Miller 1

Krystal Miller

Tuesday December 11, 2012

An Inconsistency with Schleiermacher's Lack of Emphasis on Church Dogma and Piety

Friedrich Schleiermacher, a prominent German Christian theologian, emphasizes the

importance of piety in order to achieve a closer relationship with God. Schleiermacher believes

that direct experience in missionary work would open up one’s self-consciousness, or awareness

of self, since that “feeling” of transformation within by doing something out of duty to God

evokes this type of change deep within us. Schleiermacher would later go on to argue that

pietism is not complete if it does not change you within. However, one major flaw in

Schleiermacher's argument is the fact that he dismisses the importance of the Old Testament.

Although Schleiermacher agrees on the importance of Jesus Christ in Christian teachings as well

as in obtaining this “feeling” of transformation during an act of pietism, the deed of repeatedly

denying the Christian Dogma as irrelevant in missionary work is not accurate since the historical

Jesus presented to us in Old Testament Scripture is directly correlated to this “feeling”

Schleiermacher is talking about in doing works of piety. A huge feature in Christianity is for its

followers to continue the path of Christ. There is no way that a person can follow the teachings

of Christ without understanding His experiences and life portraits. Thus, Schleiermacher's

outright denial of the criticality of the Old Testament in obtaining a close relationship with God

through following the works of Christ is not only invalid, but inaccurate. This research paper will

serve to convince the reader that Schleiermacher's claim that the Old Testament is insignificant

in understanding piety is not only false, but will also prove the magnitude of Scripture through

the teachings of theologian Karl Barth.

Miller 2

I will first support my thesis by acknowledging Schleiermacher’s theory of “feeling”

through community service and the piety a person has to humanity and especially the church,

which is essential in understanding Schleiermacher's flaw in his principal theological teaching.

“Schleiermacher regards humanity as an organism of such moral agents who are not only vessels

of reason but unrepeatable symbols of it and organs of its productivity” (Niebuhr 96). With this

said, according to Schleiermacher, humans are called by God to be agents of unity among the

community. However, he argues that “it is in the church and free society that the inner

individuality of the single person assumes a more significant part” (130). Thus, Schleiermacher

would say that as a part of our human nature, our inherent morality would point us to the

direction of serving our community, but especially to the church and for the benefit of all. This

natural role humans have to serve the community leads to pietism because by serving others, we

are essentially serving God. “Schleiermacher conceives the church to be the final community of

personal individuality, for the religious is the highest grade of feeling” (131) and so therefore, if

we were to serve for the good of the church, we would achieve a higher awareness into our self-

consciousness and this is accomplished through “feeling”.

This “feeling” that Schleiermacher talks about is “the unity of the self for which even the

sum of the world’s influences upon the individual can account” (123) and so when a person

experiences “feeling” through helping others in the community this person also experiences a

unity of the self. Not only that, but also according to Schleiermacher, a closer relationship with

God. The reason that there is a closer relationship with God is because “as the expression of an

immediate existence-relationship, feeling arises out of the self in its totality” (121). Simply

speaking, when we commit to piety towards the community of the church, we are transcending

our entire being outside of our self. An example of this “feeling” is when a person decides to

Miller 3

volunteer at a soup kitchen during the thanksgiving holidays. This act alone for this individual is

overwhelming enough, and this person becomes deeply moved by his or her act of kindness.

Adding to this overwhelming sensation is a young girl who this person serves the last daily

helping of mashed potatoes. Drowned in happiness, the young child tells the volunteer that she is

greatly thankful for all that he or she has done to help the needy during the holiday season. The

volunteer immediately begins to transcend outside his- or her-self due to this random “feeling”

that has overtaken the physical being.

