What has endured of his life and work?


by Béla Varga


Translated by Rev. Vilma Szantho Harrington



Budapest, 1981



ISBN 963 00 0425 9

Kiadja a Magyar Unitárius Egyház H-1055 BUDAPEST V., Nagy Ignác u. 4.

Felelős kiadó: DR. FERENCZ JÓZSEF

Sajtó alá rendezte: SZENT-IVÁNYI ILONA







The Hungarian Unitarian Church in 1979 marked the four hundredth year — anniversary of the martyrdom of the founder of the Unitarian Church, Francis David.

In this same year the leadership of the church made a new effort to publish some works relating to his life and work. Most of these were published in Hungarian.

Today we are aware of an interest among the English speaking Unitarians, particularly, and among liberal religionists of our international community, in what Hungarian Unitarians have been saying since this religion was founded in the 16th century.


To serve this interest we have chosen one of the essays of Dr. Bela Varga, Professor of Ethics and Philosophy at the Unitarian Theological Seminary at Kolozsvar (now Napoca), and later Bishop. This study of Dr. Varga's on what is permanent in Francis David's ideas was written for the three hundred and fiftieth anniversary of his martyrdom. His conclusions are as meaningful to us today as fifty years ago. What is true is eternal, and what is eternal is everlasting. We asked the Rev. Vilma Szantho Harrington to do the translation. She studied under Dr. Varga, and still considers herself a follower of that great mind and soul. Rev, Vilma Szantho was married to the Rev. Donald Harrington in 1939 in Buda­pest, and returned to the U.S.A. Ever since then their ministry has been a close link between our American and Hungarian churches. For general information let me point out that Hungarian Unitarianism has since 1918 had two branches. The larger branch is in Transylvania, Roumania, where 90% of Unitarians live. The ministers preach in the Hungarian language. The smaller branch of 10% is in Hungary, mostly in Budapest. Several of our Hungarian Unitarian mi­nisters have studied abroad, in England and in the U.S A. Most of them are acquainted with the writings of their fellow Unitarians abroad.


Humbly, and with love, we offer this essay to our worldwide liberal religious community, in the hope that it may provoke some dialogue between us. We look forward to discussion, and are ready to answer questions.

Let me quote from one of the sermons of Francis David, which he delivered in 1569 at Gyulafehervár: "bread is to nourish and strengthen our body, likewise the teaching of Jesus is bread to nourish our soul." May this publication also be bread to our liberal religious community across all bounda­ries.





Dr. Joseph Ferencz, Bishop




Church historians have still an important task before them, namely to put the life and work of Francis David into a proper perspective. Francis David was not only a Hungarian genius, but Humanism's spiritual enlightenment came to flower in his work and person. He can be regarded as one of the outstanding figures of mankind. There are three reasons that the name of Francis David has not yet entered the Pantheon of intellectual and spiritual giants. First, because he was Hungarian, second, because he tried to stir up the thinking of people in an area which still lives today in a pre-Francis David time, and still stubbornly holds on to those ideas, fearing that one step forward would be the end; the third reason in that church historians have done a very limited research on his behalf.


To properly understand Francis David's place in the intellectual unfolding of Western culture, we have to glance at it dialectically. The first great European thinker was Plato, who searched for the universal and eternal in this world in the realm of thoughts and ideas, ideas which are beyond the senses and beyond the experiential world, that are not limited to space and time. He taught that the world we live in and experience is a mere shadow, a faint reflection of the realm of Permanence and Truth. The realm of Truth and Permanence is called Transcendent, meaning that it is beyond and above the boundaries of human experience. All that is eternal and of permanent value belong to this transcendent realm. God Himself, the highest idea, the embodiement of good, who draws to himself the mil­lions of created beings by the power of love which He radiates constantly, belongs to that transcendent realm. This was a great and new utterance in so long ago as the 4th century B.C. When Plato presented this idea of the transcend­ent to the European thinkers, the response to it was two-fold. Firstly, there was an effort to search out the particulars of the Transcendent.


Secondly, the philosophers sought to discover how the transcendent reality is reflected in man's soul, and attempted to understand that transcend­ent reality better through man's intellect. This effort was indeed daring-to say that not only the transcendent, but also man himself is some­how the possessor of truth, and that man is capable of expressing the truth. This point of view locating access to truth and the permanent in man himself is called the immanental view, emphasizing human potentiality and human crea­tivity, as contrasting with the transcendent, which emphasizes the other-worldly, beyond human experience. The main question of the immanental view is how the divine is reflected in man's soul, or in other words, what is divine in man?

