3

The Problemof Political Theology

edited byPaweł ArmadaArkadiusz GórnisiewiczKrzysztof C. Matuszek

Akademia IgnatianumWydawnictwo WAMKraków 2012

5

Contents

Introduction: Political Theology, the Question of Modernity, and the Discourse on Politics 7 Paweł Armada Political Theology: Between Denouncing the World and Making a New One 7 Arkadiusz Górnisiewicz The Birth of Modernity from the Spirit of Theology 17 Krzysztof C. Matuszek The Different Concepts of Political Theology 23David Janssens Violent Grace: The Theologico-Political Problem in Ancient Poetry and Philosophy 29Arkadiusz Górnisiewicz The Problem of the Closure of any Political Theology: Remarks on the Controversy between Erik Peterson and Carl Schmitt 45Jacek Bartyzel The Social Kingdom of Christ in the Catholic Theology of Politics (On Pope Pius XI’s Encyclical “Quas primas”) 59Leora Batnitzky Judaism, Christianity, and the Theologico-Political Problem of Modernity 77Paweł Armada Prophetology as a Political Science? 89

6 Contents

Bogdan Szlachta The Christian Concept of Voluntarism as a Source of Modern Political Thinking 101Till Kinzel Between “libertas philosophandi” and “conservatio tranquillitatis”: Political Theology, Hermeneutics, and Bible Criticism in Early Modern Cultures of the Enlightenment 111Victoria Kahn Post-War Machiavelli: Strauss versus Kojève 131Paweł Kaźmierczak Dietrich von Hildebrand and Political Theology: Catholic Austria versus National Socialism 149Krzysztof C. Matuszek The Problem with Reco gnizing the Enemy: Critical Review of Carl Schmitt’s Political Theology 161John P. McCormick Educable or Sinful Evil? Revisiting the Moral Status of the Political in the Schmitt-Strauss Exchange 179Michał Łuczewski The Sleep of Monsters Produces Reason 199

Contributors 221

Name Index 223

Paweł Kaźmierczak

Dietrich von Hildebrand and Political Theology

Catholic Austria versus National Socialism

The credit for reintroducing the concept of political theology to the contemporary political

discourse is given to Carl Schmitt (1888-1985), a German jurist and political philosopher,

called “a Heidegger of political theory” due to his involvement with the National Socialist

regime1.

In this context Carl Schmitt’s contemporary, a German philosopher Dietrich von Hildebrand

(1889-1977), is worth mentioning. As a proponent of realist phenomenology and a fervent

Catholic convert, he was a relentless opponent of National Socialism from the very start of

the movement in Germany. After Hitler rose to power in 1933, he had to emigrate from

Germany and actively opposed the National Socialist regime from Austrian soil.

The political concepts of Dietrich von Hildebrand were rooted in his theological vision.

Accordingly, he perceived National Socialism and Bolshevism as historical appearances of

Antichrist2. In his interpretation, they were not just political systems – they aspired to be

comprehensive worldviews3 and earthly messianisms4. According to Hildebrand, National

Socialism was a heretical movement, notwithstanding the fact that Hitler claimed to adhere to

“positive Christianity” and to “oppose neo-paganism”5.

1 C. Schmitt, Politische Theologie. Vier Kapitel zur Lehre von der Souveränität, Duncker & Humblot, München

1922. Cfr. T. B. Strong, Foreword: Dimensions of the New Debate around Carl Schmitt, in: C. Schmitt, The

Concept of the Political, The University of Chicago University Press, Chicago 2007, p. xii. Cfr. G. Geréby, Political

Theology versus Theological Politics: Erik Peterson and Carl Schmitt, さNew German Critiqueざ 105, Vol. 35, No. 3,

Fall 2008, p. 8.

2 „The AﾐtiIhrist is reariﾐg his head iﾐ Bolshe┗isﾏ aﾐd Natioﾐal “oIialisﾏさ, D. ┗oﾐ HildeHraﾐd, Quietistische

Gefahr, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatざ 30, 10. March 1935, p. 227.

3 Ibidem, p. 228.

4 D. von Hildebrand, Noch einmal: Katholizismus und Politik, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1935, No. 46, 17

November, s. 1096.

5 D. von Hildebrand, Ceteruﾏ ceﾐseo…! „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1934, No. 45, 14 October, p. 3.

Dietrich von Hildebrand pinned his hopes on the Catholic Church, and on Austria, whose

leaders intended to implement the social teaching of the Church6. Therefore, he unreservedly

supported the position of the Austrian chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss (1932-34), from whom

he heard the meaningful assertion: “Today politics is not about purely political issues, but

about worldview. For me the fight against National Socialism is in fact the fight in defense of

the Christian worldview”7. Hildebrand therefore perceived Dollfuss as a gift of Providence

for Austria8.

In Hildebrand’s opinion, Dollfuss understood the call of Providence and responded to this

appeal in the program of his government, summed up in the motto “Austriam instaurare in

Christo”9. Therefore the German philosopher exhorted the Austrian Catholics: “May each

one understand that allegiance to the government of Dollfuss is not a question of political

taste and political partisanship, but a sacred obligation that he has as a Catholic, as a

European, as a German, and as an Austrian”10. Standing on the side of Dollfuss – and, after

his assassination, on the side of the Christian corporative state he had founded – was the sign

of the commitment to Christ in the battle against the Antichrist11.

Hildebrand’s programmatic article in “Reichspost” entitled Österreichs große deutsche

Stunde (The Great German Hour of Austria) contrasted the “national awakening” of Austria

“to the meaning of its existence and to its providential task” with the “national rising” in

Germany, expressed by “the torrent of idolatrous slogans”12. The very use of the concept of

Austria’s God-given mission confirms that Hildebrand looked at political developments

through a theological lens: “When God’s plan becomes luminously evident, and the mission

6 D. von Hildebrand, Österreichs Sendung, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, ヱ9ンン, No. ヱ, ン DeIeﾏHer, p. 4.

7 D. von Hildebrand, Memoiren und Aufsätze gegen den Nationalsozialismus 1933-1938. Mit A. von Hildebrand

und R. Ebneth herausgegeben von E. Wenisch, Matthias Grünewald-Verlag, Mainz, 1994, p. 59.

8 „Die Vorsehuﾐg hat OestereiIh deﾐ riIhtigeﾐ Maﾐﾐ für das autoritati┗e Regiﾏe gesIheﾐkt.さ D. von

Hildebrand, Zum Jahrestag des autoritären Regimes in Österreich, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1934, No. 14, 11

March, p. 18.

9 Was wir wollen, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1933, No. 1, 3 December, p. 3.

10 D. von Hildebrand, Österreichs Sendung, op. cit., p. 5.

11 D. von Hildebrand, Quietistische Gefahr, op. cit., p. 228.

12 D. von Hildebrand, Österreichs große deutsche Stunde, „ReiIhspostさ ヱ9ンン, No. ヲンヱ, ヲヰ August; repriﾐt: D. von

Hildebrand, Memoiren und Aufsätze, op. cit., p. 161-162.

which God has entrusted to a national community is grasped, this establishes an objective

foundation on which a new and more lively consciousness of community, a new love, and a

new will to live are built up”13. Hildebrand’s reading of the “mission” of Austria was

fourfold: “The mission is Catholic, it concerns humanity as a whole; it is Western; and it is

German”14.

The Involvement of the Catholics in the Political Sphere

To support the above mentioned appeal Hildebrand analyzed the question of the engagement

of the Catholics in politics in the article Quietistische Gefahr (The Danger of Quietism) and

he criticized their withdrawal from the political sphere.

He referred to the history of the Catholic Center Party in Germany, dissolved after National

Socialism came to power. As a result of the bankruptcy of this version of political

Catholicism, the majority of German Catholics decided to withdraw “into the purely religious

sphere”15. Hildebrand agreed that there had been an excessive politicization of Catholicism,

but he also criticized this exaggerated reaction to the previous involvement in politics16. In

his opinion, this quietist tendency represented “an outright desertion of duty”, especially in

the face of the totalitarian claims of the state17.

Hildebrand elucidated his position as follows: “It is precisely the rootedness of genuine

Catholics in a realm that transcends politics, their freedom from the inner dynamism of

political practice, and their consideration of all things in conspectu Dei, that requires them to

erect a dam against every encroachment of the state”18.

There are two elements in this postulate. First, the religious sphere is higher than the political

and therefore should be autonomous and have precedence over politics. Second, the religious

13

Ibidem.

14 Ibidem.

15 D. von Hildebrand, Quietistische Gefahr, op. cit., p. 227.

16 D. von Hildebrand, Noch einmal: Katholizismus und Politik, op. cit., p. 1095.

17 D. von Hildebrand, Quietistische Gefahr, op. cit., p. 227. Cfr. D. von Hildebrand, Noch einmal: Katholizismus

und Politik, op. cit., p. 1095-1096.

18 D. von Hildebrand, Quietistische Gefahr, op. cit., p. 227.

element must radiate on the earthly and political domain. As Hildebrand put it, “Instead of

politicizing Catholicism one must Catholicize politics”19.

The Theology of the Reich

Worded differently, Hildebrand’s warning meant that religiously motivated participation in

political life should not lead to any form of earthly messianism. Earthly messianisms, such as

National Socialism and Bolshevism, were utopian systems, based on the false presumption

that it is possible to construct a paradise on earth. Terrestrial messianism rejects the truth of

the original sin and it believes that humans can be perfected by external means, such as law

and economy20.

This concept is very different from the Christian perspective. Consequently, Hildebrand did

not consider terrestrial messianism a serious temptation for the Christians. What was at stake,

however, was the risk of yielding to the “sacralization” of the political sphere, present

especially in the various ideologies of the Reich, one of whose exponents was Carl Schmitt21.

These ideologies erased the boundary between the empire, belonging to the earthly sphere,

and the Church, rooted in the supernatural22.

The First Reich was the Holy Roman Empire, Heiliges Römisches Reich, inaugurated by the

coronation of Otto I as emperor in 962 and abolished by Napoleon in 1806, and the Second

Reich, or the German Reich was the Hohenzollern empire (1871-1918)23. As Kurt

Sontheimer points out, the idea of the Third Reich, harking back to the tradition of the First

and the Second Reich, was widespread in antidemocratic German circles after 191924, and it

led to the birth of the theology of the Reich, conceived as a higher, transcendent order, which

19

Ibidem.

20 D. von Hildebrand, Noch einmal: Katholizismus und Politik, op. cit., p. 1096.

21 J. Hell, Katechon: Carl Schﾏitt’s Iﾏperial Theology aﾐd the Ruiﾐs of the Future, さThe GerﾏaﾐiI Re┗ie┘ざ ヲヰヰ9,

vol. 84, Issue 4, p. 283-326

22 D. von Hildebrand, Noch einmal: Katholizismus und Politik, op. cit., p. 1096.

23 D. Nicholls, Adolf Hitler. A Biographical Companion, ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, Denver, Oxford, 2000, p. 264-

265.

24 K. Sontheimer, Antidemokratisches Denken in der Weimarer Republik. Die politischen Ideen des deutschen

Nationalsozialismus zwischen 1918 und 1933, Nymphenburger Verlagshandlung, München 1962, p. 280. Cfr. C.

Noser, Die historische Tragik in der Dialektik gegen die universalen Synthesen des katholischen Denkens und

Handelns, „Ci┗itas. ZeitsIhrift für das IhristliIhe Geﾏeiﾐ┘eseﾐざ, ヲヰヰ9, “oﾐderheft ン, p. 221.

encompassed the German people25. In Austria it took shape of “the theology of the

Anschluss”26.

Dietrich von Hildebrand and Klaus Dohrn, the editors of “Christliche Ständestaat”, strove to

rectify the theology of the Reich27, and, in particular, to oppose the idea of bringing Austria

back “home to the Reich”28 (which Hildebrand also termed the “idol of the Anschluss”)29.

They applied the concept of the Reich to the Austrian empire, which, in their reading of

history, embodied the Christian West in miniature30. This Austrian version of the ideology of

the Reich was closely related to the concept of “the true German culture” (wahres

Deutschtum)31, which could best be preserved in the independent Austria: “It is high time that

every Austrian become fully conscious of the great hour of Austria, which is also a German

hour. It is deplorable if anyone lets himself be unsettled by the mendacious thesis that

Austria has artificially excluded itself from the great wave of the national rising of German

culture. On the contrary, everyone in Austria ought to feel the magnitude of the

25

K. Breuning, Die Vision des Reiches. Deutscher Katholizismus zwischen Demokratie und Diktatur (1929-1934),

Max Hueber Verlag, München, 1969, p. 238ff.

