2022/06/21

Friedrich Schleiermacher - Wikipedia

Friedrich Schleiermacher - Wikipedia

Friedrich Schleiermacher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Friedrich Schleiermacher
Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher.jpg
Born
Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher

November 21, 1768
DiedFebruary 12, 1834 (aged 65)
Alma materUniversity of Halle (1787–90)[1]
Era18th-/19th-century philosophy
RegionWestern philosophy
SchoolGerman Idealism[2]
Jena Romanticism[3]
Berlin Romanticism[4]
Romantic hermeneutics[5]
Methodological hermeneutics[6]
InstitutionsUniversity of Halle (1804–07)
University of Berlin (1810–34)
Notable studentsAugust Böckh
Friedrich Adolf Trendelenburg
Main interests
TheologypsychologyNew Testament exegesisethics (both philosophic and Christian), dogmatic and practical theologydialectics (logic and metaphysics), politics[7]
Notable ideas
Hermeneutics as a cyclical process[8]
Influences
Influenced

Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (German: [ˈfʁiːdʁɪç ˈʃlaɪɐˌmaχɐ]; November 21, 1768 – February 12, 1834) was a German Reformed theologianphilosopher, and biblical scholar known for his attempt to reconcile the criticisms of the Enlightenment with traditional Protestant Christianity. He also became influential in the evolution of higher criticism, and his work forms part of the foundation of the modern field of hermeneutics. Because of his profound effect on subsequent Christian thought, he is often called the "Father of Modern Liberal Theology" and is considered an early leader in liberal Christianity. The neo-orthodoxy movement of the twentieth century, typically (though not without challenge) seen to be spearheaded by Karl Barth, was in many ways an attempt to challenge his influence. As a philosopher he was a leader of German Romanticism.

Biography[edit]

Early life and development[edit]

Born in Breslau in Prussian Silesia as the grandson of Daniel Schleiermacher, a pastor at one time associated with the Zionites,[15][16] and the son of Gottlieb Schleiermacher, a Reformed Church chaplain in the Prussian army, Schleiermacher started his formal education in a Moravian school at Niesky in Upper Lusatia, and at Barby near Magdeburg. However, pietistic Moravian theology failed to satisfy his increasing doubts, and his father reluctantly gave him permission to enter the University of Halle, which had already abandoned pietism and adopted the rationalist spirit of Christian Wolff and Johann Salomo Semler. As a theology student, Schleiermacher pursued an independent course of reading and neglected the study of the Old Testament and of Oriental languages. However, he attended the lectures of Semler and became acquainted with the techniques of historical criticism of the New Testament, and of Johann Augustus Eberhard from whom he acquired a love of the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle. At the same time, he studied the writings of Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi and began to apply ideas from the Greek philosophers to a reconstruction of Kant's system.[7]

Schleiermacher developed a deep-rooted skepticism as a student and soon rejected orthodox Christianity.[17]

Brian Gerrish, a scholar of the works of Schleiermacher, wrote:

In a letter to his father, Schleiermacher drops the mild hint that his teachers fail to deal with those widespread doubts that trouble so many young people of the present day. His father misses the hint. He has himself read some of the skeptical literature, he says, and can assure Schleiermacher that it is not worth wasting time on. For six whole months there is no further word from his son. Then comes the bombshell. In a moving letter of 21 January 1787, Schleiermacher admits that the doubts alluded to are his own. His father has said that faith is the "regalia of the Godhead," that is, God's royal due.[18]

Schleiermacher confessed: "Faith is the regalia of the Godhead, you say. Alas! dearest father, if you believe that without this faith no one can attain to salvation in the next world, nor to tranquility in this—and such, I know, is your belief—oh! then pray to God to grant it to me, for to me it is now lost. I cannot believe that he who called himself the Son of Man was the true, eternal God; I cannot believe that his death was a vicarious atonement."[18]

Tutoring, chaplaincy and first works[edit]

An engraving of Schleiermacher from his early adulthood.

At the completion of his course at Halle, Schleiermacher became the private tutor to the family of Friedrich Alexander Burggraf und Graf zu Dohna-Schlobitten (1741–1810), developing in a cultivated and aristocratic household his deep love of family and social life. Two years later, in 1796, he became chaplain to the Charité Hospital in Berlin. Lacking scope for the development of his preaching skills, he sought mental and spiritual satisfaction in the city's cultivated society and in intensive philosophical studies, beginning to construct the framework of his philosophical and religious system. Here Schleiermacher became acquainted with art, literature, science and general culture. He was strongly influenced by German Romanticism, as represented by his friend Karl Wilhelm Friedrich von Schlegel. That interest is borne out by his Confidential Letters on Schlegel's Lucinde as well as by his seven-year relationship (1798–1805) with Eleonore Christiane Grunow (née Krüger) (1769/1770–1837), the wife of Berlin clergyman August Christian Wilhelm Grunow (1764–1831).[7]

Though his ultimate principles remained unchanged, he placed more emphasis on human emotion and the imagination. Meanwhile, he studied Spinoza and Plato, both of whom were important influences. He became more indebted to Kant though they differed on fundamental points. He sympathised with some of Jacobi's positions, and took some ideas from Fichte and Schelling. The literary product of that period of rapid development was his influential book, Reden über die Religion (On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers), and his "new year's gift" to the new century, the Monologen (Soliloquies).[7]

In the first book, Schleiermacher gave religion an unchanging place among the divine mysteries of human nature, distinguished it from what he regarded as current caricatures of religion and described the perennial forms of its manifestation. That established the programme of his subsequent theological system. In the Monologen, he revealed his ethical manifesto in which he proclaimed his ideas on the freedom and independence of the spirit and on the relationship of the mind to the sensual world, and he sketched his ideal of the future of the individual and of society.[7]

Pastorship[edit]

From 1802 to 1804, Schleiermacher served as a pastor of a small Reformed church in the Pomeranian town of Stolp. He relieved Friedrich Schlegel entirely of his nominal responsibility for the translation of Plato, which they had together undertaken (vols. 1–5, 1804–1810; vol. 6, Repub. 1828). Another work, Grundlinien einer Kritik der bisherigen Sittenlehre [Outlines of a Critique of the Doctrines of Morality to date] (1803), the first of his strictly critical and philosophical productions, occupied him; it is a criticism of all previous moral systems, including those of Kant and Fichte: Plato's and Spinoza's find most favour. It contends that the tests of the soundness of a moral system are the completeness of its view of the laws and ends of human life as a whole and the harmonious arrangement of its subject-matter under one fundamental principle. Although it is almost exclusively critical and negative, the book announces Schleiermacher's later view of moral science, attaching prime importance to a Güterlehre, or doctrine of the ends to be obtained by moral action.[7] The obscurity of the book's style and its negative tone prevented immediate success.

Professorship[edit]

In 1804, Schleiermacher moved to become university preacher and professor of theology to the University of Halle, where he remained until 1807. He quickly obtained a reputation as professor and preacher and exercised a powerful influence in spite of charges of atheism, Spinozism and pietism. In this period, he began his lectures on hermeneutics (1805–1833) and he also wrote his dialogue the Weihnachtsfeier (Christmas Eve: Dialogue on the Incarnation, 1806), which represents a midway point between his Speeches and his great dogmatic work, Der christliche Glaube (The Christian Faith); the speeches represent phases of his growing appreciation of Christianity as well as the conflicting elements of the theology of the period. After the Battle of Jena, he returned to Berlin (1807), was soon appointed pastor of the Trinity Church and, on May 18, 1809, married Henriette von Willich (née von Mühlenfels; 1788–1840), the widow of his friend Johann Ehrenfried Theodor von Willich (1777–1807).[7]

At the foundation of the University of Berlin (1810), in which he took a prominent part, Schleiermacher obtained a theological chair and soon became secretary to the Prussian Academy of Sciences. He took a prominent part in the reorganization of the Prussian church and became the most powerful advocate of the union of the Lutheran and Reformed divisions of German Protestantism, paving the way for the Prussian Union of Churches (1817). The 24 years of his professional career in Berlin began with his short outline of theological study (Kurze Darstellung des theologischen Studiums, 1811) in which he sought to do for theology what he had done for religion in his Speeches.[7]

While he preached every Sunday, Schleiermacher also gradually took up in his lectures in the university almost every branch of theology and philosophy: New Testament exegesis, introduction to and interpretation of the New Testament, ethics (both philosophic and Christian), dogmatic and practical theology, church history, history of philosophy, psychologydialectics (logic and metaphysics), politicspedagogyaesthetics[7] and translation.

In politics, Schleiermacher supported liberty and progress, and in the period of reaction that followed the overthrow of Napoleon, he was charged by the Prussian government with "demagogic agitation" in conjunction with the patriot Ernst Moritz Arndt.[7]

At the same time, Schleiermacher prepared his chief theological work, Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche (1821–1822; 2nd ed., greatly altered, 1830–1831; 6th ed., 1884; The Christian faith according to the principles of the evangelical church). Its fundamental principle is that the source and the basis of dogmatic theology are the religious feeling, the sense of absolute dependence on God as communicated by Jesus through the church, not the creeds or the letter of Scripture or the rationalistic understanding. The work is therefore simply a description of the facts of religious feeling, or of the inner life of the soul in its relations to God, and the inward facts are looked at in the various stages of their development and presented in their systematic connection. The aim of the work was to reform Protestant theology, to put an end to the unreason and superficiality of both supernaturalism and rationalism, and to deliver religion and theology from dependence on perpetually changing systems of philosophy.[7]

Though the work added to the reputation of its author, it aroused the increased opposition of the theological schools it was intended to overthrow, and at the same time, Schleiermacher's defence of the right of the church to frame its own liturgy in opposition to the arbitrary dictation of the monarch or his ministers brought him fresh troubles. He felt isolated although his church and his lecture-room continued to be crowded.[7]

Schleiermacher continued with his translation of Plato and prepared a new and greatly-altered edition of his Christlicher Glaube, anticipating the latter in two letters to his friend Gottfried Lücke (in the Studien und Kritiken, 1829) in which he defended his theological position generally and his book in particular against opponents on both the right and the left.[7]

The same year, Schleiermacher lost his only son, Nathaniel (1820–1829), a blow that he said "drove the nails into his own coffin", but he continued to defend his theological position against Hengstenberg's party and the rationalists Daniel Georg Konrad von Cölln (1788–1833) and David Schulz (1779–1854), protesting against both subscription to the ancient creeds and the imposition of a new rationalistic formulary.[7]

Death[edit]

A statue of Schleiermacher at Palais Universitaire in Strasbourg

Schleiermacher died at 65 of pneumonia on February 12, 1834.[19]

Work[edit]

Doctrine of knowledge[edit]

Schleiermacher's psychology takes as its basis the phenomenal dualism of the ego and the non-ego, and regards the life of man as the interaction of these elements with their interpenetration as its infinite destination. The dualism is therefore not absolute, and, though present in man's own constitution as composed of body and soul, is relative only even there. The ego is itself both body and soul — the conjunction of both constitutes it. Our "organization" or sense nature has its intellectual element, and our "intellect" its organic element, and there is no such thing as "pure mind" or "pure body." The one general function of the ego, thought, becomes in relation to the non-ego either receptive or spontaneous action, and in both forms of action its organic, or sense, and its intellectual energies co-operate; and in relation to man, nature and the universe the ego gradually finds its true individuality by becoming a part of them, "every extension of consciousness being higher life."[7]

The specific functions of the ego, as determined by the relative predominance of sense or intellect, are either functions of the senses (or organism) or functions of the intellect. The former fall into the two classes of feelings (subjective) and perceptions (objective); the latter, according as the receptive or the spontaneous element predominates, into cognition and volition. In cognition, thought is ontologically oriented to the object; and in volition it is the teleological purpose of thought. In the first case we receive (in our fashion) the object of thought into ourselves. In the latter we plant it out into the world. Both cognition and volition are functions of thought as well as forms of moral action.[7]

It is in those two functions that the real life of the ego is manifested, but behind them is self-consciousness permanently present, which is always both subjective and objective — consciousness of ourselves and of the non-ego. This self-consciousness is the third special form or function of thought — which is also called feeling and immediate knowledge. In it we cognize our own inner life as affected by the non-ego. As the non-ego helps or hinders, enlarges or limits, our inner life, we feel pleasure or pain. Aesthetic, moral and religious feelings are respectively produced by the reception into consciousness of large ideas — nature, mankind and the world; those feelings are the sense of being one with these vast objects. Religious feeling therefore is the highest form of thought and of life; in it we are conscious of our unity with the world and God; it is thus the sense of absolute dependence.[7]

Schleiermacher's doctrine of knowledge accepts the fundamental principle of Kant that knowledge is bounded by experience, but it seeks to remove Kant's scepticism as to knowledge of the ding an sich (the noumenon) or Sein, as Schleiermacher's term is. The idea of knowledge or scientific thought as distinguished from the passive form of thought — of aesthetics and religion — is thought which is produced by all thinkers in the same form and which corresponds to being. All knowledge takes the form of the concept (Begriff) or the judgment (Urteil), the former conceiving the variety of being as a definite unity and plurality, and the latter simply connecting the concept with certain individual objects.[7]

In the concept, therefore, the intellectual and in the judgment the organic or sense element predominates. The universal uniformity of the production of judgments presupposes the uniformity of our relations to the outward world, and the uniformity of concepts rests similarly on the likeness of our inward nature. This uniformity is not based on the sameness of either the intellectual or the organic functions alone, but on the correspondence of the forms of thought and sensation with the forms of being. The essential nature of the concept is that it combines the general and the special, and the same combination recurs in being; in being the system of substantial or permanent forms answers to the system of concepts and the relation of cause and effect to the system of judgments, the higher concept answering to "force" and the lower to the phenomena of force, and the judgment to the contingent interaction of things.[7]

The sum of being consists of the two systems of substantial forms and interactional relations, and it reappears in the form of concept and judgment, the concept representing being and the judgment being in action. Knowledge has under both forms the same object, the relative difference of the two being that when the conceptual form predominates we have speculative science and when the form of judgment prevails we have empirical or historical science. Throughout the domain of knowledge the two forms are found in constant mutual relations, another proof of the fundamental unity of thought and being or of the objectivity of knowledge. Plato, Spinoza and Kant had contributed characteristic elements of their thought to this system, and directly or indirectly it was largely indebted to Schelling for fundamental conceptions.[7]

Hermeneutics[edit]

While Schleiermacher did not publish extensively on hermeneutics during his lifetime, he lectured widely on the field. His published and unpublished writings on the subject were collected together after his death and published in 1838 as Hermeneutik und Kritik mit besonderer Beziehung auf das Neue Testament. However, it was not until Heinz Kimmerle's 1959 edition[20] "based on a careful transcription of the original handwritten manuscripts, that an assured and comprehensive overview of Schleiermacher's theory of hermeneutics became possible."[21]

Schleiermacher wanted to shift hermeneutics away from specific methods of interpretation (e.g. methods for interpreting biblical or classical texts) and toward a focus on how people understand texts in general. He was interested in interpreting Scripture, but he thought one could do so properly only after establishing a system of interpretation that was applicable to all texts. This process was not a systematic or strictly philological approach, but what he called "the art of understanding."[22] Schleiermacher viewed a text as a vehicle that an author used to communicate thoughts that he had had before creating the text.[23] These thoughts were what caused the author to produce the text; at the moment of text creation, these "inner thoughts" become "outer expression" in language. In order to interpret a text, then, the interpreter must consider both the inner thoughts of the author and the language that s/he used in writing the text. This approach to interpreting texts involves both "grammatical interpretation" and "psychological (or technical) interpretation." The former deals with the language of the text; the latter with the thoughts and aims of the author.[24]

The language used by an author "is what mediates sensuously and externally between utterer and listener".[25] The ultimate goal of hermeneutics for Schleiermacher is "understanding in the highest sense"[26]— experiencing the same thoughts that the author experienced when writing the text. Understanding is a historical process involving learning about the context in which the author wrote, and how the text's original readership understood its language.[27] Understanding is also a psychological process drawing upon intuition and a connection between interpreter and the author.[28] Reader and author are both human. As humans, they have some degree of shared understanding. That shared understanding is what makes it possible for a reader to understand an author.

Part of the art of understanding is the art of avoiding misunderstanding. Schleiermacher identifies two forms of misunderstanding. Qualitative misunderstanding is a failure of grammatical interpretation— failing to understand the language of the text— "the confusion of the meaning of a word for another."[29] Quantitative misunderstanding a failure of technical/psychological interpretation— misunderstanding the nuance in the author’s own "sphere."

In studying the language that an author uses to present his/her thoughts, an interpreter may be able to understand these thoughts even better than the author him/herself.[30] This can be done by discovering why a particular work was produced, and by discovering unity within other works produced in a similar genre by others, or unity in other works by the same author in any genre.[31]

Despite Schleiermacher’s claim to the possibility of understanding of the author’s thoughts better than the author, he grants that "good interpretation can only be approximated" and that hermeneutics is not a "perfect art."[32] The art puts the interpreter in the best position by "putting oneself in possession of all the conditions of understanding."[33] However, the extent of an interpreter’s understanding of a text is limited by the possibility of misunderstanding the text.

Schleiermacher's work had a profound impact on the field of hermeneutics, so much so that he is often referred to as "the father of modern hermeneutics as a general study."[34] His work marks the beginning of hermeneutics as a general field of inquiry, separate from specific disciplines (e.g. law or theology).[35] In the twentieth century, philosophers such as HeideggerGadamer, and Ricoeur would expand hermeneutics even farther, from a theory of interpretation of textual expressions into a theory of interpretation of lived experiences.