Ever since Plato outlined this challenging idea, ever since he developed the concept of a tran­scendent and an enduring truth, humanity has been struggling to understand it, to draw closer to it, to unite with it. This struggle towards the transcendent is the hallmark of the post-Platonian thinking in Western Europe. This de­sire for the experience of divine immanence is constant, it is inextinguishable in man; to stop it or to squelch it would be death itself. In enlightened and more intellectually developed man, this desire for knowing the truth of the transcendent becomes stronger and stronger. It is the divine spirit in man which encourages him to struggle for the God within, or even against the God without. But, even when he battles against God, even then he does it for God, for the God-like within himself. The first step in this struggle was made by Aristotle, and although he does not solve the problem, he introduces the concepts of evolution and organic unity, which are the main founda­tions of the immanental school of thought. The appearance of Jesus was an important turn­ing point in this struggle. He brought the tran­scendent world quite close to the spirit of man. His method was not to philosophize, nor to deal solely with abstract thought, but rather he pre­sented and portrayed the reality of God, as He is, and as He is realizable in the Kingdom of God. In the teachings of Jesus the concepts of the transcendent and the immanent find each other in a complementary manner, in which the suffering, unhappy person can find his own sal­vation in the capability to be re-born, and can recognize the values which enable man to be perfect. He gives guidelines as to how a human being can become a true citizen of the Kingdom of God. He points to the fact that the potentia­lity for it exists in the human spirit. "The King­dom of God is within you." With this statement the idea of the divine immanence entered into the consciousness of man, perhaps for the first time. According to Karl Böhm, it is a mistake to say that Jesus did not apply his idea of the Kingdom to this earthly existence. He realized it within his own small circle, and made it the responsibility of his disciples to bring it about in the larger community. The death of Jesus and the fact that he did not return as expected, weakened the immanental idea. Then came Apostle Paul, who took a giant step to make Christianity totally transcendent. It is undeniable that in the Gospel the tran­scendent idea dominates. Joseph Nagy says that the historian who writes in the vein of tran­scendent philosophy (theology) really writes of myths and legends. He writes not of every day  happenings in the life of his hero, but infuses the events with transcendent power. This is why in the Gospels the events of Jesus' life are often shrouded in supernatural power. Threads of the "other world" shine through the Gospel. In Pauline thinking, these threads are woven into a strong cloth of full theology. Thus, Christi­anity, the religion of the heart, of love was soon transferred into a "faith." The next step was the founding of the Church; then dogma and later theology. These steps led Christianity a few hundred years after Jesus' death almost wholly in a transcendent direction. Christianity in the Middle Ages was absolutely under the rule of the Roman Church and her dogmas. Philosophy itself served the Church. To mention only one of the dogmas which deeply influenced the thinking of the Christian world, the deity of Jesus was promulgated at the Council of Nicaea. After that, Christianity was centered on the transcendent. The first three centuries continued to struggle against it. It seems to us that men always had a great need of a transcendent concept of "being." Thus, the Church was upholding and with her dogma  safeguarding it. The Christian world waited a long time for the return of Jesus, waited for miracle, and when it did not happen, the Church created a miracle herself, making Jesus God, very God of very God. With this, the tran­scendent concept in Christianity conquered. A faint light of the immanental view lived on in the closed, secret rooms of monasteries. Those who were not satisfied with the dogmas of the Church, but searched for truth themselves, were called mystics. Mystics are those who tried to find God in their own innermost souls, and not just through the dogmas of the Church. Roman Catholicism has many saints from the ranks of those monastic persons, although they were the ones who were seeking in separate personal ways their spiritual union with God, and upheld the idea that the fountain of every theology and religion is in the individual soul. Thus the mystics kept alive the immanental con­cept in a very special and particular way. The 15th century rediscovered man, anatomi­cally and socially, the 16th century rediscovered him, religiously as well. This is the time of  Christianity's reorientation and reorganization — the time of Reformation. In essence the Reformation is the effort to bring man's attention back to himself after centuries of alienation by the transcendental concept of the Church. The Reformation's great importance in the spiritual evolution of humankind was to bring back the concept of immanence into the consciousness of each individual. It was not able to totally fulfil this task because it did not dare to do so radically. Luther, the most out­standing figure of the Reformation, did not even want to break away from the established Church. Circumstances forced him to go as far as he did in helping man to find his salvation even outside the Church, by emphasizing the individual soul's potential, which up until then was completely in the hands of the Church. Luther worked hard for the re-establishment of the importance of the individual in every area of society, but walked carefully in the field of theology. Through his ideas of individualism, God was brought nearer to the person. But he dared not to touch the Church's power as the keeper of the Transcendent. Thus, he replaced the Pope with the absolute authority of the Bible.


