Albrecht Ritschl

What accounts for Albrecht Ritschl's profound effect on modern theology? Philip Hefner proposed that he so energetically brought together in his work the elements of his generation, that all theology now stands on his shoulders. Many theologians have attacked Ritschl's ideas, others vigorously defend him, but all must confront him. The essays presented here will enable students and scholars to experience the force of Ritschl's writing for themselves. Ritschl was born in 1822 into the intellectual, social, and ecclesiastical elite of Berlin. After finishing his studies at the University of Tuebingen, he taught at Bonn for eighteen years and at Goettingen for twenty-five. Hefner shows that Ritschl spoke a word to his own age that was so appropriate and so in resonance with his contemporaries in Germany that despite its weaknesses it became the dominant theology of his generation. Ritschl's impact can be traced to three major factors: forceful statement of Christian faith, positive link to tradition, and scientific method. He exhibited a remarkable combination of scholarly integrity and devotion to the Christian life, as seen in his ten-year study of pietism - a movement he opposed. His theology also contributed to much that followed, including historical-critical studies and dialectical theology. These essays offer a balanced sample of Ritschl's thinking. In the Prolegomena to 'The History of Pietism' he establishes his method of studying different confessions on the basis of Christian lifestyle. Theology and Metaphysics offers his celebrated rejection of metaphysics in favor of a christocentric approach. Instruction in the Christian Religion, the writing that won for Ritschl his popularity among students, sets forth his specific doctrinal beliefs. Today's students will discover that Ritschl is both an intriguing historical figure and a thinker worth grappling with. These essays, along with Philip Hefner's extensive introduction, provide needed material for a reevaluation of Ritschl and of nineteenth century theology. Philip Hefner is Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology at the Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago. He has written 'The Promise of Teilhard' and a major work on Ritschl - 'Faith and the Vitalities of History'. He also edited 'The Scope of Grace' and 'Changing Man: Threat and Promise'.

Warum brach uber Deutschland nach der vielversprechenden Stabilisierung der Mark 1923/24 und dem anschliessenden Aufschwung eine Krise von ungekanntem Ausmass herein? Welche Faktoren verbanden sich zu dieser Katastrophe? Ware sie zu verhindern gewesen? Hatte die ungluckliche Weimarer Republik ein besseres Schicksal nehmen konnen? Der Autor untersucht die inneren und ausseren Sonderfaktoren der deutschen Konjunkturentwicklung seit 1924. Die ungewollten Anreizwirkungen des Dawes-Plans haben die Zwangslagen und Handlungsspielraume der deutschen Krisenpolitik ab 1929 wesentlich vorherbestimmt. Albrecht Ritschl legt in diesem Buch eine neue Deutung der Bruningschen Deflationspolitik vor, in der sich der Schwerpunkt der Kritik an der deutschen Konjunkturpolitik in die Phase des Dawes-Plans verlagert. Zugleich ergibt sich damit eine neue Interpretation der Borchardt-Thesen zur deutschen Konjunkturpolitik der letzten Jahre Weimars. Die ungebremste Auslandsverschuldung Deutschlands ab 1924 spielt eine Schlusselrolle bei der Erklarung von Deutschlands Krise und Konjunktur zwischen dem Dawes-Plan und der Transfersperre."

My original intention in writing this book was to consider evolving mar­ ket systems and Hayekian criteria of efficiency (see von Hayek (1931, 1945) ), and to discover those formal structures which might possibly lie at the base of economic systems capable of evolution. Much work in this field had already been done by others (see, for example, Kirzner (1975) and Nelson/Winter (1982) ), and a consensus seems to have been reached that something like system theory must be the logical point of departure for evolutionary theory in economics. But most of the previous work in this area is purely intuitive, and though there is much talk in it of systems and system theory, a precise definition of the concept of a system in this context is nowhere to be found. I had hoped to be able to sketch a working definition of pricing and production systems in a few pages and then to go on to investigate their performance within the framework of modern stability analysis. It soon became clear, however, that difficult and complex problems arise from the very outset of such an endeavor. If, for example, one speaks of dynamic systems of pricing and production, it should be made clear just how these systems differ from those portrayed in standard price theory and why that theory is inadequate for such analysis.