Was Schleiermacher a liberal theologian?
Here’s the problem clearly stated: Many folks define liberal theology as theology that takes its starting point from experience, e.g. either one’s own cultural-historical values, or (more commonly) transcendent human reason. As a result, they conflate Schleiermacher’s theological liberalism with secular humanism, Enlightenment reason, etc.
Henry Volk [12/03/2015 10:52 AM]
I’ve often heard it said that Sschleiernacher was basically an atheist.
John Kissinger [12/03/2015 10:56 AM]
well before you go around the campus of your seminary tomorrow telling everyone how Schleiermacher almost destroyed theology altogether until it was rescued by Karl Barth, let’s try to understand this complex and fundamental aspect of Schleiermacher’s theology and philosophy of religion. Experience and feeling are quite clearly not the same thing in Schleiermacher’s theology. https://fluxofthought.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-friedrich-schleiermachers-theology/
Charles Page [12/03/2015 11:13 AM]
ask David Vanoy about this!!!
Charles Page [12/03/2015 11:17 AM]
is it an absolute that Barth rescued Schleiermacher’s theology? We know that Barth rescued modern theology from the likes of Carl Henry.
John Kissinger [12/03/2015 12:00 PM]
One implication of his view of the inherently diverse nature of religion is a modest stance toward religious doctrine. Schleiermacher does not reject doctrine outright. While he denies that doctrine without inner piety has any value, calling it the “oft-broken echo of that original sound,” he affirms that doctrine is “the necessary and inseparable outcome” of inward piety. http://www.theologian-theology.com/theologians/modern-theology-schleiermacher-christian-faith/