On Religion

" On Religion. Speeches to its cultured despisers " is one of the most important works of the theologian Friedrich Daniel Schleiermacher. It was published in 1799 and laid the foundation for its reputation as a church father of the 19th century '. Schleiermacher explains in his view of what religion is its core by: feeling and intuition of the universe. It is independent of morality and metaphysics. The beginnings of a church doctrine and a religious education teaching are discussed. On religion is considered as religion philosophical work of the early Romantic period that has shaped the modern Protestantism sustainable.

• 8.1 Primary Sources
• 8.2 secondary literature
• 8.3 Notes and references

Genesis

" On Religion " was published anonymously in 1799 publishing the first time in Berlin Unger. It was Schleiermacher's first release, which formed the basis for his fame. Why Schleiermacher his name would not bring them to the authorship in connection, he explained in a letter: "I knew [ ... ] that many would not be able to separate their metaphysics and their religion, and that those that which a keeps other metaphysics indifferent, would dare not even warm zeal for religion, and that I am not against all I would be able to explain in more detail. That is why [ ... ] I do not sezte the book my name before, and did earnestly what is mine to let him remain unknown. "

The work was already in the exhibition catalog for the Easter Fair under the title " On Religion. Announced speeches to the same enlightened haters ", but appeared but only in June of this year. Probably changed Schleiermacher and his publisher the title of the book at very short notice to make it seem less like a pamphlet in atheism. The original edition of the first edition comprised 312 pages of text.

The impetus for writing was Schleiermacher by his friend and roommate Friedrich Schlegel. First notes refer to the late summer of 1798 as the beginning of the company. While the emergence of a letter he kept especially his close friend Henriette Herz up to date. He feared much that parts of the speeches could be censored by the state, because they appeared atheistic. In this case, the print permission had not been granted. The fears were unfounded, however, and on 15 April 1799, he completed the speeches after a sleepless night. In 1803 he finally openly admitted to be the author of the speeches, after he was in 1801 publicly called such. For Schleiermacher's lifetime three more editions of the speeches published. The editions of 1806 and 1821 were partially heavily reworked, so that, for example, Spinoza's imprint was mitigated. Moreover, the notion of intuition in 1806 several times, feeling replaced '. These two issues devoted to Schleiermacher while his childhood friend Karl Gustav Brinckmann, who had the speeches after the first reading in 1800 praised effusively. In the edition of 1821 Schleiermacher added at every speech or explanations to the " Doctrine of the Faith " establish a stronger substantive terms. The third edition of 1831 experienced only predominantly stylistic corrections.

Content

In " On Religion. Speeches to its cultured despisers " Schleiermacher sets out what constitutes religion in his opinion, in its pure form and thus it is distinguished. Sub-themes of the essay provide education, church and plurality of religions dar.

The book is divided into five speeches in which the author addresses a fictional audience. Despite the great review of " feeling" in the plant it is not fanciful, but leads his readers or listeners thought out, planned and advised by his thoughts. He also goes on possible heckling and other views of the " public" one.

First Speech - Apology

In the Apology Schleiermacher defended his plan to write in this way about religion.

Schleiermacher addressed to the educated who are indeed world- arrested unpleasant, but certainly in a position to go with him the " arduous journey " into the interior of man. For religion is created in man, is a separate " province in the mind " to. That is why it is basically something other than imagine the educated among them: " The fear of an eternal essence and computing on a different world, which, you think, are the Angel of all religion, and that is you generally contrary (sic ). " Schleiermacher encourages its readers in this rejection, because religion is at the core of this view is very different. He wants to discover what religion is by its nature and calls it "that you, disregarding your attention is from anything that is otherwise called religion only to this single hints and moods that you will find your in everything they say and noble deeds god enthusiastic people. "

Schleiermacher writes that he does not fear the demise of religion, although he observed an increasing secularization in society.

Second Speech - On the Nature of Religion

The second speech is central to the book, and therefore also the longest. Schleiermacher performs here what religion is actually: View of the Universe and neither the moral nor the metaphysics committed.

Religion is completely independent of morality and metaphysics ( used in the sense of " theoretical philosophy " and Kant's " transcendental "). Both just like a veil has been placed over them. It can not be functionalized for human coexistence and also provides no direct insight. Speculating on whether there is a God, is in the area of ​​religious mythology empty. Thinking, Explaining, systemizing is part of metaphysics, religion is not rooted in the thinking. Also to action drives the religion not to. You can do anything from religion, but everything to her: " Its essence is neither thinking nor acting, but intuition and feeling. " Religion is passive contemplation of the universe, which reveals itself and the people deeply touched: " View of the Universe, I ask you friends with this term, he is the Angel of my whole speech, it is the most common and highest formula of religion (sic) ".

