Full Text for Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence (Text)
Jnking so many
streams of heter ogeneous thought converged that it is impossible
for anyone to claim definitely that he was just this or that. His
theology represents multa in multis.1 ) Living at a time when crass
rationalism was still in vogue, he determined to end rationalism's
arid intellectualism; yet he himself remained a rationalist in the
fullest sense of the word, inasmuch as his whole theology was
1) Cf. Dr. Carl Stange's illuminating article "Die geschichtliche Be-
deutung Schleiermachel's" in Zeitschrift ftter systematische Theologie,
J ahrgang 1933/34, pp. 691 fl.
74 Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence
determined, not by Scripture but by his own subjective thinking,
which in the last analysis mal wm·· ~d reason. Le never
quite cast off his Reformed heritage, and yet he sharply repudiated
orthodox Calvinistic doctrine. A romanticist, influenced by Fried-
rich Schlegel, trying to instill new life and vigor into the decadent
ethical categories of his day, he refused, nevertheless, to follow the
call of theological romanticism and opposed to it his own specula-
tive system of independent realistic thought. Renouncing Kant,
he still absorbed into his speculations important Kantian funda-
mentals. A pantheist in his religio-philosophical speculations,
deeply affected by Spinoza, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and others,
he, nevertheless, in his pastoral practice so emphasized traditional
dualism that the charge of pauthel:>m raised against him has been
declared unfair. An idealist, delighting in Platonist philosophy, he
none the less proved himself an ethical realist. A philosopher of
no mean rating, he insisted, nevertheless, that religion and phi-
losophy must be kept independent of each other. A mystic, he yet
i~maL_~ an __ ~lV1S., rith '~een _ acH 81 understanding of the
need", of ·;~he ChtiTCh of },is day. An £u dent patriot, h::: still fought
the an+l.')riti"" to f'rl."m }>~ was supposed to be in SUb)eCLion.
A strict moralist, he engaged, nevertheless, i..'l a dubious love af
with a married woman and demanded that she divorce her husband.
Forever retaining his inherited Moravian penchant for personal
piety, he, nevertheless, defended the immoral novel Lucinde of his
romanticist friend Schlegel. Schleiermacher thus represents a the-
ological paradox, complex and yet again extremely simple in his
basic theological premises. All Biblical theologians are agreed that
he was the great non-Christian of his time, posing in his day and
ours as the great Christian 2) who did much to revive and revitalize
Christianity. But the Cl:-,ristianity for which he stood was not the
Christianity of the Holy Scriptures and of the Ecumenical Confes-
sions. It was the non-Christianity of Modernism.3 )
3
Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher was born in Breslau
on November 21, 1768. His father, a member of the Reformed
Church, served for lUealY yecuS as an army chaplQin. His grand-
father,4) also a Reformed minister, had for many years championed
the enthusiastic, chilia~th;;, ·",·'tualhr ryerverse speculati'Jns of the
2) He has been called the "Reformer of the 19th century:' F. Pieper,
Christliche Dogmatik, I, 128, 145.
3) Doctrines, according to Schleiermacher, are secondary, they beh;
no more than th:: "accounts of the religious affections set forth in
speech." Cf. Knudson, The Doctrine of God, p. 50.
4) D. Schenkel, Friedrich Schieiermacher, "In the veins of his an-
cestors flowed religious blood that was easily made to boil up."
Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence 75
religious neurotic Elias Eller until his fraud was exposed. If H . R.
Mackintosh 5) claims that there is in Schleiermacher's make-up
"little material for the psychologist," he overlooks the fact that
Schleiermacher's heredity perhaps has fully as much to do with his
theological development as his environment. He was a child of his
time, but also the heir of family traits that had much to do in
shaping his life and thought. He received his early education at
Breslau and Pless, but obtained no decisive influences from his
training until he attended the schools of the pietistic Moravians,
first at Niesky and later at Barby. Finding himself in conflict with
the theological views of the Moravians,6) he, in 1787, attended the
University of Halle, where for two years he studied the philosophies
of Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and the Leibniz-W olffian school, being
especially influenced by Plato. Leaving Halle in 1789, he stayed for
a while with an uncle of his at Drossen, near Frankfort on the
Oder and in 1790 passed the church examination in theology.
Between 1790 and 1793 he held a position as tutor in the household
of Count Dohna, a cultured, pious family, where (as he later de-
clared) he learned the nature of humanity and freedom, which were
vital factors in the development of his ideas on morality and religion.
Lll 1793 he became a member of the Gedike Seminary at Berlin,
and in 1794 he received a church appointment in Landsberg, where
he was ordained and did ministerial work, preaching regularly and
translating the sermons of Professor Hugh Blair of Edinburgh and
of the English minister John Fawcett. Having studied Jacobi's
Letters on the Doctrine of Spinoza, he was moved to write some
essays of his own on Spinoza. Constantiy studying and writing,
Schleiermacher soon became known in wider circles, and in 1795
he was appointed Reformed pastor at the Charite at Berlin, which
he served till 1802. Here he continued to write on philosophy and
religion, publishing in 1797 his Reden ueber Religion (Addresses
on Religion) and in 1800 his Monologe (Soliloquies), joined the ro-
mantic circle led by the Schlegels, associated himself with Henrietta
Herz, a Jewess (a relation making him the object of much gossip),
defended Schlegel's indecent Lucinde, and became entangled in
a compromising love affair with Eleonore Grunow, the wife of a
Berlin pastor, who, however, in the end, despite his pleas remained
loyal to her husband. These experiences led to his "exile" at Stolpe
in Pomerania, where he spent two unhappy years, working hard to
5) Types of Modern Theology, pp.31 and 32.
