Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 14

During a recent evening of bibliomania-

cal revelry, Robert Allenson, president


of the distinguished firm of theological
booksellers in Naperville, Illinois, told
me the following story about Tillich - a
Tillich's story that he had heard during his stu-
dent days at Union Theological Semi-
nary: Reinhold Niebuhr, deep in con-
Philosophy of versation and oblivious to all else, was
descending a staircase, while Tillich was
coming up the same stairs. As they pass-
History ed, the student with Niebuhr asked
him: But what about Dr. Tillich's view
on the subject? You mean that damned
pantheist? replied Niebuhr with a
chuckle. Several weeks later, as spring
The Bearing of His Historical Under- was coming on, Niebuhr found Tillich,
standing on His Theological Commitment who was a great lover of nature, on his
hands and knees in the quadrangle
sniffing a crocus. Ah, Professor Tillich,
he called out, what are you doing?
Tillich, without changing his position,
looked up and said: It is zee damned
pantheist worshipping zee flowers.
This tale, perhaps better characterized as
Geschichte than Historie, provides a
most appropriate starting-point for our
discussion of Tillich's philosophy of his-
tory, for it reminds us of the extent to
by John Warwick Montgomery which Tillich's views have been sub-
ject to facile generalization and superfi-
cial criticism. The centrality of Tillich's
historical understanding to his entire
theological endeavor makes it imperative
that as we study this aspect of his thought
we avoid labels, epithets, and the pre-
conceptions that so readily give rise to
them, and instead try sensitively to dis-
Professor Montgomery holds doctorates cover the root concerns that informed
from Chicago and Strasbourg, and is head his views of historical reality.
of the department of Church History and
the History of Christian Thought in CALL FOR A NEW APPROACH
Trini ty Evangelical Di vini ty School, Deer- Some justification for a paper on Til-
field, Illinois. This article was presented lich's philosophy of history seems in
as a paper at a Philosophy Conference order when the mass of Tillich litera-
at Wheaton College, Illinois. Professor ture is growing daily, and when valuable
Montgomery was one of the speakers at analyses of his approach to history have
the LF.E.S. Theological Conference in already been done from a variety of
Moscia, August 25 - September 4. theological perspectives. 1 Yet after one

28
has granted the genuine contributions of Christianity which would stand in
offered by previous studies of Tillich's opposition to all forms of idolatry.
philosophy of history, two highly sig- We first meet our theologian in post-
nificant considerations undeniably de- World War I Germany--a Germany
mand a new and different approach: smarting under military defeat and over-
first, the striking last stage of Tillich's whelming war reparations, further
thought, characterized by his intense weakened by the inept Weimar Republic,
interest in the history of religions and and open to the totalitarian panacea
his unwitting influence on death-of-God about to be offered by National Social-
thinking during the final year of his life ism. 4 In the autobiographical section
(<<Faithful to his vocation and his des- (Part One) of The Interpretation of His-
tiny, said religious phenomenologist tory;> Tillich describes his reaction to
Mircea Eliade at the Tillich Memorial that situation: he established his politi-
Service of the University of Chicago cal position on the boundary6 between
Divinity School on October 29, 1965, the individualistic autonomy debilitating
Paul Tillich did not die at the end of the Weimar government and the rising
his career, when he had supposedly said dictatorial heteronomy that would en-
everything important that he could say. gulf Germany under Hitler. For Tillich,
On the contrary, he died at the begin- both autonomous individualism and
ning of another renewal of his thought. heteronomous authoritarianism were
Thus his death is even more tragic, for demonic; he opted instead for a theono-
theologian and historian of religion alike. mous orientation: a religious socialism
But it is also symbolic2) ; secondly, re- that would avoid these idolatrous ex-
cent applications of the insights of ana- tremes. Thus, until Reinhold Niebuhr
lytical philosophy to philosophy of history3 and others at Union Theological Semi-
have provided a technique by which a nary engineered his emigration from
keener examination of Tillich's historical the Third Reich in 1933, he served as one
thinking now becomes possible to histori- of the outstanding members of the Ger-
an and theologian alike. The present essay, man Christian-Socialist party.
therefore, while endeavoring to present Out of this political philosophy, Tillich
a synoptic view of the general develop- developed a striking interpretation of
ment of Tillich's theology of history, history, involving the dialectic interac-
will come to focus on the revolutionary tion of theonomous, heteronomous, and
last years of his career, and will seek to autonomous motifs. He writes:
offer a responsible analytical critique By analyzing the character of his-
of his fully matured outlook on the re- torical time, as distinguished from
lations between history and religious physical and biological time, I de-
belief. veloped a concept of history in which
the movement toward the new, which
ULTIMATE CONCERN AND is both demanded and expected, is
THEONOMOUS HISTORY constitutive. The content of the new,
A proper beginning is made at the toward which history moves, appears
keystone of Tillich's entire theological in events in which the meaning and
endeavor--a keystone which was put in goal of history become manifest. I call-
place early in his life and which in so ed such an event the center of his-
many and variegated ways, conditioned tory; from the Christian viewpoint
all his subsequent thinking. I refer to the center is the appearance of Jesus
his passionate desire to create a theology as the Christ. The powers struggling
and arrive at a historical understanding with one another in history can be

29
given different names, according to identified with any earthly power, wheth-
the perspective from which they are er corporate or individual, but stands
viewed: demonic-divine-human, sac- in judgment on all of man's decisions.
r amen tal- prophetic-secular, heterono- A Christian socialism seemed, in Til-
mous-theonomous-autonomous. Each lich's view, the best means of achieving
middle term represents the synthesis such a theonomous goal.
of the other two, the one toward which
history is always extending itself-- GOD'S TRANSCENDENCE OVER
sometimes creatively, sometimes de- HISTORY
structively, never completely fulfilled, What evaluation do we place on this
but always driven by the transcendent theology of history? In spite of its ob-
power of the anticipated fulfillment. vious leanings toward over-generaliza-
Religious socialism should be under- tion (a built-in danger in any historical
stood as one such move toward a new typology), and in spite of the naivete
theonomy. It is more than a new of its socialism (why cannot the social
economic system. It is a comprehen- body become a demonic heteronomy no
sive understanding of existence, the less all-embracing than the traditional
form of the theonomy demanded and national state?), Tillich's interpretation
expected by our present Kairos. 7 gives striking expression to one of the
most fundamental themes of Christian
Tillich views the history of western philosophy of history: God's transcen-
Christendom by way of this typology.H dence over history. This theme, stressed
The early Middle Ages exhibited the- alike by the Old Testament prophets
onomy, for both corporate and individual and the Protestant Reformers, is in es-
power were subordinated to an ultimate, sence the application to history of the
divine perspective. In the later medie- First Commandment: I am the Lord
val period, the ecclesiastical system thy God, which have brought thee out
came to overshadow everything, and a of the land of Egypt, out of the house
heteronomy resulted. The Renaissance of bondage. Thou shalt have no other
constituted an individualistic, autono- gods before me. In the greatest of con-
mous over-reaction to the stifling medie- temporary theological interpretations of
val heteronomy. The early Reformation history, Eric Voegelin's still unfinished
endeavored to restore the theonomous Order and History, one can see how
perspective of early Christianity, but in Tillich's theonomy motif has borne ex-
the later years of the Reformation era, ceedingly rich fruit; as I have noted
Protestant ecclesiastical controls coupled elsewhere, Tillich taught Voegelin to see
with the absolutistic powers of rising the central demonic temptation of our
national states created a new heter- time: the attempt to create God in man's
onomy. The eighteenth-century Enlight- own image--in the image of his political,
enment chose the path of rationalistic social, and religious theories and pro-
autonomy, thus over-reacting to heter- jects. Both cry to our age what Luther
onomy as the Renaissance had done in cried to his: Let God be God!lO
relation to medieval civilization. 9 For Yet Tillich never developed his historical
Tillich, the breakdown of autonomy after philosophy in detail. The Interpretation
World War I offered two alternatives: of History was the only book-length
return to a totalitarian heteronomy, as work on the subject he was to write, and
exemplified by Nazi (or Communist) when, a few years before his death, the
rule, or commitment to a theonomous American Theological Library Associa-
way of life, where the Ultimate is not tion requested permission to reprint it,
30
Tillich refused. Though the autobiogra- position. Existential questions, according
phical section of the book was recent- to Tillich's famous "principle of correla-
ly reissued,u the substantive portion of tion, can be answered only by proper
it, applying Tillich's typology to histori- ontological understanding. The most
cal epochs, remains out-of-print. Why? basic reason, then, for Tillich's lack of
For one thing, as Tillich himself tells continuing interest in historical inter-
us in his contributions to Christian Cen- pretation will be found to lie in the
tury's "How My Mind Has Changed nature of his ontological commitment.
series, he moved "beyond religious so- To this we shall now give our attention.
cialism after coming to the United
States,12 and did not find the political BEING ITSELF AND HISTORY UNDER
climate of the present an incentive to- THE PROTESTANT PRINCIPLE
ward more extensive interpretation of Tillich's profound concern with theono-
the past: my--with the elimination of all forms
Since the early twenties I have made of idolatry through focus on the only
a distinction between periods in which Ultimate Concern that is truly ultimate-
historical opportunities are predomi- led him to condemn the identification of
nant and those in which historical the Absolute with anything in the
trends determine the outcome. While phenomenal world. Thus in his auto-
I felt that the years after World War biography he wrote:
I were years of opportunity, I feel that My fundamental theological problem
those following World War II have arose in applying the relation of the
been years of trend. This also is only absolute, which is implied in the idea
relatively true, but it has a some- of God, to the relativity of human
what paralyzing influence on politi- religion. Religious dogmatism, includ-
cal passion. And since I believe that ing that of Protestant orthodoxy and
the key to history is historical action, the most recent phase of what is called
my desire to concentrate on the prob- dialectical theology, comes into being
lems of an interpretation of history when a historical religion is cloaked
was also diminished. 13 with the unconditional validity of the
Here Tillich makes quite clear that it divine, as when a book, person, com-
has been the present which has driven munity, institution, or doctrine claims
him to any historical interests that he absolute authority and demands the
has had, not the reverse, and it is not submission of every other reality; for
difficult to relate this present-time orien- no other claim can exist beside the
tation to Tillich's profound concern with unconditioned claim of the divine. But
philosophical and religious existentialism, that this claim can be grounded in a
which is at root a present (rather than finite, historical reality is the root of
past) oriented world-view. 14 But Tillich all heteronomy and all demonism.
quite rightly claims that he "was never The demonic is something finite and
an existentialist in the strict sense of the limited which has been invested with
word ;15 indeed, his entire theological the stature of the infinite. 16
endeavor can be understood as an at- But, if nothing "finite and limited can
tempt to stiffen and shore up existentia- be identified with the Ultimate, where do
lism through a firm ontology--or, ex- we find it? What criteria do we employ?
pressed otherwise, an attempt to provide Tillich refuses to start the search for the
an apologetic bridge for the existential- Ultimate in the realm of epistemology.
ly-immersed modern man to cross over for, he claims, every epistemology pre-
to an ontologically justifiable religious supposes an ontology. The start must there-
31
fore be made at the point of ontological paganism, Judaism or humanism which
reality itself. also reveal or actualize the New Being ;~IJ
Being itself is both the beginning and for Tillich this concept of a latent
the end of the search for the Ultimate, Church precludes the possibility of ec-
for it is the only Ultimate and the only clesiastical arrogance21 by exposing to
proper object of theonomous faithY No- criticism the idolatrous and presumptive
thing--no existent thing, idea, or person-- claims of the empirical churches. But,
can be identified with Being itself with- even more important, Tillich's ontologi-
out committing the root sin of idolatry; cal commitment demanded a radical
thus religious doctrines, affirmations and reinterpretation of the place of the his-
beliefs must be regarded as symbolic of torical Christ in Christian theology.
Being itself and not confused with ulti-
mate truth. For Tillich, religious phe- FAITH AND HISTORICAL
nomena, whether Christian or non-Chris- UNCERTAINTY
tian, can never attain a status beyond In The Interpretation of History it had
the symbolic: that is to say, though they been evident that Tillich was fully con-
participate in ontological reality, they vinced by the rationalistic arguments of
always point beyond themselves to that Lessing against historical certainty, and
Beingwhich is not another existent thing, by the negative judgments of nineteenth
but the ground of all that is.lS Here we century biblical criticism on the worth
arrive at Tillich's most fundamental of the New Testament accounts of Jesus.
operating rule, the Protestant principle, There Tillich wrote that, consistent with
by which he scores all attempts to elevate an aim held as far back as his doctoral
the symbolic to the level of ultimacy: studies in 1911, he was attempting to
as the Reformers condemned late medie- answer the question, how the Christian
val Romanism for heteronomously ab- doctrine might be understood, if the non-
solutizing the visible Church and identi- existence of the historical Jesus should
fying it with the divine will, so we must become historically probable.22 In the
unqualifiedly reject all historical identi- second volume of his Systematic The-
fications of the Absolute with religious ology the volume dealing with Chris-
phenomena. Where the myth is taken tology, Tillich reaffirmed his conviction
literally, writes Tillich, God is less than that faith cannot rest on such unsure
the ultimate, he is less than the subject ground as historical research into the
of ultimate concern, he is not God in the life of Jesus ;23 and, a year before his
infinite and unconditional sense of the death, in a foreword to the English trans-
great commandment.!!) lation of a seminal work by his teacher
Tillich's ontological orientation had a Martin Kiihler, Tillich made clear that
predictable effect on his historical in- the years had not altered his view-
terests: it shifted him away from history, point: I do believe that one emphasis
which at best can provide only symbols in Kiihler's answer is decisive for our
and myths of ultimacy, and directed his present situation, namely, the necessity
gaze to the purity of unconditioned Be- to make the certainty of faith indepen-
ing itself. Thus one finds remarkably dent of the unavoidable incertitudes of
little stress placed on ecclesiology in Til- historical research.24 But how to avoid
lich's thought, and a tendency to depre- the incertitudes of historical research
ciate the Church manifest in favor of when a historical incarnation of God in
a Church latent which is not a spe- Christ appears central to the Christian
cifiable or identifiable historical group, proclamation? Tillich's answer is to re-
but is composed of those groups within gard the Christ-event, not from the stand-
32
point of de facto divine incarnation (this tianity, as well as of any other re-
would have all the earmarks of idola- ligion, must be judged. The only in-
trous identification of Being itself with fallible truth of faith, the one in which
the finite and would violate the Pro- the ultimate itself is unconditionally
testant principle), but from the view- manifest, is that any truth of faith
point of religious symbol. Jesus, under- stands under a yes-or-no judgment. 27
stood symbolically as the Christ, is the
most fundamental religious symbol of THE ,KINGDOM OF GOD' SYMBOL
all, for in His death on the cross we have The stage was therefore set for Tillich's
the great Kairos--the decisive event par analysis of history and the Kingdom of
excellence--which symbolizes the judg- God in the third and final volume of
ment of Being itself on all human pre- his Systematic Theology. There he states
tensions and idolatrous expressions. 25 In- that in regard to the question of history's
deed, Jesus conceived as the Christ may meaning the subject-object character of
be termed the New Being, since in Him history precludes an objective answer in
we see the dichotomy betweel1 man's any detached, scientific sense,28 and that
essence and existence mended, and in- historical interpretation is subject to the
sight is given into the true nature of theological circle 29 interlocking the
Being, which is Eros or self-realizing observer with what he observes, so that
10ve. 26 But, having said all of this, we it is an unavoidable circle wherever the
must always be on our guard against ab- question of the ultimate meaning of his-
solutizing the historical Jesus or basing tory is asked.30 In the absence of any
our faith upon a historical foundation; possibility of arriving at objective histori-
indeed, the best evidence that the Christ- cal meaning (to do so would raise his-
event constitutes the greatest of all re- tory to the level of ultimacy, thus vio-
ligious symbols is that it judges even it- lating the Protestant principle), Tillich
self! affirms that the ambiguities of history
Every type of faith has the tendency are best understood and overcome
to elevate its concrete symbols to ab- through the symbol Kingdom of God.
solute validity. The criterion of the The Kingdom of God may appear
truth of faith, therefore, is that it im- through a political system, a revolu-
plies an element of self-negation. That tion, a church, or an individual, and
symbol is most adequate which ex- whenever it does appear it heals the
presses not only the ultimate but also conflicts of history--but it heals them
its own lack of ultimacy. Christianity only fragmentarily. For the ultimate
expresses itself in such a symbol in and final answer to history is not
contrast to all other religions, namely, found in history, but at the end of
in the Cross of the Christ. Jesus could history. This answer is the salvation
not have been the Christ without of God, called by Tillich universal
sacrificing himself as Jesus to him- essentialization, which means that
self as the Christ. Any acceptance of all being, man included, is raised to
Jesus as the Christ which is not the unambiguous unity with the ground
acceptance of Jesus the crucified is and power of being, and therein finds
a form of idolatry. The ultimate con- its fulfillment. 31
cern of the Christian is not Jesus, but Since Tillich views evil as a negative--as
the Christ Jesus who is manifest as the absence of being--he holds that it
the crucified. The event which has has no actual ontological existence; uni-
created this symbol has given the versal essentialization therefore pre-
criterion by which the truth of Chris- cludes the eternal damnation of anyone. 32
33
Indeed, it is vital to see that when Til- historical interpretation of the Christian
lich employs traditional eschatological faith. It should not come as a surprise,
terminology (general resurrection, last therefore, that in spite of Tillich's
judgment, etc.), he does not refer to opposition to suprahistoricaln view of
concrete historical happenings at the end salvation-history,39 and in spite of his
of the age; he regards these doctrines as caveats against the historical indifferent-
symbols of man's present relationship to ism of the Eastern religions,40 his last
the ground of his being. Thus he can years saw him being drawn more and
discuss the resurrection of the body with- more into the orbit of non-historical
