In discussing the music of Karl Weigl (1881-1949), it is essential to estimate the state of research regarding the composer and his professional life. Although a copious account and collection of Weigl's papers exists at Yale University, much contribution in the form of editions, recordings, and scholarly texts is needed. Schooled by Adler, Schoenberg, and Zemlinsky, Weigl graduated from the Musikacademie of Vienna in 1899 with high honors, with later employment in the Vienna Opera as a vocal coach (where he worked with such figures as Bruno Walter, Friedrich Weidemann, and Lotte Lehmann.). A theory and composition appointment to the New Vienna Conservatory after 1918 dramatically opened Weigl's professional horizons. With the rise of anti-semitism in Nazi Germany, Weigl and his family escaped to New York in autumn 1938. Eventually, Weigl obtained positions in the Hartt School of Music, Brooklyn College, Boston Conservatory, and finally, the Philadelphia Academy of Music in 1948. Although Weigl's music has been commented upon by Stephen Davison, Wendell Davis, and Michael Kater, much literature in the form of published analysis, commentary, and biography has yet to come forward. This paper principally covers Weigl's Night Fantasies, Op. 13 as well as the 28 Variations for Piano, Op. 15 and the expressionist conventions they contain.

Trots att begreppet historiemedvetande uttryckligen har funnits med i läroplanen sen år 2000 så finns det fortfarande inte en enhetlig definition av begreppet i svensk skola. Syftet med den här studien är att belysa den problematik som uppstår på grund av inkluderingen av detta begrepp och det fria tolkningsutrymme som blir resultatet. I detta arbete presenteras en översikt av det aktuella forskningsläget kring begreppet historiemedvetande med särskilt fokus på den svenska skolan och den kritik som riktats mot begreppet. Studien har genomförts genom kvalitativa intervjuer med fem olika högstadie- och gymnasielärare som fått berätta om hur de tolkat och operationaliserat begreppet. Resultaten visar att de olika tolkningarna resulterat i olika fokuseringar och upplägg av undervisningen. Detta leder i sin tur till att undervisningens likvärdighet kan ifrågasättas. / Despite the fact that the term historical consciousness has been explicitly included in the curriculum since the year 2000, there is still not a homogeneous definition of the term in Swedish school. The aim of this study is to illustrate the problems that occur because of the inclusion of this term and the freedom of interpretation as a result. Presented in this paper is an outline of the current field of research regarding the term historical consciousness with particular focus on the Swedish school and the criticism against the term. The study has been conducted by qualitatively interviewing five high school and upper secondary school teachers who has given their accounts on how they have interpreted and operationalized the term. The results show that the different interpretations has resulted in different focusing and approaches to teaching. This in turn leads to the fact that the equality of education may be questioned.

In this thesis I present a critical explication of Barth’s doctrine of providence in Church Dogmatics III.3. I argue that Karl Barth’s doctrine of providence developed throughout CD III.3 represents a ‘personalist’ revision of Reformed orthodoxy which can only be understood through his ad hoc use of philosophical resources. I claim that critics and supporters alike have missed the depth of Barth’s revision of Reformed providence by failing to perceive his ad hoc use of contemporaneous philosophical tools of the personal. Barth’s doctrine of providence remains theology proper, and not philosophy, but cannot be understood without philosophy. By setting Barth in conversation with three philosophical theologians, Vincent Brümmer, John Macmurray and Austin Farrer, I attempt to show how far Barth is from pre-modern understandings in his articulation of the doctrine of providence. These conversations equip the reader to discern continuities and discontinuities of Barth’s thought with 20th century personal, relational philosophy, thereby making sense of many of Barth’s counterintuitive claims. For Barth, human life is the continual double-agency of human self-determination and divine determination. This life in covenant before God (coram Deo) constitutes the Godgiven opportunity of human personhood. Seen in dialogue with personalist philosophical thinkers, Barth’s doctrine of providence overcomes problematic aspects of traditional Reformed views and grants limited time and space for personal development. Providence sheds light on Barth’s ‘eternalizing’ eschatology in that election establishes the objective reality of salvation for all creatures, while providence explicates God’s active lordship in the human’s self-determination of personal identity in history (the subjective formation of the person who is objectively saved). Election describes God’s salvific work on behalf of creation solely in the work of Jesus Christ. Providence determines the identity of those creatures in relation with the personal God. The conversations I propose with philosophical theologians enable the reader to discern a greater philosophical coherence in Barth’s doctrine of providence. Through contrast with the philosophical theologians, Barth’s christocentric and Trinitarian articulation gains clarity and significance. Building on these philosophical comparisons, I attempt to assess Barth’s elaborations on entrenched debates concerning history as determined by divine action, human freedom under divine providence, and the problem of evil in world-occurrence. I argue that Barth’s ‘personalist’ post-Enlightenment providence as seen in the whole of III.3 points to absolute confidence in God’s determination of all world-occurrence, limited human autonomy of action under God’s universal providence, and an explication of evil that strengthens the Christian in the face of suffering and injustice.

No description available.

Restoration seeks to heal the environment and make amends for damages done by human interference. Preservationists, however, claim that restoration is anthropocentric, hubristic, and ultimately misguided. I defend restoration against these criticisms, and examine narratives from Karl Marx and Lynn White, Jr. to explain human alienation from nature. I use a synthesis of lessons from Marx and White to favor a restoration paradigm over a preservationist model.

