No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Ritschlian School the Essence of Christianity and Karl Barth
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009
Extract
William Hamilton has recently called our attention to the significance of the idea of the ‘essence of Christianity’ associated with the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. ‘… It is not at all clear’, writes Hamilton, ‘that the phrase itself does not still have some real usefulness. It is interesting that in Dietrich Bonhoeffer's final papers we have a projected outline for a little book that was to have been called The Essence of Christianity.’ Our aim in this essay is a reassessment of the significance of Ritschl, Harnack and Troeltsch as these sought to illumine from their own theological perspectives the essence of Christianity. We place Harnack and Troeltsch in the ‘Ritschlian School’ in the sense that both acknowledged Ritschl as their teacher and in spite of divergencies from him in their respective theologies nevertheless continued to note their indebtedness to him. We shall show that the effort to define the essence of Christianity is intimately associated in the work of each of these theologians with the search for right theological method.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1963
References
page 390 note 1 Hamilton, William, The New Essence of Christianity (Association Press, New York, 1961), p. 12.Google Scholar
page 390 note 2 Ritschl, , Schleiermachers Reden über die Religion und ihre Nachwirkungen auf die evangelische Kirche Deutschlands (Bonn, 1874), p. 46f.Google Scholar
page 391 note 1 Schleiermacher, , Speeches on Religion to its Cultured Despisers, tr. Oman, J. (Harper Torchbooks, New York, 1958), p. 241.Google Scholar
page 391 note 2 ibid., p. 247
page 391 note 3 Schleiermacher, , The Christian Faith, tr. Mackintosh, H. R. and others (T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1928), p. 52.Google Scholar
page 391 note 4 ibid., p. 57.
page 392 note 1 ibid., p. 38.
page 392 note 2 ibid., p. 81f.
page 392 note 3 Schleiermacher, , Kurae Darsiellung des Theologisehen Studiums sum Behuf ein-ltitender Vorlesungtn (Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, Hildesheim, 1961), p. 73f.Google Scholar
page 393 note 1 Ritschl, , A Critical History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation, tr. Black, J. S. (Edmonston and Douglas, Edinburgh, 1872), p. 522Google Scholar . Hereafter cited as J.R. I.
page 393 note 2 Ritschl, , Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung, II (A. Marcus und E. Weber, Bonn, 1903), P. 3.Google Scholar
page 394 note 1 J.R. I, p. 449.
page 394 note 2 J.R.I, P.451.
page 394 note 3 Kattenbusch, , Von Schleiermacher zu Ritschl (J. Richer, Giessen, 1903), p. 5ff.Google Scholar
page 394 note 4 J.R.I, p. 234.
page 394 note 5 Ritschl, , The Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation, III, tr. Mackintosh, H. R. and Macaulay, A. B. (T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1902), p. 546Google Scholar . Hereafter cited J.R. III.
page 395 note 1 J.R.III, 331.
page 395 note 2 J.R.III, p.7.
page 395 note 3 J.R.I III, p. 5.
page 395 note 4 J.R. III, p. 5.
page 395 note 5 J.R. III, p. 8.
page 395 note 6 J.R. I, p. 472. On p. 474 Ritschl says ‘ … He [Schleiermacher] represents Christ's influence upon men not directly as ethical, but rather as aesthetic. …’
page 395 note 7 J.R. I.P-466, p.473.
page 396 note 1 J.R. I, P. 185.
page 396 note 2 Barth, Karl, ‘Schleiermacher's “Celebration of Christmas”’ Theology and Church, tr. Smith, L. P. (S.C.M. Press, London, 1962), p. 147f.Google Scholar Note especially what Barth says concerning Leonard's speech on p. 149 and concerning Edward's ii f position on p. 155f.
page 396 note 3 Barth, , Protestant Thought: From Rousseau to Ritschl, tr. Cozens, B. (Harper and Brothers, New York, 1959), p. 346Google Scholar . See also Barth's comments on the significance of poetic language for Christian theology on p. 335.
page 397 note 1 J.R. I, p. 2.
page 397 note 2 J.R. I, p. 228.
page 397 note 3 J.R. I, p. 157.
page 397 note 4 J.R. I, P. 480.
page 397 note 5 J.R. I, p. 485.
page 398 note 1 J.R. III, p. 11.
page 398 note 2 J.R. III, p. 9.
page 398 note 3 J.R. I, p. 587.
page 398 note 4 J.R. III, p. 380.
page 398 note 5 J.R. III, p. 547.
page 398 note 6 J.R. III, p. 544.
page 399 note 1 J.R. I, p. 491.
page 399 note 2 Schleiermacher, , The Christian Faith, p. 353.Google Scholar
page 399 note 3 Barth, , Church Dogmatics, III.3, tr. Bromiley, G. W. (T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1960), p. 324Google Scholar . Barth accuses Ritschl of weakness in his own doctrine of sin. See C.D.IV.I, p. 383.
page 399 note 4 J.R. III, p. 219.
page 400 note 1 J.R. III, p. 25.
page 400 note 2 J.R. III, p. 218.
page 400 note 3 Mackintosh, H. R., ‘The Development of the Ritschlian Theology’, Some Aspects of Christian Belief (George Doran Co., New York, 1923), p. 170.Google Scholar
page 400 note 4 ibid., p. 135f.
page 400 note 5 J..R. I, p. 417.
page 401 note 1 J.R. I, p. 404.
page 401 note 2 J.R. III, P.547.
page 402 note 1 Ritschl, , Die Entstehung da altkatholischen Kirche (Bonn, 1857), p. v.Google Scholar
page 402 note 2 J.R. I, p. 18.
