oa Bibliografisch gedeelte

The author of the present article shows that contemporary discussion about the question of divine impassibility suffers from a lack of precision regarding the meaning of the terms ‘impassibility’, ‘patripassianism’ and ‘theopaschitism’. These terms are often used in ways that fail to do justice to the meaning they have in the history of doctrine. On the basis of historical and systematical considerations he makes some proposals for a proper use of the terms in the future, and argues that the terminological proposals of Warren McWilliams and Jürgen Moltmann, who introduced the neologisms ‘propassibility’ and ‘patricompassianism’, are not worthy of following.