Informe de Seminario para optar al grado de Licenciado en Filosofía

The dissertation focuses on Karl Barth's theology as it relates to present issue in Evangelical thought. Chapter 1 states that an Evangelical theology of religions can affirm and apply particular aspects of Barth's doctrine of the Holy Spirit that will serve to redefine some present Evangelical approaches to the content of divine revelation. Chapter 2 surveys the theology of religions models constructed by Karl Rahner, Clark Pinnock, Amos Yong, and Terrance Tiessen. These scholars affirm in some respect that non-Christians need not have explicit knowledge of Jesus Christ and His work in order to appropriate the benefits of redemption. Chapter 3 examines Barth's trinitarian-oriented doctrine of revelation. For Barth, the doctrine ofthe Trinity provides the key to genuine divine revelation because revelation's content cannot be separated from its form in Jesus Christ. Chapter 4 addresses Barth's evaluation of the phenomenon of religion and natural theology. His attack on both concepts as human attempts to fashion God in their own image will be discussed. Chapter 5 will discuss and analyze the Christ-centered nature of Barth's doctrine of the Holy Spirit. The discussion shows how for Barth the Holy Spirit is the sole mediator of Christ's presence who guides persons into objective knowledge of Christ and equips them for Christian service. Chapter 6 details Barth's use of secular "parables" of truth in the world in relation to the one Truth-Jesus Christ. The focus is how these "lights" of truth in creation never exist apart from Christ's reconciling work. Chapter 7 evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of Barth's thought as it relates to thesis of the work. Particular attention is given to Barth's rejection of general revelation and the doctrine of common grace as juxtaposed with the work of Herman Bavinck, whose thought is utilized as a useful alternative to Barth's thought in this area. Chapter 8 will conclude by briefly addressing Bavinck's position in contrast to Barth. Finally, the work seeks to reaffirm the thesis that use of selective aspects of Barth's thought can serve as an aid to on-going Evangelical efforts to formulate a viable theology of religions.

Inhalt: Die Dissertation beschäftigt sich mit den bisherigen Arbeiten die zum Vergleich der beiden Denker Alexis de Tocqueville und Karl Marx erschienen sind. Sie versucht die Urspünge für das Aufgreifen des Vergleichs zu klären und weshalb eine richtige Diskissuion zu dieser Thematik bis heute nicht zustande kam. Abschließend wird eine Möglichkeit für einen fruchtbaren Vergleich dieser beiden Theoretiker gegeben. / Inhalt: The doctoral thesis analysis the previous works on the comparison of Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl Marx. It tries to find out what was the reason for the taking up of this topic after the second world war. Astonishingly this comparison never leads to an extensive academic discussion. Finally the theses shows potentialyties of making a fruitfull comparison between this two great thinkers.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Boston University / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis or dissertation. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / The problem of this dissertation is to present and to analyze critically the doctrine of sin in Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics, Volumes I/1--IV/3. First the Church Dogmatics is summarised in terms of the doctrine of sin, and three discernible periods, I/1--II/1, II/2--III/4, and IV/1--IV/3, are found. Following the exposition the teachings on sin for each period are restated, their respective Christological presuppositions shown and compared, and the tensions which exist between them explored. Next Barth's mature conception of sin, period three, is analyzed for its New Testament orientation. Finally, problems in Barth's mature doctrine of sin are presented, and a final evaluation is made. These are the major findings: In the first section, Volumes I/1--II/1, sin is portrayed as an objective reality which has drastically altered man's life. Man is under the judgment of original sin, is spiritually dead, and can know God only through the Word of God coming afresh to him. In Volumes II/2--III/4, there is a de-emphasizing of the nature of sin. Sin is objectively impossible. Jesus Christ is the genuine man who actualizes all other men. As He has already rejected sin, man's sin is rejected. From creation God has denied evil by rejecting certain possibilities. Sin is man's choice for these rejected possibilities, das Nichtige. The emphasis is on God's rejection and not on man's choice. Although man sins by choosing the objectively impossible, sin cannot destroy but only pervert. Jesus Christ is the higher truth. The basis for this new understanding of sin is Barth's Christo-absolutism which declares that Jesus Christ is God Himself, the ontic center of creation. Creation is instrumental to this historic center and is in both noetic and ontic synthesis with it. Creation has already been fulfilled in Him. Thus the following tensions arise. (1) Time has no intrinsic meaning since creation is fulfilled. (2) Creation loses its creaturely dimension in its synthesis in Jesus Christ. (3) Sin, overruled by Jesus Christ, has no intrinsic meaning. This entire perspective is found to be unbiblical. In Volume IV/1--IV/3, sin is re-emphasized. In the light of Jesus Christ's reconciliation, sin is seen to have greater reality as man's other determinant. Sin cannot change Jesus Christ's work for man, but man in sin achieves something powerfully real and brings chaos into creation. He contradicts himself damaging both his relationship to God and man. Only God's grace keeps man from falling into das Nichtige. Sin is overcome in Jesus Christ, but man's sinful past is still with him. This understanding of sin rests in Barth's new Christological emphasis that Jesus Christ still fights evil and suffers for sinful man. With this the categories of time, creation, and sin regain Biblical orientation. Barth's mature doctrine of sin is in the main obedient to the New Testament in teaching the following: (1) An understanding of sin must be drawn primarily from Jesus Christ's reconciling act. (2) Sin is volitional rebellion against God. (3) Sin's consequences are horrible, releasing das Nichtige into creation. (4) Evil is not only a power released by sin but attacks man. (5) Theology cannot give a rational explanation for sin without neutralizing it. (6) Man in sin faces judgment and condemnation. Barth does deviate from the New Testament, however, by not developing the law as a background for Christ's reconciling work. Our final evaluation of Barth's doctrine of sin in the third section is positive. The reader is confronted by such a compelling picture of Jesus Christ the Reconciler of sinful man that he knows himself to be a sinner. / 2031-01-01

Thesis advisor: O. Ernesto Valiente / Thesis advisor: Richard Lennan / Thesis (STL) — Boston College, 2018. / Submitted to: Boston College. School of Theology and Ministry. / Discipline: Sacred Theology.