What Schleiermacher exactly mean by " universe " is interpreted partly different. Ulrich Barth understands by an interweaving of God and the world idea. Potepa sees the term is more a description of the eternal world, and the wholeness of the world. A religious feeling arises, however, not the mere awareness of the existence of the universe one, but when it occurs in relation to man.

The view and the feeling that triggers the intuited, are connected directly to each other at first, the "supreme flower of religion." At this moment, the universe is revealed. The stronger the feeling, the stronger the religion. Schleiermacher writes, " religion is sense and taste for the infinite. " When you have religion, meets a constantly the universe in the finite: " accept all individuals as a part of the whole, all Limited as a representation of the infinite, that is religion [ ... ]. Imagine all events in the world as acts of God, which is religion. " Miracles are everywhere if one perceives everything with religion. The idea of ​​a personal God is not necessary, but only a particular way of looking at the universe. Schleiermacher refers to Spinoza: " Spinosa! It permeated the high world spirit, the infinite was his beginning and end, the universe his only eternal love [ ... ]; He was full of religion and full of the Holy Spirit. " Spinoza is considered to pantheism arrested because he believed God was to be found in all beings, and he used the term Ἓν καὶ Πᾶν: coined (eg, unity of all ' ). Some terms have only a secondary importance, which is also true for immortality for him and also for Schleiermacher: the desire for it does not arise from the religion.

The universe can be a reveal in nature, rather still in the laws of nature, and above all in humanity, "for the world to look at and to have religion, man must have only found humanity, and he finds them only in love and through love. [ ... ] For mankind so let us draw near as we find material for the religion. Everyone contributes to represent a part of humanity as a whole. At the same time leaves the infinite, this is reflected in the finite, look for yourself sometimes: 's personality includes namely the whole spectrum of human nature itself.

A special place has Schleiermacher also the story: "History in the strictest sense is the highest object of religion, with it she raises and ends with her [ ... ] and all true history has first had a religious purpose everywhere and is of religious ideas is assumed. In their field then are the highest and most sublime conceptions of religion. "Being and Will of the individual case also reflects the history of mankind.

Third Speech - On the Formation of Religion

In the third speech, Schleiermacher develops a "religious [n ] Education Teaching ," in which it can be distinguished from the educational ideals of the Enlightenment.

Basically, education is just as impossible as in the sense of art or in the ruling administration in religion and in beholding. Instead, " the universe [ ... ] even his viewers and admirers " forms. Religion is created in man: "Man is born with the religious system like any other, and if only his mind not force unterdrükt [ ... ] is [ ... ] so it would have to develop infallible in each to his own kind." This is also reflected in the child's enthusiasm for all things supernatural and fantastic creatures - here is revealed the first impulse of religion.

Now this sense is but the child expelled a very early stage of rational and practical people. Assign only the value of what has value and rationality. Silent contemplation, the basis of religion, they consider laziness and therefore does not encourage the imagination. The pursuit of the infinite and the higher is despised and not given to the children about it. In this case, these enlightened do not even ridicule or vice versa be delivered because, " they do not despise the religion, although they destroy them ."

Schleiermacher concludes with the close connection between religion and art: "Religion and art are juxtaposed as two friendly souls whose inner relationship, whether they punish the same, but them is still unknown. "

Fourth Speech - About sociability in religion or the Church and the priesthood

In the fourth speech Schleiermacher describes what religious communities serve and there are some shortcomings in the existing church.

Religious communities form the fact that truly religious people have touched a need for exchange of information about: " Is religion once, so they must necessarily be sociable: it is in the nature of man, not only, but also quite excellent in theirs. You must confess that there is something very unnatural if the person wants that which he has created and elaborated in be closed, even in him. " This need stems from the fact " in order to legitimize itself from itself, that it is nothing but human had met "Everyone is both priest and layman, depending on which role he currently occupies in Communication -. therefore whether he listens silently or giving their own experiences. Through this exchange the religious sense is refined and elaborated.

The formation of different communities is quite natural: "Of course, those who are in one of these points most similar to also attract each other the most ." This gathering of like-minded acts such as better understanding.

Nevertheless, the Church of the despisers of religion is considered to be particularly bad: While religion is only bewilderment of the individual, seems its organized form as a danger to society. However, these large churches are mainly a place for those who still have no religion. The people here are still looking for it and want to be supposedly meet passively by the priest. So they cling to dead terms and the Church in turn prevents by rigid dogmas and mindless rituals the development of a religious individuality. But the more you have true religion, the less important is a church therefore. Then one is according to Schleiermacher, a member of the true Church. That is why religion is also not responsible for the abuses in the Großkichen - they get there so not to bear, as the owners of true religion are hard to find there. Nevertheless, the existing church is justified. You can be a point of connection between seekers and members of the true Church, thus acting as a kind of educational institution. For this, the priest would however be members of the true Church and have experienced true religion, in order to report it to. Unfortunately, this is often not the case. To remedy the situation, Schleiermacher asks why the radical separation of church and state. For by awarded by the State privileges are often found unworthy priests, who does not see through the essence of religion. Yet if the Church alone, however, the followers of the true church would collect only and are not inhibited by priests without real religion.

Fifth Speech - About the religions

In the fifth speech Schleiermacher describes how to behave in the different religions to each other.

No one can carry the whole universe in itself: "So much Everyone sees easily that no one can have religion entirely; because man is finite and religion is infinite. " Instead, each carries a certain conception of the universe in itself - depending on the viewing angle. That is why there are many religions: " So I have provided the majority of religions and just as I find them in the nature of religion justified. " Every intuition stands for itself and is not dependent on any other. So there is an inherent pluralism of religious principle, everyone wishes the true religion has even a tolerant handling of different religions together.

Here Schleiermacher attracts the positive ( existing and historical ) religions before the natural. Natural religion is nothing original, but interspersed with philosophy and morality. Who are appending, loses rapidly in shallow indifference and indeterminacy that does not conform to the spirit of true religion. The positive religions, however, are always determined from a central notion in the center. That is why there is only true religion here - even if the positive religions have attached her still good stuff. Hermann Fischer sums it up this way: "Religion is always present just as certain, because the perception of the universe is always possible only in a specific form. " For the owner of true religion so it is crucial that he also has a fixed point in their intuition. On these all later revealed beliefs can relate. Only if such a foundation has consolidated, someone has "active citizenship in the religious world ." Here you can be a member of an existing religion, when you share the same vision deeply. But you can also create a new one that has a new center in their intuition. Not even the belief in a personal God is necessary. All religions and views are thereby completely equal footing.

Nevertheless, Schleiermacher has Christianity to a prominent position. In Christianity, there is the idea of redemption and reconciliation in the center. It is aimed at a connection between man and God, and man and the universe. Jesus Christ acted as a mediator because he agreed finite and infinite in itself and both are brought together. Since this is the essence of religion is generally, has Christianity " the religion itself the object of his contemplation ." It is therefore " the religion of religions." Intermediaries such as Jesus are in the world of religions always necessary. Judaism stands in contrast: it is based according to Schleiermacher, not to reconciliation but revenge. Nevertheless, Schleiermacher concludes with remarks that "nothing is more unchristian than to seek uniformity in religion ".

Influences on the work

Schleiermacher's " Discourses on Religion " are mainly influenced by the intellectual climate of the early Romantic period and of the views of the Moravian Church.

With the speeches Schleiermacher intervened in the bustling religious-philosophical discourse of his time. He attached great importance to a representation of the religious and cultural situation of the German-speaking world, which was characterized by a progressive shift away from religion. This work was published in the highly topical. Here, Schleiermacher attempted by Potepa simultaneously on a " theoretical religion modernization program " and wanted to open by turning away from traditional ways of thinking new approaches to the subject.

The speeches about religion are regarded as fundamental religion philosophical work of romance. Schleiermacher was the beginning of his writing process already preacher at the Charité in Berlin and had many early Romantics in his circle of friends. In the spirit of the young romantic he complains about the enlightenment to lead to rationalizing flattening and to care only for the here and now. Fischer concludes: "Those wretched generality 'and' empty sobriety ' [ ... ] the Enlightenment are outbid by a religion of feeling, the heart, of feeling, coming into the individuality and subjectivity to their right ." Here Schleiermacher replaces, applied from the outside ' truth of the Bible through an inner truth in the religious, individual feel.

Schleiermacher granted Kant's moral argument for God a rejection when he emphasizes the importance of religion, which is independent of moral considerations. Nevertheless, Schleiermacher respects by Ulrich Barth, the " epochal [n ] emancipation performance that has accomplished the Enlightenment at its core ."

With the " turn to art Schleiermacher takes the early romantic program of universalization of art on ," writes Andreas Arndt. Other ideas of Schleiermacher are influenced by Romanticism, the emphasis on the individual experience in religion or his church theory. Later, Schleiermacher increasingly distant from the romantic influence.

The early influence of the Moravian Pietism gave Schleiermacher's understanding of religion in the speeches of an openness to modernity. They stood out from catholicizing inclinations (eg cult of Mary, hierarchical organization ) later Romantics. This includes the view of religion as an object of very own experience and from the church as a place of communication about religious experiences. Moreover, Schleiermacher moved from the Moravian pietism his deep understanding of Jesus Christ as the absolute center of Christianity. The demand that any connection between church and state to cut also corresponds Moravian ideals and the same time an assent to the ideals of the French Revolution.

Also by other thinkers Schleiermacher has taken stuff in the speeches. So his religion concept is strongly influenced by Spinoza's teachings. Spinoza rejected the existence of a personal God from largely. He meant to find God in all beings, which earned him the accusation of pantheism. With this idea of ​​God, his concept of infinity, which was significant for Schleiermacher combined. Later, however, he distanced himself from Spinoza. This Spinozism Sympathy is also found in Goethe, Herder and Lessing, and is an expression of theism crisis that showed up at this time in a higher education. Schleiermacher wanted to catch the speeches.

Fichte's philosophy of the self led to Schleiermacher's discussion on the importance of individuality. The Atheism dispute to spruce up was based on the rejection of a personal God. Schleiermacher shared the idea that the desire for immortality has nothing to do with religion, but is purely selfish motivation, also with Goethe, Lessing and Fichte. The art of reasoning, as Schleiermacher, it operates in the speeches, in turn sprang from Plato's model.

Reception

The criticism of Schleiermacher's contemporaries to " On Religion " was very different. Even with the early Romantics was no agreement about it.

After the appearance of the Speeches on Religion first there was no great public response. Schleiermacher's friend Schlegel devoted to them in the fall of 1799 as the first anonymous mostly positive in the journal Athenaeum, referring in several aphorisms it. However, he disliked the lack of objectivity of the work. The theologian Johannes Daniel Falk commented in 1801, however, the first derogatory about the " chatter ". Later, Hegel and Jean Paul brought ( praising and blaming at the same time ) the language on it. Generally, many reviewers praised the originality of the work, but also criticized individual views, as Schleiermacher's separation of religion from any pulses for moral action or of rationality. Inaccuracies displeased, for example, when the concept of religion or in the separation of God and the universe. So wrote in 1803 the teacher Johann Gottlieb Rätze, it conquer " bey of all excellence, truth and certainty, much vague, erroneous, one-sided and contradictory in it."

Most critical expressed strong supporters of the Enlightenment movement, such as Daniel Jenischhaus. Representatives of the Romantic movement were voted overall course friendly. Thus Novalis had the speeches epochal size and Schleiermacher called the " heartbeat of the new age ". Only he gave Schleiermacher therefore his undivided support.

Schleiermacher's friends and acquaintances praised the speech as a new pattern portrayal of the religious conception of romance. Schlegel reported in a letter to Schleiermacher also assume that Goethe had borrowed his copy. After the first speeches he had first been quite enthusiastic, but has become increasingly averse at the end, the Christian appeared the work. Friedrich bag, a good friend of Schleiermacher, accusing him in a letter, however, the hypocrisy, because he would come up as a theologian, a Christian and a preacher while, " holds the universe for the deity, which religion is nothing more than intuition of the universe; the well does not recognize the link between religion and morality; of all motives to goodness that are hergenommen from religious terms, scorned and ridiculed, who wants to know of any gratitude towards an invisible ever-living benefactor something --- what is such a preacher for a regret worthy man! " George Spalding assured Schleiermacher, however, by letter, to be convinced of his sincere piety.

Such opinions are examples of the great controversies of the work that continues today.