6) His letters to his father show that at first he was in agreement
with the pietistic trends of the Unitas fratrum. D. Schenkel, Friedrich
Schleiermacher, p. 15 ff. - Lie. Hans Scheele: "Here perhaps Schleier-
Macher was influenced by his Moravian youth impressions; here are in-
fluences of a Christian profession, which greatly rejoiced in the Savior
and was sure of Him, and which lived in his new life and of his new life."
Die Theorie von Christus als dem zweiten Adam bei Schleiermacher, p. 58.
76 Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence
forget his Berlin associations. He studied Schelling, prepared A.
translation and comm.entary v~ ~lato's VV'.irks, and comp;;;:3d a ge
eral historical and critical study in ethics (Outlines of a Critique
of Previous The01'ies of Ethics). In 1804 Schleiermacher joined
the faculty of the University at Halle, where he lectured and wrote
indefatigably on various theological subjects and in 1806 was
elected University pastor. However, when in the winter of 1806
to 1807 Halle was taken and plundered by the French and Schleier-
macher himself was relieved of his private possessions, he, in 1807,
withdrew to Berlin, where he continued his lectures and library
work. In 1808 he married a young widow, Henriette von Willich,
nee Muehlenfels, the former wife of a Berlin pastor. This mar-
riage supplied him with the required emotional stability. In 1809
he was appointed Reformed pastor of Trinity Church, and when
in 1810 the University of Berlin was established, SchleiermachE
was appointed professor on the theological faculty, De Wette an
Marheinecke being his associates. The Halle experience had con-
verted Schleiermacher into an ardent patriot. and from 1808 to
18 e del - :ed n of 1 - me ~ :1 inflw to ths cause
German freedom. IiI: 1:I1so WUL'Aed th·t!!essly for the union of the
Reformed and the Lutheran churches in Germany and for the
freedom of the Church from the authority of the State in matters
concerning itself.7l Though constantly at variance with civil
authorities, he remained eminently popular with his students and
church members, and his almost phenomenal capacity for lecturing,
writing, preaching, pastoral and social pursuits, political activities,
and the like continued unabated until his death on Feb. 12, 1834.
Never in rugged health, slightly deformed, by nature highly emo-
tional, he made himself, nevertheless, so useful to the world of his
day that his funeral has been described in the following laudatol"J
words: "On the 15th of February, 1834, a funeral procession was
seen moving through the streets of Berlin the like of which that
capital had rarely before witnessed. The coffin, covered with a
black pall and simply decorated with a large copy of the Bible,
was borne on the shoulders of twelve students of the University,
thirty-six of the most robust of whom had voluntee:': to plr-
form, alternately, this pious service. After these cam", .. train of
mourners on foot, extending upwards of a mile in length, and
these were followed by one hundred mourn=----_o coacL , heac' '
by the equipage of the King and the Crown Prince. Along the
whole line traversed by the procession dense crowds 1)£ sympathiz-
ing spectators had gathered, while in the cemetery, beyond the
gates of the city, similar crowds were assembled; and on every
countenance might be read the fact that the individual borne to
7) Cf. Brandt, Philosophy of Schleierrrwcher, p. 11.
Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence 77
the grave was one of those representative men in whom are con-
centrated, as it were, in a focus the moral and intellectual life of
the nation and the period to which they belong and who become,
in consequence, centers of new light and diffusers of new and
vivifying warmth. Such was indeed the case; for it was Friedrich
Ernst Schleiermacher, whom by a spontaneous movement the
capital of Protestant Germany was thus honoring in death." 8)
In a subsequent paragraph the biographer says: "During a quarter
century Schleiermacher had exercised in that city the double func-
tion of a teacher at the University and in the Church; and approv-
ing himself a fearless citizen in times of imminent peril and an
inspired preacher during a period of great religious indifference,
he at a most critical juncture in the history of Prussia contributed
more than any other individual to keep alive in all classes the
pride of nationality and the love of independence, and to awaken
religious earnestness and quickening moral sentiments. Ever ready
to sacrifice himself in the interest not only of his country, but of
the whole German nation, then bending under the yoke of F rance,
his example had acted contagiously in Berlin more especially, where
his influence was supreme, and had sustained in the people that
determination to liberate themselves when an opportunity offered,
which was ultimately so nobly carried out, 'His fresh, mighty,
ever-cheerful spirit,' says a contemporary, 'had the effect of a
courageous army during the period of greatest depression; and the
energies which he set in motion were not isolated and superficial,
but were the deepest and noblest in the human breast.' Children
crowded to his religious lessons, men and women of the highest
culture hung upon his lips when he addressed them from the
pulpit and in private life clung to him with reverent affection, while
the hundreds of students who flocked in yearly from all parts of
Germany to attend his philosophical and theological lectures, car-
ried away by the extraordinary influence of his individuality, as-
sumed the character of disciples rather than of pupils. In this
way, as well as through his writings, his influence had spread
throughout the whole of Protestant Germany and attained a height
rarely, if ever, equaled in modern times; while over the theologians
of the rest of the Protestant world also the opinions of this highly
gifted man exercised no inconsiderable sway." 9)
4
Of the many works of Schleiermacher his Ueber die Religion:
Reden an die Gebildeten unter ihren Vemechtern (Concerning Re-
ligion: Addresses to the Educated Among Its Despisers) and his
popular Der Christliche Glaube nach den Grundsaetzen der evan-
8) The Life of Schleiel'macher as Unfolded in His Autobiography
and Lettel'S. Translated from the German by Frederica Rowan, pp. IX fi.
9) Ibid.
