Journal index

In the first part of the essay, we summarise the constitutive elements of the concept of justification in the Reformation. These elements are the iustitia Christi aliena, Jesus’ substitutionary atonement as historical basis, Calvin’s unio mystica cum Christo and Luther’s “happy exchange”, the concept of sola fide, the principle that “faith is not a merit” and the “true faith contains true knowledge as well”, the forensic context of justification, imputatio is not infusio, the sharp distinction between justification and sanctification, the truth of simul iustus et peccator, the justification as existential experience and the adoption of all believers. In the second part, we inquire how Paul Tillich, in his Systematic Theology, reinterprets the concept of justification compared to the classic authors of the Reformation. It will be shown that Tillich basically changes the cognitive content of justification. The essay does not address the historical development of the concept of justification from Luther to Tillich, but concentrates only on the comparison of Tillich and the theology of the Reformation.

Paul Tillich reinterpreted Christology along the lines of the method of correlation. We need to ask whether this gigantic enterprise has indeed succeeded in preserving Christianity in its original form. I attempt to prove that a significant discrepancy exists between orthodox and Tillichian theology, especially with respect to dealing with the issue of the historical Jesus, the use of ontological concepts and “incarnation”. I therefore set forth the following observations: 1. Tillich mistakenly sets the reality of faith against fides historica and restricts the latter to just one dimensionless point. 2. The ontological concepts employed by Tillich contain contradictions and are unable to adequately express the infinite, qualitative differences between Christ and other human beings. 3. Tillichian Christology misinterprets the dogma of Chalcedon and is a modern, ontological version of Nestorianism.