Rev.B.Zirsangliana
A short Biography of Paul Tillich (1886 – 1965)
Paul Tillich, a German Lutheran theologian was born in 20th Aug, 1886 in a village called Starzeddel.He was brought up in a pastor-family. During the Nazi period he was forced to leave Germany. He settled in the United States and held teaching positions at Union theological seminary, New York, Harvard Divinity School, and the University of Chicago. His first volume of systematic theology was produced in 1950 while he was residing in Union theological seminary in New York City.
Evaluation of Tillich’s Systematic theology Vol 1:
Theological thought and purpose of Paul Tillich:
Tillich, in his preface to Systematic volume I tells us that his purpose is ‘to present a method and structure of a theological system written from an apologetic point of view and carried through in a continuous correlation with philosophy’ (p. ix-x).According to Tillich, all theology as he sees it, has a dual function: to state the basic truth of the Christian faith and to interpret this truth in the existing cultural situation. Tillich is convinced, on the contrary, that it is the unavoidable duty of the theologian to interpret the message in the cultural situation of his day. All of this makes it clear that Tillich is adverse to all supranaturalistic methods. His method of correlation, the basis of his whole theology, is expressly designed to avoid the pitfalls of supranaturalism without falling back in to idealistic liberalism. Tillich maintained that the fundamental questions arising today from our humanity are expressed by our cultures in different ways through their art and religious traditions, providing answer express in terms of religious symbols. He identified five questions arising from our human existence, with five answers in the form of Biblical religious symbols;
• How can we posses’ knowledge of which we are certain? Symbolic answer: Logos
• How can we resist the destructive forces that threaten to disintegrate our lives? Symbolic answer: God as creator.
• How can we remedy the loneliness and alienation we experience? symbolic answer: Jesus Christ
• How can our lives be genuine given the complete ambiguity of our morality, religious practices and cultural self expression? Symbolic answer: the spirit.
• Is there any meaning in history? Symbolic answer: the kingdom of God.
Tillich approached these correlations by considering our ‘essential nature’ the ‘existential disruption’ in which we exist, and the actuality of life.
2. Methodology/ Method of Correlation:
Throughout his theology Tillich undertakes the difficult task of setting forth a systematic theology which is at the same time an apologetic. His aim is to show that the Christian message actually does answer the questions which modern man is being forced to ask about his existence, his salvation and his destiny. In his formulation of systematic theology Tillich used a method of Correlation. He defined the method of correlation as follows; “ In using the method of correlation systematic theology proceeds in the following way: it makes an analysis of the human situation out of which the existential questions are arise, and it demonstrate that the symbols used in the Christian message are the answer to these questions. Correlation requires an analysis of human situation which human in turns reveals something about the nature of human existence.” Hence, Tillich’s theology is a dialogue between classical Christianity and modern man. In this it is analogous to the work of the second century apologists who mediated between Christianity and late classical culture.
In his method of correlation, he shows the interdependence between the ultimate questions to which philosophy is driven and the answers given in the Christian message. In this method question and answer determine each other; if they are separated, the traditional answers become unintelligible, and the actual questions remain unanswered. Philosophy and theology are not separated, and they are not identical, but they are correlated. Such a method seeks to be dialectical in the true sense of the word. In order to gain a clearer understanding of this method of correlation it is necessary to discuss its negative meaning. Tillich’s aim in method of correlation is to create genuine conversation between human culture and revelation rather than driving a wedge between them.
3. Tillich’s definition of ‘sources’ and ‘experience’ in doing theology
In regard to the sources of theology, Tillich rejected what he calls ‘the assertion of neo-orthodox Biblicism’ that the Bible is the only source. For Tillich the Biblical message could not be understood and could never have been received had there not been preparation for it in human history. Since therefore, the Biblical message embraces more than the Biblical books, systematic theology has a source other than the Bible. Yet he admitted that the Bible is the basic course of systematic theology because it is the original document about the events on which Christian Church is founded.
In his systematic theology Vol I, Tillich discusses about the sources of theology as he sees them – scripture (both text and the events behind the texts), the over all church history and tradition. And the wider tradition of history and religion of the world. Tillich has a problem with seeing experience as a source, but rather prefers this to be seen more appropriately as the medium through which the sources are understood and analysed. Tillich says, “The event on which Christianity is based (he called it ‘Jesus of Nazareth’) is not derived from experience; it is given in history. Experience is not the source from which the contents of systematic theology are taken but the medium through which they are existentially received. Thus according to Tillich if we are committed to declare that Christ is the final revelation, experience could not be the fundamental source from which systematic theology is taken.
