This paper considers two twentieth-century heresiological critiques of G. W. F. Hegel. That Henri de Lubac and Sergius Bulgakov should both worry at Hegel's ‘heresy’ is hardly surprising. More surprising, however, is how and that each charges Hegel with a different heresy. Though de Lubac's heresiological critique has proven more influential, I commend Bulgakov's. The paper concludes by querying the very strategy of assaying philosophers like Hegel heresiologically.

中文翻译：

---

Heterodox Hegels：德卢巴克和布尔加科夫的异病学

本文考虑了GWF黑格尔的20世纪20年代的生物学批判。亨利·德·鲁巴克和塞尔吉乌斯·布尔加科夫都应该为黑格尔的“异端”而担忧，这不足为奇。然而，更令人惊讶的是，每个人如何以及如何以不同的异端指控黑格尔。尽管事实证明了德·卢巴克（De Lubac）的病学批评更具影响力，但我赞扬布尔加科夫（Bulgakov）的批评。本文通过质疑像黑格尔这样的哲学家从哲学上分析哲学的策略来得出结论。