Luther did try to lift Christianity out of the tight grip of the transcendent power concept, power centered in and exercised by the Church. He gently re-introduced the ennobling concept of the immanent. But, John Calvin was concerned that, by going too far, the Reformation itself would be jeopardized. He put himself and the Bible into the seat of authority. Calvin was the conservative power in Protestantism. He is the founder of the Protestant Church, a real Protes­tant Pope. Dilthey says that Calvin put brakes on the possibility of a fully developed Protes­tant Reformation. He held back the immanental concept in Christianity. Man was thrown back into the same helpless position he was in before the Reformation. The pendulum of Christianity swung again towards the transcendent, from which Luther's teaching had tried to push it forward.


Francis David, when he began his reformation did not fully realize that his would be the task of bringing to fulfilment the promise of Protestant   Reformation,  in  its  highest  goal, namely, to bring back into Christianity the imma-nental, the here-and-now potentiality of the King­dom of God. What Francis David began in the 16th century came to gradual fruition in the free Christian movements of the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. Not altogether by himself, but under the influences of people abroad and at home, Francis David dared to touch dogmas of the Church which other reformers did not even attempt. He lifted the teaching of Christi­anity from the premises it had rested on for centuries and placed it upon a new founda­tion. In this lies his importance as a reformer. He came to his conclusions through many years of study, and because of his personality and genius, he could not have arrived at any other conclusions than those he finally proclaimed. Francis David's reformation is the closest to Luther's ideas, and with the help of Luther's conclusions, he brings to fulfilment the ideas of the real reformation: namely, to re-establish the individual's worth in the secular and ethical sense. He accomplished this without denying the transcendent power in life. He lived so deeply in the ideology and theology of the 16th century that he had not even imagined the immanental without the transcendental, without a permanent, all pervasive truth. That later ratio­nalism and humanism would deny the transcend­ent power could not have been foreseen by David. He wanted to enrich Christianity by reaching back beyond Pauline thinking, to the Gospel itself. He restated the immanental char­acter of Christian teaching. He emphasized again the divine potential of the human soul, the noble ideas of man's mind, for which Jesus himself bore witness. Yet, some like László Ravasz, late Bishop of the Calvinist Church in Hungary, in this century called David destruc­tive. If his teaching is destructive, in the same sense the whole Protestant Reformation could be called destructive. We realize in David's thinking, his work and in the results of his life a very constructive synthesis of the transcendent and immanent aspects of Christian theology. This synthesis is absolutely essential if Christianity wants to remain a constructive, creative for­ce in the cultural progress of mankind. This was proved by the religionists of the 19th and 20th centuries. In  accordance  with   the  teachings of Jesus, we must give God what is God's and give man what is man's. One other criticism of Francis David's ideas was that he allowed reason to play too important a role in faith. It is true that David dared to reason about doctrines which until then had been beyond the boundaries of reason. Yet, this did not cause him to divorce his ideas from the emotional aspects of religion. It is a fact, though, that Francis David and the religion which sprang from his inspiration, gave more importance to reason than other branches of Christianity were willing to. In Unitarianism sober reasoning became an essential part of the immanental and the transcendental elements of Christianity. This insistence on reason saved Unitarianism from ever becoming a mere one­sided, subjective religion, which subjectivity could lead to mysticism.

We know that in the Middle Ages mysticism was a common factor. Luther and Calvin gave no importance to any kind of mystical experience. Calvin himself denied the value of mystical rev­elation. Yet in the 18th century, mysticism did appear in  both Lutheranism and  Calvinism.


The Church had to close her eyes to it, because she could do nothing against it. Later this re­sulted in the formation of many different kinds of sects.

In Unitarianism, such aberrations did not occur, and we can thank Francis David's insistence on the use of reason for this. Only the use of sober reason can prevent extreme swings from one side to the other, to the objective transcendent, or subjective immanental view of religion. And, any extreme which disregards knowledge and reason is damaging to the soul. Religion makes its demands upon the whole person, and requires his whole intellectual self. Thus, it is impossible to exclude mind and rea­soning from religious concepts. In the field of religion, as in the field of science, the helpful effects of the use of knowledge are evident, and any effort which would seek to exclude reason and knowledge from the field of religion would resemble the efforts of the man standing on a branch of a tree who begins to saw the branch from under himself. The narrow, one­sided outlook is dangerous whether it be ratio­nalism or emotionalism.