This “feeling” of appreciation and love for serving humanity is exactly what

Schleiermacher is saying of the way in which we become closer to God. Schleiermacher would

continue to add:

But the feeling of ‘absolute dependence,’ which is the content of pious feeling,

refers to that absolutely original having-been-posited-in-a-particular-way to which

there is no responding freedom. Feeling of this order indicates more than the sheer

‘happened-ness’ of the self; it symbolizes the life-unity within which the

reciprocal moments of suffering and doing transpire” It is not a mystical or a-

cosmic state of mind but the consciousness of the unity of the self that is given

within experience rather than derived from it (123).

In short, this “feeling” sensed by someone during an act of good change towards his or her

community is much higher than the self because this “feeling” of doing good and serving others

is something so overpowering that the person undergoes an out-of-body experience. The reason

why there is a unity in self is because the person has empathized with the feelings of the sufferer.

Thus, the “feeling” that the person senses is essentially a reaction towards doing good in his or

her community. Thus, the unity of the self-derives from the person believing he or she has a

Miller 4

purpose to fulfil—for community service through the grace of God. The person feels like he or

she has accomplished a piety towards God and that by successfully performing a duty to God, his

or her natural role as agents of change is executed. Serving humanity for the sake of following

the teachings of the church and doing right by others are a major part of forming a positive

relationship with the Creator.

“Schleiermacher designates this inner and underivable selfhood that stands within the

person, in a co-inhering polarity with the community; and the mode through which this inner

givenness of the self achieves expression and enters into consciousness is feeling” (121). In other

words, there is a magnetic field between us and the community. There is a natural pull for us to

serve the community as God intends. Schleiermacher explains that “feeling” is “the original

expression of an immediate existence-relationship” (121) which means that once we experience

“feeling” through missionary work we begin to see ourselves as serving a purpose. The reason

that a person has such a propensity to serve the community and engage in piety is because,

Schleiermacher says:

The ethical agent never stands over against the state or any other of these forms as

though it were an alien and autonomous entity. On the contrary, he bears a

responsibility for it that is consonant with his own moral sense; since the

individual and corporate persons participate in each other, there can be no sharp

distinction between private and public responsibility, and neither one can claim a

higher or different morality from the other (118).

With this said, it is clear to Schleiermacher that it is one’s natural piety to act as an agent

of change in one’s community. “Schleiermacher construed the individual as an end-in-himself

and an agent who participates in a number of social orders: the family, the nation and state, the

Miller 5

institutions of learning, the church, and free associations” (129). It would therefore be immoral

to go against serving humanity because each person carries an enormous obligation to minister to

the community of God.

Schleiermacher acknowledges the existence of Jesus Christ and also acknowledges Christ

as a superior role model for humans in regards to morality:

For Schleiermacher, Jesus is the mediator par excellence who knows that the

finite can only imperfectly become a bearer of the infinite and must undergo death

in this cosmic process.’ In worship, the Christian ‘reflects and continues’ the

ministries and missions that Jesus began. When Christians similarly attempt to

express the infinite with finite means, their aim is to continue Christ’s ministry

(VanderWilt 297-298).

This quote also suggests that for Schleiermacher, Christians have a piety to serve Christ.

Through following Christ, the church community will become closer to God.

However, the main problem I have with Schleiermacher is that he accepts Christ as

important but yet denies the weight of the life and experiences of Christ. Christ’s experiences are

important because they serve as a basic standard of Christian teaching. Christianity and its

Dogma are founded on the basis of discipleship through Christ, and for Schleiermacher to accept

Christ and accept his teachings and correlate these with piety, and yet repudiate Christian Dogma

is nonsense. Christian Dogma is founded on the teachings of Christ and so therefore, to refuse

Dogma is to refuse Christ. Schleiermacher is being contradictory and a massive hypocrite.