out reference to the Resurrection of Oriental thought. From May to July of
Christ as either norm or criterion ;33 1960, Tillich visited Japan, and in re-
thus, a la Schelling's concept of the be- trospect he described the religious ef-
comingness of God, Tillich sees Being fect his Eastern experience had upon
itself as engaged in the eternal con- him:
quest of the negative; 34 and thus he They have confirmed my theological
diagrams 35 the relation between eterni- conviction that one cannot divide the
tyand time not in terms of the traditional religions of mankind into one true
biblical concept of linear, historical pro- and many false religions. Rather, one
gression,36 viz. must subject all religions, including
Christianity, to the ultimate criteria
Creation. Incarnation. Last judgement of religion: the criterion of a faith
but in such a way as to affirm that which transcends every finite symbol
fulfillment is going on in every mo- of faith and the criterion of a love
ment here and now beyond history, not which unconditionally affirms, judges,
some time in the future, but here and and receives the other person. 41
now above ourselves :37 The fact that so many highly educated
people (in the West) prefer Zen to
Eternity Christianity seems to me to stem
the ((existential now)) from their aversion to the objectified
human history and literally interpreted Christian
Kenneth Hamilton has well captured the symbols. The necessity of demytho-
symbolical spirit of Tillich's understand- logizing in the sense of deliteraliz-
ing of the Kingdom of God and its ing or deobjectifying has become
eschatological fulfillment: more urgent for me in light of these
Allegory: Christ will deliver up the observations and of the whole im-
Kingdom to the Father, and God will pact of Eastern wisdom on me. And
be all in all. Eastern wisdom, like every other
Reality: Universal participation in the wisdom, certainly belongs to the self-
Ground of Being can come only in es- manifestations of the Logos and must
sentialization, where the Absolute be included in the interpretation of
gathers into itself all that is positive Jesus as the Christ, if he is rightly to
in the movement from essence to exist- be called the incarnation of the
ence, thus fulfilling itself through the Logos.42
world -process. 38 On his return to the United States, Til-
Tillich's endeavor to provide an ontologi- lich delivered at Columbia University
cal answer to man's existential predica- the American Bampton Lectures for 1961,
ment led him--as our analysis of his subsequently published under the title,
views of Christ and the Kingdom has Christianity and the Encounter of the
well demonstrated--to a basically non- World Religions;43 there Tillich himself
34
drew many of the parallels between well as an appropriate base for the criti-
Eastern religious thought and his own cism of his philosophy of history in the
ontological version of Christianity that subsequent sections of this paper.
Professor Yoshinori Takeuchi of Kyoto It might well be that one can say the
had earlier noted in his Festschrift essay inner telos, which means the inner
for Tillich. 44 Mircea Eliade, in memori- aim of a thing, such as the telos of
alizing Tillich, noted that the Bampton the acorn is to become a tree--the inner
Lectures signified only the beginning of aim of the history of religions is to
a new phase in Paul Tillich's thought45-- become a Religion of the Concrete
a phase marked by his proposal at the Spirit. But we cannot identify this
University of Chicago Divinity School Religion of the Concrete Spirit with
of a joint seminar on History of Religions any actual religion, not even Christi-
and Systematic Theology; this took place anity as a religion .... We can see
in the winter and autumn quarters of the whole history of religions in this
1964, and Eliade describes Tillich's con- sense as a fight for the Religion of
tribution to it in terms that well charac- the Concrete Spirit, a fight of God
terize the religious ontologist whose against religion within religion. And
interests had always extended beyond this phrase, the fight of God within
the historical confines of Christian faith: religion against religion, could be-
Paul Tillich would never have be- come the key for understanding the
come a historian of religions nor, as otherwise extremely chaotic, or at least
a matter of fact, a historian of any- seemingly chaotic, history of religions.
thing else. He was interested in the ... I must say that my own Systematic
existential meaning of history--Ge- Theology was written before these
schichte, not Historie. When confront- seminars and had another intention,
ed with archaic, traditional, and namely, the apologetic discussion
oriental religions, he was interested against and with the secular. Its pur-
in their historical concreteness and pose was the discussion or the answer-
immediacy, not in their modifications ing of questions coming from the
or changes or in the results of the scientific and philosophical criticism
flowing of time. He did not deny the of Christianity. But perhaps we need
importance of the temporal flux for a longer, more intensive period of
the understanding of the history of interpenetration of systematic the-
specific religious forms--but he was ological study and religious historical
primarily interested in their struc- studies. Under such circumstances the
tures: he deciphered their meaning structure of religious thought might
in grasping their structures. 46 develop in connection with another
Tillich's last public lecture was delivered or different fragmentary manifestation
on October 12, 1965, on the subject, The of theonomy or of the Religion of the
Significance of the History of Religions Concrete Spirit. This is my hope for
for the Systematic Theologian. In it he the future of theologyY
correlated his new appreciation for the
non-historical religions of mankind with THE TILLICHIAN DILEMMA
his ontologically conceived, essentially Shortly after Tillich's death, The Chris-
non-historical interpretation of Chris- tian Century published an article en-
tianity; his hope was that out of them titled, After Tillich, What? Its author
a Religion of the Concrete Spirit might concluded his evaluation as follows:
arise. Tillich's remarks, quoted in extenso, Tillich solved the problem of reflection
provide a fitting close to his career as and doubt not by equating the absolute
35
with the whole content of a system of it), and even though no revelational
thought or of religious feeling, but by limit to its use could be appealed to
identifying it with a paradoxical object-- (since revelation had also been subordi-
one whose objectivity can be grasped nated to it), Tillich found himself un-
only in its self-cancellation and whose willing to allow the principle to destroy
power is exercised by its self-negation. his own ultimate concern. 51 Like the sor-
... To have seen this is Tillich's enduring cerer's apprentice, he perhaps became
contribution.4B In point of fact, to have dimly aware too late of having conjured
seen this is Tillich's quandary--a dilem- up a critical methodology that even he
ma which makes Robert Benchley's ten was incapable of controlling; like a mod-
years in a quandary seem like a mild ern King Midas (to change the simile) he
experience indeed. had acquired a power that was now
systematically and logically destroying
THE PROTESTANT PRINCIPLE that which he loved most.