26 D. von Hildebrand, Engelbert Dollfuss. Ein katholischer Staatsmann, op. cit., p. 7.

27 R. Ebneth, Die Österreichische Wocheﾐschrift „Der Christliche Stäﾐdestaat“. Deutsche Eﾏigratioﾐ iﾐ

Österreich 1933-1938, Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag Mainz 1976, p. 136.

28 C. Noser, Die historische Tragik in der Dialektik gegen die universalen Synthesen des katholischen Denkens

und Handelns, op. cit., p. 221.

29 „WahrliIh, Oesterreich war ein Abendland im Kleinen, das Land, in dem der Genius der christlichen

AHeﾐdlaﾐd aﾏ reiﾐsteﾐ siIh eﾐtfaltete.さ D. von Hildebrand, Österreich, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1934, No.

42, 23 September, p. 6. Cfr. „Der Uebergang zur autoritativen Regierungsform und die entschiedene Abwehr

gegen die Häresie des Nationalsozialismus sind die Geburtsstunde des Wiedererwachens der österreichischen

Idee, des österreichischen vaterländischen Bewußtseins, und die Todesstunde des Anschlußidols.さ D. von

Hildebrand, Zum Jahrestag des autoritären Regimes in Österreich, op. cit., p. 19.

30 „Das ReiIh ist das iﾏ GlauHeﾐ geheiligte, durIh die ┗erﾐüﾐftige Erkeﾐﾐtﾐis geeiﾐte uﾐd staatliIh föderierte

AHeﾐdlaﾐdさ, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1935, No. 14, 7 April, p. 326. C. Noser, Die historische Tragik in der

Dialektik gegen die universalen Synthesen des katholischen Denkens und Handelns, op. cit., p. 221. Cfr. D. von

Hildebrand, Habsburg und die österreichische Sendung, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, ヱ9ンヶ, No. 47, 22 November,

p. 1114.

31 C. Noser, Die historische Tragik in der Dialektik gegen die universalen Synthesen des katholischen Denkens

und Handelns, op. cit., p. 221. Cfr. D. von Hildebrand, Wahres Deutschtum, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1935, No.

48, 1 December, s. 1143-1148.

responsibility towards the German spirit and German culture which he is at present called to

protect, preserve, and cultivate”32.

The editors and authors of „Christliche Ständestaat” wanted to delineate their vision of the

Reich in sharp contrast to the Greater German Reich ideology, therefore they often spoke of

“Sacrum Imperium” or the Holy Roman Empire instead the Holy Roman Empire of the

German Nation33. The Reich was a supra-national community, which, due to the political

situation of the 1930’s, could be perceived not as a political, but as a spiritual and cultural

unity34.

According to „Christliche Ständestaat” the Reich had to be Catholic35, since Catholicism was

a supranational unity of mankind in Christ, opposed by the same token to every form of

nationalism. In the article Österreich und der Nationalismus (Austria and Nationalism)

Hildebrand attacked nationalism as the great heresy of modern times, since it put collective

egoism of the nation above the common good of Europe, mankind or the supernatural

community of the mystical Body of Christ and thus represented a perversion of a real love

towards one’s own nation36.

The very supranational character of the Reich necessitated its Catholicity. Therefore, it was

the Catholic Austria, and not the Protestant and nationalist Prussia, that could be seen as the

legitimate heir of the medieval Sacrum Imperium37. With reference to the history of the Holy

Roman Empire the postulated Reich was conceived as the exterior side of the Church38.

Hildebrand kept reiterating the motive of the Catholic and supranational character of Austria.

In the article Der Genius Österreichs und der Provinzialismus (The Genius of Austria and

Provincialism) he wrote: “Austria has always been a stronghold of Catholicism: the former 32

D. von Hildebrand, Österreichs große deutsche Stunde, op. cit., p. 164.

33 T. Haecker, Betrachtungen über Vergil, Vater des Abendlandes, „Der Breﾐﾐerさ, ヱン. Folge, Herbst 1932, p. 3-

31, a digitalized version available at: http://corpus1.aac.ac.at/brenner/, accessed 22 January 2011.

34 R. Ebneth, Die Österreichische Wochenschrift „Der Christliche Stäﾐdestaat“, op. cit., p. 137. Cfr. D. von

Hildebrand, Die geistige Einheit des Abendlandes, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1933, No. 3, 17 December, p. 7-12.

35 Ibidem, p. 23.

36 D. von Hildebrand, Österreich und der Nationalismus, CS 1934, No. 54, 16 December, p. 24.

37 R. Ebneth, Die Österreichische Wochenschrift „Der Christliche Stäﾐdestaat“, op. cit., p. 137.

38 K. Breuning, Die Vision des Reiches, op. cit., p. 311.

head of the supranational Holy Roman Empire, the secular arm of Christendom, has always

been a luminous antithesis to all forms of provincialism. This is not primarily because

Austria was the head of a great empire with many inhabitants, but rather because it was

Catholic, Western, and supranational”39.

Sometimes the revival of the ideology of the Reich was attributed to the pain resulting from

the downfall of the monarchy or to the fear of “swissification” of Austria, that is of

succumbing to the spirit of provincialism40. Another source of Reichsideologie in Austria was

found in Pan-German Romanticism 41. Alfred Missong intended to clarify and purify the

concept of the Reich by arguing that the idea of the Reich as the conservative political

concept of the twentieth century should not be identified with the mythologized vision of the

medieval Sacrum Imperium42.

In this connection Dietrich von Hildebrand wrote: “People forget that even an ideal realm

with such sacred foundations as the Holy Roman Empire, with an emperor who was

personally holy such as Henry II, still remains something this-worldly and earthly. The

Church rises infinitely above this realm, since she is essentially supernatural. As the unity of

the Church triumphant, suffering, and militant, she connects the world to come with this

world. The focal point must never be shifted to the extent that too much is expected sub

specie aeternitatis from an earthly realm. In building up the earth one should bring in neither

too little theology nor too much theology”43.

According to Hildebrand, the analogous disregard for the difference between the natural and

supernatural orders happened when Christianity was identified with the Western culture44. On

the other hand, in Hildebrand’s own terms, the Catholic Austria, independent of the Hitler’s

39

D. von Hildebrand, Der Genius Österreichs und der Provinzialismus, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ ヱ9ンヵ, No. ンヱ, ヴ August, p. 731-732.

40 Ibidem, p. 731.

41 K. Breuning, Die Vision des Reiches, op. cit., 164.

42 Alfred Missong ┘as aﾐ Austriaﾐ CatholiI puHliIist IollaHoratiﾐg ┘ith the ﾏagaziﾐe „“Ihönere Zukuﾐftさ; iﾐ

„ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ he used the pseudonim Otto Bruner, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1934, No. 49, 11

November, p. 12ff. cfr. R. Ebneth, Die Österreichische Wochenschrift „Der Christliche Stäﾐdestaat“, op. cit., p.

140.

43 D. von Hildebrand, Noch einmal: Katholizismus und Politik, op. cit., p. 1096-1097.

44 Ibidem.

Third Reich, was the bastion of the culture of Christian West45. The West (Abendland) was

understood not as a geographical or political concept, but rather as spiritual and cultural one.

The „Christliche Ständestaat“ editorial quoted the fragment of chancellor Kurt Schuschnigg’s

speech, in which he stated that the West grew from the consonance between antique

Christianity and Teutonism and could not exist without either of the two elements46.

In 1936 Dietrich von Hildebrand got deeper engaged with the monarchist movement, which

gained ground during Schuschnigg’s rule. He adopted “Little Austrian” version of

monarchism, which envisioned the restoration of the Habsburg monarchy within the borders

of the Austrian Republic47. In the article Kaiser Karl (Emperor Charles) he expressed his

hope that the late pious emperor Charles will be succeeded on the throne by his son, Otto48.

The article Habsburg und die österreichische Sendung was another expression of this

conviction. Hildebrand considered the house of Habsburg to be the incarnation of the

Austrian idea and the mission of Austria, namely the defense of the Catholic Church and

unity of the western culture49.

Conclusion

Hildebrand attributed the seductive power of National Socialism over many German

Catholics to a peculiarly German prejudice, namely “the supposition that traces of God are to

45 „Österreich nicht ein Bestandteil Deutschlands, sondern ein eigenwertiges edles Gebilde ist, das die

Vorsehung zum christlichen Bollwerk gegen Bolschewismus und Nationalsozialismus, zur Rettung des wahren

Deutschtums und der ganzen abendländischen Kultur auserseheﾐ hatさ. D. von Hildebrand, Der neue Kanzler,

„ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1934, No. 35, 5 August, p. 17.