We cannot resist the thought that there is some similarity between Francis David and Emanuel Kant's endeavors. What Kant did in opposi­tion to philosophical dogmatism, Francis Da­vid did in the field of theological dogmatism. David is the founder of theological criticism. The theological thinking which he introduced is just as opposite to Christian dogmatism as Kant's theory of knowledge is to metaphysical dogmatism. In David's concept, the ethical im­perative of the free will plays as important a role as it does in Kantian ethics. Kant's con­cept of Christianity searches beyond Pauline theology to the Gospel, so does David's. At the beginning of the 19th century Kant is spoken of as the philosopher of Protestantism. Later the Prussian government forbade him to speak on religious issues and he was not even recognized as a Christian — he who gave to mankind the most magnificent writings in the field of ethical science. In like manner many would deny Francis David the title of being a Christian.

David had no time to put into writing most of his theological theories, but that he was clear about them is proven by important steps he took. One of these was the calling the Diet of Torda which he instituted and which was ac­complished according to his concept. This was in 1568, when religious freedom became the law of the land. The law said that the ministers of religion were allowed to preach the Gospel according to their own understanding and inter­pretation. The members of the Church were free to accept or not to accept the interpretation of the minister. It was forbidden to imprison or persecute anyone for his interpretations of reli­gion, because faith is a gift of God. We deem the result of the Torda Diet great because it expresses a universal idea, longing for freedom of the human soul. Through the centuries this longing was often squelched, but never fully, because history lives on. The Edict of Toleration of 1568 is a document which we must not forget. The Reformation begun by David was carried forward and developed by the 18th and 19th century thinkers in Europe. Out of the concept of the immanent flows the concept of individualism. The value of the individual, free­dom of conscience, freedom of inquiry, of tolerance in religion, in politics these became the basis of modern democracy. Freedom, equality, the peoples' sovereignty, would remain empty concepts if we were to take away from them faith in the nourishing power of the in-dwelling God. These, then were the foundation stones which Francis David set in the structure of European culture. We are interested in this because indi­vidualism acknowledges man's spiritual, inner value, which is denied by a one-sided view of the transcendent. Individualism, as a concept, has been greatly enlarged through the centuries, so much so that today it is not even individ­ualism, but personalism. Personalism which in the beginning had many negative connotations, today is a part of every branch of intellectual persua­sion. Individualism begins where and when the person discovers in himself the Universal, — when he is able and willing to act beyond his own personal interest, when he gives his talents in the service of others. This kind of personalism carries with it the realization of being a child of God. István Schneller is the Hungarian exponent of this idea. Personalism has a larger and deeper meaning than individualism. Individualism can be a separating divisive concept; personalism recognizes the transcendent as an immanental power; thus, the person accepts Jesus' calling, "Be ye the children of God." Freedom of conscience has two sides — one re­fers to faith and the other to morality. Where there is freedom of conscience in the area of faith, the independent moral sense of responsi­bility is also strengthened, so that morality, faith, ethics and religion are fused into one. Channing is a classic representative of this idea. He empha­sized not only the religious but the ethical as­pect of Unitarianism, and the demands of soci­ety on the person if he is to be that noble creature. Bunsen calls Channing the great prophet of the 19th century. Renan calls him the saint of the 19th century. Shall we also speak of Martineau, who deepened the thought of the immanental in the field of theology, and further built philosophically on what was begun by David ? Otto Pfleiderer calls Martineau the grea­test personality in the field of religion in the 19th century. But perhaps even greater was Dostoyevsky, who goes deeper into the sould of struggling, suffering man, where he finds and interprets the immanental power in the con­science, wich is man's passport to immorality. Religious toleration is the natural outcome of personalism and freedom of conscience. David was the image of this. In his discussions he was always patient and tolerant towards others, which was a rarity in those days. The wording of the Diet of Torda is the best example of this. In the name of Unitarianism, there was no blood shed which always results from intolerance, and in this respect particularly it stood the test of the Christianity of Jesus. It is regretable that after the death of King John Sigismund, the rulers who followed him — Istvan Bathori and Gabor Bethlen — had little regard for the idea of tolerance. But the gift of the Diet of Torda lived on to enrich our lives even today. Francis David is still the greatest teacher of the Hunga­rian people; not only of them, but of all nations. A leading Protestant Churchman remarked in his writings about Francis David that, "David could hardly be called a Unitarian because his denomination once excommunicated him, but if he were living today he would excommunicate the Unitarian Church. He was undeniably the greatest among them, and one of the greatest intellectual heroes of that age." We know that George Blandrata in 1579 rallied twenty-five Unitarian ministers around himself, who represented not even one-tenth of the Uni­tarian ministry of that time, and they broke with Francis David. The real reason for this could have been that Blandrata's political sense told him that by this act the future of the Uni­tarian Church might be protected. This, then, is the source of the statement that his denomi­nation had once excommunicated Francis Da­vid. The statement that Francis Dávid would excommunicate the Unitarian Church is the author's personal opinion. But as long as this has been said we must deal with it. The author of this attack on Unitarianism was perhaps moti­vated by the fact, that 20th century Unitarians have greatly advanced from orthodox theology. They do not, for instance, accept every word and letter of the Bible as the only revelation of God; furthermore, Unitarianism lived comple­tely in the 18th century rationalism, that David, who after all lived in the 16th century culture, could not foresee or recognize. The facts are that a good Catholic cannot believe anything but what his church teaches. It seems to us that a good orthodox Protestant cannot progress any further than the 16th century in the field of his faith. But the followers of Francis David cannot allow themselves to stop where he left off in the 16th century. This would, in essence, be a denial of his spirit.