When we speak of ‘experience’ it is important to note that it has become the most important source of Contemporary liberation theology. In the contemporary trend of Liberation theology it is an analysis of human life situation and experience that sets theological agenda. Tillich didn’t give prime importance to experience for his theological formulation. From the perspective of liberation theology this would be the weakness of Paul Tillich-theology. It is important to note that Tillich tried to correlate the Culture and Christianity. On the other hand he seemed to over sight what a particular culture or context has a unique experience. Furthermore this unique experience is to be considered as a basis for the formulation of a relevant theology for a particular community or culture.
Reason, Revelation and Symbol
Tillich distinguishes two categories of reason, namely, an ontological reason and a technical reason. The former is the "structure of the mind which enables the mind to grasp and to shape reality," and the latter "is reduced to the capacity for ‘reasoning’" (Systematic theology Vol 1, p.71-75). For Tillich, the fundamental idea of reason is the ontological reason. The technical reason is adequate only as an adopted instrument for revealing the ontological reason. The ontological reason, in which subjective and objective are rooted, can be related to logos. The subjective reason can be defined as the rational structure of the mind, and that is able to catch and to form the reality. Relatively, the objective reason can be defined as the rational structure of reality, and that is caught and formed by the mind. Consequently, Logos is "the word which grasps and shapes reality" (p.74), and therefore is the ontological reason. Tillich takes the term, the depth of reason, to relate the transcendental power of which to the meaning of being-itself. However, reason subjects to our actual existence, and therefore reason experiences the limitations, conflicts, and ambiguities of our existence. Accordingly, a quest for revelation is inevitable to resolve the finitude of our reason. Reason is not the source of theology, yet it plays a significant role in the theology.
According to Tillich Revelation unveils what concerns us ultimately. He distinguishes two categories of revelation, namely, original and dependent revelation. An original revelation is a "giving" side revelation which never "gives" to us before, while the dependent revelation is a "receiving" side revelation by which the individual and the group are transformed. "Jesus is the Christ both because he could become the Christ and because he was received as the Christ" (p.126). Thus, the revelation of Jesus as the Christ, in which Christian message is rooted, is the final and actual revelation, and which in turn resolve the finitude of our existential reason. Revelation unveils our ultimate concern. Yet, the ground of revelation, for Tillich, is described as the "ground of being manifest in existence" (p.155). In terms of Christianity, "the ground of being is God" (p.156). Revelation mediates knowledge through human cognitive reason. The knowledge of revelation is the knowledge of God which must be described symbolically. The "Word of God" is a symbol for God revealing itself in Jesus as the Christ, because the Word of God reveals God’s manifestation in Jesus as the Christ which is the meaning of the symbol. For Tillich, symbols direct above themselves to something else. Symbols, not like signs, participate in the power of that which they symbolize. "A symbol has truth: it is adequate to the revelation it expresses. A symbol is true: it is the expression of a true revelation" (p.240). Religious symbols can be true symbols only if they participate in the power of the divine to which they point. Religious symbols are "double-edged," they point themselves to the infinite as well as the finite; they drive the infinite toward the finite and the finite toward the infinite; they unveil the divine life for the human and the human for the divine. Religious symbols transfer ultimate truth through things, persons and events.
Faith as ultimate concern
Tillich declared, ‘The object of theology is what concerns us ultimately. Only those propositions are theological which deal with their object in so far as it can become a matter of ultimate concern for us.’ The most fundamental assumption of his theological system is that faith is ‘the state of being ultimately concerned.’ Even his ontology is tied to this notion of faith. He stated, ‘Our ultimate concern is that which determines our being or not-being. Only those statements are theological which deal with their object in so far as it can become a matter of being or not-being for us.’