Schleiermacher shares his thoughts on the Christian Dogma by comparing it with the

Christian Christmas tradition. He writes, “The Christmas gathering of family and friends is too

restricted, too much defined by a single social and emotional level of life, to be the Christian

Miller 6

community as it exists historically” (Niebuhr 69). Schleiermacher is criticizing Scripture by

saying that it has left the daily life of its followers as rigid. This rigidness, Schleiermacher would

argue, prevents people from experiencing “feeling” when performing an act of community

service because they would see the act as something like a chore. A person’s mood affects the

way in which they are able to execute. “Consequently the “temper” or “mood” in that

Schleiermacher so carefully portrays is in danger of being smug” (69). Thus, if a person thinks of

piety as a chore or obligation simply because it is tradition, that is hazardous; simply because

according to Schleiermacher, “Mood is, the permanence of religious feeling” (125). Simply

speaking, mood affects experiencing “feeling” because in order to undergo an out-of-body

experience to reach God, there must be a “mood” or a “sense” from the individual that is rooted

in happiness and appreciation. Schleiermacher's explanation concerning the lack of “feeling” that

is necessary in obtaining a closer relationship with God during pietism is understandable; still, he

misses the point completely by ignoring the fact that the Christian Dogma is not all bad. In fact,

the Old Testament is fundamental in understanding piety because it taught us about Jesus Christ

and much of what we know about Him, especially regarding His cultural background and

material condition. This background about Christ is significant because it influenced many of His

teachings and the way that He viewed the world.

Schleiermacher is not only criticizing the Old Testament for its rigidity but also for being

too admirable with Judaism:

He argued against the canonical standing of the OT on the grounds that it

expresses Jewish, not Christian, religion. For him this conclusion was the

unavoidable result of the advancing critical scholarship that was undermining the

Miller 7

christological exegesis used to defend the church’s claim to the OT against the

synagogue’s counter-claim to its sole rightful possession (Capetz 297).

This is comical simply because many of the teachings of the Church have origins from the

Hebrew Bible. In fact, it is a well-known truth that Jesus Christ was a Jew. A contradiction in

Schleiermacher’s claim is his belief that Jesus—a Jew—is an important figure in grasping piety.

It is clear that Schleiermacher has some negative feelings towards anything Jew (And yet he

accepts Christ?). Paul E. Capetz went on to say that “Surprisingly, there has been very little

scholarship devoted to Schleiermacher’s stance toward the OT” (297). This finding is not

shocking since Schleiermacher is known to contradict himself, especially when it came to

religious devotion, Christ, and the Gospel—which are all intertwined and sourced from the

Hebrew Bible or Old Testament Scripture.

What is odd about Schleiermacher is that he does agree on the premise that the Christian

church and its teachings on Christ must have derived from somewhere—and suggests a historical

source. He writes:

If we consider the actual appearance of the Christian church, if we view its entire

subsequent course, it will occur to no one to posit that activity as only a purely

inward one...And so we shall be able to follow no other rule than this: everything

that appears in Christ’s individuality as a life-moment appears as a deed and an

action, and it must be able to be apprehended in its historical connection in a

purely human way; but nevertheless, we conceive it as the expression or effect of

God which was internal (Schleiermacher, “Life of Jesus” 34).

It is funny that Schleiermacher cannot admit that this historical source he mentions that

Christianity might have may possibly be Biblical. In fact, the teachings of the Christian church

Miller 8

have its origins primarily in the Old Testament. Why is it so difficult for Schleiermacher to

accept this? It is clear that he denounces the Church Dogma, and its rigidity is one reason why.

But Schleiermacher also mentions another. He says that there are contradictions in the Old

Testament in regards to the historical dates of events. Schleiermacher explains:

Now we have another difficulty. There are only very few places in our Gospels where the

time difference between the one and the other event is given. Wherever that then is

missing, one has actually no gauge for the intervals of time and consequently also no

gauge for the whole, so that we could then maintain that the public ministry of Christ had

occupied such and such a space of time” (41).

There may not be actual dates for every single piece of evidence given in the Old Testament, but

that should not be enough reason for Schleiermacher to completely deny the importance of the

Old Testament in understanding piety and its role that it has for us as a community of God;

especially considering that Old Testament Scripture, piety, and Christ are so closely intertwined.

Swiss theologian Karl Barth says that “Christianity is an historical religion” (Jenson 13).

He continues, “The attempt to understand how Jesus Christ, a past event, can be the decisive

reality in our present life is the chief problem of modern theology. To be sure the fact that we are

found by God through His action in history is no new discovery of modern times” (13). Barth’s

acceptance that Christianity has a historical source is in accordance with Schleiermacher. But

what separates Barth from Schleiermacher is Barth’s admittance of the importance of the Gospel

in understanding Jesus Christ and, as consequence, our piety to him. Barth explains, “The Gospel

has always proclaimed that this reality is Jesus, ‘crucified under Pontius Pilate” (13). In addition,

unlike Schleiermacher, by agreeing with the Gospel, he is also asserting that God is at work with

us through human history because through Old Testament Scripture, we are able to understand

Miller 9

the relation between God and his people, and the covenant he made with them, which is to offer

his Son into the world to save them from sin. This is further confirmed when “Barth teaches, as

do all Christian theologians, that God’s covenant with man is fulfilled in Jesus Christ” (131).

Barth, like Schleiermacher accepts the role that Jesus Christ has on influencing the

messages of the Christian church. He says that the “Christian Doctrine is the attempt, undertaken

as a responsibility of the church, to summarize the gospel of Jesus Christ as the content of the

church’s preaching (Barth, “Learning Jesus Christ” 17), which highlights the fact that

Christianity is derived from Scripture. If Scripture is the foundation of Christianity, tell me how

it is possible that Schleiermacher will encourage piety, a basic obligation in Christianity and

accept Christ but yet reject Scripture? Theologian Andy Alexis-Baker continues with

summarizing Barth’s claim on the importance of Christ in Scripture by adding that, “Jesus’ life,

death and resurrection thus define human being as a creature who hears and obeys God’s Word.

Jesus provides a moral geographical space within which creaturely existence finds its meaning

and telos” (428). In essence, Jesus’ earthly experiences in life as written in Scripture are

significant since it explains our moral code. Barth confirms in his own words the relevancy of

the Gospel in understanding the historical Jesus as and his function as a moral guide to all

humanity:

In the history of Jesus, we have to do with the reality which underlies

and precedes all other reality as the first and eternal Word of God, that

in this history we have actually to do with the ground and sphere, the

atmosphere of the being of every man, whether they lived thousands of

years before or after Jesus (428).

Miller 10

With this said, how can one ignore Scripture? Especially if the Gospel and Church tradition are

our gateway in understanding the role in which we have us humans in serving God? To

understand the relevancy of piety in Christian tradition, it is best to understand the role of Jesus

Christ.

Piety is defined as an obligation, thus it is necessary to understand to whom we must be

pious. Christian tradition describes Jesus Christ as an important example of what is expected of

us. “Without being obligated to us, God places himself under obligation to us in his Son Jesus

Christ” (Molnar 71), so therefore God brought Christ into this world as a spiritual example for

humans. Barth explains that because God has sent his Son as an example, “Through the ‘gifts

and operation of the Holy Spirit’ our ‘direct participation in Jesus Christ’ is brought about so that

we can live within the life of God” (Healy 290). In other words, according to Barth, we must be

pious to the teachings of Christ. Community service is important because when we engage in

good works towards the community, we are directly following Christ's example on earth. Thus,

we become Christ-like and form a closer relationship to God. Barth continues, “We now come to

the man who is responsible to this commanding God. Here again we must begin by stating that

this is the question answered in Jesus Christ. One cannot emphasize enough that in him true man

as well as true God is present and manifest” (Barth, “Christian Life” 19). So, according to Barth,

Christ is exceptionally important in piety because it is through him that we are able to become

closer to God. Barth’s assessment between piety and Dogma are in line with Schleiermacher's

reasoning which states a connection between piety and Christ.

