Schleiermacher and Us: Focused on Religion’s Cultured Despisers, or Those Despised by the Cultured?

Last updated on: March 26, 2018 at 12:07 pm by Paul Louis Metzger

Schleiermacher and Us: Focused on Religion’s Cultured Despisers, or Those Despised by the Cultured? 2018-03-26T12:07:14-07:00 Paul Louis Metzger

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Friedrich Schleiermacher; Wikipedia

In “Evangelical Theology in the 19th Century,” Karl Barth writes, “There is hardly any doubt that the distinctive beginnings of 19th-century theology coincide with the publication of Schleiermacher’s book, On Religion, Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers in 1799.”[1] T. F. Torrance claims that perhaps the principal characteristic trait of this movement was the conviction “that theology and even biblical exegesis could only be pursued within the framework of the accepted or prevailing Weltanschauung or a generally intelligible view of the totality of things, human, cosmic and divine.”[2]

On this reading of Schleiermacher, the theologian’s mission is to demonstrate that religion, and theology with it, has an indispensable role to play in human culture, including the cultivation of its worldview. Schleiermacher’s Speeches is an apologetic for the Christian faith to its cultured despisers. E. Graham Waring writes, “Schleiermacher loved that in religion which was alive, and sought at once to show his ‘despising’ friends that it was not alien to their experience of culture, and to found it in human nature in such a way as to give it independent status.”[3] Schleiermacher saw himself as belonging to that “higher priesthood” that

strives to awaken the slumbering germ of a better humanity, to kindle love for higher things, to change the common life into a nobler, to reconcile the children of earth with the Heaven that hears them, and to counterbalance the deep attachment of the age to the baser side.[4]

Key to Schleiermacher’s appeal was his notion of the feeling of absolute dependence.[5] He wrote, “Quantity of knowledge is not quantity of piety.”[6] And while it would be impossible to be pious without also being moral, one cannot be scientific or moral without being religious, in Schleiermacher’s estimation.[7] For Schleiermacher, religion is not ultimately about doctrine and rational argumentation or moral duty, but about “immediate consciousness” of all finite and temporal reality in and through the infinite and eternal.[8]

It is often understood that Jesus’ significance on this view of religion is that he has greater God-consciousness than the rest of us. Thus, his uniqueness is quantitative rather than qualitative. There is no sense of Kierkegaard’s infinite qualitative distinction between God and humanity when assessed from this vantage point. However, it should be noted that not everyone agrees with this assessment of Schleiermacher’s Christology.

According to Kevin Hector, the oft-cited criticism that Schleiermacher’s Christology is low does not account for “the crucial role that actualism plays in [Schleiermacher’s] theology.”[9] Hector acknowledges that there are weaknesses in Schleiermacher’s thought, such as his lukewarm Sabellianism. However, Hector asserts that there is no feature in Schleiermacher’s Christology that involves the rejection of a robust Trinitarian framework.

Hector also claims that Schleiermacher’s Christology is “even higher than traditional Chalcedonianism” since, for Schleiermacher, “every moment of Christ’s life repeats the pure act of God’s being, such that Christ is God incarnate.”[10] While Schleiermacher’s Christology is fashioned around Christ’s “God-consciousness,” long conceived as a rejection of the deity of Christ, Hector reasons that against the backdrop of Schleiermacher’s actualistic theology, Christ’s God-consciousness “functions as the organ by which God’s pure act is apprehended and turned into Christ’s own activity.”[11] Christ’s God-consciousness does not ground or establish Christ’s deity. Instead, Christ’s God-consciousness is the divine or supernatural medium or vehicle which facilitates Christ’s manifestation or reproduction of God’s pure act every moment in his incarnate state. “The important thing about Christ, then, is not his God-consciousness per se, but the fact that this consciousness is the means through which God’s being is incarnated.”[12]

As already noted, Schleiermacher would make no allowance for piety apart from morality. In fact, Schleiermacher is remembered for his ethical preaching.[13] Now what is remembered of his theology, and those inspired by his progressive orientation? Further to Gustavo Gutiérrez’s analysis, given Schleiermacher’s preoccupation with doing theology in a world where cultured humanity has come of age, what place is there for doing theology among those who are struggling to be seen as human in this age?[14] Does our immediate consciousness of the eternal and infinite lead us to be theologically and culturally preoccupied with those our society often does not make time and space for? Or does such consciousness lead us to focus our attention on the cultured despisers of religion rather than those despised by the cultured? This is not simply a question for Schleiermacher. It is one that all of us must ask of ourselves.

________________

[1]Karl Barth, “Evangelical Theology in the 19th Century,” in The Humanity of God (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1960), page 12.

[2]Thomas F. Torrance, Karl Barth: An Introduction to his Early Theology, 1910-1931 (London: SCM Press, Ltd., 1962), page 33.

[3]E. Graham Waring, introduction to On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers, by Friedrich Schleiermacher (New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Company, 1955), page xii.

[4]Friedrich Schleiermacher, On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers, with an introduction by E. Graham Waring (New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Company, 1955), page 8.

[5]Schleiermacher, On Religion, page 28.

[6]Schleiermacher, On Religion, page 27.

[7] Schleiermacher, On Religion, page 30.

[8] Schleiermacher, On Religion, page 28.

[9] Kevin W. Hector, “Actualism and Incarnation: The High Christology of Friedrich Schleiermacher,” in International Journal of Systematic Theology 8:3 (July 2006): 307.

[10]Hector, “Actualism and Incarnation,” page 308.

[11]Hector, “Actualism and Incarnation,” page 311.

[12]Hector, “Actualism and Incarnation,” page 312.

[13]Hughes Oliphant Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church, vol. 6, The Modern Age (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), pages 94-95.

[14]See Gary J. Dorrien’s discussion of Gustavo Gutiérrez and Schleiermacher in Reconstructing the Common Good: Theology and the Social Order (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990), page 107.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

March 19, 2018

On Hegel: If the Real Is the Rational, How Real Are You?

Next Post

March 31, 2018 Jesus’ Victory Doesn’t End on Easter. It Lasts Forever.

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month June 2025 April 2025 March 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz