Potentials and Problems of a Theological Foundation of Tolerance

容忍是在某些宗教、哲学或意识形态信念的背景和前提下发展起来的。然而，具体地说，这些前提条件往往是拒绝那些想法或信仰不同的人的决定性原因。宗教信仰也是如此，因为它们的追随者声称绝对的真理，从而拒绝其他信仰或不信仰的人的生活方式和心态。人们的印象是，宗教往往阻碍和平共处，而不是被视为宽容的推动者。在这个关于新教-基督教信仰的项目中，不一定是这样的。主要目标是发展一种一致和连贯的宽容神学理论，该理论可以与世俗背景相联系。这应以批判性和建设性的方式与研究股的指导模式相结合来实现。这一指导性模型支持这样的假设，即宗教宽容不能仅仅通过指出相似信仰和/或伦理价值观的交集来实现，而更重要的是确定各自宗教中使拒绝相对化并产生尊重的参照点，以便宽容可以被描述和塑造为“被尊重驯服的拒绝”(B.Simon)。因此，可以证明，宽容所必需的自我相对化必须来自信徒在他们(这里是新教徒-基督徒)对现实本身的理解的背景下的自我理解，因此必须在那里寻找相应的动机，以便通过尊重来发展宽容的潜力，这可以“驯服”拒绝。对于新教-基督教信仰来说，这些动机在教条上包括，最重要的是感觉到自己的信仰不可用，在伦理上，包括爱邻居、陌生人和敌人的戒律的中心地位。他们的业绩将结合研究股的指导模式进行审查。具体地说，哈特穆特·罗塞诺追求教条认识论的指导问题，即新教-基督教信仰中是否可以以及在多大程度上可以发展宽容的潜力，如何确定这些潜力，以及是否可以界定宽容的限度，以及可以在多大程度上界定宽容的限度。Kinga Zeller探讨了伦理指导问题，即不同版本的爱的戒律如何与研究单位的指导模式有关，以及相应的调解尝试会带来什么好处和挑战。然后，这两个PI将对宽容的教条主义和认识论以及伦理学调查的结果进行分类，一方面是对基督教伦理的全面模式的影响，另一方面是对物质教条问题的影响。

Tolerance develops in the context and under the preconditions of certain religious, philosophical or ideological convictions. However, in concreto, these preconditions are often decisive reasons for rejecting those who think or believe differently. This is true for religious convictions insofar as their adherents claim absolute truth and thus reject the way of life and mindset of people of other faiths or non-beliefs. Religions, so the impression goes, tend to stand in the way of peaceful coexistence rather than being perceived as promoters of tolerance. That this does not have to be the case is to be worked out in this project with regard to the Protestant-Christian faith. The main goal is to develop a consistent and coherent theological theory of tolerance, which can be linked to a secular context. This shall be achieved in critical-constructive engagement with the Research Unit's guiding model. This guiding model supports the hypothesis that religious tolerance cannot only be achieved by pointing out an intersection of similar beliefs and / or ethical values, but that it is much more important to identify points of reference within the respective religion that relativize rejection and generate respect, so that tolerance can be described and shaped as "rejection tamed by respect" (B. Simon). Hence, it can be shown that the self-relativization necessary for tolerance must come from the self-understanding of believers in the context of their (here: Protestant-Christian) understanding of reality itself, so that corresponding motives must be sought there in order to develop a potential for tolerance through respect, which can "tame" rejection. For the Protestant-Christian faith, these motives include, in dogmatic terms, above all the perception of the unavailability of one's own faith and, in ethical terms, the central position of the commandment to love one's neighbor, stranger and enemy. Their performance is to be examined in connection with the Research Unit's guiding model. Specifically, Hartmut Rosenau pursues the dogmatic-epistemological guiding question of whether and to what extent potential for tolerance can be developed within the Protestant-Christian faith, how these would be determined, and also whether and to what extent limits to tolerance can be defined. Kinga Zeller examines the ethical guiding question of how the commandment of love in its various versions relates to the guiding model of the Research Unit and what gains as well as challenges result from corresponding attempts at mediation. The two PIs then classify the results of the dogmatic and epistemological as well as ethical investigations into tolerance in terms of their implications for a comprehensive model of Christian ethics on the one hand, and for material-dogmatic questions on the other.