Ethics[edit]

His grave in Berlin

Next to religion and theology, Schleiermacher devoted himself to the moral world, of which the phenomena of religion and theology were, in his systems, only constituent elements. In his earlier essays he endeavoured to point out the defects of ancient and modern ethical thinkers, particularly of Kant and Fichte, with only Plato and Spinoza finding favour in his eyes. He failed to discover in previous moral systems any necessary basis in thought, any completeness as regards the phenomena of moral action, any systematic arrangement of its parts and any clear and distinct treatment of specific moral acts and relations.[7]

Schleiermacher's own moral system is an attempt to supply these deficiencies. It connects the moral world by a deductive process with the fundamental idea of knowledge and being; it offers a view of the entire world of human action which at all events aims at being exhaustive; it presents an arrangement of the matter of the science which tabulates its constituents after the model of the physical sciences; and it supplies a sharply defined treatment of specific moral phenomena in their relation to the fundamental idea of human life as a whole. Schleiermacher defines ethics as the theory of the nature of the reason, or as the scientific treatment of the effects produced by human reason in the world of nature and man.[7]

As a theoretical or speculative science it is purely descriptive and not practical, being correlated on the one hand to physical science and on the other to history. Its method is the same as that of physical science, being distinguished from the latter only by its matter. The ontological basis of ethics is the unity of the real and the ideal, and the psychological and actual basis of the ethical process is the tendency of reason and nature to unite in the form of the complete organization of the latter by the former. The end of the ethical process is that nature (i.e. all that is not mind, the human body as well as external nature) may become the perfect symbol and organ of mind.[7]

Conscience, as the subjective expression of the presupposed identity of reason and nature in their bases, guarantees the practicability of our moral vocation. Nature is preordained or constituted to become the symbol and organ of mind, just as mind is endowed with the impulse to realize this end. But the moral law must not be conceived under the form of an "imperative" or a "Sollen"; it differs from a law of nature only as being descriptive of the fact that it ranks the mind as conscious will, or Zweckdenken, above nature. Strictly speaking, the antitheses of good and bad and of free and necessary have no place in an ethical system, but simply in history, which is obliged to compare the actual with the ideal, but as far as the terms "good" and "bad" are used in morals they express the rule or the contrary of reason, or the harmony or the contrary of the particular and the general. The idea of free as opposed to necessary expresses simply the fact that the mind can propose to itself ends, though a man cannot alter his own nature.[7]

In contrast to Kant and Fichte and modern moral philosophers, Schleiermacher reintroduced and assigned pre-eminent importance to the doctrine of the summum bonum, or highest good. It represents in his system the ideal and aim of the entire life of man, supplying the ethical view of the conduct of individuals in relation to society and the universe, and therewith constituting a philosophy of history at the same time. Starting with the idea of the highest good and of its constituent elements (Güter), or the chief forms of the union of mind and nature, Schleiermacher's system divides itself into the doctrine of moral ends, the doctrine of virtue and the doctrine of duties; in other words, as a development of the idea of the subjection of nature to reason it becomes a description of the actual forms of the triumphs of reason, of the moral power manifested therein and of the specific methods employed. Every moral good or product has a fourfold character: it is individual and' universal; it is an organ and symbol of the reason, that is, it is the product of the individual with relation to the community, and represents or manifests as well as classifies and rules nature.[7]

The first two characteristics provide for the functions and rights of the individual as well as those of the community or race. Though a moral action may have these four characteristics at various degrees of strength, it ceases to be moral if one of them is quite absent. All moral products may be classified according to the predominance of one or the other of these characteristics. Universal organizing action produces the forms of intercourse, and universal symbolizing action produces the various forms of science; individual organizing action yields the forms of property and individual symbolizing action the various representations of feeling, all these constituting the relations, the productive spheres, or the social conditions of moral action. Moral functions cannot be performed by the individual in isolation but only in his relation to the family, the state, the school, the church, and society — all forms of human life which ethical science finds to its hand and leaves to the science of natural history to account for. The moral process is accomplished by the various sections of humanity in their individual spheres, and the doctrine of virtue deals with the reason as the moral power in each individual by which the totality of moral products is obtained.[7]

Schleiermacher classifies the virtues under the two forms of Gesinnung ("disposition, attitude") and Fertigkeit ("dexterity, proficiency"), the first consisting of the pure ideal element in action and the second the form it assumes in relation to circumstances, each of the two classes falling respectively into the two divisions of wisdom and love and of intelligence and application. In his system the doctrine of duty is the description of the method of the attainment of ethical ends, the conception of duty as an imperative, or obligation, being excluded, as we have seen. No action fulfills the conditions of duty except as it combines the three following antitheses: reference to the moral idea in its whole extent and likewise to a definite moral sphere; connection with existing conditions and at the same time absolute personal production; the fulfillment of the entire moral vocation every moment though it can only be done in a definite sphere. Duties are divided with reference to the principle that every man make his own the entire moral problem and act at the same time in an existing moral society. This condition gives four general classes of duty: duties of general association or duties with reference to the community (Rechtspflicht), and duties of vocation (Berufspflicht) — both with a universal reference, duties of the conscience (in which the individual is sole judge), and duties of love or of personal association.[7]

It was only the first of the three sections of the science of ethics — the doctrine of moral ends — that Schleiermacher handled with approximate completeness; the other two sections were treated very summarily. In his Christian Ethics he dealt with the subject from the basis of the Christian consciousness instead of from that of reason generally; the ethical phenomena dealt with are the same in both systems, and they throw light on each other, while the Christian system treats more at length and less aphoristically the principal ethical realities — church, state, family, art, science and society. Rothe, amongst other moral philosophers, bases his system substantially, with important departures, on Schleiermacher's. In Beneke's moral system his fundamental idea was worked out in its psychological relations.[7]

Schleiermacher held that an eternal hell was not compatible with the love of God. Divine punishment was rehabilitative, not penal, and designed to reform the person.[36] He was one of the first major theologians of modern times to teach Christian Universalism.

Writings concerning society[edit]

On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers is a book written by Schleiermacher dealing with the gap he saw as emerging between the cultural elite and general society. 

Schleiermacher was writing when the Enlightenment was in full swing and when the first major transition into modernity was simultaneously occurring. With the fall of the late Middle Ages and a vigorous discourse taking hold of Western European intellectuals, the fields of art and natural philosophy were flourishing. 

However, the discourse of theologians, arguably the primary and only discourse of intellectuals for centuries, had taken to its own now minor corner in the universities. 

On Religion is divided into five major sections

  1. the Defense (Apologie), 
  2. the Nature of Religion (Über das Wesen der Religion), 
  3. the Cultivation of Religion (Über die Bildung zur Religion), 
  4. Association in Religion (Über das Gesellige in der Religion, oder über Kirche und Priesterthum), and 
  5. the Religions (Über die Religionen). 

Schleiermacher initiates his speeches on religion in its opening chapter by asserting that the contemporary critique of religion is often over-simplified by the assumption that there are two supposed "hinges" upon which all critiques of religion(s) are based. These two over-simplifications are given by Schleiermacher as 

  • first, that their conscience shall be put into judgement, and 
  • second, the "general idea turns on the fear of an eternal being, 
    • or, broadly, respect for his influence on the occurrences of this life called by you providence
    • or expectation of a future life after this one, called by you immortality."[37]

https://archive.org/details/onreligionspeech00schluoft/page/n12/mode/1up

Religious thought[edit]

From LeibnizLessingFichteJacobi and the Romantic school, Schleiermacher had imbibed a profound and mystical view of the inner depths of the human personality.[7] His religious thought found its expression most notably in The Christian Faith, one of the most influential works of Christian theology of its time.

Schleiermacher saw the ego, the person, as an individualization of universal reason; and the primary act of self-consciousness as the first conjunction of universal and individual life, the immediate union or marriage of the universe with incarnated reason. Thus every person becomes a specific and original representation of the universe and a compendium of humanity, a microcosmos in which the world is immediately reflected. While therefore we cannot, as we have seen, attain the idea of the supreme unity of thought and being by either cognition or volition, we can find it in our own personality, in immediate self-consciousness or (which is the same in Schleiermacher's terminology) feeling. 

Feeling in this higher sense (as distinguished from "organic" sensibility, Empfindung), which is the minimum of distinct antithetic consciousness, the cessation of the antithesis of subject and object, constitutes likewise the unity of our being, in which the opposite functions of cognition and volition have their fundamental and permanent background of personality and their transitional link. Having its seat in this central point of our being, or indeed consisting in the essential fact of self-consciousness, religion lies at the basis of all thought, feeling and action.[7]

At various periods of his life Schleiermacher used different terms to represent the character and relation of religious feeling. In his earlier days he called it a feeling or intuition of the universe, consciousness of the unity of reason and nature, of the infinite and the eternal within the finite and the temporal. In later life he described it as the feeling of absolute dependence, or, as meaning the same thing, the consciousness of being in relation to God.[7] In his Addresses on Religion (1799), he wrote:[38]

Religion is the outcome neither of the fear of death, nor of the fear of God. It answers a deep need in man. It is neither a metaphysic, nor a morality, but above all and essentially an intuition and a feeling. ... Dogmas are not, properly speaking, part of religion: rather it is that they are derived from it. Religion is the miracle of direct relationship with the infinite; and dogmas are the reflection of this miracle. Similarly belief in God, and in personal immortality, are not necessarily a part of religion; one can conceive of a religion without God, and it would be pure contemplation of the universe; the desire for personal immortality seems rather to show a lack of religion, since religion assumes a desire to lose oneself in the infinite, rather than to preserve one's own finite self.

Schleiermacher's concept of church has been contrasted with J.S. Semler's.[39][need quotation to verify]

Reception[edit]

The Dutch Reformed theologian Herman Bavinck, deeply concerned with the problem of objectivism and subjectivism in the doctrine of revelation, employs Schleiermacher’s doctrine of revelation in his own way and regards the Bible as the objective standard for his theological work. Bavinck also stresses the importance of the church, which forms the Christian consciousness and experience. In so doing, he attempts to overcome the latent weakness of Schleiermacher’s doctrine of revelation through his emphasis on the ecclesiological doctrine of revelation.[40]

Legacy[edit]

  • In the Berlin-Kreuzberg district, Schleiermacherstrasse was named after him in 1875; an area in which the streets were named after the founding professors of the Berlin University.

Works[edit]

Under the title Gesamtausgabe der Werke Schleiermachers in drei Abteilungen, Schleiermacher's works were first published in three sections:

  1. Theological (11 vols.)
  2. Sermons (10 vols., 1873–1874, 5 vols)
  3. Philosophical and Miscellaneous (9 vols., 1835–1864).

See also Sämmtliche Werke (Berlin, 1834ff.), and Werke: mit einem Bildnis Schleiermachers (Leipzig, 1910) in four volumes.

Other works include:

Modern editions:

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Biografie, Friedrich Schleiermacher
  2. ^ Kristin Gjesdal, Gadamer and the Legacy of German Idealism, Cambridge University Press, 2012, p. 156.
  3. ^ Paola Mayer, Jena Romanticism and Its Appropriation of Jakob Böhme, McGill-Queen's University Press, 1999, p. 101.
  4. ^ Helmut Thielicke, Modern Faith and Thought, William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1990, p. 174.
  5. ^ Kurt Mueller-Vollmer (ed.), The Hermeneutics Reader, Continuum, 1988, p. 72.
  6. ^ Edward Joseph Echeverria, Criticism and Commitment: Major Themes in Contemporary "Post-Critical" Philosophy, Rodopi, 1981, p. 221.
  7. Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae  One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the public domainChisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Schleiermacher, Friedrich Daniel Ernst". Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  8. ^ Friedrich Schleiermacher, Hermeneutics: The Handwritten Manuscripts, ed. by Heinz Kimmerle, trans. by James Duke and Jack Forstman (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977), p. 196: "just as the whole is understood from the parts, so the parts can be understood from the whole. This principle is of such consequence for hermeneutics and so incontestable that one cannot even begin to interpret without using it."
  9. ^ Anthony C. Thiselton, New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading, Harper Collins, 1997, p. 214.
  10. Jump up to:a b Friedrich Schleiermacher, "Ueber den Begriff der Hermeneutik mit Bezug auf F. A. Wolfs Andeutungen und Asts Lehrbuch", lecture delivered on August 13, 1829; published in Friedrich Schleiermachers sämtliche Werke III/3, 1838 (Schleiermacher makes reference to Ast's Grundlinien der Grammatik, Hermeneutik und Kritik (1808) and Wolf's Vorlesungen über die Enzyklopädie der Altertumswissenschaft (1831)); Richard E. Palmer, Hermeneutics, Northwestern University Press, 1969, ch. 6.
  11. ^ Michael N. Forster, After Herder: Philosophy of Language in the German Tradition, Oxford University Press, 2010, p. 9.
  12. ^ Frederick C. BeiserLate German Idealism: Trendelenburg and Lotze, Oxford University Press, 2013, p. 20.
  13. ^ Hinson-Hasty, Elizabeth (2013). "'In Each the Work of All, and in All the Work of Each': Sin and Salvation in Schleiermacher and Rauschenbusch". In Wilcox, Jeffrey A.; Tice, Terrence N.; Kelsey, Catherine L. (eds.). Schleiermacher's Influences on American Thought and Religious Life (1835–1920). Vol. 1. Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publications. pp. 371–372. ISBN 978-1-60608-005-4.
  14. ^ Schwarz, Hans (2005). Theology in a Global Context: The Last Two Hundred Years. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. pp. 144–145ISBN 978-0-8028-2986-3.
  15. ^ Boston Collaborative Encyclopedia of Western Theology: Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768–1834)
  16. ^ Public Domain Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "Zionites"Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved June 18, 2014.
  17. ^ Michael A. G. Haykin, Liberal Protestantism, p. 3
  18. Jump up to:a b B. A. Gerrish, A Prince of the Church: Schleiermacher and the Beginnings of Modern Theology (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1984), p. 25.
  19. ^ Knox, John S. "Friedrich Schleiermacher: A Theological Precursor of Postmodernity?"Church Life Journal. Retrieved October 15, 2020.
  20. ^ Friedrich Schleiermacher: Hermeneutik, Heinz Kimmerle (ed.), 1959; second, revised edition, Heidelberg: Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1974.
  21. ^ Duke, James O. "Translators' Introduction" Hermeneutics: The Handwritten Manuscripts. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1977, 1.
  22. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. "The Hermeneutics: Outline of the 1819 Lectures," New Literary History, Vol.10, No. 1, Literary Hermeneutics (Autumn, 1978), 1.
  23. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. "The Hermeneutics: Outline of the 1819 Lectures," New Literary History, Vol.10, No. 1, Literary Hermeneutics (Autumn, 1978), 2-3.
  24. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. ed. Andrew Bowie. Hermeneutics and Criticism. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 229.
  25. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. ed. Andrew Bowie. Hermeneutics and Criticism. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 232.
  26. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. ed. Andrew Bowie. Hermeneutics and Criticism. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 228
  27. ^ Friedrich D. E. Schleiermacher, "The Hermeneutics: Outline of the 1819 Lectures," New Literary History, Vol. 10, No. 1, Literary Hermeneutics (Autumn, 1978), 6.
  28. ^ Palmer, Richard (1969). Hermeneutics: Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger, and Gadamer. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. pp. 87–88. ISBN 9780810104594.
  29. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. "The Hermeneutics: Outline of the 1819 Lectures," New Literary History, Vol. 10, No. 1, Literary Hermeneutics (Autumn, 1978), 9.
  30. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. "The Hermeneutics: Outline of the 1819 Lectures," New Literary History, Vol. 10, No. 1, Literary Hermeneutics (Autumn, 1978), 9.
  31. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. ed. Andrew Bowie. Hermeneutics and Criticism. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 256.
  32. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. "The Hermeneutics: Outline of the 1819 Lectures," New Literary History, Vol. 10, No. 1, Literary Hermeneutics (Autumn, 1978), 14.
  33. ^ Schleiermacher, Friedrich D. E. ed. Andrew Bowie. Hermeneutics and Criticism. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 227.
  34. ^ Palmer, Richard E. Hermeneutics. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1969.
  35. ^ Palmer, Richard (1969). Hermeneutics. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. pp. 96–97. ISBN 9780810104594.
  36. ^ Gunton, Colin E. The Cambridge Companion to Christian Doctrine. p. 240.
  37. ^ F. Scheiermacher, On Religion, Ch.1, pp12-13.
  38. ^ Quoted in Kedourie, Elie. Nationalism, p. 26. Praeger University Series. 1961. ISBN 0-09-053444-1
  39. ^ Rendtorff, Trutz. Church and Theology: The Systematic Function of the Church Concept in Modern Theology, Westminster Press, 1971, ISBN 978-0-664-20908-7.
  40. ^ Woo, B. Hoon (2015). "Bavinck and Barth on Schleiermacher's Doctrine of Revelation"Korea Reformed Theology48: 38–71. doi:10.34271/krts.2015.48..38.

References[edit]

  • Heinrich FinkBegründung der Funktion der Praktischen Theologie bei Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher: Eine Untersuchung anhand seiner praktisch-theologischen Vorlesungen. Berlin 1966 (Berlin, Humboldt-U., Theol. F., Diss. v. 25. Jan. 1966) [master's thesis]
  • Wilhelm Dilthey: Leben Schleiermachers, ed. M. Redeker, Berlin 1966
  • Falk Wagner: Schleiermachers Dialektik. Eine kritische Interpretation, Gütersloh 1974
  • Brian A. Gerrish: A Prince of the Church. Schleiermacher and the Beginnings of Modern Theology, London / Philadelphia 1984
  • Kurt-Victor Selge (ed.): Internationaler Schleiermacher-Kongreß Berlin 1984 (Zwei Teilbände), Berlin / New York 1985
  • Günter Meckenstock: Deterministische Ethik und kritische Theologie. Die Auseinandersetzung des frühen Schleiermacher mit Kant und Spinoza 1789–1794, Berlin / New York 1988
  • Hans-Joachim Birkner: Schleiermacher-Studien. (Schleiermacher-Archiv. Band 16), Berlin / New York 1996
  • Julia A. Lamm: The Living God: Schleiermacher's Theological Appropriation of Spinoza, University Park, Pennsylvania 1996
  • Ulrich Barth / Claus-Dieter Osthövener (Hg.), 200 Jahre "Reden über die Religion". Akten des 1. Internationalen Kongresses der Schleiermacher-Gesellschaft Halle, 14.–17. March 1999 (Schleiermacher Archiv 19), Berlin / New York 2000
  • Kurt Nowak: Schleiermacher. Leben, Werk und Wirkung. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001.
  • Matthias WolfesÖffentlichkeit und Bürgergesellschaft. Friedrich Schleiermachers politische Wirksamkeit, Berlin / New York 2004
  • Lundberg, Phillip (2005). Tallyho – The Hunt for Virtue: Beauty, Truth and Goodness – Nine Dialogues by Plato. AuthorHouse. ISBN 1-4184-4976-8.
  • Christof Ellsiepen: Anschauung des Universums und Scientia Intuitiva. Die spinozistischen Grundlagen von Schleiermachers früher Religionstheorie, Berlin / New York 2006
  • Walter Wyman, Jr.: "The Role of the Protestant Confessions in Schleiermacher’s The Christian Faith". The Journal of Religion 87:355–385, July 2007
  • Christentum – Staat – Kultur. Akten des Kongresses der Internationalen Schleiermacher-Gesellschaft in Berlin, March 2006. Hrsg. von Andreas Arndt, Ulrich Barth and Wilhelm Gräb (Schleiermacher-Archiv 22), De Gruyter: Berlin / New York 2008
  • Daan Thoomes, Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768 - 1834): Theoloog, filosoof en pedagoog. In: Tom Kroon & Bas Levering (red.), Grote pedagogen in klein bestek. Amsterdam, SWP, 2008 / 2019 [1]

Further reading[edit]

In English
  • Andrejč, Gorazd. "Bridging the gap between social and existential-mystical interpretations of Schleiermacher's 'feeling'." Religious Studies (2012): 377-401. online
  • Barth, Karl. The Theology of Schleiermacher. trans. Geoffrey Bromiley. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1982.
  • Barth, Karl. "Schleiermacher," in Protestant Theology from Rousseau to Ritschl. New York: Harper, 1959. Ch. VIII, pp. 306–354.
  • Brandt, R. B. The Philosophy of Schleiermacher: The Development of his Theory of Scientific and Religious Knowledge. Westport, CT: 1968.
  • Crouter, Richard. Friedrich Schleiermacher: Between Enlightenment and Romanticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 2008.
  • Dole, Andrew. Schleiermacher on religion and the natural order (AAR: Religion, Culture & History, 2010).
  • Dole, Andrew. "What is ‘religious experience’ in Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics, and why does it matter?." Journal of Analytic Theology 4 (2016): 44-65. online
  • Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method, 2nd revised ed. tr. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald . Marshall. New York: Continuum, 1994.
  • Kenklies, K. (2012). "Educational theory as topological rhetoric. The concepts of pedagogy of Johann Friedrich Herbart and Friedrich Schleiermacher". Studies in Philosophy and Education31 (3): 265–273. doi:10.1007/s11217-012-9287-6S2CID 144605837.
  • Kenklies, Karsten. "Schleiermacher, Friedrich Daniel Ernst". In Encyclopedia of Educational Theory and Philosophy. Edited by D.C. Phillips. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2014, pp. 733–735.
  • Kerber, Hannes. "Strauss and Schleiermacher. An Introduction to 'Exoteric Teaching". In Reorientation: Leo Strauss in the 1930s. Edited by Martin D. Yaffe and Richard S. Ruderman. New York: Palgrave, 2014, pp. 203–214.
  • Robinson, Matthew Ryan. Redeeming relationship, relationships that redeem: free sociability and the completion of humanity in the thought of Friedrich Schleiermacher (Mohr Siebeck, 2018).
  • Selbie, W. E. Schleiermacher: A Critical and Historical Study. New York: Dutton, 1913.
  • Stratis, Justin. God's Being Towards Fellowship: Schleiermacher, Barth, and the Meaning of ‘God is Love’. (Bloomsbury, 2019).
In French

External links[edit]

Bridging the gap between social and existential-mystical interpretations of Schleiermacher's ‘feeling’ | Religious Studies | Cambridge Core

Bridging the gap between social and existential-mystical interpretations of Schleiermacher's ‘feeling’ | Religious Studies | Cambridge Core
Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher.jpg

Bridging the gap between social and existential-mystical interpretations of Schleiermacher's ‘feeling’



Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 February 2012
GORAZD ANDREJČ

Abstract


The article engages with two contemporary understandings of Schleiermacher's notion of feeling which are in important aspects in conflict: 
  1. a social understanding (Kevin W. Hector and Christine Helmer) and 
  2. an existential-mystical understanding (Thandeka). 

Using the phenomenological category of ‘existential feelings’ drawn from the work of Matthew Ratcliffe, I argue that they can be brought into a coherent overall account that recognizes different aspects of feeling in Schleiermacher's work. 

I also suggest that such an interpretation of Schleiermacher's concept of religious feeling offers 
a different and better understanding of the role of feelings in religious experience and belief 
than the contemporary ‘perception-model’ of religious experience.

Religious Studies , Volume 48 , Issue 3 , September 2012 , pp. 377 - 401


DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412511000254[Opens in a new window]
CopyrightCopyright © Cambridge University Press 2012



References


Ästhetik O: Ästhetik, ed. Odebrecht, Rudolf (Berlin: Walter de Guyter, 1931).Google Scholar


CF: The Christian Faith, ed. Mackintosh, H. R. & Stewart, J. S. (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1999).Google Scholar


Dial O: Dialektik 1822, ed. Odebrecht, Rudolf (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs Verlag, 1942). Reprinted in Friedrich Schleiermacher: Dialektik 1822. II, ed. Frank, Manfred (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 2001).Google Scholar


Dial T: Dialectic or, The Art of Doing Philosophy: A Study Edition of the 1811 Notes, ed. & trans. Tice, Terrence (Atlanta GA: Scholars Press, 1996).Google Scholar


OR: On Religion: Speeches to its Cultural Despisers [a translation of the first, 1977 edition of the German text], 2nd edn, ed. Crouter, Richard (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).Google Scholar


Adams, Robert M. (2005) ‘Faith and religious knowledge’, in Marina, Jacqueline (ed.) Cambridge Companion to Friedrich Schleiermacher (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Albrecht, Christian (1994) Schleiermachers Theorie der Frömmigkeit (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Alston, William P. (1991) Perceiving God: The Epistemology of Religious Experience (Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar


Bowie, Andrew (1997) From Romanticism to Critical Theory: The Philosophy of German Literary Theory (London: Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Bowie, Andrew (1998) ‘Introduction’, in Schleiermacher, F. E. D., Hermeneutics and Criticism and Other Writings, ed. Bowie, Andrew (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), vii–xxxi.Google Scholar


Bowie, Andrew (2003) Aesthetics and Subjectivity: From Kant to Nietzsche (Manchester: Manchester University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Bowie, Andrew (2005) ‘The philosophical significance of Schleiermacher's hermeneutics’, in Marina, Jacqueline (ed.) Cambridge Companion to Friedrich Schleiermacher (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Brandt, Richard B. (1968) The Philosophy of Schleiermacher: The Development of his Theory of Scientific and Religious Knowledge (Westport CT: Greenwood Press).Google Scholar


Crouter, Richard (1996) ‘Introduction’, in Schleiermacher, F. E. D., On Religion: Speeches to its Cultural Despisers. 2nd Edition, Crouter, Richard (ed.) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), xi–xxxix.Google Scholar


Daniels, Michael (2003) ‘Making sense of mysticism’, Transpersonal Psychology Review, 7, 39–55.Google Scholar


Deigh, John (2004) ‘Primitive emotions’, in Solomon, Robert C. (ed.) Thinking about Feeling (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 9–27.Google Scholar


De Sousa, Ronald (2004) ‘Emotions: what I know, what I'd like to think I know, and what I'd like to think’, in Solomon, Robert C. (ed.) Thinking about Feeling (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 61–74.Google Scholar


Dole, Andrew (2010) Schleiermacher on Religion and Natural Order (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar


Dupré, Louis (1964) ‘Toward a revaluation of Schleiermacher's “philosophy of religion”’, The Journal of Religion, 44, 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Foltz, Bruce V. (1995) Inhabiting the Earth: Heidegger, Environmental Ethics and the Metaphysics of Nature (Atlantic Highlands NJ: Humanities Press).Google Scholar


Forster, Michael (2002) ‘Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher’, in Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Available: <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schleiermacher/> [6.10.2011].Google Scholar


Frank, Manfred (1997) The Subject and the Text: Essays on Literary Theory and Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar


Frank, Manfred (2005) ‘Metaphysical foundations: a look at Schleiermacher's Dialectic’, in Marina, Jacqueline (ed.) Cambridge Companion to Friedrich Schleiermacher (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 15–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Frijda, N., Manstead, A. & Fischer, A. (2004) ‘Epilogue: feelings and emotions – where do we stand?’, in Frijda, N., Manstead, A., & Fischer, A. (eds) Feelings and Emotions: The Amsterdam Symposium (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 450–468.Google Scholar


Gendlin, Eugene (1978–1979) ‘Befindlichkeit: Heidegger and the philosophy of psychology’, Review of Existential Psychology & Psychiatry: Heidegger and Psychology, 16. Available: <http://www.focusing.org/gendlin_befindlichkeit.html> [2.11.2010].Google Scholar


Goldie, Peter (2004) ‘Emotion, feeling and knowledge of the world’ in Solomon, Robert C. (ed.) Thinking about Feeling (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 91–106.Google Scholar


Grove, Peter (2004) Deutungen des Subjekts: Schleiermachers Philosophie der Religion (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Grove, Peter (2010) ‘Symbolism in Schleiermacher's theory of religion’, in Sockness, B. W. & Gräb, W. (eds) Schleiermacher, the Study of Religion, and the Future of Theology (Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter), 109–120.Google Scholar


Hector, Kevin W. (2006) ‘Actualism and incarnation: the high Christology of Friedrich Schleiermacher’, International Journal of Systematic Theology, 8, 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Hector, Kevin W. (2010) ‘Attunement and explication: a pragmatist reading of Schleiermacher's “theology of feeling”’, in Sockness, B. W. & Gräb, W. (eds) Schleiermacher, the Study of Religion, and the Future of Theology (Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter), 215–242.Google Scholar


Heidegger, Martin (1996) Being and Time, trans. Stambaugh, Joan (Albany NY: State University of New York Press).Google Scholar


Helmer, Christine (2003) ‘Mysticism and metaphysics: Schleiermacher and a historical-theological trajectory’, Journal of Religion, 83, 517–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Helmer, Christine (2010) ‘Schleiermacher’, in Gunton, C. E. & Fergusson, D. A. S. (eds) Blackwell Companion to Nineteenth Century Theology (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell), 31–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Herms, Eilert (1999) ‘Handeln aus Gewißheit. Zu Martin Heideggers Phänomenologie des Gewissens’, Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie, 41, 132–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Herms, Eilert (2003) Menschsein im Werden: Studien zu Schleiermacher (Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck).Google Scholar


Hutto, D. D. & Ratcliffe, M. (eds) (2007) Folk Psychology Re-Assessed (Dordrecht: Springer).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


James, William (1985) Varieties of Religious Experience (London: Penguin Books).Google Scholar


Lamm, Julia (1994) ‘The early philosophical roots of Schleiermacher's notion of Gefühl, 1788–1794’, The Harvard Theological Review, 87, 67–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Lamm, Julia (1996) The Living God: Schleiermacher's Theological Appropriation of Spinoza (University Park PA: Pennsylvania State University Press).Google Scholar


Mackintosh, Hugh R. (1945) Types of Modern Theology: Schleiermacher to Barth (London: Nisbet).Google Scholar


Marina, Jacqueline (2004) ‘Schleiermacher on the outpourings of the inner fire’, Religious Studies, 40, 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Marina, Jacqueline (2008) Transformation of the Self in the Thought of Friedrich Schleiermacher (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Proudfoot, Wayne (1985) Religious Experience (Berkeley CA: University of California Press).Google Scholar


Proudfoot, Wayne (2010) ‘Immediacy and intentionality in the feeling of absolute dependence’, in Sockness, B. W. & Gräb, W. (eds) Schleiermacher, the Study of Religion, and the Future of Theology (Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter), 27–38.Google Scholar


Putnam, Hilary (2004) The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar


Ratcliffe, Matthew (2008) Feelings of Being: Phenomenology, Psychiatry, and the Sense of Reality (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Ratcliffe, Matthew (2010) ‘Phenomenology of mood and the meaning of life’, in Goldie, P. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Emotion (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 349–471.Google Scholar


Ratcliffe, Matthew (2012) ‘The phenomenology of existential feeling’, draft of a chapter forthcoming in Marienberg, S. & Fingerhut, J. (eds) The Feeling of Being Alive (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter). Available: <http://durham.academia.edu/MatthewRatcliffe/Papers/571536/The_Phenomenology_of_Existential_Feeling> [6/7/2011].Google Scholar


Redeker, Martin (1973) Schleiermacher: Life and Thought (Philadelphia PA: Augsburg Fortress Press).Google Scholar


Rorty, Richard (1979) Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar


Smith, Quentin (1981) ‘On Heidegger's theory of moods’, The Modern Schoolman: A Quarterly Journal in Philosophy, 58, 211–236. Available: <http://www.qsmithwmu.com/on_heidegger's_theory_of_moods.htm> [2.11.2010].CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Solomon, Robert C. (2003) Not Passion's Slave (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Solomon, Robert C. (ed.) (2004) Thinking about Feeling (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar


Solomon, Robert C. (ed.) (2009) ‘Emotions in phenomenology and existentialism’, in Dreyfus, H. L. & Wrathall, M. A. (eds) A Companion to Phenomenology and Existentialism (Blackwell Companions to Philosophy) (Oxford: Blackwell), 291–309.Google Scholar


Sorrentino, Sergio (2010) ‘Feeling as a key notion in a transcendental conception of religion’, in Sockness, B. W. & Gräb, W. (eds) Schleiermacher, the Study of Religion, and the Future of Theology (Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter), 97–108.Google Scholar


Stocker, M. & Hegeman, E. (1996) Valuing Emotions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar


Strasser, Stephan (1977) Phenomenology of Feeling: An Essay on the Phenomena of the Heart (Pittsburgh PA: Duquesne University Press).Google Scholar


Swinburne, Richard (1991) The Existence of God (Oxford: Clarendon Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Ten Kate, Laurens (2007) ‘Intuition of the other: an analysis of Anschauung in Schleiermacher's On Religion – with references to Kant’ [Part of a ‘triptych’: E. Borgman, L. Ten Kate, & B. Philipsen, ‘A triptych on Schleiermacher's On Religion’], Literature & Theology, 22, 393–404.Google Scholar


Thandeka (1992) ‘Schleiermacher's Dialektik: the discovery of the self that Kant lost’, The Harvard Theological Review, 85, 433–452.Google Scholar


Thandeka (1995) The Embodied Self: Friedrich Schleiermacher's Solution to Kant's Problem of the Empirical Self (Albany NY: State University of New York Press).Google Scholar


Thandeka (2005) ‘Schleiermacher, feminism, and liberation theologies’, in Marina, Jacqueline (ed.) Cambridge Companion to Friedrich Schleiermacher (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 287–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1965) ‘Lecture on ethics’, Philosophical Review, 74, 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Wrathall, Mark A. (2011) Heidegger and Unconcealment: Truth, Language and History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar


Wyman, Walter E. Jr. (2010) ‘The cognitive status of the religious consciousness’, in Sockness, B. W. & Gräb, W. (eds) Schleiermacher, the Study of Religion, and the Future of Theology (Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter), 189–202.Google Scholar


Wynn, Mark (2005) Emotional Experience and Religious Understanding (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Wynn, Mark (2011) ‘Renewing the senses: conversion experience and the phenomenology of the spiritual life’, International Journal of Philosophy of Religion. Published Online in February 2011. Available: <http://www.springerlink.com/content/b329u48g434717j8/fulltext.pdf> [6/7/2011].Google Scholar


Yandell, Keith (1994) The Epistemology of Religious Experience (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar

Related content

A critical examination of existential feelingJ. Saarinen
Philosophy, Psychology
2018
Matthew Ratcliffe (2008, 2015) has argued that existential feelings form a distinct class of bodily and non-conceptual feelings that pre-intentionally structure our intentional experience of others,… Expand
5
PDF
Save
Alert

A critical examination of existential feeling 1Law, Medicine
2017
All material supplied via JYX is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, and duplication or sale of all or part of any of the repository collections is not permitted, except… Expand

View 1 excerpt, cites background
Save
Alert

Autism and the Panoply of Religious Belief, Disbelief and ExperienceK. Clark, Ingela Visuri
Philosophy
Neurology and Religion
2019
While the cognitive mechanisms that incline us towards theistic belief in superhuman agents have been well documented over the past twenty-five years, unbelief has not received nearly so much atten… Expand

Save
Alert

Existential feelingsM. Ratcliffe
Philosophy
The Routledge Handbook of Phenomenology of Emotion
2020
5
Save
Alert

Parkinson’s Disease, Religious Belief and SpiritualityR. Barker, Clare Redfern
Philosophy
Neurology and Religion
2019

Save
Alert

Phenomenology, Neurology, Psychiatry and Religious CommitmentI. Kidd
Psychology
Neurology and Religion
2019
1
Save
Alert

Methodological Hazards in the Neuroscientific Study of ReligionS. Judge
Psychology
Neurology and Religion
2019

Save
Alert

Embodied Cognition and the Neurology of ReligionWarren S. Brown
Psychology
Neurology and Religion
2019

