Our researchers

Surprisingly, mainstream histories of biblical exegesis, such as Frei's or Reventlow's, usually disregard Hegel's approach to biblical interpretation. However, some of Hegel's epigones, such as Strauss, Bauer, Vatke, or Baur, were influential in the history of exegesis. This article aims at highlighting the relevance of Hegel's exegetical writings for the construction not only of the "philosophical Bible"-that is, in my own terminology, the interpretations of the Bible made by philosophers-but also for the biblical exegesis made by theologians. Beyond the place that his commentaries on the Scriptures occupy in his Philosophy of Religion, Hegel's exegesis has exerted influence over biblical exegesis and philosophy, particularly hermeneutics.

Almost all scholars of the Enlightenment consider Hobbes, Spinoza, and Locke as the founding theorists of the secular modern state. In contrast to the widely held view of the modern state, I argue that far from being secular it was the product of the sacralization of politics, which resulted from the way these philosophers interpreted the Scriptures as part of their philosophical inquiries. The analysis of the linguistic turn in their biblical interpretations reveals how they tried to undermine the power of the Church to claim greater freedoms for the state. Their philosophical inquiries initiated the secularization of the Christian religion and the sacralization of politics as two correlative developments, rather than the secularization of the state per se, as is usually supposed. The philosophical arguments proposed by Hobbes, Spinoza, and Locke helped to resolve the religious battles of Europe's many confessions in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, but are still pertinent to our current very different historical context.

Theological and political concepts and practices are frequently deeply related in political thought. If this statement is true in general, it is particularly accurate for the case of John Locke, to the extent that we can apply the label "political theology"-following Carl Schmitt's approach to the topic-for evaluating his project. Elisabeth A. Pritchard's recent book Religion in Public: Locke's Political Theology centers on that specific "label," which has sometimes been used, albeit not frequently, by other scholars. Speaking of a Lockean political theology means that liberalism does not represent the official end of every kind of political theology. In Pritchard's understanding, Locke's political theology consists of the shared conviction or consensus that individuals are the sacred property of a transcendent and benevolent creator. As a result, in his view Locke condemns every kind of political theology that compromises with hierarchical and competitive structures, providing differential access to the sacred. In this article I will defend a competing argument: In John Locke's writings we can find a political theology of sovereignty, even though he argued using liberal political presuppositions. In the end he consecrates political power just as the previous political tradition did, even if he uses a different argumentative path for achieving legitimation. He creates the fiction that political intervention, even in sacred matters, can be eliminated from the political arena.

In recent years, Ernst H. Kantorowicz's work 'The King's Two Bodies' (1957) has been the object of both historical and philosophical research. Kantorowicz decided to subtitle his book 'A Study in Medieval Political Theology', but few scholars have actually recognised his work as research in 'political theology'. The aim of this article, then, is to uncover the sense(s) in which his book might be considered a work of 'political theology', especially in the sense coined by Carl Schmitt in 1922. Such a discussion ultimately aims to contribute to the foundation of political theology research, a subject that has been widespread among European intellectuals in the twentieth century and which continues to be a focus of interest. This article argues that Kantorowicz's book can be interpreted as a practice of -- and also an enriching addition to -- Schmitt's thesis on political theology, even if it does not mention Schmitt's name. Such a conclusion is only possible by accepting that there was a heated dialogue between Kantorowicz and Schmitt through Erik Peterson's work. The article further discusses its approach with other scholars that, even though they are based on similar hypotheses, make different conclusions.

Carl Schmitt is a key figure in modern political thought, but discussion of his work often focuses upon specific elements or themes within his texts. This book provides a wide-ranging discussion of Carl Schmitt¿s discourse and provides a new perspective on his contribution, presenting the idea of Nomos of the Earth as the key idea that organizes his political and legal discourseThis book creates a `reverse genealogy¿ of Schmitt¿s theoretical system, starting from his legal and political concept of nomos so as to reconstruct his understanding of order. It connects the different topics the Carl Schmitt developed along his intellectual trajectory, which have generally been approached in separate ways by scholars: the legal theory, the concept of the political, the theory of international relations and political theology. The text considers the whole of Carl Schmitt¿s work including writings that have been previously unknown to the English speaking academy; old journals with just three or four pages, newspaper articles, manuscripts of conferences, and Festschrifts. It provides a balanced examination of the whole complex of Carl Schmitt¿s political discourse.

Posiciones ante el derecho contiene la traducción anotada de tres obras de Carl Schmitt: Ley y juicio. Examen sobre el problema de la praxis judicial de 1912; Derechos de libertad y garantías institucionales en la Constitución del Reich de 1931; y Sobre los tres modos de pensar la ciencia jurídica de 1934. Las dos primeras obras ven la luz en español por primera vez. ¿Por qué reunir estas tres obras en una sola edición? Porque en su afán por aclarar el estatuto jurídico de la decisión, definen la posición de Schmitt ante el derecho. Los textos descubren a un jurista en lucha con un contexto intelectual dominado por el positivismo jurídico. Su interés es poner de relieve que el derecho no está solamente constituido por normas, sino también por decisiones e instituciones como pone de manifiesto en Sobre los tres modos de pensar la ciencia jurídica. El derecho no es un ámbito autónomo que flota abstractamente al margen de la realidad, sino que está encarnado cultural e institucionalmente. Así lo supone el concepto de garantía institucional, alumbrado por primera vez por el jurista de Plettenberg. En Ley y juicio propone una respuesta original y provocadora a la pregunta por cuándo una sentencia judicial es correcta. El estudio preliminar de Montserrat Herrero procura dar razón de la original reflexión de Carl Schmitt en torno al fenómeno jurídico.

¿Por qué investigar acerca de lo que ha permanecido de la herencia política de Thomas Hobbes en nuestro presente? Es que a pesar de los muchos cambios y de las adaptaciones a las nuevas circunstancias, el Estado moderno que él teorizó sigue en pie, tal vez con un rostro menos feroz, pero sostenido en los mismos presupuestos de una antropología materialista que sostenían al viejo monstruo. A partir de estas premisas, esta obra indaga en los puntos de inflexión del pensamiento de Hobbes que aún hoy se presentan como problemas de nuestro tiempo: lo político como ámbito artificial, la consideración del prójimo como enemigo potencial y su redención política, la cuestión de hasta qué punto se puede preservar la libertad política, la relación entre religión y política, el peligro o la pertinencia de la objeción de conciencia, la deseable configuración del orden internacional. Y, al mismo tiempo, analiza la resonancia de las ideas hobbesianas en la argumentación política contemporánea poniendo en relación temas y pensadores claves del mundo de hoy, tales como el tema de la vigilancia y la seguridad, clásicamente foucaultiano, o el del prójimo, clásicamente psicoanalítico, entre otros. El pensamiento político del siglo XX no ha dejado que el filósofo inglés quedara definitivamente en el pasado. Y es por ello, sostiene la autora, que el interés por dilucidar y comprender las tesis que él trazó con firmeza es también un modo de abrir espacios de claridad