Identity and Difference in Form of Thought and Metaphor: Coverage and Interference Analysis of two Theological Forms of Thought in Relation to the Body-of-Christ-Metaphor

思想形态的分析是神学研究中最具创新性的领域之一。在德语神学里，有两种主要的思维形式是对立的，一种是差别思维，另一种是统一思维。Pröpper， Striet等人在自由范畴中重新表述了神与地的关系，并将其视为严格的差异关系。相比之下，<s:1>勒将其反映在以一元论为基础的主体哲学中，这种哲学在很大程度上是由统一时刻决定的。这个研究项目的目的不是建立两种思想形式的直接比较的范围或解决问题的潜力，而是通过一种材料教条，围绕着在两种思想形式中出现的有限与绝对关系中的同一性和差异性之间的紧张关系：基督的身体。在此过程中，材料的重点将放在19世纪和20世纪对基督身体隐喻的教会应用上：有限的主体将被整合到基督神秘的身体中，从而形成教会。隐喻意义的过剩被用来对两种思想形态进行耐久性测试，测试它们的启发式能力和验证强度的限制：哪种范式特别关注基督身体的教会学的哪些方面？什么隐喻的内容不能或很难以思想形态的特定方式可见？与测试对象发生的干扰有助于使基督身体术语的结构逻辑变得更加透明。在这一过程中，考虑的媒介本身将通过浸入到各自思想形态的参数中而被重新配置。应用程序使用两个不同的材料对象进行规划。一方面，约翰·亚当Möhler（1796-1838）是人们关注的焦点。他的浪漫-器官-基督-教会论（教会作为持续的化身）在部分二手文献中证明了一种倾向于统一思想（万有神论）。另一方面，基督的身体教会学必须在二十世纪二十年代到四十年代之间的德语区域内进行分析。在1940年，一大批在某种程度上极端的基督论草稿导致了对这个充满本体论的隐喻的彻底解构（Koster）。所以我们可以称这段时期为基督身体-教会论的过渡时期。项目的成果首先包括对两种突出的神学思想形态的范围分析，并证明了它们解决问题的潜力。其次，该项目将对19世纪和20世纪基督身体教会学的历史做出有系统的创新贡献。第三，它在于对教会隐喻的批判性重新定位。最后，对宗教领域内部认同建构的相当文化政策和向外分化策略进行了分析。

The analysis of thought-forms is one of the most innovative areas of theological research. In the German-speaking theology two prominent forms of thought stand opposite: On the one hand the Thought of Difference and on the other hand the Thought of Unity. Pröpper, Striet among others reformulate the god-earth-relationship in categories of freedom and take it as a strict relationship of difference. In comparison Müller reflects it in a monistical-based subject philosophy as considerably determined by the moment of unity.The research project does not aim at establishing the range or the problem-solving-potential of both thought-forms in direct comparison, but rather by a piece of material dogmatics that revolves around the tension between identity and difference in relations of the finite to the absolute that occurs in both thought-forms: the Body-of-Christ term. In doing so the material focus will be on the ecclesiological use of the Body-of-Christ-Metaphor in the 19th and 20th century: the finite subjects will be integrated in the mystic body of Christ and thus form the church. The surplus of the metaphors meaning is used to subject both thought-forms to an endurance test about their heuristic capacity and the limits of their validation strength: what paradigm concentrates particularly on which aspects of the Body-of-Christ-Ecclesiology? What metaphorical contents cannot or hardly be made visible in a thought-form specific way? Occurring interference with the test object can help making the structural logic of the Body-of-Christ term become more transparent. The medium of consideration itself will be reconfigured during this process by immersing it into the parameter of the respective thought-form.The application plans with two different material objects. On the one hand Johann Adam Möhler (1796-1838) is in the center of attention. His romantic-organological Body-of-Christ-Ecclesiology (church as continued incarnation) is attested in parts of the secondary literature a tendency towards Thought of Unity (panentheism). On the other hand the Body-of-Christ-Ecclesiology has to be analyzed within the German language area between the nineteen-twenties and nineteen-forties. A flood of to some extent extreme christomonistic drafts results in a radical deconstruction of this ontological loaded metaphor (Koster) in 1940. So we can call this a period of transition of the Body-of-Christ-Ecclesiology.The yield of the project first of all consists of the range analysis of two prominent theological thought-forms which are proved in their problem-solving-potential. Secondly, the project will make a methodical innovative contribution to the history of the Body-of-Christ-Ecclesiology in the 19th and 20th century. Thirdly, it lies in a critical relocation of the ecclesiological metaphor. Finally an analysis of considerably cultural policy concerning intern identity constructs and strategies of differentiation outwards in the area of religion is in prospect.