Kaleidoscope: F.M. Dostoevsky and the Early Dialectical Theology

Katya Tolstaya, Ph.D. (2006), Faculty of Theology, VU University, Amsterdam, is Director of the Institute For Academic Study of Eastern Christianity (INaSEC) and Assistant Professor of Dogmatics and Ecumenics . She publishes on Western systematic theology, Eastern Orthodoxy, literature, and hermeneutics.

"In many ways Kaleidoscope is the first and certainly the most extensive work dedicated to the topic of Dostoevsky and early dialectical theology. [...] Kaleidoscope marks an important step forward in the complex relationship between Dostoevsky and early dialectical theology." - David Tew, in: Anglican Theological Review 98.2"Tolstaya’s book serves as an invaluable reminder of the need to read Dostoevsky through the kaleidoscope of his worldviews and not simply to overlay his texts with our own views." - Michael R. Kelly, Brigham Young University, in: The Russian Review Volume 71, Issue 1 (2017)

• LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSPREFACEPART I. METHOD1.THE POLYPHONIC NOVEL1.1Introduction. ‘The man in man’ and the heart1.2 Polyphony as genre of Dostoevsky’s novels (Bakhtin)1.3 The place of the idea in the polyphonic novel1.4Dialogue within the polyphonic novel as a condition for exposing the truth1.5 The four entities: living person, author, narrator, hero1.6 The relation between author, narrator and characters in the polyphonic novel2.KALEIDOSCOPE2.1The two types of reader of the polyphonic novel; the life of the text in ‘great time’2.2The relation between Dostoevsky’s ego documents and the polyphonic novelsPART II. THE ROOTS OF POLYPHONY, OR: ‘HOW DO YOU BELIEVE?’ DOSTOEVSKY’S RELIGIOUS CONCEPTIONS IN THE EGO DOCUMENTS3.INTRODUCTION4.THE REBIRTH OF RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS4.1Dostoevsky’s youth4.2The periodization of Dostoevsky’s faith4.3The meaning of Siberia for the periodization of Dostoevsky´s faith4.4Doubt and constants of faith. Christ as the truth5.‘MASHA IS LYING ON THE TABLE’5.1Introduction. The text5.2The scientific-ethical problem of the ego documents; the lacunae5.3Discussion of the text5.4The form of “the 1864 entry” in relation to other genres6.‘HOW DO YOU BELIEVE?’ PHILOSOPHICALLY 6.1Introduction. ‘A philosophical deist’6.2Dostoevsky and Kant7.‘HOW DO YOU BELIEVE?’ THEOLOGICALLY 7.1Introduction7.2The conception of God in connection with Christology and ethics7.3Christ as God and man in Dostoevsky’s conception7.4The body of Christ in the grave, resurrection, and salvation7.5Transfiguration into the ‘I of Christ’ in relation to the thought of A.S. Khomyakov7.6Transfiguration into the ‘I of Christ’ in relation to the doctrine of theosis and the doctrine of the pervasion of creation by divine energies7.7Dostoevsky’s ego documents in the light of theosis and the unity of creation7.8The ethics of neighbourly love and the immortality of the soul7.9Neighbourly love and the coincidence of God and immortality in ‘Unfounded Assertions’, the correspondence with A. Kovner and N. Ozmidov. The hidden personal message7.10Realism and the hidden message7.11Dostoevsky’s ideology7.12 General and contemporary history in an eschatological perspective in ‘Socialism and Christianity’7.13 Dostoevsky’s chiliasm7.14The ‘apocalyptic’ and the ‘rose-coloured’ Christianity of Dostoevsky7.15Belief in literal resurrection from the dead. Dostoevsky and N. F. Fedorov7.16Freedom in the light of sin8.CONCLUSION PART III. DOSTOEVSKY AND EARLY DIALECTICAL THEOLOGY9.INTRODUCTION TO THE THEME “DOSTOEVSKY AND EARLY DIALECTICAL THEOLOGY” 9.1 Introduction9.2State of research9.3Dostoevsky reception and translations in the German-speaking world10. DOSTOEVSKY IN THE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN BARTH AND THURNEYSEN 10.1The character of the correspondence10.2Crime and Punishment in 1915 and Barth’s interest in Dostoevsky in 1919-192010.3Thurneysen as Dostoevsky expert10.4Conclusion11. THURNEYSEN’S DOSTOJEWSKI 11.1„Was ist das: der Mensch?“ and other central themes in Thurneysen’s Dostojewski11.2 Demarcations11.3 Rodion Raskolnikoff11.4 The Brothers Karamazov11.5 The Idiot11.6 Part three of Dostojewski11.7Eschatology and the drunkard Marmeladov11.8Attack on religion and the Church in the ‘poem’ about the Grand Inquisitor11.9Ivan Karamazov11.10A ‘dialectical turn’ in Ivan’s speech: his atheism11.11The Creed of Ivan Karamazov11.12‘Ivan Karamazov is the Grand Inquisitor’ and therefore the devil11.13A kaleidoscopic twist. Thurneysen’s view of love in the teaching of Starets Zosima11.14Thurneysen’s view of the soteriology of Starets Zosima11.15Active love in the doctrine of Starets Zosima11.16Conclusion in the light of the reception of Thurneysen’s Dostojewski12. DOSTOEVSKY IN RÖMERBRIEF II EXPLAINED IN THE LIGHT OF THE BRIEFWECHSEL AND THURNEYSEN’S COMMENTARIES12.1 Introduction12.2 The cooling of Barth’s and Thurneysen’s interest in Dostoevsky12.3 By Thurneysen?12.4 ‘I have read your proofs’12.5 Ivan Karamazov in Barth’s commentary on Rom. 8:17 and 18 and in Thurneysen’s remark on Rom. 8:1812.6 Theodicy in Rom. 5:3-512.7 The polyphony of The Brothers Karamazov in the context of Römerbrief II: Zosima12.8 The Grand Inquisitor in Römerbrief II12.9 Römerbrief II and Marmeladov12.10 Existential attitude in Römerbrief II12.11 ‘God’s viewpoint’12.12 The problems of early dialectical theology in present-day Barth studies12.13 In conclusionARCHIVE MATERIALBIBLIOGRAPHYINDEX