What do you think?
Rate this book
The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches
"This unsurpassed classic is more than a history of Christian ethical ideas. It comes near to being a history of the Christian era, for it relates these ideas to the changing structures of church and society, showing the mutual influences between ideas, social forces, and institutions."--James Luther Adams, Edward Mallinckrodg, Jr., The Divinity School, Harvard University.
- GenresReligionNonfiction
572 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1960
130 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
May 28, 2024
THE FIRST PART OF THE GERMAN THEOLOGIAN’S MOST SIGNIFICANT WORK
Ernst Troeltsch (1865-1923) was a German Protestant theologian who taught at the University of Bonn, then Heidelberg University, and finally the Humboldt University of Berlin.
He wrote in the Foreword to this 1911 book, “I have gathered within this volume the fruit of my scattered researches… Now that they appear in public in collected form, it will be clear that, in spite of the fact that they are drawn from so many sources, they all spring from a unified plan… I found myself confronted by a double task: to make clear to myself both the ecclesiastical dogmatic tradition of Protestantism in its own historical sense, and the intellectual and practical situation of the present day in its true fundamental tendencies… All this research… was only intended … in order to think through and formulate the world of Christian thought and life in frank relation to the modern world… I was confronted with this further question: What, then, would be the relation of such a new and formative conception of the Christian attitude to life to its own ancient organizations, the churches? Further, could such a new conception … be grafted on to the old organizations at all and… what kind of social adhesion or relation with a fellowship would be possible in harmony with this new view of life?”
In the Introduction, he observes, “The modern social problem is thus first of all oriented by the idea of the State, and by its orientation towards the Church it become the quite different problem of the relation between the religious forces and the economic and social and political forces… But the difference is not that which exists between the ‘natural’ and the ‘supernatural’; it is the distinction between an association which proceeds from a religious aim and the most important associations which exist for purely temporal ends… Thus the State again tends to become identified with economic social problems, and the social doctrines of the Church… become the doctrine of its relation both to the State and to Society, which are the more important secular forces confronting the Church. Thus it is an actual fact of history that from the beginning all the social doctrines of Christianity have been likewise doctrines both of the State and of Society.” (Pg. 31-32)
He argues, “it is a great mistake to treat all the ideas which underlie the preaching of Jesus as though they were primarily connected with the ‘Social’ problem. The message of Jesus is obviously purely religious; it issues directly from a very definite idea of God, and of the Divine Will in relation to man. To Jesus the whole meaning of life is religious; His life and His teaching are wholly determined by His thought of God. At the same time we must also remember that late Judaism shared the prevalent religious tendency of the ancient world; that is to say, here also political and social disintegration had shaken men’s faith in finite ideals, and had caused them to look with longing towards the horizon of the infinite.” (Pg. 50)
He explains of early Christianity, “Christianity seems to influence social life in two ways: Either, on the one hand, it develops an idealistic anarchism and the communism of love, which combines radical indifference or hostility towards the rest of the social order with the effort to actualize this ideal of love in a small group; or on the other hand, it develops along social-conservative lines into an attitude of submission to God and His Will, so far as the world is concerned, combined with a strong independence of an organized community which manages its own affairs, which, as its range of influence increases, finds that it cannot ignore secular institutions, but that it must do its utmost to utilize them for its own purposes… The third possibility, that of using the ordinances of Society positively, as preliminary phases for the attainment of the highest religious-ethical goal, lies still entirely beyond the vision of the Early Church.” (Pg. 82-83)
He points out, “This idea of the derivation of the Imperial authority from the Law of Nature through a free and equal people was … echoed by the Fathers of the Church, whose sympathies were Roman… The authority of the Emperor comes from God---even under pagan rule---and still more that of the Christian Emperors… From this early Christian viewpoint, however, the ‘Divine Right of Kings’ means that an Emperor can be Emperor either ‘by the grace of’ or ‘by the wrath of’ God, just as the people deserve a good or a bad Emperor. Thus this theory of Natural Law … broke down on the question of Imperial authority.” (Pg. 155-156)
He asks, “Why and how did it then become possible to carry out in practice the Christian moral standard in the State, in Society, in trade, in economic and family life, in a way which was impossible for the early Church with her views about the sinful, and therefore tainted, origin of the ‘world’ and all its institutions? That it became possible in theory can only be explained on the assumption that to some extent it must previously have become possible in fact; and the reason which made this actual realization possible must then give to the Catholic social ideal of civilization a permanent character and a permanent relation with definite actual social and economic conditions.” (Pg. 236)
He suggests, “asceticism did not hinder the formation of a unified civilization and did not desire to hinder it, and where it did break through it, it did so only for itself and in a single case, but not for the whole. Indeed, the manifold creations of a semi-monasticism showed that asceticism sought to adjust and accommodate itself, and in so doing it confessed that it was only relatively necessary. Its great movements helped to float the vessel, but they did not provide the crew.” (Pg. 245)
He points out, “Unjust institutions, which are not obedient to the Law of God, may and must be altered; godless rulers must be deposed or warned, and taught to amend their ways. The ‘right of resistance’ and of rebellion is a right of the Christian conscience for the sake of love and of organic harmony… it if can be exercised with causing still greater general disorder. The Church especially is justified in her struggle against godless and insubordinate State authorities, and is therefore justified in revolution. In doing so she is only maintaining the uniformity of the Christian body… In the Canon Law… all have equal rights, and all are obliged to submit to the same judicial procedure… It is a beginning of the idea of subjective public rights.” (Pg. 289)
Of Medieval Catholicism, he notes, “through all of these movements, however, a sociological type of Christian thought was being developed, which was not the same as that of the sect-type; it was, in fact, a new type---the radical individualism of mysticism. This type had no desire for an organized fellowship; all it cared for was freedom for interchange of ideas, a pure fellowship of thought, which indeed only became possible after the invention of printing… The isolated individual, and psychological abstraction and analysis became everything. All that was left of the ‘Lex Christi’ is the example of Christ. This type, however, only attained its universal historical significance in the later protestant Dissenters, and in their connection with Humanism.” (Pg. 377)
This is an important work of early 20th century theology, and will be of interest to those studying such theology.
