20 March 1889 A.D. Albrecht Ritschl Dies—Tubingen & Schleiermachian Theologian

20 March 1889 A.D.  Albrecht Ritschl Dies—Tubingen & Schleiermachian Theologian

Frei, Hans Wilhelm. “Albrecht Ritschl.”  Encyclopedia Britannica.  30 Jul 2012.  http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/504628/Albrecht-Ritschl.  Accessed 15 Jul 2014.

Albrecht Ritschl,  (born March 25, 1822, Berlin—died March 20, 1889, Göttingen, Ger.), German Lutheran theologian who showed both the religious and ethical relevance of the Christian faith by synthesizing the teaching of the Scriptures and the Protestant Reformation with some aspects of modern knowledge. Most of the results of Ritschl’s scholarship were presented in his major work, Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung (The Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation), 3 vol. (1870–74).

The son and grandson of Lutheran clergymen, Ritschl was trained in theology and philosophy at the universities of Bonn (1839–41) and Halle (1841–43). After receiving his doctorate in 1843, Ritschl joined the ranks of the Tübingen school, a theological movement involved in reconstructing the origins of Christianity and the early history of the church and its theology. Ritschl taught at the University of Bonn (1846–64) and at Göttingen from 1864 until his death. His first significant publication, Die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche (1850; “The Origin of the Old Catholic Church”), revealed both his initial indebtedness to and gradual breach with the Tübingen school, which, in its analysis of the early history of Christianity, he found too indebted to Hegelian presuppositions. Virtually all of his research came to fulfillment in his major work, Die christliche Lehre von der Rechtfertigung und Versöhnung, which deals with the historical and biblical materials (vols. 1–2) and with Ritschl’s own reconstruction (vol. 3).

Ritsch’s youthful biblical conservatism was shaken by the Hegelianism of the Tübingen theologian Ferdinand Christian Baur. In his earliest writings he agreed with Baur that Christianity is a historical development of perfectly logical pattern rather than a dogma revealed once and for all. By the time the second edition of his Die Entstehung der alt-katholischen Kirche appeared in 1857, he had abandoned this position completely. Henceforth, he refused to force the results of historical research into preconceived speculative patterns. He thought that the New Testament history of Jesus Christ, viewed simply as history and not as miracle, can lead to a practical rather than a speculative judgment affirming Jesus’ divine mission. Ritschl’s was a theology of revelation based on this unity of history with practical moral or value judgments. Influenced heavily by Immanuel Kant, Ritschl viewed religion as the triumph of the spirit (or moral agent) over humanity’s natural origins and environment. But he rejected for use in theology what he understood to be the impersonal generalizations of metaphysics and the natural sciences. The mystical and intuitive elements of the religious life were also completely foreign to his activist outlook; the goal of Christian life, he maintained, is work in and for the Kingdom of God. Against Protestant Pietism, which emphasized the spiritual piety of the individual, Ritschl argued persuasively for the ethical development of man in the context of his community, which for Ritschl took precedence even over the church itself.

Ritschl shared with Friedrich Schleiermacher the belief that for Christianity God is not known as self-existent; he is known only insofar as he conditions human trust in his self-revelation through Christ. Ritschl rejected such doctrines as original sin, the miraculous birth of Christ, the Trinity, and the Incarnation. His attempt to apply the tenets of Kantian philosophy to Protestant Christianity was typical of an era that had little feeling for the mystery of religion and no dread of a divine judgment. His effort to maintain a theology of divine revelation without the faith in miracles underlying the older dogma was bitterly attacked by both liberal and conservative critics, but his influence on German Protestant theology in the second half of the 19th century was nevertheless immense.