78 Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence
gelischen Ki1·che im Zusammenhang dargesteLLt (The Christian
Faith Systematically Presented According to the Principles of the
Evangelical Church) set forth with sufficient clearness his doctrines
concerning religion and theology. The first work appeared in 1799,
but was re-published by Schleiermacher in 1806, 1821, and 1831,
and more recently by Professor Otto (3d edition, 1913) . The first
edition of The Christian Faith appeared in 1821-1822 and again in
1830 in an enlarged revision. In his Addresses Schleiermacher
develops his basic ideas on the nature and value of religion. Among
the educated Germans, he contends, religion is commonly despised,
while among the French and English it is held in honor. This leads
him to address them on the "Mysteries of Humanity" (die Myste-
rien der Menschheit). The essence of religion is neither thought
nor action, but intuition and feeling. And such intuition (An-
schauung) regards the Universe. For the term Universe Schleier-
macher uses also such expressions as the "Heavenly" (das Himm-
lische) , the "Eternal and Holy Destiny" (das ewige und heilige
Schicksal), the "Exalted World Spirit" (der hohe W eltgeist) , the
"Spirit of the Universe" (der Geist des Universums), the "Eternal
Providence" (die ewige Vorsehung) , the "Living Deity" (die le-
bendige Gottheit) . The thought of immor tality in the sense of a
life in another world, he believes, does not belong to religion.
Intuition of the Universe is effected by the Universe itself. Every
intuition is connected with feeling, and the strength of the feelings
determines the degree of religiousness. The real origin of religion
is effected in a person by an experience, which is like a ''holy
embrace" or a "virginal kiss." The Universe is reflected in nature,
much more clearly, however, in man's inner life. In his inner life
everyone experiences humanity, for every person is a "compend of
humanity." Schleiermacher says: "Let us go to humanity ; ther e
we find material for r eligion." The religious feelings in man
Schleiermacher describes as a "pious reverence for the Eternal and
Invisible," humility, gratitude, joy, confidence, and trust. Religion
is not brought about by doctrine, but in such a way that man, who
is born with a religious disposition, realizes and actualizes it. If re-
ligion exists, it must be social. Religion creates the most perfect
result of human sociability, an "academy of priests," "a chorus of
friends," "a union of brethren." This unity of religious people is
different from the historical Church, whose faults are to be ex-
plained by its union with the State. Hence the Church must be
freed from the State. Religion must individualize itself, and this
it has accomplished in the various positive religions. In Christ
the truly divine is the glorious clearness, into wl>..ich the great idea
which He had come to represent, namely, that everything finite
needs a higher mediation, to unite itself with the Deity, was de-
Schleiennacher, His Theology and Influence 79
veloped. "His consciousness of the originality of his religion and
of the originality of its purpose and power to impart itself (to
others) and thus to create religion was at the same time the con-
sciousness of his mediatorship and of deity. But Christ never
claimed to be the only Mediator. Christianity therefore does not
desire to be the only religious manifestation among men ruling
forever, for Christ has pointed to the truth which should come
after him." Brief as these statements are, they, nevertheless, show
Schleiermacher's unchristian fundamentals. Schleiermacher re-
pudiates the Holy Scriptures and every specific Christian doctrine
in the traditional sense of the orthodox Church. In view of the
Christian terminology which he consistently used, this judgment
may seem harsh; but, after all, it is correct. By means of Chris-
tian expressions Schleiermacher in reality taught pantheistic pa-
ganism though he has been heralded as the "Reformer of the
19th Century." 10) Dr. F. Pieper's verdict is not too severe:
"Schleiermacher, the 'father' of the theology of self-consciousness
in the 19th century, denies the guilt of sin and the removal of the
guilt of sin through the vicarious atonement of Christ, the eternal
deity of Christ, the Holy Trinity, in short, all fundamentals of the
Christian faith." 11) A more detailed study of his doctrines accord-
ing to his dogmatic work The Christian Faith will prove this verdict
to be founded on fact.
5
Schleiermacher's mysticism. - F . H. Jacobi (1743-1819, "a pa-
gan in reason, a Christian in feelings") defined religion as "faith
founded on feeling in the reality of the ideal." Schelling defined
religion as "the union of the finite with the infinite, or as God's
coming to self-consciousness in the world." 12) These definitions were
adopted Lfl a slightly modified form by Schleiermacher, who defined
religion as the "feeling of absolute dependence upon God." By
that very definition of religion Schleiermacher manifests himself
as a pantheistic mystic; for the God whom he had in mind is not
the personal, supramundane God, but only the "supreme Cau-
sality." Strong rightly explains his view thus: "Schleiermacher
held that nature not only is grounded in the divine Causality, but
fully expresses that Causality; there is no causative power in God
for anything that is not real and actual. This doctrine does not
essent ially differ from Spinoza's natura naturans and natura natu-
rata." 13i Hodge interprets his view as follows: "It is the funda-
mental principle of Schleiermacher's theory that religion resides
10) Cf. Pieper, Christliche Dogmatik, I, p. 145.
11) Christliche Dogmatik, I, p . 136
12) Hodge, System.atic Theology, I, p. 21.
13) Systematic Theology, I, p. 287.
80 Schleiennacher, His Theology and Influence
not in the intelligence or the will or active powers, but in the
sensibility. It is a form of feeling, a sense of absolute dependence.
Instead of being, as we seem to be, individual, separate free agents,
originating our own acts, we recognize ourselves as a part of a
great whole, determined in all things by the great whole, of which
we are a part. We find ourselves as finite creatures over against
an infinite Being, in relation to whom we are as nothing. The
Infinite is everything; and everything is only a manifestation of
the Infinite." 14) Again: "Religion consists in feeling, . .. i. e., the
consciousness that the finite is nothing in the presence of the In-
finite - the individual in the presence of the universe. This con-
sciousness involves the unity of the one and all, of God and
man." 15)
Schleiermacher's doctrine of revelation. Since Schleiermacher
teaches the absolute immediacy between man and God, there can
be no revelation in the historic sense by God to sinful man.
Revelation consists not in the communication of divine, spiritual
truths to men, but only in providential influences by which a re-
ligious life is awakened in the soul. Schleiermacher does not
claim for the Christian religion supreme absoluteness. The feeling
of dependence upon God is found in the primitive pagan as well
as in the enlightened Christian, and so absoluteness of religion is
only a matter of degree according as this sense of dependence upon
God reveals itself in an Llldividual or a community. Nor can there
be any inspiration in the Christian sense; there can be only in-
tuitions of eternal truths differing with the degree of a person's
religious feeling. Christianity, subjectively considered, consists in
intuitions occasioned by the appearance of Christ. Christian the-
ology is the logical analysis and logical elucidation of such in-
tuitions. The Bible has no causative or normative authority at
all; it is only a means of awakening in believers the religious
intuitions experienced by the Apostles, so that they obtain sim-
ilar intuitions of divine thingS.16) It is not without reason that
Schleiermacher rejected the old-fashioned term Loci Communes
and substituted for this time-honored expression as the title of
his dogmatic Der Christliche Glaube or Die Glaubensleh1'e.m By
this new term he declared his renunciation of the Schriftprinzip.
Schleiermacher's doctrine of the Trinity. Having rejected
Christian theism, Schleiermacher, of course, had no room for the
Christian doctrine of the Triune God. To him God in Himself
is the Father; God in Christ is the Son, and God in the Church,
14) Hodge, Systematic Theology, I, p. 65 f.
15) Systematic Theology, I, p . 173.
16) Cf. Hodge, Systematic Theology, I, p. 66.
17) Cf. Strong, Systematic Theology, I, p.42.
Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence 81
the Holy Spirit. His concept of God is at best Sabellian, though
his view of God was lov. _ th_a th_. of ~..lbellius. God is the
"absolute In...~'lity" (die einfache and absolute Unendlichkeit), not
a person, but simply "Being" with the single attribute of omnipo-
tence. Other divine attributes express not what exists in God, but
the effects which the absolute Infinity produces in us. The at-
tributes of divine wisdom, goodness, holiness, and the like, simply
mean that the "Supreme Causality" produces these attributes in us.
This denial of the reality of the divine attributes is only the result
of Schleiermacher's mystico-pantheistic doctrine of the divine
immanence.
Schleiermacher's doctrine of man. According to Schleier-
m~chel' n-.011 is " .. ot h "rea~"'.Le, \.. ... ",atc";' iJy Gud ir .... lis uwn image,
but the "spirit" (der Geist, God) in the way, or form, in which
it comes to self-consciousness on our earth (der Geist, der nach
Art und Weise unserer Erde zum Selbstbewusstsein sich gestaltet).
Man thus is an integral part of the world, but as such also an
integral part of God. 'I'here is in man a consciousness of the world,
a ~ ~ of we] ms' llsn :, b als( G< COIl ow ss, ,ch
is God in us in the form of consciousness. Schleiermacher rejects
the Bibli,-l ar . unt _~ a _:.ttw. :.tte!t. :~ati;" dSSb .• mg that man's
original state was not at all ideally perfect, since his God-con-
sciousness was not sufficiently strong to keep in check his sel£- or
world-consciousness. The ideal state, in which the God-conscious-
ness becomes victorious in man, is to be reached by development,
or evolution. Schleiermacher frequently uses the term flesh, but
by this he does not mean the corrupt fallen nature in the Christian
sense of the term, but man's consciousness so far as it is related
to the world, or his self-consciousness. So also he uses the term
spirit, not in the sense of the Holy Spirit or of the new man
wrought by the Holy Spirit in the believer through faith, but God
in us, or the mere Gottesbewusstsein. Sin, in Schleiermacher's
theology, is not the transgression of the divine Law, but man's
feeling of the lack of the absolute control of the Absolute Being
in him. The conviction that the "Highest Causality" really should
rule supleme in him becomes the sense of guilt. From this feeling
of sin and guilt arises man's feeling of the need of redemption.
From all fhis it is obvious how superficial Schleiermacher's system
of theology is. God to him is the mere Cause of things. Man is
a revelation of this Cause, Su;. i" a feel.illg in man that he is not
fully controlled by the "Supreme Cause." So also religion can
mean nothing more in his theology t.han sLmply man's acknowledg-
ment of God as the "absolute Bei '1.g" and of himself as a form in
which this Causality is revealed. Schleiermacher's mystic pan-
S
82 Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence
theism therefore does not go much beyond that of Hindu Brahman-
ism. Schleiermacher ultimately deifies man himself.
Schleiermache1"s doctrine of redemption.18 ) To fit the idea of
redemption into his system of absolute dependence, Schleiermacher
must render his conception of redemption as superficial as that of
sin. Redemption to him is nothing more than the giving of com-
plete control to the God-consciousness in man. To accomplish this,
man needs the stimulus of Jesus, who is the Ideal Man, and in
whom the God-consciousness was supreme from the beginning.
Man is redeemed by becoming like Christ, that is, by letting Christ's
God-consciousness actuate, strengthen, and make perfect his own
God-consciousness. In plain words, man becomes redeemed by
imitating C.hrist or by doing good works after His eXanlple. With
this scheme of theology the traditional doctrine of divine wrath and
punishment, of course, does not agree. Sin and guilt are real only
in our own consciousness or in our subjective apprehension of
them. Like pain and pleasure, so also right and wrong are only
subjective states or vices. Man is sinful and guilty only in his own
feeling, not in the judgment of God. Sin, therefor e, does not exist
as an objective reality. At best it is an imperfection, a weakness,
a having not yet attained; but there is nothing culpable about this.