The explanation of faith as transcendent trust allows one to affirm with Tillich (1) that all human beings participate in both the finite and the infinite and that they ask, as well as attempt to answer, ultimate questions; that faith (2) is subjectively certain, objectively uncertain, can be idolatrous, and so includes elements of risk, doubt, and courage, (3) is a capacity within all human beings, even the agnostic, (4) is a centered act of the total personality accounting for one’s style of life, (5) may be identified with the phenomenon of the holy, and (6) implies an act and a content. None of these assertions mandates that faith be defined as ultimate concern
Tillich’s attempt to safeguard the truth of faith from that of the various sciences, such as physics, psychology, history, and philosophy, failed. If his analysis demonstrated anything, it was that all truth is interrelated. The theologian and philosopher of religion cannot consider the truth of faith in the absence of a consideration of truths from all areas of experience. Ultimate truth impacts all other truths, and they in turn lead back to ultimate truth. Instead of the theologian working hard to define, to defend, and to safeguard the turf of the theological enterprise, that enterprise can best be served by his or her efforts to elaborate, in conjunction perhaps with persons from other disciplines, a broad scheme of speculative ideas by and through which all truth may be coordinated and interpreted. In that way, faith can be shown to be not only an act by which the personality is centered, but also an act that is relevant to and informs our understanding of each and every reality. Within such a framework, faith needs no defense.
Thus Tillich’s definition of Faith as ultimate concern is closely linked with a religious pluralism. Infact every believer in different faith communities has the ultimate concern individually or corporately. If that ultimate concern is to be considered as one’s destiny in religious belief, Tillich would be blamed as the equalizer of all religions.
3. Tillich understanding of God Tillich's ontology through his analysis of essence, existence and essentialisation led to a dramatic revision and understanding of God in the Christian faith. i.e. God does not exist. He is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him. Although this looks like Tillich was an atheist such misunderstanding only arises due to a simplistic understanding of his use of the word existence. What Tillich is seeking to lead us to is an understanding of the 'God above God'. We have already seen earlier that the Ground of Being (God) must be separate from the finite realm (which is a mixture of being and non-being) and that God cannot be a being. God must be beyond the finite realm. Anything brought from essence into existence is always going to be corrupted by ambiguity and our own finitude. Thus statements about God must always be symbolic (except the statement 'God is the Ground of Being'). Although we may claim to know God (the Infinite) we cannot. The moment God is brought from essence into existence God is corrupted by finitude and our limited understanding. In this realm we can never fully grasp (or speak about) who God really is. The infinite cannot remain infinite in the finite realm. That this rings true can be seen when we realize there are a multitude of different understandings of God within the Christian faith alone. They cannot all be completely true so there must exist a 'pure' understanding of God (essence) that each of these are speaking about (or glimpsing aspects of).
Paul Tillich is a major opponent of deism. He opposes the natural theology of deism and the deistic concept of history. His own development of the idea of God as being and his consequent a historical interpretation of the Christian message do, however display a demonstrable affinity to deistic thought. If this charge is valid his concept of God may not be considered as a solution to the problem of polarization between faith and reason since it is based on a misrepresentation of divine revelation.
God as Ground of Being
Tillich understood and defined God in terms of ground of being. Tillich made an attempt to explain this in a very philosophical term. Tillich’s definition of God as the ground of being has a relevance to our contemporary world where women are struggling for liberation from the bondage of patriarchy. ‘Paul Tillich suggested that Protestantism was too male-oriented. It needed some of the element provided by Mary in Roman Catholicism. Tillich even suggested that on his view of God as the ‘ground of being’ was more of a ‘mothering’ than a ‘fathering.’ In this regard Tillich has made a significant contribution towards the construction of feminist-image of God. Even before the contemporary feminist he felt the need to make a balance in our usage of God’s name and took the pioneering effort.
3.4. Tillich’s rejection of historicity of Christ
If we critically look in to the Christology of Paul Tillich there is lack of specificity at the core of his Christology. Paul Tillich, in his systematic theology rejected the historical events in Christ (such as incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection). Though Tillich has his own explanation of Christ, it makes his theology abstract and preferring a philosophical articulation to the historical fact of Christ. Infact it is the historical Jesus which gives us a new paradigm in our struggle for liberation.