As we have emphasized, Tillich was
concerned throughout his career with BEING ITSELF
the issue of idolatry: he wished above But suppose--by what Franz Pieper called
all to have an ultimate concern that was the happy inconsistency so characteris-
in fact ultimate (Being itself), and he tic of modern theologians 52 --the Protes-
endeavored mightily to develop a meth- tant principle is kept in subordination
odology (the Protestant principle) which to Being itself: is Tillich better off? Can
would crush all attempts to absolutize Being itself survive as an ultimate con-
the non-ultimate. But, in this case, where cern? The answer is Yes only if Being
does ultimacy lie? With Being itself or itself is given no descriptive content
with the Protestant principle? With the whatever, i.e., if it is understood in a
absolute or with its self-negation? purely formal sense only. Why? Be-
This quandary was brought into sharp cause the moment any characteristics
focus by Thomas J. J. Altizer, in his are given to it, then these fall under the
1963 review of Tillich's Christianity and axe of the Protestant principle, which
the Encounter of the World Religions, preserves Being itself from idolatrous,
where he asserted that had Tillich ap- anthropomorphic contamination. Every-
plied his Protestant principle consistent- thing predicated of Being itself (even
ly--by refusing to give ultimacy even to love) must be regarded symbolically in
Being itself--he could have become the orderto avoid absolutizing finitevalues. 53
progenitor of a new theonomous age: Under these circumstances, though Til-
Potentially Tillich could become a new lich insists that religious symbols do
Luther if he would extend his principle participate in the ultimate reality to
of justification by doubt to a theological which they point, no meaningful criteria
affirmation of the death of God.49 Til- can possibly determine whether an al-
lich, however, was horrified at such a leged symbol is in fact truly symbolic
suggestion, and in the heated argument of Being itself. Otherwise stated, there
with death-of-God theologians shortly is no way of knowing which aspects of
before his death (Mrs. Tillich connects a symbol only point to the absolute and
his fatal heart attack with it)50 Tillich which actually participate in it--or in-
refused to give the Protestant principle deed, if any genuine participation oc-
a critical function in relation to Being curs at all. 54
itself; though his writings had never set And if we do take Being itself in a purely
limits on the application of the principle formal sense? Then we indeed have an
(even Jesus, as we noted, was judged by irrefutable concept--but its irrefutability

36
is a Pyrrhic victory, since it is achieved Where does the root difficulty lie in Til-
at the cost of draining away all substan- lich's remarkable system? Precisely at
tive knowledge. As Willard van Orman the epistemological point: Tillich con-
Quine has well stated: sistently refuses to face the verification
A curious thing about the ontological question. In the spirit of such metaphysi-
problem is its simplicity. It can be cal philosophers of history as Kant and
put in three Anglo-Saxon monosyl- Hegel,57 he does not see that the attempt
lables: What is there?)) It can be to produce a philosophy of maximum
answered, moreover, in a word-- generality results in a formal Weltan-
Everything)) (or Being itself!)--and schauung that says nothing because it
everyone will accept this answer as says everything. Over much of Tillich's
true. However, this is merely to say labors the remark could be posted that
that there is what there is.55 Wolfgang Pauli wrote on a paper sub-
Paul Edwards, in a trenchant essay on mitted to him by a fellow physicist: This
Professor Tillich's Confusions, delivers isn't right. This isn't even wrong!)) Til-
the coup de grace: Tillich's theology is lich missed the vital insight offered by
indeed safe from anti-theological argu- contemporary analytical philosophy58 in
ments, ... but only at the expense of its distinction between analytic (purely
being compatible with anything what- formal) and synthetic (content) judg-
ever. All of us normally regard this ... ments; only the latter, based on ex-
as a reason for calling a sentence mean- periential investigation of the world, can
ingless or devoid of cognitive content.))56 provide substantive knowledge of reality.
If one intends, therefore, to speak of
REMEDY: HISTORY THE FUNDAMENT religious or historical meaning, he must
OF FAITH offer concrete evidence in behalf of his
Whether Being itself or the Protestant claims--or, at minimum, show that his
principle serves as the ultimate reference views are not compatible with all nega-
point in the Tillichian world-view, the re- tive evidence! Granted, only a high level
sult is the same: total absence of religious of probability can ever be adduced in sup-
content. Neither the purely analytical con- port of such synthetic claims; but to
cept of Being nor the purely critical Prot- demand absolute certainly is to obtain
estant principle can offer any substantive pure formality and thus no knowledge
answers to ultimate questions such as of the world at all.
those concerned with the meaning of his-
tory. To avoid heteronomous and autono-
mous idolatries, we must be able to dis- HISTORICAL PROBABILITY
tinguish true theonomy from them; butthe In trying to elevate religious truth above
formality of Tillich's system precludes the the <<incertitudes of history, Tillich was
possibility of our doing so. The crucial attempting the impossible. All our veri-
events (kairoi) of history must be identi- fiable knowledge of the world, present
fied and related to the great Kairos--the or past, is based on the sifting of ex-
Christ-event--but the symbolical charac- periential data, and just as in ordinary
ter of the latter leaves us without clear life we must constantly jump the gap
criteria for recognizing kairoi and, equal- between probability and certainty by
ly important, for distinguishing divine faith, so in the religious realm we have
from demonic kairoi. And the Kingdom no right to demand--much less any
of God hardly solves the ambiguities of expectation of acquiring--a certainty
history when the operations of Being it- transcending the probabilities of histori-
self cannot be unambiguously specified. cal evidence. 59 Ian Ramsey has recently
37
resuscitated Butler and Newman in ef- the Systematic Theology reaches its
fectively making our point: terminal sections on the Kingdom of God
Butler reminded us that a total devo- and eschatology, the reader is uncom-
tion to duty--shown, for example, by fortably reminded of Wolcott Gibbs's
leaping into a river to save a drowning evaluation of Alexander Woolcott: He
child--could, and reasonably, be as- wasn't exactly hostile to facts, but he
sociated with many empirical un- was apathetic about them. And in Til-
certainties and probabilities; we might lich's hope for the future of theology, a
be mistaken about the strenght of the Religion of the Concrete Spirit, one
current, about our swimming ability, finds the exact opposite of factual con-
or whether in fact that floating heap creteness: a transparent wraith of a
was a child, and so on. But acknow- religion, capable of interpretation in any
ledging these uncertainties Butler direction one wishes--the parent of Al-
claimed that we should nevertheless tizer's mystical third age of the Spiriv,63
think a man in a literal sense distract- and of the secular theologians' God of
ed--not himself--who failed to respond the present, who is conveniently identi-
to the moral challenge displayed by fied with the social action favored at the
such a situation of great consequence. moment. 64
For Butler this moral response reared
on probabilities, this total devotion, THE JESUS OF HISTORY
and (in Newman's phrase) this real Herbert Butterfield's warning still stands:
assent is reasonable, as being that "the Christ of the theologians must not
which any reasonable man, anyone be divorced from the Jesus of history.65
deserving to be called a person, would Had Tillich approached religious and
in similar circumstances display. historical truth-questions from the stand-
Probability in this special sense is point of the Jesus of the primary docu-
(said Butler) the guide of life. So ments, he would have found the answer
our Christian convictions based on to his quest. Claiming to be no less than
historical uncertainties are in prin- God incarnate and verifying that claim
ciple reasonable as being one with by His resurrection, Jesus demonstrated
the rest of life. 60 that the ultimate could and did enter the
How unfortunate that Tillich uncritically phenomenal world, that those who had
absorbed the negative nineteenth century seen Him had seen the Father (John
criticism of the New Testament records 14:6-9), and that therefore His word
and never made an effort to distinguish stood in judgment and in grace over
truly inductive historical method from everything else. The true preservative
the rationalistic, antimiraculous histori- against idolatry is, then, not a Protestant
cism that passed itself off as scientific principle (or any other principle) that
history.61 Had he made this distinction, judges Jesus, but acknowledgment that
he would have found the New Testament Jesus and Jesus alone is the Way, Truth,
documents fully capable of sustaining and Life. Whereas the Protestant prin-
the truth-claims of the Christian faith,62 ciple leads logically to a negation of
and he would not have been led into a ultimacy itself, Jesus is the door leading
quixotic endeavor to ground religious the believer into the Father's Kingdom.
belief in formalistic ontology. Tragically, Now the characteristics of God's reign
his focus shifted from the facts of his- become clear through the teachings, the
tory to the tautologies of Being, until he life, and the death of His only Son; and
was incapable of saying anything con- a literal Incarnation of God becomes the
crete about either history or faith. When empirical center of history, the key to

38
its meaning, and the earnest of eschatol- position, pp. 345-48); (2) John W. Sanderson,
ogical fulfillment at the time of Christ's Jr., "Historical Fact or Symbol? The Philosophies
of History of PaulTillich and Reinhold Niebuhr,))
return. 66 Westminster Theological Journal, XX (May, 1958),
Only if God did in fact enter the world 158-69, and XXI (November, 1958), 58-74; (3)
in Jesus can Tillich's theonomous per- William Wright Paul, "PauITillich's Interpretation
spective on the total historical drama of History)) (Ann Arbor, Michigan: University
Microfilms [AC-l No. 59-3124/, 1959); (4) George
come to fruition. For apart from a de H. Tavard, Paul Tillich and the Christian Mes-
facto revelation of God in history, what sage (New York: Scribner, 1962), especially
Danto calls substantive philosophy of chap. v ("Christology As History))), pp. 82-112;
history is in principle impossible, since (5) Robert D. Knudsen, "Symbol and Myth in
Contemporary Theology, with Special Reference
it always implies a stance outside of time to the Thought of Paul Tillich, Reinhold Niebuhr,
by which the philosopher views the and Nicolas Bel'dyaev)) (Roslyn, Pa.: The Author,
present and the past in the perspective 1963), passim (mimeographed and stylistically
of the future (indeed of the ultimate revised version of the author's 1952 S.T.M. thesis
future, for there must be an end to submitted at Union Theological Seminary, New
York); (6) ]. Heywood Thomas, Paul Tillich: An
every story).67 Wittgenstein was quite Appraisal ("The Library of Philosophy and Theo-
right that the sense of the world must logy)); London: SCM Press, 1963), especially
lie outside the world.68 How to find it chaps. iii ("Christology and Historical Criticism))),
then? Not by constructing philosophical pp. 78-90, and vii ("History and the Kingdom of
God))), pp. 150-71; (7) Avery R. Dulles, SI,
towers of Babel that inevitably produce "Paul Tillich and the Bible,)) in Thomas A.
confusion because they attempt the im- O'Meara and Celestin D. Weisser (eds.), Paul Til-
possible, but by recognizing that no man lich in Catholic Thought (Dubuque, Iowa: Priory
has ascended up to heaven, but he that Press, 1964), pp. 109-32 (with Tillich's reply
as to the relation between the Jesus of history
came down from heaven, even the Son and the Christ of faith, pp. 309-10); (8) Ja-
of man (John 3:13). Lacking the eternal mes Luther Adams, Paul Tillich's Philosophy of
perspective necessary to discover his- Culture, Science, and Religion (New York: Harper,
tory's meaning, we must forever remain 1965), passim; and (9) Bruce ]. R. Cameron, "The
in darkness concerning it unless a shaft Historical Problem in Paul Tillich's Christology,))
Scottish Journal of Theology, XVIII (September,
of light from outside the world illumines 1965),257-72.
the shadows of history. Tillich, for all 2 Mircea Eliade, "Paul Tillich and the History
his ontological speculations and his over- of Religions,)) in The Future of Religions by Paul
weening desire to escape from the his- Tillich (New York: Harper, 1966), pp. 35-36.