Save
Alert

Religion and Frontotemporal DementiaNikolas Block, B. Miller
Philosophy
Neurology and Religion
2019

Save
Alert

The Scientific Study of ReligionJ. Collicutt
Philosophy
Neurology and Religion
2019

Save
Alert




1
2
3



References
SHOWING 1-10 OF 83 REFERENCES
SORT BY
Schleiermacher on the outpourings of the inner fire: experiential expressivism and religious pluralismJacqueline Mariña
Philosophy
Religious Studies
2004
Both in the Speeches and in The Christian Faith Schleiermacher offers a comprehensive theory of the nature of religion, grounding it in experience. In the Speeches Schleiermacher grounds religion in… Expand
7
Save
Alert

Renewing the senses: conversion experience and the phenomenology of the spiritual lifeMark Wynn
Philosophy
2012
In his discussion of conversion experience, in The Varieties of Religious Experience, William James draws attention to a variety of experience which has not been much investigated in the philosophy… Expand
12
Save
Alert

Making Sense of MysticismMichael Daniels
Philosophy
2003
I define mysticism as the individual's direct experience of a relationship to a fundamental Reality . A review of the literature reveals many different conceptions and descriptions of mystical… Expand
7
PDF
Save
Alert

Deutungen des Subjekts: Schleiermachers Philosophie der ReligionPeter Grove
Philosophy
2004
This comprehensive study of Schleiermacher's theory of subjectivity and philosophy of religion presents an important contribution to the understanding of modern theology and philosophy. By following… Expand
4
Save
Alert

Toward a Revaluation of Schleiermacher's "Philosophy of Religion"L. Dupré
Art
The Journal of Religion
1964
SCHLEIERMACHER'S name is closely connected with the Romantic movement in Germany. He started writing under the impulse of Schlegel, was a great admirer of Novalis, and became thoroughly influenced by… Expand
2
Save
Alert

Intuitions of the Other: An Analysis of Anschauüng in Schleiermacher’s On Religion – with references to KantL. Kate
Art
2007
Part of a threefold publication: Erik Borgman, Laurens ten Kate, Bart Philipsen, A Triptych on Schleiermacher's On Religion, pp. 382-416; preface by L. ten Kate, p. 382. The following three texts… Expand
3
Save
Alert

The Early Philosophical Roots of Schleiermacher's Notion of Gefühl, 1788–1794Julia A. Lamm
Philosophy
Harvard Theological Review
1994
No single term has been so misunderstood or so debated in the history of Schleiermacher interpretation as Gefühl (“feeling”). The intensity of the controversy surrounding this term is testimony to… Expand
49
Save
Alert

Perceiving God: The Epistemology of Religious ExperienceW. Alston
Philosophy
1991
In Perceiving God, William P. Alston offers a clear and provocative account of the epistemology of religious experience. He argues that the "perception of God"-his term for direct experiential… Expand
245
Save
Alert

Schleiermacher, the Study of Religion, and the Future of TheologyBrent W. Sockness, W. Gräb
Philosophy
2010
This volume documents a significant meeting in the history of Schleiermacher studiesat which leading scholars from Europe and North America gathered to probe key features of Schleiermacher's… Expand
2
PDF
Save
Alert

The epistemology of religious experienceKeith E. Yandell
Philosophy
1993
Introduction: is our task impossible or impolite? Part I. The Experimental Data: 1. Religious experience, 'East' and 'West' Some basic epistemological concepts Part II. The Challenge from… Expand
44
Save
Alert




1
2
3
4
5
...



알라딘: 종교론 프리드리히 슐라이어마허

알라딘: 종교론
Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher.jpg
종교론 
프리드리히 슐라이어마허 (지은이),
최신한 (옮긴이)
대한기독교서회
2002-09-01
===
 9.5 100자평(3)리뷰(2)
양장본280쪽

목차

옮긴이 머리말 ... 5 
첫째 강연 : 종교 변증론 ... 15 
Ⅰ. 어떻게 해서 슐라이어마허는 종교와 같이 잊혀진 것에 대해 강연하게 되었나? 
Ⅱ. 슐라이어마허는 왜 하필 교양인들에 대해 묻는가? 
Ⅲ. 교양인들은 왜 그의 말을 경청해야 하는가? 
Ⅳ. 슐라이어마허는 종교를 어떻게 변증하려 하는가? 

둘째 강연 : 종교의 본질에 대하여 ... 45 
Ⅰ. 종교는 사람들이 보통 생각하듯이 지식이나 행위가 아니며, 형이상학이나 도덕, 혹은 이 둘의 합성물도 아니다. 
Ⅱ. 종교는 우주의 영원하고 이상적인 내용과 본질에 대한, 그리고 무한자와 시간적인 존재 가운데 있는 영원자에 대한 경건한 직관이며 느낌이다. 
A: 종교에 대한 근본적인 정의, 종교는 우주에 대한 직관과 감정이다. 그것은 형이상학과 도덕에 병행하는, 본질적이고 필연적인 제3의 인간 정신이다. 
B: 이 정의에 대한 보다 정확한 규정 
1. 종교적 '직관'과 연관해서 
2. 종교적 '감정'과 연관해서 
C: 구체적인 예를 통한 이 정의의 상술 
1. 종교적인 여러 '직관'과 연관해서 
2. 종교적인 여러 '감정'과 연관해서 
Ⅲ: 교의와 특정한 교의적 개념은 종교의 본질에 속하지 않는다. 이는 이차적이며 다른 방식으로 사용되어야 하고 전통적인 의미와는 다르게 이해되어야 한다. 
Ⅲ-1: "신"과 "영혼불멸성"에 대한 특별 부록 

셋째 강연 : 종교의 형성과 교화에 대하여 ... 119 
머리말 
Ⅰ. 인간은 어떻게 종교로 형성되며 이는 무엇으로부터 이루어지는가? 왜 요즈음 사람들은 이에 대해 비관적으로 생각하는가? 
Ⅱ. 이 시대가 안고 있는 종교의 장애는 어떻게 ..... 

넷째 강연 : 종교 내적 교제에 대하여, 혹은 교회와 성직에 대하여 ... 151 
머리말 
Ⅰ. 진정한 교회, 진정으로 경건한 사람들의 .... 
Ⅱ. 정당한 비판과 공격은 종교에 해당된다기보다 .... 
Ⅲ. 이러한 교의적 교회에 가장 곤란한 짐을 지우는 .... 
Ⅳ. 이러한 궁경을 조정할 수 있는 방법 .... 
Ⅴ. 종교를 위해 활동하고자 하는 .... 
맺음말 : 진정한 교회를 위한 송영 

다섯째 강연 : 여러 종교들에 대하여 ... 197 
머리말 
Ⅰ. 종교를 정확하게 이해하려면 개별 종교를 탐구해야 한다. 
1. 종교는 '실정종교들'로 개별화된다. 
2. 종교의 개별화는 우주에 대한 가능한 직관 가운데서 하나의 직관이 .... 
3. 종교 일반은 이러한 실정적 형태를 띨 때 비로소 .... 
Ⅱ. 개별 종교 고찰 : 특히 그리스도교와 유대교 고찰 
1. 머리말 
2. 유대교 
3. 그르스도교 : 그리스도교의 본질/ 그리스도교가 담지하는 .... 
맺음말 해제 : 근원적 새로움의 개성적 자기화 ... 255 

슐라이어마허 연보 ... 269 
참고문헌 ... 270 
찾아보기 ... 273

====

저자 및 역자소개
프리드리히 슐라이어마허 (지은이) 

저명한 신학자이자 철학자. 1768년 독일의 브레슬라우에서 출생했다. 1787년부터 1790년까지 할레 대학에서 신학, 철학, 고전학을 연구하였고, 그 후에는 베를린의 샤리테 병원 원목을 지냈다.

1804년부터 1806년까지 할레 대학에서, 1810년부터는 베를린 대학에서 강의했다. 베를린 학술원의 저명한 구성원으로서 베를린 대학 창립을 주도한 바 있다. 1834년 숨을 거뒀다. 지은책으로 <변증법>, <해석학>, <윤리학>, <기독교 신앙> 등이 있다.

최근작 : <기독교신앙>,<종교론>,<성탄축제> … 총 6종 (모두보기)

최신한 (옮긴이) 
독일 튀빙엔 대학에서 박사학위를 받은 후 한남대학교 철학과에서 가르치고 있다. 주관심 분야는 형이상학, 종교철학, 해석학이며 이와 관련된 다수의 논문과 저술을 발표했다. 한국해석학회, 한국헤겔학회, 대한철학회, 철학연구회 회장을 역임했으며 한국인문학총연합회 공동회장을 맡고 있다. 대표저술로 『독백의 철학에서 대화의 철학으로』, 『지평확대의 철학』, 『헤겔철학과 형이상학의 미래』 등이 있으며, 『종교론』, 『해석학과 비평』(Schleiermacher), 『종교철학』(Hegel), 『인간적 자유의 본질』(Schelling) 등을 우리말로 옮겼다. 접기
최근작 : <현대의 종교 담론과 종교철학의 변형>,<인생교과서 헤겔>,<헤겔철학과 형이상학의 미래> … 총 18종 (모두보기)

===
출판사 제공 책소개

슐라이어마허가 1799년에 발표한 {종교론} 1판의 완역이 새로 출판되어 나왔다. 
신학사에서뿐만 아니라 철학사에서도 중요한 위치를 차지하고 있는 슐라이어마허의 주요 저서이다. 그는 할레(Halle) 대학에서 신학과 철학 및 고전학을 공부했으며, 이 책은 베를린의 샤리데 병원 원목으로 있을 때 집필한 것이다. 