All the Christological elements have their historical evidence which guarantee that son of man (Christ) himself experienced our life situations and actively participated in the struggle of liberation. It is in the historical Jesus the oppressed and marginalized today found a hope and a liberation paradigm
Abstractness of Tillich’s theology
Considering the overall theological formulation Tillich’s theology it is abstract and difficult to comprehensible without philosophical knowledge. Since Tillich was mainly writing for the intellectuals those who doubted the theological validity his theology, as a result of it, became an abstract for the common people. His definition of God as ‘Being itself’, sin or the fall as ‘existential disruption’ is abstract and difficult to comprehend………
The influence of Bultmann (1884 – 1976 AD)
Andrian Thatcher rightly observed that Tillich was influenced by post renaissance philosophical tradition. Tillich was influenced by a contemporary German theologian, Rudolf Bultmann, who argued that the Christian world view, as expressed in the Bible, was outdated. Cast, as it was, in mythological terms, Bultmann argued, with references to a three-tiered universe, a heavenly city, a "house of many mansions" which included numerous thrones, and so forth, it depicted a cosmos alien to modern men and women. The result, Bultmann believed, was that many contemporary people tended to reject the Bible and, with it, the message of salvation inherent in its narrative. For Bultmann the solution, is to recast the story of Christ's redemptive work in modern, philosophical, psychological, and scientific language that would enable today's men and women to ascertain the truth (that the mythological language no longer conveys). Tillich was quite impressed with Bultmann's call for the "demythologization" of the Bible and, in his own theological writings, undertook to replace the mythological expression of the Christian message with a new, existential interpretation.
Conclusion:
It is clear to note that Tillich’s systematic theology is characterized by a theology of synthesis which synthesizes two poles (e.g. apologetic and kerygmatic theology) standing in the polarity of every existential situation. Such an existential approach to theology has signified Tillich’s thought. Examining the human situation is the first step for theologians take in their attempts to answer human existential questions. For Tillich, there are two criteria rendered for every theology, namely, "the object of theology is what concerns us ultimately" (12), and "what concerns us ultimately determines our being or non-being" (14). In other words, the object of theology is to explain our ultimate concern which determines our being or non-being.
Tillich’s thought revolves around the conviction that theology has to engage with contemporary culture. In this, he is the polar opposite of Karl Barth. For Tillich, all theology is essentially apologetics. Infact, he suggests that religion and culture are really two sides of the same coin. Incapable of existing without each other.
Paul Tillich's Systematic Theology is one of the most important theological works of the 20th century, and the theological system par excellence of liberal Protestant Christianity. In his day, Tillich was held in high esteem not only among theologians, but by experts in many different fields for his incredible breadth of knowledge, his insight into culture, and his humanity.
Whether one has accepted Tillich’s theology, his pioneering effort for the formulation of systematic theology has to be appreciated. His systematic theology, till date give us an insight for the theological study. Tillich, in his systematic theology challenged us to search for a relevance theology for today.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Jonathan Hill, The history of Christian thought, Oxford : A Lion Book, 2003
A.Richardson, editor and writer of the article on ‘Deism’, A Dictionary of Christian Theology, London : SCM Press, 1969,
Rosemary Radford Reuther, Mary-the feminine face of the Church, London : SCM press Ltd, 1979
Grenz S. & Olsen R., 20th Century Theology: God and the World in a Transitional Age, Paternoster Press, 1993, p.124)
Charles W. kegley&Robert W.Bretall, The theology of Paul Tillich Vol 1, New york: Macmillan Company, 1959
Gareth Jones, The Blackwell companion to Modern theology, Oxford : Blackwell publishing, 2004
Conclusion :
Tiillich’s emphasis on the importance of the study of human culture and experience
The Christian way of explaining our ultimate concern must be derived from the Christian message, which includes the Bible, the church history, and the history of religion and culture. All these are regarded as the sources of systematic theology. Yet, the religious experience is the medium indicating those sources to talk to us. Tillich regards this experience as a medium, not the source itself, through which the sources come to us. Among these sources and open experiences, a quest for the norm of the Christian systematic theology is necessary to guide theologians. A norm to which the sources and the medium are subjected to must be derived from Jesus the Christ event. For Tillich, this norm is the "New Being in Jesus as the Christ" (50). Thus, the "New Being in Jesus as the Christ" is not only the object of theology, but also is our ultimate concern which determines our being or non-being. Accordingly, the "method of correlation" is taken by Tillich himself as a mode to link questions with answers, situations with messages, human existence and divine revelation. As Tillich states, "the method of correlation explains the contents of the Christian Faith through existential questions and theological answers in mutual interdependence" (60). This method summarizes Tillich’s theological system. In this system, the philosophical questions raised by analysis of human existence and the theological answers based on the sources, the medium, and the norm of the systematic theology must be divided and maintained. For Tillich, such a division underlies the structure of his theological system.
No comments:
Post a Comment