3 E.g., Arthur C. Danto, Analytical Philosophy
torical, found himself compelled to lo-
of History (Cambridge, England: Cambridge Uni-
cate the great Kairos in a minor province versity Press, 1965).
of the Roman empire during the reign 4 Cf. Karl Hennig, "Paul Tillich: Leben und
of Caesar Augustus. Would that Tillich Werk,)) in Der Spannungsbogen. Festgabe fUr
had given himself fully to that historical Paul Tillich zum 75. Geburtstag (Stuttgart: Evan-
gelisches Verlagswerk, 1961), pp. 171 ff.
event, for there the Light of the world 5 Paul Tillich, The Interpretation of History,
indeed shone forth; there a perspicuous trans. Rasetzki and Talmey (New York: Scribner,
revelation from outside of time clarified 1936); Part One of this work has just been
the meaning of history once for all. reissued under the title, On the Boundary: An
Autobiographical Sketch (New York: Scribner,
1966).
6 With the "boundary)) motif in Tillich's thought,
Notes cf. Helmuth Thielicke, "Paul Tillich--Wanderer
1 Especially noteworthy are: (1) James Luther zwischen zwei Welten,)) in Der Spannungsbogen,
Adams, IITillich's Interpretation of History,)) in pp. 9-24.
Charles W. Kegley and Robert W. Bretall (eds.), 7 Tillich, On the Boundary, pp. 80-81.
The Theology of Paul Tillich (New York: Mac- 8 I have-discussed and schematically diagram-
millan, 1952), pp. 294-309 (with Tillich's reply med Tillich's theonomy-heteronomy-autonomy
to Adams and to other critics of his historical view in my book, The Shape of the Past: An

39
Introduction to Philosophical Historiography 25 Cf. Tillich's article, ((Kairos,)) in Halverson and
((( History in Christian Perspective,)) Vol. 1; Ann Cohen (eds.), A Hand-book of Christian Theology
Arbor, Michigan: Edwards Brothers, 1963), pp. (New York: Meridian Living Age Books, 1958),
127-31. pp. 196-97.
9 Cf. Tillich, ((A History of Christian Thought: 26 See Tillich's Love, Power, and Justice (New
A Stenographic Transcription of Lectures Deliver- York: Oxford University Press, 1954), passim.
ed during the Spring Term, 1953 at Union The- 27 Tillich, Dynamics of Faith (New York: Harper
ological Seminary,)) ed. Peter H. John, pp. 234 to Torchbooks, 1958), pp. 97-98.
41. (((These lectures are intended for private use 28 Tillich, Systematic Theology, Ill, 349.
of present and former students of Dr. Tillich and 29 I have dealt in some detail with the issue of
are not to be quoted for publication without his the ((theological circle)) in my paper, ((Lutheran
permission))--Foreword.) Hermeneutics and Hermeneutics Today,)) in As-
pects of Biblical Hermeneutics ((( Concordia The-
10 Montgomery, op. cit., pp. 135-36; I treat Voe- ological Monthly. Occasional Papers,)) No. 1; St.
gelin in detail on pp. 131 ff. Louis, Missouri, 1966), pp. 78-108.
11 See above, note 5.
12 Cf. Hanns Lilje, ((Paul Tillichs Bedeutung fur 30 Tillich, Systematic Theology, loco cit.
das amerikanische Geistesleben,)) in Der Span- 31 Alexander J. McKelway, The Systematic The-
nungsbogen, pp. 149-69. ology of Paul TilIich (Richmond, Virginia: John
13 Tillich, in Harold E. Fey (ed.), How My Mind Knox Press, 1964), p. 249.
Has Changed (New York: Meridian Living Age 32 ((Absolute judgments over finite beings . .. are
Books, 1961), pp. 165-66. impossible, because they make the finite infinite))
14 Cf. Rudolf Bultmann's characteristic statement (Tillich, Systematic Theology, III, 407).
at the close of his Gitford Lectures: ((Always in 33 McKelway, op, cit., p. 245, n. 11.
your present lies the meaning in history" (The 34 Tillich, Systematic Theology, Ill, 405. On the
Presence of Eternity: History and Eschatology profound influence of Schelling's Lebensphiloso-
(New York: Harper, 1957J, p. 155). phie on Tillich's ontological thought, see John
15 How My Mind Has Changed, p. 165. Cf. Til- H. Randall, Jr., ((Tillich's Systematic Theology,
lich's exceedingly valuable essay, ((Existential vol. Ill,)) Union Seminary Quarterly Review, XIX
Philosophy: Its Historical Meaning,)) in his The- (May, 1964),356 ff.
ology of Culture, ed. Robert C. Kimball (New 35 See Tillich, Systematic Theology, Ill, 420.
York: Oxford University Press, 1959), pp. 76-111. 36 As presented, e.g., in my Shape of the Past, pp.
16 On the Boundary, p. 40. 42,45.
17 ((The God who is a being is transcended by :17 Tillich, ((The Decline and the Validity of the
the God who is Being itself, the ground and Idea of Progress,)) in his The Future of Religions,
abyss of every being)) (Tillich, Biblical Religion p. 79. Cf. Tillich's theme of ((the eternal now,"
and the Search for Ultimate Reality /Chicago: which served as the title of one of his important
University of Chicago Press, 1955J, p. 82). sermons and was chosen by him as the title for
18 See Tillich's essays, ((The Meaning and Justifi- the entire published sermon collection in which
cation of Religious Symbols)) and ((The Religious it appeared: The Eternal Now (New York: Scrib-
Symbol)) in Sidney Hook (ed.), Religious Ex- ner, 1963).
perience and Truth (New York: New York Uni- 38Kenneth Hamilton, ((Paul Tillich,)) in Philip
versity Press, 1961), pp. 3-11, 301-21. Edgcumbe Hughes (ed.), Creative Minds in Con-
In Tillich, ((Where Do We Go from Here in The- temporary Theology (Grand Rapids, Michigan:
ology?)) Religion in Life, Winter, 1955-56. Eerdmans, 1966), p. 478. Cf. Hamilton's book-
lenght treatment of Tillich: The System and the
20 Thomas, op. cit., p. 140. Gospel: A Critique of Paul TilIich (((The Library
21 Ibid., pp. 140-41. Tillich treats the ((Church of Philosophy and Theology)); London: SCM
latent)) in conjunction with several topics dis- Press, 1963).
cussed in the third volume of his Systematic The- 39 See Tillich's Systematic Theology, Ill, 363. On
ology. the dialectical concept of ((suprahistory)) (((meta-
22 The Interpretation of History, p. 33. history,)) Geschichte), see my essay, ((Karl Barth
23 Systematic Theology (3 vols.; Chicago: Uni- and Contemporary Theology of History,)) publi-
versity of Chicago Press, 1951-1963), Il, 113. shed both in the Evangelical Theological Society
24 Tillich, ((Foreword)) to Martin Kiihler, The So- Bulletin, VI (May, 1963), 39-49, and in The
Called Historical Jesus and the Historic, Biblical Cresset, XXVII (November, 1963),8-14.