In the 19th century version of the fourth edition was nevertheless still reissued ten times, even though the speeches were significantly suppressed in the reception of Schleiermacher other publications This only changed with the new edition of the original version in 1899 by Rudolf Otto. In the 20th century so dominated the text of the first edition in the reception. This original version was published until now in more than 30 editions. The speeches are rezipiert again especially since the Second World War.

Position in the work of the author

The speeches documented by Hermann Fischer " the romantic religion and Christianity understanding of the young Schleiermacher and are probably become his most famous work. " 's Speeches also form the foundation for its reputation as a Father of the Church of the 19th century.

" On Religion " Schleiermacher 's first publication. From the time before a few sermons from Schlobitten and Landsberg, which were later published in his collection of sermons exist. Shortly after, already in January 1800 he released his next major work, which was also interspersed romantic: " monologues. A New Year's gift. " After that, he was not only a religion theorists, but also as an ethicist. In the same year " Familiar Letters on Schlegel Lucinda " and a year appeared on Schleiermacher's Plato translation, which was planned with Schlegel, but was realized alone.

In addition to the speeches are considered important works of Schleiermacher: the monologues (1800), the dialectic and " The Christian faith according to the principles of the Protestant church shown in connection " ( the Doctrine of Faith 1821 /22), where the centrality of the historical redeemer and mediator Jesus Christ is still running. Although certainly less rezipiert, the doctrine applies as a true life's work of Schleiermacher, which the speeches had to adjust later.

Effective history

The effect of history of " On Religion " extends to the 21st century.

The speeches were Schleiermacher's contemporaries did not remain unaffected. So spruce represents the " Broad of the present age " and the "Instructions" later Schleiermacher very similar conception of religion, which is aimed also against Orthodox tendencies and partly against the Enlightenment.

Even Ludwig Feuerbach (1804-1872) has received for his theory of projection pulses of Schleiermacher's speeches, their thoughts on taking up the doctrine. Fischer writes: "In Schleiermacher's understanding of religion as an expression of, the feeling of absolute dependence ' [ a term from the Doctrine of the Faith ] has Feuerbach the ultimate convergence of theology to anthropology seen [ ... ]; about Schleiermacher also going, you have only to realize that the man is not from God but from nature and from its own nature is dependent. " The critics of religion Feuerbach thus partially agreed with Schleiermacher. The secret of theology is anthropology. Only the people were not committed to the universe, but rather felt the inadequacy of their own, they did create a god.

As the most important Schleiermacher 's critics considered the theologian Karl Barth (1886-1968), the - will be awarded the title, Father of the Church of the 20th century ' - as the antithesis to Schleiermacher. He's the turn of Schleiermacher to anthropology in turn objected to. His general allegation stating that Schleiermacher in his theology elevates men to the measure of all things and God assigns too low a priority. This is followed by more allegations: Schleiermacher 's theology had turned into a feeling, consciousness and cultural theology in which God no space is left. Barth saw the truth of Christianity in Schleiermacher veiled because he in no way not discuss that people need salvation through Jesus Christ. For this reason he also felt Schleiermacher's Christology as inappropriate. Nevertheless, Barth was not unaware of its tremendous importance, " belongs at the head of a theology of the latest time and for all time includes the name of Schleiermacher and none beside him. " Nevertheless, he was not recommending him as a theological model.

Even more Schleiermacher was criticized by the theologian Emil Brunner. Herrmann Fischer summarizes: " After Brunner Schleiermacher has falsified the theological concepts in psychology; Grace is no longer awarded, but devious. " Schleiermacher not propagating the faith in God, but to man. Other major theologians like Bultmann and Friedrich Gogarten joined the criticism. Only since the mid-50s is no longer overshadowed by this devastating critique, so that there will be a new orientation and new appreciation of Schleiermacher's work.

To date, Schleiermacher's Speeches and the Doctrine of the Faith by Ulrich Barth have " contributed the most to the genesis and development of the modern Protestantism ". That's why he called Schleiermacher first release as " manifesto of liberal Protestantism " and stressed that without them the whole piety development of Protestantism in the 19th and 20th century would not have been possible. Hans Joachim Rothert refers to the continuing relevance: "a work which, as this is his spiritual power has been able to obtain such unbroken, testifies for itself "

Hermann Fischer raises especially Schleiermacher's importance for the ( systematic ) theology out: ". Nor era that would have profiled their own understanding of faith and theology not in the mode of consent, a critical analysis or rejection of his systematic approach" The speeches were always with by crucial. In philosophy, the work unfolded, however, not nearly as strong effect.