Református Szemle 109.6 (2016)

Am Beginn des Aufsatzes (1) wird der Begriff „Toleranz“ im kurzen geschichtlichen Kontext vorgelegt und Unterschied gemacht zwischen inhaltlicher und formaler Toleranz. Nachher wird die Toleranz in den Religionen des Alten Orients —im religionsgeschichtlichen Kontext —geschildert (2—3). Im folgenden Abschnitt (4) wird die heute als Toleranz verstandene zwischen­ menschliche Verhaltensweise vorgestellt. Im 5. Kapitel wird der Begriffunter dem Titel „Der Fremde in Israel,“ nachher (6) „Israel in der Fremde“ dargestellt. Im letzten Abschnitt (7) wird das Thema kurz zusammengefasst.

At the dawn of the 20th century, the young László Ravasz began to rethink the main principles of Hungarian Reformed homiletics. His program was basically stimulated by the so- called “value-theology”, inspired by the Neo-Kantian philosophy. In this paper I examine his homilethical method by analysing his Christmas sermons. I scrutinize the rhetorical situation, the chosen biblical texts, the structure, the content, and the illustrations of the sermons. I conclude that half century later, we can still learn from Ravasz’ views.

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.

After the death of Stalin the church policy of the communist states formerly belonging to the Soviet bloc began to change gradually. In 1955 Áron Márton, a Roman Catholic bishop sentenced to death, was released from prison, and many other priests, monks and ministers were freed. Hungarian Protestant churches in Romania were allowed to contact sister churches in Hungary and the world. Following a simplified administrative procedure for obtaining passports, people were allowed to travel abroad and build relationships. Romanian citizens became aware of the unease and dissatisfaction towards the political system in Hungary. The events of the 1956 Revolution were followed mostly through the radio, and Hungarians in Romania have openly expressed their sympathy, especially university students and students of theology. They openly opposed the official propaganda labelling the Hungarian uprising as counter-revolution. After the revolution in Hungary was suppressed, the Romanian state power also retaliated. In the first period the Hungarian clergy were mingled especially in other kind of political issues. Then, after 1958, several explicitly church oriented suits followed. Four lawsuits against 26 Protestant theological students, ministers and theology professors. In three so-called Bethanist-cases 21 ministers and church members were found guilty. 15 further church members were convicted in show trials, in many cases based on their attitude towards the 1956 Revolution. These trials were part of an anti-religious propaganda started in 1957, but in a larger context they were intended to intimidate the Hungarian ethnic people. They intended to create a context of fear, in which the communist power could take the initiative to liquidate the autonomous Hungarian university and undergraduate school system, and in which, by means of his own delegated church representatives, could intervene and control the church from within.