Christ, trans. Carl E. Braaten (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1964), p. xii. (This translation is 40 See, e.g., his 1939 essay, ((Historical and Non-
limited to the first and second essays in the 1896 historical Interpretations of History: A Com-
ed. of Kiihler's book.) parison,)) in his The Protestant Era, trans. James

40
Luther Adams (Chicago: University of Chicagu and to raise his finger if something is said that
Press, 1948), pp. 16-31. lacks rationality. He answered that he could not
41 How My Mind Has Changed. p. 161. accept this task because he would have to raise
42 Ibid .. pp. 163-64. his finger during the whole lecture" (The The-
4:) New York: Columbia University Press, 1963. ology of Paul Tillich, eds. Kegley and Bretall,
44 Takeuchi, "Buddhism and Existentialism: The p. 330).
Dialogue between Oriental and accidental .j9 Tillich's inability to grasp this vital fact was
Thou.r,th,)) in Waiter Leibrecht (ed.), Religion and clearly brought out in his interview with Ved
Culture: Essays in Honor of Paul Tillich (New Mehta shortly before his death. Mehta: "I asked
York: Harper, 1959), pp. 291-318. Tillich whether ... he thought Christ really
45 Eliade, in Tillich's The Future of Religions. performed miracles or whether he thought
p.32. the miracles were 'mythological: in Bultmann's
46 Ibid .. p. 33. sense." "I think there is good evidence for some
47 Tillich, "The Significance of the History of of those healings that He did, he (Tillich) re-
Religions for the Systematic Theologian, in his plied equably. "But in history, of course, you never
The Future of Religions, pp. 87-88, 91. have definite evidence for anything)) (Ved Mehta,
48 Robert P. Scharlemam.c, "After Tillich, What?" "The New Theologian 1,0) The New Yorker XLI
The Christian Century LXXXII (December 1, [November 13, 1965/, 128).
1965), 1480. Scharlemann's muddy neo-Tillich-
ian thinking has been scored by John Hick in an (illIan T. Ramsey, Christian Discourse: Some
exchange in Theology Today, XXII (January, Logical Explorations (London: Oxford University
1966),513-29; XXIII (April, 1966), 139-40. Press, 1965), pp. 23-24.
49 Altizer, in The Christian Scholar, XLVI (Winter,
61 This is Alan Richardson's primary criticism of
1963),362. Cf. my book, The 'Is God Dead?' Con- Tillich's theology of history; see Richardson's
troversy (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, History Sacred and Profane (Bampton Lectures
1966), pp. 23-24 and passim. for 1962. London: SCM Press, 1964), pp. 127-31.
62 See Montgomery, "Toward a Christian Philo-
50 So reports Dr. Jurgen Winterhager, professor sophy of History,,, in Carl F. H. Henry (ed.).
of ecumenics at Berlin. Jesus of Nazareth: Saviour and Lord (Grand
;;1 Cf. Tillich's sermon, "Our Ultimate Concern,"
Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1966), pp. 225-40.
in his The New Being (New York: Scribner, 1955), Argues George H. Tavard (op. cit., pp. 111-12):
pp. 152-60; and D. Mackenzie Brown (ed.), "Tillich is right in being sceptical of the his-
Ultimate Concern: Tillich in Dialogue (New torians' effort to re-write the story of Jesus--but
York: Harper, 1965), passim. for the wrong reason. Historians cannot re-write
52 Franz Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, trans. and
the story because it is already written: the his-
eds. T. Engelder, J. T. Mueller, and W. W. F. Al- torical value of the New Testament is plain
brecht (4 vols.; St. Louis, Missouri: Concordia, enough. Historians have not been able to make
1950-1957), II, 557. its reliability improbable. Tillich has simply not
5:l "There can be no doubt that any concrete as-
been radical enough in criticizing liberal the-
sertion about God must be symbolic, for a con- ology. He has not seen that the historians who
crete assertion is one which uses a segment of doubt the value of the records have failed to
finite experience In order to say something about establish their point. Here, Paul Tillich remains
him!> (Tillich, Systematic Theology, I, 239). a child of his generation, a victim of the his-
54 This point has been made by a number of Til-
toricism of the last century.
lich's critics in the symposium edited by Sidney 6:) See Montgomery, The 'Is God Dead?' Contro-
Hook (op. cit.).
versy, p. 26.
55 Willard van Orman Quine, "On What There
64 Cf. James McCord's opinion, described in Time,
Is,)) in his From a Logical Point of View (2d ed.;
New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1963), p. 1. August 5, 1966, pp. 69-70, that "we are on the
56 Paul Edwards, "Professor Tillich's Confusions,)'
threshold of a whole new era in theology,))
Mind LXXIV (April, 1965), 197 (Edward's italics).
characterized by emphasis on the Holy Spirit--
57 See my Shape of the Past, pp. 67-68, 70-71:
"the God of the present."
and cf. Tillich's own remarks in How My Mind 65 Herbert Butterfield, Christianity and History

Has Changed, p. 168. ]I should not be necessary (London: Collins Fontana Books, 1957), p. 168.
to point out that for all this Tillich was no (l6 Montgomery, "Where Is History Going?" Re-

orthodox Kantian or Hegelian (see The Future of ligion in Life, XXXIII, No. 2 (Spring, 1964).
Religions, pp. 85-86). G7 Danto, op. cit., p. 12.
58 Of more than humorous interest is Tillich's 68 "Der Sinn del' Welt I11USS auserhalb ihrer lie-
passing comment: "lance said to a Logical pos- gen)) (Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophi-
itivist that I would like him to attend my lectures cus, 6. 41).

41

Вам также может понравиться