^{page 347 note 1} Otto, R., Das Heilige (Breslau: Trewendt und Granier, 1917). English translation: The Idea of the Holy (Oxford University Press, 1958).Google Scholar

^{page 347 note 2} See The Idea of the Holy, p. 1.

^{page 347 note 3} R. Otto, notes on the English translation of Kantisch-Fries'sche Religionsphilosophie, Schütte, H. W., Religion und Christenlum in der Theologie Rudolf Ottos (Berlin: de Gruyter & Co., 1969), p. 123. See also The Idea of the Holy, p. xxi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 348 note 4} See Otto, R., The Philosophy of Religion (London: Williams & Norgate, 1931), p. 229.Google Scholar

^{page 348 note 5} On Luther and the mystical tradition, see The Idea of the Holy, pp. 104–7; Otto, R., ‘Mystische und gläubige Frömmigkeit’, in Aufsälze das Numinose betrtffend (Stuttgart/Gotha: Verlag Friedrich Andreas Perthes A. G., 1923), pp. 71–107Google Scholar; Otto, R., ‘Rettung aus Verlorenheit nach Luther. Justificatio per Fidem’, in Sünde und Urschuld (Mūnchen: C. H. Beck, 1932), pp. 43–60.Google Scholar

^{page 349 note 6} The Idea of the Holy, pp. 99–100; see also pp. 23–4.

^{page 349 note 7} Otto, R., Die Anschauung vom Heiligen Geiste bei Luther (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1898), p. 15.Google Scholar

^{page 349 note 8} ibid., p. 48.

^{page 349 note 9} ibid., p. 53.

^{page 349 note 10} ibid., p. 96.

^{page 350 note 11} Ritschl, A., Geschichte des Pietismus (Bonn: Adolph Marcus, 1886), vol. 3, pp. 195–438.Google Scholar

^{page 350 note 12} See, for example, Otto's ‘Epilogue’ to Schleiermacher, F. D. E., Uber die Religion (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1899), p. xxxii.Google Scholar

^{page 350 note 13} Otto, R., review of Leonard Nelson's edition of Fries, J., Wissen, Glaube und Ahndung (Gōttingen: Öffentliches Leben, 1905), in Die Christliche Welt, vol. 22, 1908, p. 819.Google Scholar

^{page 350 note 14} In his review of Otto's The Philosophy of Religion, Wilhelm Bousset remarks that Otto ought to have made more of the connection of Fries to Moravian pietism. He goes on to say that Fries's second wife was a member of the Brethren, and his sisters also. See Theologische Rundschau, vol. 12,1909, p. 424.

^{page 350 note 15} Uttendörfer, O., ‘Die Entwiirfe Zinzendorfs zu seiner Religionschrift’, in Zeitschrift für Brüdergeschichte, vol. 13, 1919, pp. 64–98.Google Scholar

^{page 350 note 16} Aufsätze das Numinose betreffend, pp. 51–5.

^{page 351 note 17} Uttendörfer, op. cit., p. 73; cf. The Idea of the Holy, p. 113.

^{page 351 note 18} Otto, R., ‘Zinzendorf als Entdecker des Sensus Numinis’, in Das Gefuhl des Oberweltlicken (Sensus Numinis) (München: C. H. Beck, 1932), pp. 4–10Google Scholar. A revised version of an earlier article on Schleiermacher entitled ‘Wie Schleiermacher die Religion wiederentdeckte’, in Die Christliche Welt, vol. 17, 1903, pp. 506–512Google Scholar (English translation, ‘How Schleiermacher Re-discovered the Sensus Numinis’, in Otto, R., Religious Essays (London: Oxford University Press, 1931), pp. 68–77)Google Scholar, appears later in Otto, R., Sünde und Urschuld (München: C. H. Beck, 1932), pp. 132–139Google Scholar under the less emphatic title ‘Der neue Aufbruch des Sensus Numinis bei Schleiermacher’.

^{page 351 note 19} ibid., pp. 5–6.

^{page 352 note 20} ibid., p p. 9–10; see also Sünde und Urschuld, p. 139.

^{page 352 note 21} Religious Essays, pp. 68–9.

^{page 352 note 22} Schleiermacher, F. D. E., On Religion (New York: Harper and Row, 1958), p. 48; The Idea of the Holy pp. 146, 171–2.Google Scholar

^{page 353 note 23} Schleiermacher, op. cit., p. 217; see also Sünde und Urschuld p. 135.

^{page 353 note 24} See Religious Essays, p. 112.

^{page 353 note 25} See Schleiermacher, op. cit., pp. 2416ff; ‘Epilogue’ to Uberdie Religion, pp. xxxi-xxxü; and The Idea of the Holy, pp. 177–8.

^{page 353 note 26} See ‘Introduction’ to Schleiermacher, op. cit., p. xix; see also ‘Epilogue’ to Uber die Religion, pp. xxxii;-xxxiii.

^{page 353 note 27} ‘Epilogue’ to Uber die Religion, pp. xxiii, xxix.

^{page 354 note 28} See ‘Introduction’ to Schleiermacher, op. cit., p. xix.