이 완역본은 루돌프 오토가 편집한 책을 대본으로 삼았으며, 거의 매 문단 편집자의 주석이 붙어 있어 다른 어느 판본보다 책의 내용을 더 잘 이해할 수 있도록 돕고 있다. 이 완역본에서는 독자의 편의를 위해 이 주석을 책의 좌우 여백에 달아놓았으며, 원문에는 없는 차례를 덧붙였고, 본문의 내용과 연관된 성서의 구절을 밝혀놓고 있다. 이 책은 부제 "종교를 멸시하는 교양인을 위한 강연"에서 알 수 있듯이, 종교에 싫증난 시대와 종교로부터 멀어져 가는 종교 망각의 시대를 종교로 되돌리려는 근본적인 시도를 하고 있다. 종교는 교양이 없고 인생의 이상을 결여한 사람들의 전유물이 아니라, 풍부한 정신적 삶을 누리는 교양인과 조화로운 인격자에게 필수적인 것이 되어야 한다는 것이다. 

이를 위해 슐라이어마허는 이 책을 크게 5개의 강연으로 구성하고 있다. 

"첫째 강연"에서는 계몽주의적 종교 비판으로부터 종교를 옹호한다. 종교는 교양인들의 체계적인 개념의 틀 속에 갇힐 수 없으며, 오히려 이것을 체험하는 사람의 내면 가운데서 생동적으로 작용한다는 것이다. 

"둘째 강연"에서는 '종교의 본질'을 규명한다. 종교의 고유한 영역은 이성이나 의지보다는 직관과 감정에 의해 인간의 심정이 무한자의 적극적인 활동에 전적으로 사로잡힘으로써 형성된다는 것이다. 

"셋째 강연"에서는 종교의 형성 가능성과 종교 교육에 대해서 묻는다. 종교의 형성 가능성과 종교 교육은 교의적인 가르침을 통해 이루어질 수 없으며, 오로지 무한자에 대한 감각 능력의 개방에 근거한다고 말한다.

 "넷째 강연"에서는 종교의 외적 · 사회적 현상인 교회와 성직에 대해 천착한다. 진정한 교회와 교의적 교회를 구별하며, 성직자와 평신도 간의 관계를 설정하고, 국가와 교회의 분리를 강조한다. 

"다섯째 강연"에서는 역사적으로 현상한 개별 종교를 분석하고 이로부터 진정한 종교의 이상을 제시한다. 슐라이어마허는 종교의 내용을 개념적으로 추상화하고 체계화하는 자연종교 내지 자연신학을 신랄하게 비판하는 한편, 역사적인 실정종교를 적극적으로 옹호한다. 종교의 생명력은 보편적인 개념에 있는 것이 아니라, 종교의 내용이 그때마다 개성적으로 형태화하는 데 있기 때문이라는 것이다. 

마지막으로 {종교론}을 풀이해 놓은 "해제"에서는 종교론이 생성된 과정, 종교의 본질과 직관, 자연 · 인간성 · 종교, 종교와 종교 공동체, 종교의 실정성과 새로움의 체험, 종교론의 현재적 의미 등을 다루고 있다. 부록으로는 슐라이어마허의 "연보"와 "참고문헌"이 실려 있다. 지난 1999년에 독일 할레에서는 {종교론} 출간 200주년을 기념하여 대규모 국제학술대회가 열렸다. 이 학술대회에서는 {종교론}이 차지하는 역사적 위상과 그 현재성이 다양한 영역에서 다루어졌다. 이 책이 '신학적 철학적 계몽주의'와 관련이 있을 뿐 아니라 1800년이라는 정신사의 축을 중심으로 '낭만주의와 관념론'의 양대 영역을 관통하고 있다는 사실이 현재적 관점에서 재조명되었으며, '종교이론'과 '문화이론'과 같은 현대의 매력적인 주제에 단초를 제공하고 있다는 점이 부각되었다. 이것은 {종교론}이 오늘날에도 여전히 철학과 신학을 중심으로 생동적인 영향을 끼치고 있는 중요한 정신의 보고(寶庫)임을 확인시켜 준다. 할레 대학에서 교수 활동을 시작한 슐라이어마허는 베를린 대학의 창립에 중심적인 역할을 했으며, 베를린 학술원의 저명한 구성원으로 일했다. 철학적으로는 초기 낭만주의와 독일 관념론의 형성에 많은 영향을 끼쳤으며, 근대의 비판적 신학은 그에 의해 성취되었다. 그는 고전 문헌학자로서 플라톤 전집을 독일어로 옮긴 플라톤 해석자였으며, 당시 독일 문화계에 큰 영향을 끼친 문화 철학자였고, 국가와 교회의 개혁을 주도한 실천적 지성인이기도 했다. 

번역자 최신한은 한남대학교 철학과 교수이다. 그는 연세대학교 대학원 철학과를 졸업한 뒤 독일 튀빙겐대학교에서 철학박사학위를 받았다. 독일학술교류처(DAAD)의 초청으로 튀빙겐대학교에서 연구교수를 역임하였으며, 국제헤겔연맹과 국제슐라이어마허학회 정회원으로 소속되어 있다. 그는 철학과 관련하여 다수의 책을 집필 혹은 번역하였으며, {독백의 철학에서 대화의 철학으로}(문예출판사)는 2001년 문화관광부 선정 우수학술도서로 선정되었다. 접기
=======
평점분포    9.5
======
구매자 (1)
전체 (3)
공감순 
     
기독교의 포스터모더니즘의 시작을 알리는 합리주의 시대의 감성주의자, 그가 그립다.  구매
낭만인생 2011-07-30 공감 (1) 댓글 (0)
===
마이리뷰
==
     
미숙한 하나님에 대한 변증이다. 

미숙한 하나님에 대한 변증이다. 헤겔과 더불어 독일의 지성인으로 최고봉으로 인정받는 슐라이어마허가 하나님을 변증했다. 

책의 부제는 ‘종교를 멸시하는 교양인들을 위한 강연’이다. 
18세기 독일은 합리주의와 이성의 힘을 절대적으로 신봉하는 시기다. 
종교를 미신과 그릇된 사고에서 비롯된 불합리로 무시했다.

이러한 도전에 대해 슐라이어마허는 변증을 위한 강연을 시작한다. 그는 종교(기독교)란 계몽주의자들이 말하는 형이상학과 도덕과 구별되며, 직관과 감정이 종교의 본질이며, 무한자인 하나님과 만남이 이루어진다고 보았다. 특히 사랑 안에 두려움이 없다는 요일4:18 말씀을 강조하며 기독교야 말로 진정한 종교임을 천명한다.

그의 강조점은 교양인으로 자부하는 계몽주의자들의 인식의 틀에 갇힐 수 없으며 초월하는 타자이다. 이성으로서는 신과 접촉할 수 없고 감정을 통해 하나님을 경험할 수 있다고 주장한다.

기독교를 옹호하려했던 그의 열정은 칭찬 받아야 마땅하지만 그의 변증이 오히려 기독교를 오해하고 감정 안에 제한시키는 역효과를 가져왔다. 합리적 사유로서 하나님을 인지하는 것의 불가능성을 주장했지만, 오히려 하나님에 대한 인식을 모호하게 만들고 말았다. 후대의 신학자들은 슐라이어마허의 영향으로 하나님을 부정하는 자유주의 신학으로 발전하게 된다.


첫째 강연은 계몽주의적 종교 비판에서 종교를 옹호하고, 
둘째 강연은 종교의 본질을 규명한다. 
셋째 강연은 종교형성의 가능성과 교육에 대해 묻고 무한자를 체험해야 한다고 말한다. 
넷째 강연은 종교의 외적. 사회적 현상인 교회와 성지에 대한 기술한다. 마지막 
다섯 번째 강연은 역사 속에서 개별 종교를 분석하고 진정한 종교로서의 이상을 제시한다.

 자유주의와 비평신학의 문을 연 본서를 조심스럽게 읽을 필요가 있다.


밑줄 긋기

“종교는 자기 안에 어떠한 법전도 지니지 말아야 한다.”
“종교는 연역이 결합에 대해서는 아무것도 알지 못한다.”
“은총은 무엇인가? 모든 종교적 감정은 우주를 통해 직접적으로 영향을 받는 한에서만 종교적이기 때문에 초자연적이다.”
“우주는 모든 방식으로 직관되고 숭배되어야 한다. 무수한 형태의 종교가 가능한 것이다.”



- 접기
낭만인생 2013-10-26 공감(3) 댓글(0)
===