David's main purpose was not just to establish a new denomination which would be recognized as an absolute authority, and close its eyes be­fore progress of the human mind and soul. According to him the individual, and the search for truth, are above all dogmas, and the prog­ress comes from within; it is immanent. His followers mean to engage in a constant struggle to understand the Gospel, to find the universal and the permanent in it, beyond any dogma of orthodox Christianity. This, man can do through knowledge. As the Scripture says "You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." And through improving, perfecting one's character, again according to the Scriptures, "Be ye perfect, as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." In Unitarianism the authority of the church is not as dicisive as it is in the Catholic and orthodox Protestant churches. This is why Unitarianism demands a high degree of discip­line and responsibility from those who adhere to it. Thus, those who understand Francis Da­vid's spirit must always struggle to deepen the spiritual and ethical life of humankind. Unitari­ans must pay attention to past and present dis­coveries which elucidate their understanding of the Gospel, and enhance man's moral and spirit­ual nature. In this vein we referred earlier to Channing and Martineau. History can prove that when an age is controlled entirely by the established church, there results a stultifying effect, on culture, on religion itself and on society on the whole.

For these reasons we find unjustifiable the thought that David would excommunicate pre­sent day Unitarians. In addition, we find the statement misleading and unjust because we cannot and will not recognize the right of his to excommunicate us, as indeed, he did not, as we do not recognize Loyola's or Calvin's right in this matter. The criterion of a Christian is not what kind of church he belongs to. The criterion  is Jesus — what would he say and how would he judge our life and faith? In Dostoyevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov, Jesus appeared before the inquisitor, who represents Christiani­ty, and is the defender of the church. The inquisitor, speaks at great length; Jesus does not utter a single word, and departs in silence. We can learn from this that with all of our disputing and differing dogmas we can be very far from him if we do not act in the spirit of love and compassion.

We live in an age where we analyze rather than sympathize, even at the graveside we discuss rather than grieve. Here we tried to capture the spirit of a great and kind man who died in the dungeon of intolerance and hate. Humanity has many martyrs who died because they were not understood by their contemporaries. We must have faith that they did not die in vain. We must continually strive to redeem their deaths by the power of thought, love and understanding.








(Stagiros 384 B.C.-Chalais 322 B.C.)

Greek metaphysical philosopher. His works mainly contain: logical, scientifical, metaphysical, and ethical trends.



(Somlyo 1533-Grodno 1586)

Prince of Transylvania since 1571 till 1575; from 1575 on he was King of Poland and remained till his death.



(Illye 1580-Alba Julia 1629)

Prince of Transylvania since 1613; King of Hungary from 1620 on.



(Saluzzo 1515-Transylvania 1588)

Italian medical doctor and a religious reformer. In 1563 he was appointed as physician and counsellor of Prince John Sigismund.

He had worked together with Francis David, but later in 1578-79 he opposed David, and was partly responsible of his trial.


