² Strauss, D. F., Gesammelte Schriften, ed., Zeller, Eduard, Bd. 5, Bonn (1877), 9Google Scholar.

³ Der Christliche Glaube (hereafter cited as Gl.) first appeared in 1821–22 and in revised form in 1830. The changes in the second edition are of interest for the professional student of Schleiermacher, though, as might be expected, they constitute elaborations, replies to criticisms and accentuation of certain themes, such as that of the second Adam, but no real alterations in direction or substance are evident. “Concerning my dogmatics, I can say that at least in the first part not one stone remains standing on another, and that nevertheless it is entirely the same.” (Schleiermacher to Graf Alexander zu Dohna, 10 April 1830, Schleiermacher als Mensch: Sein Wirken, Familien- und Freundesbriefe, 1804 bis 1834 ed., H. Meisner, Stuttgart/Gotha (1923), 357. Cf. also Fr. Schleiermacher's Briefwechsel mit J. Gass, ed., Gass, W., Berlin (1852), 219Google Scholar f.) Except where otherwise noted, all of the following references are to the revised edition, and the reader may consuit it in either the original German or the English translation.

⁴ Send., 16 (587) Schleiermacher wrote two lengthy epistles to his former pupil, Lücke, in 1829, explaining his mind on the criticisms he had received of the first edition of The Christian Faith. These Sendschreiben über seine Glaubenslehre an Lucke provide an unusual commentary on the work by the author himself and an apology for the second edition of 1830.

⁵ These lines have not been included on the title page of the Edinburgh edition of the ET.

⁶ Therefore, practical theology stands at the apex of the theological curriculum. See KD, Pt. III.

⁷ KD¹, § 6.

⁸ SW, I/12, Die Christliche Sitte, 7 f.

⁹ Gl., § 28, 2.

¹⁰ Gl, § 15.

¹¹ Send., 21 (593).

¹² Treatise Concerning Religious Affections, ed. Smith, John, New Haven (1959), 101Google Scholar.

¹³ Send., 16 (588).

¹⁴ For Schleiermacher on “scholasticism” see Gl. § 16, postscript; § 28, 3; also “Ueber die Lehre von der Erwählung,” SW I/2, 461 f.

¹⁵ Gl., § 15, 2.

¹⁶ Send., 60 (642).

¹⁷ Gl., §§ 15–18.

¹⁸ GL, § 15, 2.

¹⁹ Ibid., 130.

²⁰ Ibid., 293; see also, for example, the sermon on John, SW II/8, Homilien über das Evangelium des Johannes, 5 ff.

²¹ See, for example, Reden, 283: “…the truly divine element is the glorious clearness to which the great idea He came to exhibit attained in His soul.” (ET, 246).

²² Gl., § 10, postscript.

²³ Ibid.

²⁴ Gl., § 19, 1 and postscript; § 15, 2.

²⁵ G1., § 27,3.

²⁶ Gl., § 19, postscript.

²⁷ Br., II, 351.

²⁸ Ibid.

²⁹ See the sermon on John 15:9–15, SW, II/1, 214 f.

³⁰ See the first edition of the Glaubenslehre, § 1, 5. The relationship of exegesis to dogmatics is typical of Schleiermacher's manner of establishing connections between disciplines. Exegesis uninformed of the present circumstances of dogmatics cannot adequately interpret the theological content of its texts, but dogmatics, being more dependent upon and reflective of “secular wisdom” ought not to control exegesis. Likewise, dogmatics will not be complete, until exegesis of Scripture has attained perfection and the religious consciousness of the early church is thoroughly understood. (GL, § 27, 3.) But again, this earliest Christian piety will not be fully comprehended until the validly Christian in all other historical forms of the church is similarly comprehended. (See the discussion of “philosophical theology” in Brief Outline of the Study of Theology.)

³¹ See SW, II/8, 106.

³² See KD, Pt. II, 3rd division. Italics mine. The other discipline belonging to this division is the knowledge of the social circumstances of the Christian church in the present, called by Schleiermacher “Church Statistics.”

³³ Seed, (isted.) § 1, 5.

³⁴ The relationship of dogmatic language to the language of preaching is discussed in Gl., § 16, i.

³⁵ Gl., § 17.

³⁶ KD, § 32-§ 68.

³⁷ KD, 89.

³⁸ Gl., § 22.

³⁹ GI., § 27.

⁴⁰ GL, § 36-§ 38.

⁴¹ Gl., § 30.

⁴² Loc. cit., “Einleitung.”

⁴³ Send., 30 ff. (605 ff.).

⁴⁴ Italics mine. There is, of course, a contradiction between this apparent declaration of Christo-centrism and the conventional movement of The Christian Faith from creation to redemption to church. But Schleiermacher was aware that this superficial direction of exposition was not the direction of the deepest current of his thinking, and he attempted to warn the reader to that effect in § 29, which states, in turgid language, that creation is not merely the presupposition of redemption but that it is apprehended through Christ. The corresponding paragraph (§33) of the first edition is much clearer on this score. Nevertheless this ostensible solution of the problem of order is still attended with grave difficulties in the Glaubenslehre.

⁴⁵ See especially § 11, 3: human bondage and redemption through Christ do not constitute merely one element among many others in the Christian self-consciousness but rather that to which all others are related.

⁴⁶ Gl., § 17.

⁴⁷ Send., 59 f. (642 f.).

⁴⁸ Gl, § 18.

⁴⁹ Br., II, 350 (ET II, 281).

⁵⁰ Gl., § 13.

⁵¹ Gl., § 10, postscript.

⁵² Gl., § 13, postscript. To a life-long correspondent, Schleiermacher wrote that “Everything is, in one sense, natural and supernatural in another. Even that the Son of God became man must be natural in a higher sense.” Br., II, 320 (ET II, 260 f.).

⁵³ Gl., § 13,1.

⁵⁴ Br., II, 342 f. (ET II, 281).

⁵⁵ See Gl., § 14,3; § 47.

⁵⁶ Gl, § 28, especially part 3.

⁵⁷ Gl., § 16, postscript.

⁵⁸ Gl, § 28, 1.

⁵⁹ Br., II, 353 (ET II, 284).

⁶⁰ Br, II, 351 (ETII, 283).

⁶¹ See Send., 60 (643). All theological borrowing from philosophy should, naturally, be selective, spread widely rather than concentrated in one system or school, and be done self-consciously. See Gl., § 28, 1.