, reinterpreting what Schmitt called "question of life and death," demonstrates how community’s internal plurality, unlike what Schmitt thought, comes from human nature. Strauss therefore makes a rereading of the question of life and death, establishing the fundamental difference between what he calls Political Philosophy and Schmitt’s Political Theology Keywords: Political Philosophy; Political Theology; Leo Strauss; Carl Schmitt; The Concept of the Political.


Author(s):  
Alessandra Silveira ◽  
José Gomes André ◽  

This paper includes the exam of a Ph.D thesis about James Madison’s political philosophy, as well as the answers presented by the candidate to several criticai observations. Various themes are considered, though always surrounding Madison’s work: the peculiar characteristics of his federalism, the relationship between the idea of human nature and the elaboration of political models, the political and constitutional controversies that Madison entangled with several figures from its time (namely Alexander Hamilton), the problem of “judicial review” and the place of “constitutionality control” taken from a reflexive and institutional point of view, and other similar themes.


Living Law ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 191-236
Author(s):  
Miguel Vatter

This chapter is dedicated to Leo Strauss’s attempt to recover the medieval Islamic and Jewish conceptions of the prophet as a political founder of the perfect legal order. The chapter situates Strauss’s political theology within the Weimar debate between proponents of legality and defenders of an extra-legal conception of legitimacy. It argues that Strauss turns back to the ancient conception of law as nomos in order to give a philosophical foundation to legality beyond Christian conceptions of legitimacy. Christian political theology has always pivoted around the polemical claim that Mosaic law was “tyrannical” in some way. Strauss’s contribution to Jewish political theology consists in examining Jewish and Islamic prophetology by formulating it in terms of the so-called tyrannical teaching of Platonic political philosophy. The chapter shows that Strauss ultimately held to the view of a profound compatibility and mutual need between the traditions of Greek philosophy and biblical prophecy.


2015 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-37
Author(s):  
Rik Peels

This article provides a critical analysis and evaluation of Gijsbert van den Brink and Kees van der Kooi’s Christian Dogmatics, a lucid and welcome presentation of the core ideas that can be found in the Christian faith. First, the book is characterized, both from a more general perspective and from a specifically theological point of view. Next, it is argued that there is a discrepancy between the way the authors characterize systematic theology and the way they practice systematic theology themselves. After that, their assessment of natural theology is criticized and several problems in the Christian Dogmatics are highlighted, such as the fact that the authors’ anthropology fails to take holistic dualism seriously. Finally, it is argued that in some places, the authors ask important questions, but then provide answers to different questions without addressing the original issues.


Grotiana ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henk Nellen

This article goes into the intentions and motives behind De veritate (1627), famous apologetic work by the Dutch humanist and jurisconsult Hugo Grotius (1583-1645). De veritate will be compared with two other seminal works written by Grotius, De iure belli ac pacis (1625) and the Annotationes in Novum Testamentum (1641-1650). The focus will be on one particular aspect that comes to the fore in all three works: the way Grotius reduced the Christian faith to a minimal religion by singling out the essential tenets this faith had in common with other religions. The core of Grotius’s argumentation consists in the idea that believers and, in particular, civil authorities have to distinguish between a few essential religious tenets that could be made rationally acceptable, and a set of supernatural dogmas, derived from divine revelation, that did not pass a certain, albeit very high degree of probability. As far as the second category was concerned, civil tolerance was called for. As becomes clear from contemporary correspondences, Grotius did not develop these rather controversial ideas in an intellectual vacuum. During his exile in Paris, he fostered contacts with members of the circle that formed around the French monk Marin Mersenne (1588-1648). This circle functioned as a kind of hothouse for the development of a minimal Christian creed. Members of this group saw promotion of a minimal creed as a solution to current religious controversies and the ensuing political turmoil and (civil) war, which were abhorred for their detrimental effects on the advancement of learning in the first place. On the other hand, it is also apparent that overt adherence to such an ideal was considered to be dangerous, because it would at least evoke the embarrassing and even repressive attention of the authorities in Church and government. An additional problem was that by defending such a religious stance, members of Mersenne’s circle laid themselves open to accusations of endorsing ‘rational beliefs’ like Socinianism, generally considered to be the worst heresy among all Christian denominations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document