But unlike Schleiermacher, Barth agrees with the importance of the teachings of the

church in addition to its teachings. Barth professes,

Miller 11

The church is thus constituted by the work of the Word and the Holy Spirit. It is

the earthly-historical form of existence of Jesus Christ himself, without whom it

would be merely a ‘dead body’, merely a natural society. And it is ‘the historical

form of the work of the Holy Spirit’, too, and as such, and only as such, is it ‘the

historical form of the faith’ (290).

In summary, the church is heavily influenced by Scripture because it itself influenced the role in

which we, as humans have, in service to God. The church therefore responded to this obligation

and has emphasized Christian followers to be pious to the works of Christ. Barth agrees on the

significance of the Gospels as evidence to our pious duty as followers of Christ. According to

Nicholas M. Healy’s account of Barth’s teachings, he writes:

Our partnership is confirmed by the gospels’ descriptions of Jesus Christ,

according to which the appointment, calling and commissioning or sending of the

apostles is integral to the identity of Jesus Christ himself as narrated in the

Gospels. The relation between Christ and the apostles is thus the Gospel narrative

version of the Pauline concept of the body of Christ. And while Barth rules out

any notion of a continuing incarnation in the church, the church’s action is not

being understood merely as a response to a ‘legacy or endowment set up by Jesus

2,000 years ago. It is a genuine and ongoing history of action in and for the world

‘in correspondence’ to Christ’s own ‘hidden being” (291).

All in all, Christianity is heavily influenced by the Gospels. It is through the gospels that we are

aware of Christ and his teachings. It is also through the Gospels that we are conscious of our

purpose in life—as servants of God through following Christ. Barth proceeds:

Miller 12

What would we know of the covenant of grace, and of man as God’s partner in its

history, if we knew nothing of Jesus Christ? In him the history begins and

proceeds. He or she through him makes man a partner in this covenant. Together

with him, as one whom God has set as his side and exalted to be his brother, man

is this partner of God. He is so in order to serve God by serving Jesus Christ. In

his history God acts exemplarily and fruitfully on and to all men. So each man as

such—or knows him not at all—has a part in his history and without it would

have no history of his own. He could know of his history as human (indistinction

from purely natural) history apart from his share in the history of Jesus Christ

(Barth, “Christian Life” 20).

This quote reiterates the idea that all of Christianity—its teachings and values—are all derived

from Scripture. Christian tradition encourages its followers to live a life through Christ as seen in

Scripture. “God’s truth is the secret meaning of history, piety and experience: yet the moment we

focus on these in themselves we ignore the truth of God’s electing grace attested in scripture—

we ignore the very reality that alone gives meaning to our lives” (Molnar 75). Therefore, it is

highly contradictory that Schleiermacher would claim that as followers as Christ, we must be

pious to reach God, and still he continues to reject the ideas of the Church. To be pious is to live

through the Church and its teachings, so it is incorrect to call Schleiermacher a true Christian if

he is going against the rules of the church and Old Testament Scripture.

Thankfully, I am not the only one who sees a major discrepancy between

Schleiermacher's proposal and his beliefs. Gerhard Spiegler writes,

Schleiermacher denies any dependence of his dogmatics on speculative

philosophy, while it is quite evident that a relationship indeed exists; and to some

Miller 13

extent is not even precluded by Schleiermacher himself. We are thus left by and

large with the puzzling fact that such a keenly critical and analytical mind as

Schleiermacher's should have been so blind at this point. Schleiermacher’s

reluctance or maybe even inability to elucidate his own position more clearly at

this point, while insisting with all his might on the dependence of the dogmatics

or religion from speculative philosophy, contributes to the puzzlement of his

students (134).

What is so sad about Schleiermacher is that even his students noticed his extreme claims and

were confused by it. Spiegler and Schleiermacher's students should be confused, because

Schleiermacher is confusing. Schleiermacher claims that Dogma should be separated from Jesus

Christ and piety; however, this is so strange because it is impossible. There is no way that

Scripture and the teachings of the Church are mutually separate from piety and Christ. It is

through the Church tradition and through Scripture that we know of God and his promise thanks

to the Old Testament, that he will send his Son, Jesus Christ, as a moral example for humanity.

