[485] And the second is: objectivity. Sometimes, when you consider me as an existentialist theologian–or some other drawer into which you want to put me! [smiling], then don't forget that BEFORE you put me into this drawer, unambiguously, there are many ambiguities in my setup [?], namely a great PASSION for objectivity (you don't believe it, but it's true!) [some laughter], for objective looking at realities WITH THE BEST POSSIBLE METHODS which can be reached. Now I can give one proof for this, before your court [judgment], namely the proof that I am terribly attacked for this by many theologians for my radical objectivity with respect to historical research^a, even if it goes to the holy Legend and to the Christian myth.

And I am not willing to give up this complete objectivity; NOBODY who does so is worthy of being an academic teacher anyhow! But now, is this sufficient for the educational function of the university? Isn't there something else demanded? Here hundreds of years of the history of the university gave an answer; they gave this answer by speaking of theology as the FIRST faculty, and some little remnants of this can still be observed in European universities: in every academic procession,

the first faculty is the theological. But this is all what's left [laughter] of this evaluation! Otherwise it is by far the last, and some of the new universities [such] as Hamburg, and Köln and Frankfurt were founded in the beginning of this century without a theological faculty completely: they had no "queen," not even a dispossessed queen. They had nothing at all! Now it is interesting that this is now remedied, and it might interest you, in