page 402 note 3 Ritschl, , Die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche, p. 23.Google Scholar
page 403 note 1 von Hamack, Agnes, Adolf von Harnack (Hans Bott, Berlin, 1936), p. 135Google Scholar . See also von Harnack, Adolf, ‘The Present State of Research in Early Church History’, Reden und Aufsätze, II (Töplemann, Giessen, 1911), p. 229f.Google Scholar
page 403 note 2 See Harnack's, review of Ecke's Ritschl und seine Schute in Reden und Aufsätze, II, pp. 355ff.Google Scholar
page 403 note 3 Agnes von Harnack, op. cit., p. 102.
page 403 note 4 Harnack, , Reden und Aufsätze, II, p. 233f.Google Scholar
page 404 note 1 Harnack, , What Is Christianity? tr. Saunders, T. B. (Harper Torchbooks, New York, 1957), p. 21.Google Scholar
page 404 note 2 ibid., p. 21.
page 404 note 3 ibid., p. 12f.
page 404 note 4 Harnack, , History of Dogma, VII, tr. Buchanan, Neil (Russell and Russell, New York, 1958), p. 226.Google Scholar
page 404 note 5 Barth, CD. I/2, p. 367.
page 405 note 1 op. cit., p. 51f.
page 405 note 2 ibid., p. 14.
page 405 note 3 Troeltsch, , ‘The Dogmatics of the “Religionsgeschichtliche Schule”’, American Journal of Theology, XVII, Number 1, January 1913, p. 12.Google Scholar
page 406 note 1 op. cit., p. 10.
page 406 note 2 Barth, C.D.I.I, p. 443.
page 406 note 3 Harack, , History of Dogma, I, p. 59.Google Scholar
page 406 note 4 ibid., pp. 76–79. On this point, see Richards, G. W., ‘The Place of Adolf von Harnack among Church Historians’, Journal of Religion, XI, July 1931, p. 341.Google Scholar
page 407 note 1 See also Harnack's, whole discussion of Socinianism in History of Dogma VII, pp. 137–167Google Scholar . Harnack follows Ritschl in criticising Socinianism for a failure properly to apprehend the significance of the forgiveness of sins as a primary feature of Christian faith. On p. 167 Harnack declares: ‘That the Christian religion is faith …, that it lives, not upon command and hopes, but upon the power of God, and apprehends in Jesus Christ the Lord of Heaven and earth as Father—of all this Socinianism knew nothing.’
page 407 note 2 ‘Ein Briefwechsel mit Adolf von Harnack’, Theologische Fragen und Antworten (A. G. Zollikon, Zurich, 1957), p. 8.Google Scholar
page 407 note 2 ibid., p. 22f.
page 408 note 1 Troeltsch, , ‘Was heisst “Wesen des Christentums”?’, Gesammelte Schriften, II (J. C. B. Mohr, Tübingen, 1913), pp. 386ff.Google Scholar This essay first appeared in Christliche Welt, 1903.
page 409 note 1 ibid., p. 419.
page 409 note 2 ibid., pp. 420–1.
page 409 note 3 Troeltsch, , ‘The Dogmatics of the “Religionsgeschichtliche Schule”’, American Journal of Theology, XVII, p. 13.Google Scholar
page 409 note 4 Troeltsch, , Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlichkeit Jesufur den Glauben (J. C. B. Mohr, Tübingen, 1911), p. 8Google Scholar . Baillie, D. M. calls attention to the significance of this book and indicates the difference between Troeltsch and Herrmann on the relation between faith and historical criticism. Faith in God and its Christian Consummation (T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1927), p. 243Google Scholar . Robinson, James refers to Troeltsch's book as an example of the position which conceives of the kerygma as a symbol objectifying a given type of piety, which is the essence of the Christian religion. A New Quest of the Historical Jesus (S.C.M. Press, London, 1959), p. 81Google Scholar . Robinson's characterisation does not properly indicate the significance of the historical Jesus for the reality and the preservation of the symbol.
page 410 note 1 ibid., p. 25.
page 410 note 2 ibid., p. 26.
page 410 note 3 ibid., p. 31.
page 411 note 1 Troeltsch, , ‘The Dogmatics of the “Religionsgeschichtliche Schule”’, American Journal of Theology, XVII, p. 14f.Google Scholar
page 411 note 2 Troeltsch, , Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlkhkeit Jesu, p. 33.Google Scholar
page 411 note 3 ibid., p. 23.
page 412 note 1 ibid., p. 38.
page 413 note 1 ibid., pp. 47–48. See also Troeltsch, , ‘The Place of Christianity Among the World Religions’, Christian Thought, its History and Application, ed. von Hügel, Baron F. (Meridian Books, New York, 1957), p. 55Google Scholar . In ‘The Dogmatics of the “Religionsgeschichtliche Schule”’ Troeltsch, characterises the Ritschlian theology as ‘a type of biblicism which, indeed, permits historical criticism of the Bible, but which declines to engage in any study of comparative religions’. American Journal of Theology, XVII, p. 8Google Scholar . In his Die Bedeutung der Geschichtlkhkeit Jesu, pp. 11–13, Troeltsch declares that Schleiermacher, Ritschl and Herrmann all seek to vindicate the absolute significance of Jesus Christ by an appeal to an internal miracle within the religious consciousness of the Christian whereby the power and certitude of faith surmount the problematic character of history.
page 413 note 2 Troeltsch, , ‘The Dogmatics of the “Religionsgeschichtliche Schule”’, American Journal of Theology, XVII, p. 16f.Google Scholar
page 414 note 1 See especially C.D.1.2, p. 864f. Note what Barth says concerning confessions as involving ‘a selection which is controlled by the present concrete situation of the Church in its confrontation by the Word…’.