Thus, it is absolute nonsense that Schleiermacher would discredit the role of Scripture.

Spiegler also comments on Schleiermacher's theory of religious “feeling”:

There is nothing within the Christian faith, as a specific modification of religious

feeling, which necessitates a conflict with the speculative formal exploration of

reality...The ground of religious feeling is the relationship between God and the

real world, whether primarily formal or primarily material in character, can

necessarily be in conflict with the reality of God-consciousness, at least not in

principle (143).

Miller 14

Accordingly, Spiegler accounts that there is nothing in Christian scripture that mentions the

“feeling” we get during an act of missionary work towards our community. This may be true, but

what I like about Schleiermacher is that he recognizes the sensation that is given to us by God

when we follow through with actions that are beneficial to one’s community. Religious “feeling”

is an emotion that is important because like Schleiermacher has pointed out, it is a modifier to

piety. The good “feeling” that we get when we help others is what pushes us to continue in the

footsteps of Christ. This quote also suggests that Spiegler does not believe that through this

religious “feeling”, we transcend out of ourselves and reach God since God is already a part of

his creation. While I do agree with Spiegler that God is already embedded in nature, I do believe

with Schleiermacher that when we commit an act of piety to God and to the church, that we do

become closer to God. Although this cannot be proved scientifically, by engaging in missionary

work, we become closer to God because we are following the examples that Christ has given us

in the Scriptures.

In summary, Schleiermacher is full of contradictions. His belief that the Old Testament is

insignificant is rubbish especially if he accepts the teachings of Christ and regards him as a moral

example of piety. Thus, the main problem encountered with Schleiermacher is the fact that he

rejects the historical Jesus as an important element in missionary work towards God’s

community. The Old Testament is exceptionally fundamental in the teachings of Christianity

because it serves as a guide for which we are to follow. Karl Barth closed the gap between

Schleiermacher's inconsistencies by admitting the significance of the Gospel and its relationship

with piety. Despite the conflicting statements proposed by Schleiermacher, his theory that piety

is entangled with religious “feeling” is agreeable because this sensation gives us enough

incentive to continue with the teachings of the Church and to live a life as Christ.

Miller 15

Works Cited

Alexis-Baker, Andy. “Theology is Ethics: How Karl Barth Sees the Good Life.” Scottish Journal of Theology.4 (2011): 425-438. Print.

Barth, Karl. Learning Jesus Christ Through the Heidelberg Catechism. Trans. Shirley C. Guthrie. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman, 1964. Print.

Barth, Karl. The Christian Life: Church Dogmatics IV.4 Lecture Fragments. Trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman, 1981. Print.

Capetz, Paul E. “Friedrich Schleiermacher on the Old Testament.” United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities.3 (2009): 297-326. Print.

Healy, Nicholas M. “Karl Barth’s Ecclesiology Reconsidered.” Scottish Journal of Theology.3 (2004): 287-299. Print.

Jenson, Robert W. Alpha and Omega: A Study in the Theology of Karl Barth. New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1963. Print.

Molnar, Paul D. “‘Thy word is truth’: the role of faith in reading scripture theologically with Karl Barth.” Scottish Journal of Theology.1 (2010): 70-92. Print.

Schleiermacher, Friedrich. The Life of Jesus. Trans. S, Maclean Gilmour. Intro. Jack C. Verheyden. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975. Print.

Miller 16

Spiegler, Gerhard. The Eternal Covenant: Schleiermacher's Experiment in Cultural Theology. New York: Harper & Row, 1967. Print.

VanderWilt, Jeffery. “‘Why Worship?’: Schleiermacher Speaks to the Question.” Scottish Journal of Theology.3 (2003):286-307. Print.