Schleiermacher's system of theology has some things in COID..11l0n
with Mrs. Eddy's pantheistic system, known as Christian Science.
SchleiermacheT's doctrine of Christ. To Schleiermacher re-
ligion (Christianity) is not a system of doctrine or a discipline;
but a living, which has nothing to do with either the Law or the
Gospel. This new living the Christian believer owes to Christ,
who, though he is nothing else than a mere man who came into
existence through his natural birth at Bethlehem, still is God in
fashion as a man, just as man is God's mode of existence on earth.
In Adam, God was only incompletely formed; in the second Adanl,
in Christ, God is completely formed, for in Him the idea of
humanity is fully realized. In ordinary men the God-consciousness
is overcome largely by his world-consciousness; but not so in
Christ, in whom the conflict between God-consciousness and
world-consciousness was overcome. How the miracle of the exist-
ence of such an Ideal Man could happen, Schleiermacher does not
explain; but he accepts it as a fact, just as he accepts it as a fact
that God manifests Himself in man. The difference between Christ
and every other man is, after all, only one of degree. Christ's
redeeming value and work therefore consists not in what He taught
or did, but in what He is. As the Ideal Man He awakens the
dormant God-consciousness in man to fuller activity and gives it
18) Cf. "Schleiermacher's View of the Essence and Origin of Sin" in
The Ch1'istian Doctrine of S in, by Dr. Julius Mueller, pp. 341 ff.
Schleiennacher, His Theology and Influence 83
victory over his self-consciousness. In view of this, Christ's aton-
ing death, resurrection, ascension, session, and triumphant reign
are of no import whatever. Good men have attested these things,
but they have no religious value. What matters is the new life
which is awakened by Christ's overwhelming God-consciousness.
That is the constituting principle of the Church, and it is by union
with the Church that this life passes over to individual believers.
Schleiermacher's doctrine of the Church. Since according to
Schleiermacher man is "the existence-form" of God on earth, there
is properly speaking no ecclesia militans and triumphans in the
Christian sense. Schleiermacher admitted no personal salvation
and personal existence of man after death. According to his view,
all philosophy is against such a doctrine, and his whole system
is a denial of it, though he says that the Christian must admit it
on the authority of Christ. What, then, does the Church mean to
Schleiermacher? Nothing more than a "Christ-redeemed" human
society in which the God-consciousness has gained the ascendancy
and in which the individual gains the ascendancy over his own
self-consciousness ever more and more. Schleiermacher'!' <:tate-
ments regarding the Church, visible as well as invisible, are
nebulous and unsatisfactory. Even R. H. Gruetzmacher admits that
his presentation of the doctrine of eschatology is of lesser value
than are his other presentations.19) As a matter of fact, he was not
much concerned with the eschatological aspect of the Church; what
was of concern to him was the strengthening of the God-conscious-
ness in humanity. Relieved of all metaphysical values, Schleier-
macher's theology ultimately became totally ethical and social,20)
Other doctrines in summary. It would lead us too far to state
all theological views of Schleiermacher in detail. Let it be said,
however, that he treated all other doctrines of the Christian faith in
the same manner as those described above, fitting them into his
theological system, by depriving them of their orthodox Christian
content. Thus, for example, Christ did not actually die on Calvary,
but His death was a mere sham death. Christ did not atone for
our sins, but He died to induce men to struggle for the ascendancy
of the God-consciousness within them. In other words, Schleier-
macher championed a mystical theory of atonement. Schleier-
macher's pantheistic system does not admit prayer in the Christian
19) Textbuch zur systematischen Theologie und ihrer Geschichte,
page 30.
20) E. J. F. Arndt: "There is u...,iversal humanity; but that universal
humanity expresses itself in numerous ways. It individuates itself; and
each individual expression has its own wor th. The individual's life task
is to become, to express ever more clear ly his unique self; and in doing
so he expresses essential humanity. Ethical Theory of Schleiermacher,
p . 24. Theological Magazine of the Ev. Synod of North America, J an., 1934.
84 Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence
sense; it rather excludes prayer. An impersonal infinite Cause
cannot hear prayer. Schleiermacher regarded the devil as nothing
more than the "idea of evil"; there is no personal devil, as there
is no sin. Schleiermacher's doctrine of sin renders repentance im-
possible, since man has nothing to repent of; and because he denies
the atoning death of Christ, his theology prevents a true and living
faith in the Christian sense. Schleiermacher's attitude toward the
Holy Scriptures is well expressed in a letter to his friend Jacobi,
in which he says: "The Bible is the original interpretation of the
Christian faith-consciousness and for this remains so permanent
that always it must be better understood and developed. This
right of development I, as a Protestant theologian, will not permit
anyone to curb. However, most as::mredly I am of the opinion that
the dogmatic language, as it has been developed since the time of
Augustine, is so profound and rich that it is adequate for possible
use of philosophy or dogmatics as long as it is used reasonably." 21)
This "reasonable handling" of Scripture was illustrated by Schleier-
mache;: in his rejection of the proof-text method and its inter-
prL._.~,m a'_ ~ ~ . :ling ts sc or tl ty. elen er VI
indeed as much of a rationalist as he was a mystic and enthusiast.
