Paul Tillich Resources
To explain this crisis, I will briefly examine the relationship between faith and how Tillich's notion of correlation deals with this idea of culture and a crisis of. Faith is an act of a finite being who is grasped by and turned to the infinite. We might say that we have faith, even if we do not believe in a personal God who is For Tillich, having a relationship with the infinite goes well beyond simply. This was my first formal exposure to Paul Tillich and it blew my socks off. Tillich revealed my idolatry I had no idea existed. Believe me when I.
In the final two chapters, Tillich outlines what he calls the truth of faith, i. For Tillich, faith and reason are not incompatible nor are they mutually exclusive.
From Hume to Tillich: Teaching Faith & Benevolence
Rather, the latter is the precondition of the former. Likewise, epistemologically, the truth of faith is not contradictory to the truth of science, history, or faith — and vice versa. Since faith is the religious structure of that which grasps a person ultimately, its truth cannot be completely confirmed or validated by the truth of history or science, nor can it be denied. Faith functions more as an interpretive discourse in relation to science, history or philosophy; it asks questions of ultimate meaning and is therefore in no position to pass judgment upon the validity of historical investigation or scientific experimentation.
Finally, the life of faith is one marked with various tensions — between doubt and courage, estrangement and wholeness, individual and community — and the attempt to maintain balance such that faith, hope and love are concretely present within the totality of the human personality. For its time, Dynamics of Faith stands among works such as H. For his part, Tillich appears to have succeeded were Niebuhr, and certainly Karl Barth, failed, i.
This, too, is significant insofar as it affords the reader the opportunity to engage Tillich in a singular volume, to catch a glimpse into the heart of his immense and intense theological edifice in an uncharacteristically crystallized form. For Tillich, faith involves a fundamental dynamic between several different sets of existential or ontological polarities, the culmination of which is best seen in the difference drawn, though not explicitly in this work, between existential and essential being.
Again, though Tillich does not explicate this distinction in detail in Dynamics of Faith, the irreducible gap between essence and existence is the foundation upon which his understanding of faith as ultimate concern is erected. The crucial question here is whether Tillich, despite all his important work to free Christian theology from myopic dogmatism, is still tacitly reliant upon a linear and indeed Neoplatonic theological trajectory still pervasive in Christianity, even in many liberal-progressive quarters.
This structure unfolds thusly: The ultimate telos toward which all creation, including especially humanity, is oriented is the restoration of this original, essential state of being.
Tillich certainly does not and for that theologians can be very grateful.
However, it is unclear, especially in the present text, as to whether his theological enterprise is buttressed by this linear, triumphalistic trajectory such that the ultimate eschatological end involves the final and indeed terminal realization of essential being over and against existential estrangement. Insofar as Tillich privileges the eventual triumph of one side of all the various ontological and existential polarities in Dynamics of Faith and elsewhere it would seem that this may be the case.
Would it not be more true to the vicissitudes of existential reality as such to suggest that the dynamic between essence and existence is not one of linearity, but of oscillation?
Essence may indeed eclipse existence but such a transfiguration is only momentary, always fleeting and never final or complete. Thus, these two concepts — essential being and existential being — would function not as total opposites on the spectrum of experience but as symbols of reality which are always implicated in one another, presenting themselves as inextricable aspects of human nature, not as phases or stages through which one progresses straightforwardly.
To be fair, there instances in Dynamics of Faith where Tillich, whether he realizes it or not, creates the possibility for such a reading, namely his insistence that faith is always an act of courage and risk from within the conditions of existence ff. His recovery of faith as the existential dynamic or structure of that which apprehends and grasps a person ultimately regardless of particular form or content is an important theological achievement in itself.
This combined with his salient discussion of the function of symbols within theological discourse and religious experience constitute the enduring legacy of Dynamics of Faith as a text which aims to crystallize an intricate, erudite and indeed robust theological system in a succinct yet compelling manner for the non-specialist. Review by SL [Note: This review references the pagination of the First Harper Torchbook edition published in Something that holds ultimate concern for us must meet two criteria: Tillich moves on to describe faith as a centered act of the whole individual.