46 „AHeﾐdlaﾐd, ┘ie ┘ir es seheﾐ, ist die harﾏoﾐisIhe VerHiﾐduﾐg jeﾐes ge┘altigeﾐ Gedaﾐkeﾐgutes, das aus

deﾏ Zusaﾏﾏeﾐklaﾐg ┗oﾐ aﾐtikeﾐ Christeﾐtuﾏ uﾐd Gerﾏaﾐeﾐtuﾏ Hesteht.さ Oesterreich und das Abendland,

„ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1935, No. 47, 24 November, p. 1119.

47 D. von Hildebrand, Souveränität des Staates und erlaubte Einmischung, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1936, No.

12, 22 March, p. 271-272.

48 „Uﾐd leﾐkeﾐ ┘ir alle, die ┘ir aﾐ OesterreiIhs “iﾐﾐ uﾐd seiﾐe große Ihristliche Sendung glauben, am heutigen

Tag unsere Blicke voll Hoffnung und Erwartung nach Steenockerzell, au f den Sohn und Thronerben

Kaiser Kar l s, in dem der geist des großen heiligmäßigen Märtyrerkaisers lebendig fortlebt.ざ D. von

Hildebrand, Kaiser Karl, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1936, No. 14, 5 April, p. 320.

49 „Sein [Habsburgs] Oesterre ich muß immer an der Se ite derer stehen, d ie d ie chr i st l i ch -

aHeﾐd läﾐd isIhe Ku ltur gegeﾐ irgeﾐdeiﾐeﾐ Nat ioﾐa l i sﾏus ┗erteid igeﾐさ D. von Hildebrand,

Habsburg und die österreichische Sendung, op. cit., p. 1114-1115.

be found in every historical reality and that they always contain a hidden valuable element”50.

He considered this conviction to be an un-Christian error deriving from the pantheistic

Hegelian reading of history as “the development of the objective World-spirit”51.

While Carl Schmitt justified the Röhm-Putsch52, Hildebrand rejected Schmitt’s decisionism,

condemning Hitler for the murders committed during the Night of the Long Knives and their

subsequent legalization53.

But, on the other hand, Hildebrand justified the authoritarian measures implemented by

Engelbert Dollfuss in Austria, who suspended the parliament and ruled by decrees54.

Consequently, one might call his position to be a Catholic version of decisionism.

Another point of contrast between Schmitt and Hildebrand was their attitude towards anti-

Semitism. Schmitt defended the racial laws of Nuremberg (1935)55, whereas Hildebrand

condemned anti-Semitism, both racial, propagated by the Nazis, and religious, peculiar to

Catholics56.

Hildebrand’s views on political theology were closer to those of Erik Peterson’s57. Both of

them warned against identifying an earthly political order with the eschatological kingdom of

God or heavenly Jerusalem. Both of them were conservative Catholic converts, highly valued

50

D. von Hildebrand, Wahre und falsche Objektivität, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1935, No. 23, 9 June, p. 539.

51 Ibidem.

52 C. Schmitt, Der Führer schützt das Recht. Zur Reichstagsrede Adolf Hitlers vom 13. Juli 1934, „DeutsIhe

Juristen-Zeitung, 1934, No. 15, 1 August, p. 945-950.

53 D. von Hildebrand, Die letzte Maske fällt, „ChristliIhe “täﾐdestaatさ, 1934, No. 31, 8 July, p. 3-5.

54 „Aus dieser Einsicht heraus, daß Österreich nur sich selbst wieder geschenkt werden könne durch ein

Verlassen der demokratisch-parlamentarischen Bahn, entschloß sich Dollfuß zum autoritativen Regime. Die

Liquidierung des Parlamentarismus, zu der die unerwartete Selbstausschaltung des Parlamentes die

Gelegenheit gab, war eine große, entscheidende vaterländische Tat.さ D. von Hildebrand, Engelbert Dollfuss. Ein

katholischer Staatsmann, Aﾐtoﾐ Pustet, “alzHurg ヱ9ンヴ; repriﾐt: „Ci┗itas. Zeitschrift für das christliche

Geﾏeiﾐ┘eseﾐさ, 2009, Sonderheft 3, p. 24.

55 C. Schmitt, Die Verfassung der Freiheit, „DeutsIhe Juristeﾐ-Zeitungさ, 1935, No. 40, 1 August, column 1133-

1135.

56 D. von Hildebrand, Die Juden und das christliche Abendland, in: D. von Hildebrand, Menschheit am

Scheidenweg. Gesammelte Abhandlungen und Vorträge. Verlag Josef Habbel, Regensburg, 1955, p. 312-340.

57 G. Geréby, Political Theology versus Theological Politics: Erik Peterson and Carl Schmitt, op. cit., p. 33.

by Josef Ratzinger, the present Pope Benedict XVI, who often referred to the works of Erik

Peterson58 and who considered Dietrich von Hildebrand to be one of the most important

Catholic thinkers of the twentieth century59.

Josef Ratzinger himself sees “the central problem for faith today” in relativism60. However,

he remarks that “In the area of politics, this concept is considerably right. There is no one

correct political opinion. What is relative – the building up of liberally ordained coexistence

between people – cannot be something absolute. Thinking in this way was precisely the error

of Marxism and the political theologies”61.

In tune with this Ratzinger’s statement were also Hildebrand’s post-war publications. For

example, in Trojan Horse in the City of God (1967) Hildebrand criticized Johannes Baptist

Metz and Karl Rahner, who, in the dialogue with the Marxists at Herrenchiemsee in 1966,

expressed the conviction that both Christianity and Communism were focused on the future.

For Hildebrand this expression represented an unacceptable ambiguity, as he emphasized the

radical difference between the historical future and future understood as the eternal life62.

As it has been demonstrated in this paper, regardless of the political circumstances in which

he found himself, Dietrich von Hildebrand always called for a religiously motivated active

engagement in the social and political life, and, at the same time, objected to “the

immanentization of the eschaton”, to borrow a phrase from Eric Voegelin63.

58

J. Ratzinger, Die Einheit der Nationen: Eine Vision der Kirchenväter, Pustet, Salzburg, 1971.

59 J. Ratzinger, Foreword, in: A. von Hildebrand, The Soul of a Lion: Dietrich von Hildebrand. A Biography by Alice

von Hildebrand, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2000.

60 J. Ratzinger, Relativism: the Central Problem for Faith Today,

http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/ratzrela.htm, access 4 January 2011.

61 Ibidem.

62 D. von Hildebrand, Trojan Horse in the City of God, Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago, 1967, p. 109.

63 E. Voegelin, The New Science of Politics, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1987, p. 120.

Bibliography

Breuning Klaus, Die Vision des Reiches. Deutscher Katholizismus zwischen Demokratie und

Diktatur (1929-1934), Max Hueber Verlag, München, 1969.

Schmitt Carl, Der Führer schützt das Recht. Zur Reichstagsrede Adolf Hitlers vom 13. Juli

1934, „Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung“, 1934, No. 15, 1 August, p. 945-950.

Ebneth Rudolf, Die Österreichische Wochenschrift „Der Christliche Ständestaat“. Deutsche

Emigration in Österreich 1933-1938, Matthias-Grünewald-Verlag, Mainz, 1976.

Haecker Theodor, Betrachtungen über Vergil, Vater des Abendlandes, „Der Brenner“, 13.

Folge, Herbst 1932, p. 3-31; a digitalized version available at:

http://corpus1.aac.ac.at/brenner/, access 22 January 2011.

Hell Julia, Katechon: Carl Schmitt’s Imperial Theology and the Ruins of the Future, “The

Germanic Review” 2009, Vol. 84, Issue 4, p. 283-326.

Geréby György, Political Theology versus Theological Politics: Erik Peterson and Carl

Schmitt, “New German Critique” 105, Vol. 35, No. 3, Fall 2008, p. 7-33.

Nicholls David, Adolf Hitler. A Biographical Companion, ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara,

Denver, Oxford, 2000.

Noser Christoph, Die historische Tragik in der Dialektik gegen die universalen Synthesen des

katholischen Denkens und Handelns, „Civitas. Zeitschrift für das christliche Gemeinwesen”,

2009, Sonderheft 3, p. 185-235.