{;
But why, then, his vast and permanent influence upon both
positive and liberal theologians? One can readily understand why
such extreme Liberals as A. Schweizer, De Wette, Biedermann,
Pfleiderer, and others should follow Schleiermacher in his destruc-
tive theology, but it is hard to see why such conservative theo-
logians as Nitzsch, J. Mueller, Tholuck, Twesten, and even Julius
Koestlin should regard themselves, to a certain degree at least, as
his followers. Still more amazing perhaps is the fact that Charles
Hodge, after having shown that Schleiermacher's whole theology
was destructive, remarks: "Can we doubt that he is singing those
praises now? To whomsoever Christ is God, St. John assures us
Christ is a Savior:' 22) Hodge, of course, knew Schleiermacher
personally and, as he says, often attended his church, in which
hy:rnns were SUll.g that were "alvvays evangelical and spiritual in an
eminent degree, filled with praise and gratitude to our Redeemer."
Hodge personally seems to have esteemed Schleiermacher very
highly in spite of his unorthodox tenets. 23 ) And his statenlent that
Schleiermacher may now be singing the praises of Christ L'l
21) C£. Horst Stephan, Geschichte der evangelischen Theologie, p. 9:30
22) Cf. Hodge, Systematic Theology, 11, p.440,
23) Some of Schleiermacher's sermons, in which he emphasizes the
ethical relation and duties of Christians are indeed very inspirillg. Cf.
Preiligten ueber den christlichen Hausstand von Dr. F. Schleiermacher.
ViHte Aufiage. BerlL'1.. 1860.
Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence 85
heaven was no doubt a fervent wish flowing from his kindly heart.
But even Strong is inclined to believe that Schleiermacher died
a Christian death,24) though as D. Schen..1rel relates the story of his
last Holy Communion, in the intimate circle of his loved ones, the
celebration bordered almost on blasphemy.25) What, then, explains
the wide and permanent influence of Schleiermacher on theologians
of all manner of doctrinal trends?
There is no doubt that Schleiermacher, by retaining the Chris-
tian terminology and veiling his liberal tenets in forms which or-
thodox believers understand in the traditional Christian sense,
exerted a great influence upon all who in the gloom and hopeless-
ness of rationalism hungered and thirsted after truth. Thousands
of true Christians no doubt listened to Schleiermacher's sermons
without being aware that he was not offering them the Christian
faith of the Reformation. ;Even learned, though not too critical
theologians were misled by Schleiermacher's crafty approach to the
problems of religion and theology. Thus Claus Harms, famous for
the p ublication of his "Ninety-five Theses" in 1817 - the tercen-
tenary of the Reformation - wrote of Schleiermacher 's A ddresses :
" Schleiermacher's Reden schlugen mir die R ationalisten tot"
(Schleiermacher's .4.ddresses for me did away with Rationalists) .26)
After the publication of his "Ninety-five Theses," Harms was drawn
into a controversy with Schleiermacher, in which he defended the
fundamental Lutheran truths against Schleiermacher's deviations
from the orthodox faith. Nevertheless, in an introductory letter
to the series Harms writes: "Dear Doctor, you were my teacher,
my master, and what I have become, if indeed I have become any-
thing, that I have become in a large measure through your in-
genious (geistvollen) writings, and I shall and will always remain
your follower" (Juenger) .27) Of course, Harms did not remain
blind to the doctrinal deceitfulness of the Berlin theologian for
any length of time. Horst Stephan writes of this: "The repristina-
tion theologians at first said resignedly with Claus Harms: 'He
who begat me, had no bread for me, ' but very soon (Hengsten-
berg's Evangelische Kirchenzeitung already in 1829) attacked him
openly.28) The great danger lurking in Schleiermacher's constant
use of the traditional orthodox dogmatical terms appears from the
24) Cf. Systematic Theology, II, p. 740.
25) C£. Friedrich Schleiermacher. Ein Lebens- una Charakterbild,
page 604£.
26) Meusel, Kirchliches Handlexikon, p. 166.
27) BTiefe ZIt einer naeheren Verstaendigung ueber verschiedene
meine Thesen betreffende Punkte. Nebst einem namhaften Briefe an
den Hel·rn Dr. Schleiermacher. Von Claus Harms, Archidiakonus an der
St. Nicolaikirche in Kiel. 1818.
28) Geschichte der Evangelischen Theologie, p. 127.
86 Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence
shrewd way in which he composed the various theses of his Glau-
benslehre. Thus Thesis No. 128, "Concerning Regeneration," reads:
"The divine operation, upon which rests the beginning of the new
life, we designate with Scripture by the expression justification;
the change, however, which in it takes place within man, by the
expression conversion." Or Thesis No. 129, "Concerning Justifi-
cation": "That God justifies man includes that to him [man] his
sins are forgiven, and he is acknowledged as a child of God. The
justification of a person, however, takes place only inasmuch as
man has true faith in the Redeemer." These seemingly Christian
theses, fortified by Scripture passages for proper proof, appear
indeed as fully orthodox,29) but in his expositions of the proposi-
tions, Schleiermacher shows his complete, radical departure from
the orthodox theology of believing Biblical theologians. This de-
. ceitful hypocrisy of Schleiermacher in misusing orthodox termi-
nology is characteristic of modern Liberals. Present-day Modern-
ism speaks of "liberal Christianity" to deceive trustful, but unwary
church members. The contention of J ohn Horsch that Schleier-
macher was the father of modern religious Liberalism is indeed
true.30) Obviously, hosts of orthodox laymen and theologians
follo·wed Schleiermacher, believing that, after all, he had a Chris-
tian message to offer, and so put the best construction on his
unorthodox theological expositions.
This deceitfuL11.ess, however, has a yet more sinister aspect.
H. R. Mackintosh, though declaring that "it is only in a relative
sense . . . that we can speak of the Dogmatic of Schleiermacher
as an authentically Christian book," nevertheless, praises it, be-
cause "it makes the Person of Christ central and all-determining,
and places the whole concept of salvation under the rubric of
sin and grace." 31) This is both true and not true. It is true since
Schleiermacher's entire theological system is centered in the
thought of man's freedom through Christ from his lower world-
consciousness to perfect God-consciousness. It is not true since
Schleiermacher rejected the entire doctrine of sin and grace, re-
demption and salvation, justification and sanctification in the tradi-
tional Christian sense. Mackintosh admits this when he writes:
"We shall search his Dogmatic in vain for the truth that in the
coming of Christ, in the simple fact of his being here, God Himself
29) R. B. Brandt: "Schleiermacher did not actually refute orthodoXy.
But his work had the effect of superannuating it. He presented an
alternative more suited to the modes of thinking, the intellectual currents
of a critical and scientific age." The Philosophy of Schleiermacher, p . 307.
What is here said, is partly true and partly false. But the verdict shows
how hard it is to judge Schleiermacher r ightly.
30) Modern Religious Liberalism, p.52.
31) Types of Modern Theology, p.100.
Schleiennacher, His Theology and Influence 87
stooped down to save us." And he quotes the modern Rationalist
Herrmann of Marbur~ :IS s~--;,g: we reg C'. myself as infinitE ':-
nearer to Nicaea than either Schleiermacher or Ritschl." 32)
Schleiermacher's care in expressing his pantheistic theology in
orthodox Christian terms therefore was not accidental; it was not
merely a clever attempt to deceive, but a well-planned attack not
so much indeed on crass rationalism as rather LLpon orthodox
Christianity. In an essay "Schleiermacher Today" G. B. Wellman
has this to say of him: "Schleiermacher began and ruled the
nineteenth century of Continental Protestant theology. . .. He has
been the inspiration of the modern approach to the study of re-
ligion [italics our own] and the founder of a new method of the
understanding of the life of Jesus.S3 )
Vvellman's words: "He has been the inspiration of the modern
approach to the study of religion," explain more fully why Schleier-
macher in liberal circles has always been popular. Already in 1868
D. Schenkel explained Schleiermacher's popularity in liberal circles
w' en he wrote: "For years, COle dogmatic controversy ; ce l-
tered in the contrast oetween rationalism and supel'llaturalism.
Only one or the other possibility (MoegHchkeit) was recognized:
'-'ill'isticUll';y was either a natural or a supernatu"'~ll phenomenon,
Thus expressed, this contrast could never be reconciled. 0 •• In his
[Schleiermachelo's] concept of religion the removal of this contrast
was given. Religion as such was to him 'immediate feeling,' or "<1
he expressed himself later, 'immediate self-consciousness' and in-
deed of this the highest degree. But by this very assumption re-
ligion was regarded at once both as natural and as supernatural." 34)
What, then, did Schleiermacher do to make himself so very
popular with religious Liberals? He pointed out to them a way to
avoid both the utter negation of crass rationalism and the implicit
trust of Christian belief in the spiritual truths of Holy Scripture.
Between the two (he shows) there is the middle way of theological
dissimulation. It is interesting to note that F. Kattenbusch points
out that, after all, there are no absolute antitheses between Ritschl
and Schleiermacher despite the great differences existing between
their theological approaches and methods. From Schleiermacher,
Ritschl learned that the dogmatician dare not ignore the historic
development of Christianity.35) Does that mean that Ritschllearned
ITem Schhier,AAhel' '"'::- method of theological dissembling? But
even more interesting is the remark of Kattenbusch that also
32) Types of Modern Theology, Pc 91l,
33) Journal of Religion, p.l72.
34) FriedTich Schleiermacher, ein Lebens- und Charakterbild,
page 487 f.
35) Von Schleiermacher zu mtschl, 1903, pp, 57 fl.
88 Sch1eiermacher, His Theology and Influence
Troeltsch 36) found a fine essential understanding (ein gutes Sach-
verstaendr:' \ ,!,- e problerr -" -- _1! -; on in Schleiermacher's the-
ological works; only, he holds, Schleiermacher must not be con-
sulted as a theologian, but merely as a philosopher. And so, Kat-
tenbusch judges; the grandsons will restore the grandfathers to
new reverence, since "comparative religion" may develop into a
sure form of neo-romanticism.an In short, it is not at all Schleier-
macher's merit that he made Christ central in his theology (if in-
deed we may speak of merit in this case), or that, as others have
said, he was able to systematize the doctrine of faith from the
viewpoint of its totality, but that (establishing modern Liberalism)
he pointed out the way to avoid both the absolute denial of extreme
rationalism and the honest Scripture theology of Christian or-
Lhodoxy. There was a middle road of double dealing, of saying
yes and no at the same time.
Of course, this new approach necessitated a special manipula-
tion of Scripture. Schleiermacher did not regard Scripture as the
source and r . faith, jus' ..... as the cra 58 rationalists had
regarded it thus. He therefOl_ ~ __ .:'. . _ find a nev nd norm
of faith, and this he located in man's God-consciousness, or in his
Cl-llistian experience. Schleiermacher t.~us became the father of
modern religious subjectivism which in the development of the-
ological possibilities is truly endless. Religious experimentalism,
in the final analysis, leaves no other authority in theology than
man's own subjective feelings or intuitions. Religious truths, it
holds, are not what Holy Scripture teaches, but what man's own
thinking or willing or feeling determine to be the truth. It is true,
Schleiermacher shifted the rationalistic emphasis from thinking
(Kant's intellectualism) to feeling; but whether one regards the
mind or the heart as the source of faith, there is no material dif-
ference in the final result of one's theological speculation. After
all, subjective theology is, as Karl Barth puts it, Selbstmitteilung
(self-revelation) ,38) Schleiermacher's theology is therefore in the
final analysis nothing else than his own speculative philosophy.
And that is true of all schools of liberal theologians who follow
subjective systems ii'. the spirit of Schleiermacher. Besides the
"Theology of Feeling" (Schleiermacher) Mackintosh in his Types
of Modern Theology treats the "Theology of Speculative Rational-
36) H. R. Mackintosh: "Troeltsch obviously felt himself called to as-
sume the task that Schleiermacher had left half done.: lS quoted as
having said that Schleiermacher's program remains the .. _~at program
of all scientific theology; it only needs working out, not the substitution
of new methods." Types of Modern Theology, p.189.
37) Ibid., p. 79.
33) Zwischen den Zeiten. Das Wort in deT Theologie 'Von Schleier-
macher his Ritsch!. 1928, p.94.
Schleiennacher, His Theology and Influence 89
ism" (Hegel), the "Theology of Moral Values" (Ritschl), the "The-
ology of Scientific Religious History" (Troeltsch) , the "Theology
of Paradox" (Kierkegaard), and the "Theology of the Word of
God" (Barth) . But though these variant and often contradictory
schools differ from that of Schleiermacher in many ways (in basic
points quite radically), they all have in common with Schleier-
macher's theology the principle of regarding truth in the light of
their own subjective feeling or thinking or believing. Everyone of
them is an Ich- Theologe. Subjectivism inheres in them all, whether
they call themselves religious experimentalists or not. Karl Barth
in the article referred to above rejects the viewpoint and method of
Schleiermacher as basically false. To him theology should not be
Selbstmitteilung, but Gottmitteilung. But in the final analysis,
since the Barthian school rejects Holy Scripture as the standard
of faith, it, too, must rely on Selbstmitteilung for its theology, since
outside the Bible there is no revelation of Gospel and salvation
truth. It is true, Barth treats the Bible apparently with the
greatest r everence; but so also did Schleiermacher and Ritschl and
so do all modernistic experimentalists. However, since they reject
Scripture as God's Word, they eo ipso also reject the divine truth
which God sets forth to us in the Bible. Schleiermacher's service
for modern liberal theology has been recognized by Carl Stange
in his helpful essay Die geschichtliche Bedeutung Schleiermachers,
in which he writes: "It is unfair to criticize him [Schleiermacher]
that his theology does not justify the demands which we make [of
theology] today, after we essentially, under his influence, have ob-
tained a deepened historical understanding of Christianity." 39)
These words indeed are a tragic admission.
There are, as Dr. Pieper points out in his Christliche Dogmatik,
only two types of theology; the orthodox, Christian Scripture
theology and the rationalistic non-Christian subjective Ich-
Theologie. The two are contradictory and mutually exclusive. One
is of God; the other, of conceited, perverted reason. One is super-
natural and apprehended by faith; the other is natural, earthly,
carnal, and the product of the human mind. (Cf. James 3: 15-17.)
Realizing this fact, the crude, but sincere rationalists preceding
Schleiermacher cast overboard the entire Christian doctrine of
Scripture and Christian orthodoxy and with it everything super-
natural. But by this very fact they committed theological suicide.
They no longer had any theology left nor any philosophy for all
that. Then came Schleiermacher, cleverly reconciling evangelical
theology with rationalism, but in such a way that while retaining
the ancient Christian expressions, he fully disavowed Christian or -
thodoxy and developed an essentially pagan theology within Chris-
39) Z eitschrift fuer systematische T heologie, 1933-1934, p. 698.
90 Schleiermacher, His Theology and Influence
tendom. Sin, man's lack of perfect God-consciousness, is really
nothing serious, nothing cona' "mt only a h3 "e in the
exercise of man's God-consciousness; and besides, sin is never LTJ.-
dividual, but only social. Christ's personal activity today is re-
placed by community activity; for as the COmmU7'H:- +"r~s in the
life of sin, so also it reaches collectively the requisite God-con-
sciousness. Schleiermacher was thus the first to assert the modern
idea of social religion, or the "social gospel." Christ's redemptive
activity merely consists in this, that the Redeemer receives man-
kind into the power of His God-consciousness. By sharing Christ's
God-consciousness and conquering his sin-consciousness, man be-
comes redeemed. But Schleiermacher's God-consciousness is
nothing more than the pantheistic divine immanence. Redemption,
then, must be communal. It is accomplished when the sinless per-
fection of Christ is communicated to society. According to Schleier-
macher, Christianity is fundamentally ethical, and he enunciates
the Kantian tenet that Christianity is essentially morality. Christ
did not fulfill tt 7"aw for us, but His perfect fuHillment of the
Law is thE Ie of our n . obe-"~nce. Chr"· ot atone
for man's sins, but His vicahuu8 saul:Ifaction mt:n~~y .l·t:veals His
sympathy for mankL'1.d. When man suffers tor the sins of the
world, he, too, suffers vicariously, though really not the individual,
but only humanity as such suffers for sin. Schleiermacher con-
tends that there is no objective reconciliation, but Christ, as the
representative of a new order in humanity, causes man to under-
stand that he must fully realize the part which he must play in his
own reconciliation; 'and reconciliation is nothing else than sub-
jective communion with Christ, and so with God, the absolute
Causality (unio mystica). Forgiveness, or peace with God, is man's
subjective feeling of being sure of his salvation. Justification is
transformation, accomplished when Christ's God-consciousness is
imparted to men. Man's pious, religious feeling, or his experience,
is his supreme authority of religion,
As one considers these basic views of Schleiermacher's system,
he sees at once how entirely the Christian doctrine has been dis-
carded by him. Schleiermacher's Ich-Theologie has left untouched
not a single tenet of the Christian faith; and yet it is at the same
time a repudiation of Christianity (not perhaps in form, but in es-
sence) so done that m