BÖHM, Karl

(Besztercebanya 1846-Kolozsvar 1911)

Hungarian philosopher. He studied in Göttingen, Tubingen and Berlin. Professor of philosophy in  Kolozsvar since 1896; member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences since 1908.

His main work: "Man and his World" (1883)

Varga quoted from his work: K. Bohm: The Phenomenology of Values till the 16th Century (Athenaeum, 1913)


BUNSEN, Christian

(Torbach 1791-Bonn 1860)

German diplomat and theologian. His main work: "Gott in der Geschichte oder der Fortschritt des Glaubens" (1858-70 in 9 volumes)



(Noyon 1509-Geneva 1564)

French reformer of Geneva. In 1541 he was invited into Geneva by the Consistory. He wrote many sermons and gave many lectures. His most important work is "Institutio"


CHANNING, William, Ellery

(Newport 1780-Bennington 1842)

American religious reformer and theologian. He became Unitarian minister in 1819. He was interested in spiritual and social questions.  "Works" (1841)


DAVID, Francis

(Kolozsvar 1520-Deva 1579)

Founder of Unitarianism and the first Unitarian bishop, between 1568-79. Studied in Wittenberg. After he returned to Transylvania he was minister of the Kolozsvar Church, and for a few years was

chaplain of Prince John Sigismund.

His principal works are: in Latin: "De falsa et vera..." (1568) in Hungarian: "Rövid magyarázat..." (Short explainment..,, 1567)


DILTHEY, Wilhelm

(Biebrich 1833-Seis am Schlern 1911)

German philosopher. He made a great contribution to the history of ideas. In 1882 he became professor of philosophy in Berlin and member  of the Academy of Sciences. He made an important influence on his contemporary thinkers.



(Moscow 1821-St. Petersburg 1881)

Excellent Russian novellist. "Crime and Punishment" (1866)

Varga quoted from his work "The Brothers Karamazov" (1880)


JOHN, SIGISMUND (Buda 1540-Alba Julia 1571)

Shortly after his birth he was elected King of Hungary. Between 1555-71 he was Prince of  Transylvania. About 1568 he became Uni­tarian and was a very open minded leader.


KANT, Emanuel

(Konigsberg 1724-1804)

Great German philosopher. Since 1770 he was professor of philosophy.

His main work: "Kritik der reinen Vernunft" (1770-81)


LOYOLA, Ignatius (Loyola 1491-Rome 1556)

Founder of the Society of Jesus. Studied in Paris. Made lots of travel­lings. His Christian doctrine and reforming moral teachings are im­portant. "Spiritual Exercises" (1548)


LUTHER, Martin

(Eisleben 1483-1546)

Great German reformer, founder of the Lutheran Church. He studied at Erfurt, was ordained and became professor of theology in Wittenberg.



(Norwich 1805-London 1900)  \

English metaphisical philosopher and Unitarian minister. His ethical and religious philosophical works are important. Professor of philosophy in Manchester since 1840, from 1853 he was professor in London.

"The Relation between Ethics and Religion" (1881) "The Seat of Authority in Religion" (1885)


NAGY, József, later called HALASY-NAGY, József (Ercsi 1885-Hajduszoboszló 1976)

Hungarian philosopher. Professor of philosophy in Pécs since 1921. He was an idealist of theory of values. "History of Philosophy" (1921); "Man and World" (1940) Varga quoted from his work: "The Idea of Developement" (Athenae­um, 1929)


PFLEIDERER, Otto (Stetten 1839-Berlin 1908)

Lutheran theologian. Professor of systematic theology in Berlin, since 1875. He opposed Harnack's conception of history of dog­mas.



(Athen 427 B.C.-Athen 348 B.C.?)

Great Greek philosopher. Desciple of Socrates. Philosophical dialogues and political works.


RAVASZ, László

(Bánffyhunyad 1882-Budapest 1975)

Calvinist professor in Kolozsvár, later bishop between 1921-48 in Budapest. Important theological writer.   Varga quoted from his work: "Homiletics" (1915)


RENAN, Ernst

(Tregnier 1823-Paris 1892)

French religious writer and scientist. He was interested in oriental and  Christian history of religion.  Since  1862 he lectured in the "College de France". His main work: "Vie de Jesus" 



(Koszeg 1847-Budapest 1939)

Lutheran theologian and professor of pedagogy in Kolozsvár and Budapest. He studied in Berlin and Halle. Pedagogical and historical writer. 




The Index was compiled by Rev. Ilona Szent-Iványi











Download in Word !