Doubt, especially in existential forms, plays a vital role in relationship to faith as it serves as the opposite pole in the state of ultimate concern Doubt requires the individual to show courage in order to accept doubt as a part of the existential condition.
However, communities of faith must not be bound by legalistic ties to doctrinal statements of belief, but rather assert the freedom of faith within the community In the second chapter, Tillich addresses what faith is not. In the intellectualistic distortion of faith, faith becomes belief rather than the state of being ultimate concerned The final distortion of faith is emotionalistic. Tillich explains in the third chapter the relationship between faith and symbols.
Other symbols for ultimate concern are used with different concrete manifestations from existential experience In the fourth chapter, Tillich describes two types of faith: Tillich makes it clear that science and faith should not interfere with each other, in that neither can prove nor deny the other; they operate on different dimensions of meaning In terms of historical truth, faith can assert that events of ultimate concern occurred in the past, but cannot assert the historical truth of any particular events where ultimate concern is supposedly revealed.
Thus, those of faith are free from the burdens of determining the veracity of historical occurrences The relationship between philosophical truth and the truth of faith are more interconnected, in that elements of each exist in the other. Philo agrees that reason is far too limited to explain itself, let alone an infinite deity.
Philo also implies that art does a better job than reason of conveying religious experience because a sense of the holy results from being touched and moved, not from being persuaded by an argument: For is it necessary to prove what everyone feels within himself?
It is only necessary to make us feel it, if possible, more intimately and sensibly. Tillich believes faith makes the courage to be possible, for it allows people to face and accept the worst in themselves and in their world.
And they even suggest a belief that philosophers should not fritter away their capabilities on attempts to build perfectly logical systems, but that they instead should draw upon all their capacities in order to help themselves and others understand how to best live. And, indeed, as a student of both Quine and Tillich, I found myself more interested and perhaps even more influenced by their behavior than by what they said. Quine also prized his independence: Perhaps to forestall the destructive influence of ignorant students, he always arrived at lecture with his comments fully written out and proceeded to read: Hence my practice down the decades of preparing copious notes for the classroom and writing my public lectures in full.
Defining Faith: Paul Tillich on Faith and Doubt - Psychotherapy and Spirituality
But the variety of his literary output indicates that Hume welcomed and pursed diverse perspectives. I respond similarly to passages of grand opera … Otherwise I have a poor memory for fiction, for it resists integration with my system of the world. And Hume joins to his independence a love of interacting with all kinds of people.
As a former student, I can attest that he invited students to leave questions on the podium and he would invariably open the lecture by responding to them, often in a way that startled the student by revealing what a profound question he or she had asked. I particularly remember one time when a Harvard student asked Tillich to define the difference between his theology and that of Billy Graham.
Quine, on the other hand, read from prepared notes from such a distance that even an attentive, dutiful student like myself had trouble following him.
Tillich gave the impression that he was inventing his massively abstract and learned lectures on the spot. So our sense that we had spent a semester watching an incredibly agile and cultivated mind in action was accurate. When he spied a student standing in the doorway of the huge hall where he spoke, he stopped lecturing and insisted that she take an empty seat in the front row. She obeyed, but her bright red cheeks revealed her embarrassment. This human concern sometimes seemed more powerful than his intellectual interests.
There are seats up here! This seems extremely close to what Philo identifies as the most effective way to convey the religious attitude. But in manifesting the courage to be and accepting himself in spite of being totally unacceptable, Tillich sometimes embraced and lived out a way of life appalling to others. His numerous affairs deeply and repeatedly hurt his wife, as he acknowledged in his deathbed apology to her.
And the cultivation of uncertainty and spontaneity that allowed him to welcome and respond fully to questions from others meant that he embraced doubt and its discomforts all his life. He never stopped exploring and wondering. So, he wondered out loud what it meant when he dreamt of all his dead friends and then of all those who had died in all the wars he knew about.015 What is the difference between faith & belief? ~ (1-4-2015)