Oesterreich und das Abendland, „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1935, No. 47, 24 November, p.

1119.

Ratzinger Josef, Die Einheit der Nationen: Eine Vision der Kirchenväter, Pustet, Salzburg,

1971.

Ratzinger Josef, Foreword, in: A. von Hildebrand, The Soul of a Lion: Dietrich von

Hildebrand. A Biography by Alice von Hildebrand, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2000.

Ratzinger Josef, Relativism: the Central Problem for Faith Today,

http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/ratzrela.htm, access 4 January 2011.

Schmitt Carl, Der Führer schützt das Recht. Zur Reichstagsrede Adolf Hitlers vom 13. Juli

1934, „Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung, 1934, No. 15, 1 August, p. 945-950.

Schmitt Carl, Die Verfassung der Freiheit, „Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung, 1935, No. 40, 1

August, p. 1133-1135.

Schmitt Carl, Politische Theologie. Vier Kapitel zur Lehre von der Souveränität, Duncker &

Humblot, München, 1922.

Sontheimer Kurt, Antidemokratisches Denken in der Weimarer Republik. Die politischen

Ideen des deutschen Nationalsozialismus zwischen 1918 und 1933, Nymphenburger

Verlagshandlung, München, 1962.

Strong Tracy B., Foreword: Dimensions of the New Debate around Carl Schmitt, in: Schmitt

Carl, The Concept of the Political, The University of Chicago University Press, Chicago

2007, p. ix-xxxi.

Voegelin Eric, The New Science of Politics, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1987.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Autorität und Führertum „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1933, No. 1, 3

December, p. 6-8; No. 2, 10 December, p. 7-10.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Ceterum censeo…! „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1934, No. 45, 14

October, p. 3-5.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Der Genius Österreichs und der Provinzialismus, „Christliche

Ständestaat“ 1935, No. 31, 4 August, p. 731-733.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Die Juden und das christliche Abendland, in: von Hildebrand

Dietrich, Menschheit am Scheidenweg. Gesammelte Abhandlungen und Vorträge. Verlag

Josef Habbel, Regensburg, 1955, p. 312-340.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Die letzte Maske fällt, „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1934, No. 31, 8

July, p. 3-5.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Der neue Kanzler, „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1934, No. 35, 5

August, p. 17.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Die geistige Einheit des Abendlandes, „Christliche Ständestaat“,

1933, No. 3, 17 December, p. 7-12.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Engelbert Dollfuss. Ein katholischer Staatsmann, Anton Pustet,

Salzburg 1934; reprint: „Civitas. Zeitschrift für das christliche Gemeinwesen“, 2009,

Sonderheft 3.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Habsburg und die österreichische Sendung, „Christliche

Ständestaat“, 1936, No. 47, 22 November, p. 1114-1115.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Kaiser Karl, „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1936, No. 14, 5 April, p. 319-320.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Memoiren und Aufsätze gegen den Nationalsozialismus 1933-1938.

Mit Alice von Hildebrand und Rudolf Ebneth herausgegeben von Ernst Wenisch, Matthias

Grünewald-Verlag, Mainz, 1994.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Noch einmal: Katholizismus und Politik, „Christliche Ständestaat“,

1935, No. 46, 17 November, s. 1095-1097.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Österreich, „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1934, No. 42, 23 September,

p. 3-7.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Österreichs große deutsche Stunde, „Reichspost“ 1933, No. 231.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Österreich und der Nationalismus, CS 1934, No. 54, 16 December,

p. 24-26.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Souveränität des Staates und erlaubte Einmischung, „Christliche

Ständestaat“, 1936, No. 12, 22 March, p. 271-272.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Trojan Horse in the City of God, Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago

1967.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Quietistische Gefahr, „Christliche Ständestaat” 30, 10 March 1935,

p. 227-228.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Wahres Deutschtum, „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1935, No. 48, 1

December, s. 1143-1148.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Wahre und falsche Objektivität, „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1935,

No. 23, 9 June, p. 539-541.

von Hildebrand Dietrich, Zum Jahrestag des autoritären Regimes in Österreich, „Christliche

Ständestaat“, 1934, No. 14, 11 March, p. 18-19.

Was wir wollen, „Christliche Ständestaat“, 1933, No. 1, 3 December, p. 3.