^{page 354 note 29} See ibid., p. xii; see also The Philosophy of Religion, p. 23.

^{page 354 note 30} See Otto, R., Naturalism and Religion (London: Williams & Norgate, 1907), p. 76.Google Scholar

^{page 354 note 31} The Philosophy of Religion p. 15.

^{page 354 note 32} ibid., p. 23.

^{page 355 note 33} See especially, Fries, J., Wissen, Glaube und Ahndung (Gottingen: Öffentliches Leben, 1905).Google Scholar

^{page 355 note 34} ‘Rudolf Otto and the Kantian Tradition’ in Zeitschrift fur Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie (forthcoming). See also Bastow, D., ‘Otto and Numinous Experience’, in Religious Studies, vol. 12, 1976, p. 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 355 note 35} Schütte, op. cit., p. 123.

^{page 355 note 36} The Idea of the Holy p. 5.

^{page 356 note 37} See Ritter, J. (ed.), Historisches Worterbuch der Philosophic (Basel/Stuttgart: Schwabe & Co., 1974), vol. 3, pp. 1034–1037.Google Scholar

^{page 356 note 38} See Seifert, P., Die Religionsphilosophie bei Rudolf Otto (Düsseldorf: G. H. Nolte Verlag, 1936), pp. 24–26Google Scholar; and Paus, A., Religioser Erkenntnisgrund: Herkunft und Wesen der Apriori Theorie Rudolf Ottos (Leiden: Brill, 1966), p. 114.Google Scholar

^{page 356 note 39} See, for example, Davidson, R. F., Rudolf Otto's Interpretation of Religion (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1947)Google Scholar; Paus, op. cit., p. III, n. 7g; Troeltsch, E., ‘Zur Religionsphilosophie’, in Kant-Sludien, vol. 23, 1919, p. 65.Google Scholar

^{page 356 note 40} The essay appears in the chapter entitled ‘Religious Problems’ in Windelband, W., An Introduction to Philosophy (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1921).Google Scholar

^{page 356 note 41} ibid., p. 326.

^{page 357 note 42} Söderblom, N., Gudstrons uppkommst (Stockholm: H. Geber, 1914)Google Scholar; Das Werden des Gottesglaubens (Leipzig: R. Stübe, 1916).Google Scholar

^{page 357 note 43} Hastings, J. (ed.), Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1913), vol. 6, p. 731.Google Scholar

^{page 357 note 44} Otto, R., ‘Parallelen und Wertunterschiede im Christentum und Buddatum’, Rudolf Otto Archive, University of Marburg, 351.Google Scholar

^{page 358 note 45} Hastings, op. cit., p. 732.

^{page 358 note 46} Otto, R., review of Gudstrons uppkommst in Theologische Literaturzeitung, vol. 40, 1915, p. 4Google Scholar; see also The Idea of the Holy, pp. 74–5.

^{page 358 note 47} The Idea of the Holy, p. 15, n.i: see also Otto, R., ‘The Sensus Numinis as the Historical Basis of Religion’, in The Hibbert Journal, vol. 30, 1931–1932, p. 427.Google Scholar

^{page 359 note 48} Otto, R., ‘Mythus und Religion in Wundt's Völkerpsychologie’, in Theologische Rundschau, vol. 13, 1910, p. 301. Otto's first use of the term ‘numen’ is in Die Anschauung vom Heiligen Geiste bet Luther, pp. 99–100.Google Scholar

^{page 359 note 49} ibid., p. 303.

^{page 359 note 50} ibid., pp. 304–5.

^{page 359 note 51} ibid., p. 297.

^{page 360 note 52} ibid., p. 304.

^{page 360 note 53} ‘Epilogue’ to Uber die Religion, p. xxix.

^{page 360 note 54} ‘Parallelen und Wertunterschiede im Christentum und Buddatum’, Rudolf Otto Archive, University of Marburg, 351.

^{page 360 note 55} Otto, R., ‘Parallelisms in the Development of Religion East and West’, Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan, vol. 40, 1912, p. 158.Google Scholar

^{page 360 note 56} Otto, R., ‘Parallelen der Religionsentwicklung’, Frankfurter Zeitung, March 31st, and April 1 st, 1913, p. 4.Google Scholar

^{page 360 note 57} Troeltsch, E. ‘Der Selbständigkeit der Religion’, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche vol. 5, 1895, p. 361.Google Scholar

^{page 361 note 58} See especially, ‘Zur Frage des religiosen Apriori’, Gesammelte Schriften (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1913), vol. 2, pp. 754–768.Google Scholar

^{page 361 note 59} The Philosophy of Religion p. 18.

^{page 361 note 60} Paus, A., Religiöser Erkenntnisgrund: Herkunft und Wesen der Aprioritheorie Rudolf Ottos (Leiden: Brill, 1966), p. 135.Google Scholar

^{page 361 note 61} See Clayton, J. ‘Can Theology be both Cultural and Christian?’ Patterson, B. E. (ed.), Science, Faith and Revelation (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1979), pp. gif.Google Scholar

^{page 362 note 62} Troeltsch, E., ‘Zur Religionsphilosophie’, Kant-Studien, vol. 23, 1919, p. 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar