One thing I’ve definitely agreed with as far as Romantic philosophy goes is the idea of negative capability. When I first read Schleiermacher, I agreed with him perhaps a little too much--only later did I see the downfall in taking his theology as completely correct. Schleiermacher walks a fine line when he criticizes religion for becoming a mere list of doctrines; this is true, but if taken too far it may cause people to throw out the importance of doctrine and biblical interpretation. It becomes easy to ignore things that we don’t like about religion by claiming that it is too restrictive in its doctrines. There’s a delicate balance we have to maintain between order and mystery. We should not attempt to analyze everything until we exhaust it, but should acknowledge the fact that there will still be questions unanswered at the end of the day. It’s ok to remain in that doubt, that uncertainty, as Keats would say. Schleiermacher would agree, and perhaps add that this feeling aids us to realize our complete dependency on God, which leads us to experience redemption. I couldn’t agree more. When it comes to understanding why things happen in this life, or waiting for answers on what will happen, we are asked to live in this ambiguity that could either separate us or draw us nearer to God. It’s a beautiful thing--something I’m trying to appreciate more than dread.
Danielle
Commented on Cameron's 'It's a long way down'
When reading Schleiermacher, I found myself doing the same thing, Danielle- agreeing too much! I thought he was right because he was contrasting "religion" as society has made it, compared to life by the Spirit- which is less about rules and more about heart. When we discussed his work in class I realized it's flawed. Following Christ is about a relationship and heart condition, but you can't completely ignore the rules and standards put in place by God in the Bible. Doctrine is still important, but it's not the most important; however, feeling close to God isn't the most important either... you have to have a balance. Living in what we view as ambiguity with complete dependence on the Savior might be scary but it truly is something beautiful! :)
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about over-analyzing things. It makes me think about some of the conversations we've had in Honors where it seems like we are beating a dead horse. We analyze something so small, and continue analyzing it, and arguing about it, until logic walks right out the back door. I think that analyzing things can be a good thing, but only as long as we realize when we've gone too far.
ReplyDeleteI really liked his whole idea with dependency on God. I feel like more people should emphasize that, but I agree about some of what he said making it easy to disregaurd Biblical things that shouldn't be over-looked. But I keep going back to dependency on God, because that is so powerful. I just can't get passed how simple but right that is.
ReplyDelete