Ernst Troeltsch (1865-1923) was a German Protestant theologian who taught at the University of Bonn, then Heidelberg University, and finally the Humboldt University of Berlin.
He wrote in the Foreword to this 1911 book, “I have gathered within this volume the fruit of my scattered researches… Now that they appear in public in collected form, it will be clear that, in spite of the fact that they are drawn from so many sources, they all spring from a unified plan… I found myself confronted by a double task: to make clear to myself both the ecclesiastical dogmatic tradition of Protestantism in its own historical sense, and the intellectual and practical situation of the present day in its true fundamental tendencies… All this research… was only intended … in order to think through and formulate the world of Christian thought and life in frank relation to the modern world… I was confronted with this further question: What, then, would be the relation of such a new and formative conception of the Christian attitude to life to its own ancient organizations, the churches? Further, could such a new conception … be grafted on to the old organizations at all and… what kind of social adhesion or relation with a fellowship would be possible in harmony with this new view of life?”
In the Introduction, he observes, “The modern social problem is thus first of all oriented by the idea of the State, and by its orientation towards the Church it become the quite different problem of the relation between the religious forces and the economic and social and political forces… But the difference is not that which exists between the ‘natural’ and the ‘supernatural’; it is the distinction between an association which proceeds from a religious aim and the most important associations which exist for purely temporal ends… Thus the State again tends to become identified with economic social problems, and the social doctrines of the Church… become the doctrine of its relation both to the State and to Society, which are the more important secular forces confronting the Church. Thus it is an actual fact of history that from the beginning all the social doctrines of Christianity have been likewise doctrines both of the State and of Society.” (Pg. 31-32)
He argues, “it is a great mistake to treat all the ideas which underlie the preaching of Jesus as though they were primarily connected with the ‘Social’ problem. The message of Jesus is obviously purely religious; it issues directly from a very definite idea of God, and of the Divine Will in relation to man. To Jesus the whole meaning of life is religious; His life and His teaching are wholly determined by His thought of God. At the same time we must also remember that late Judaism shared the prevalent religious tendency of the ancient world; that is to say, here also political and social disintegration had shaken men’s faith in finite ideals, and had caused them to look with longing towards the horizon of the infinite.” (Pg. 50)
He explains of early Christianity, “Christianity seems to influence social life in two ways: Either, on the one hand, it develops an idealistic anarchism and the communism of love, which combines radical indifference or hostility towards the rest of the social order with the effort to actualize this ideal of love in a small group; or on the other hand, it develops along social-conservative lines into an attitude of submission to God and His Will, so far as the world is concerned, combined with a strong independence of an organized community which manages its own affairs, which, as its range of influence increases, finds that it cannot ignore secular institutions, but that it must do its utmost to utilize them for its own purposes… The third possibility, that of using the ordinances of Society positively, as preliminary phases for the attainment of the highest religious-ethical goal, lies still entirely beyond the vision of the Early Church.” (Pg. 82-83)
He points out, “This idea of the derivation of the Imperial authority from the Law of Nature through a free and equal people was … echoed by the Fathers of the Church, whose sympathies were Roman… The authority of the Emperor comes from God---even under pagan rule---and still more that of the Christian Emperors… From this early Christian viewpoint, however, the ‘Divine Right of Kings’ means that an Emperor can be Emperor either ‘by the grace of’ or ‘by the wrath of’ God, just as the people deserve a good or a bad Emperor. Thus this theory of Natural Law … broke down on the question of Imperial authority.” (Pg. 155-156)
He asks, “Why and how did it then become possible to carry out in practice the Christian moral standard in the State, in Society, in trade, in economic and family life, in a way which was impossible for the early Church with her views about the sinful, and therefore tainted, origin of the ‘world’ and all its institutions? That it became possible in theory can only be explained on the assumption that to some extent it must previously have become possible in fact; and the reason which made this actual realization possible must then give to the Catholic social ideal of civilization a permanent character and a permanent relation with definite actual social and economic conditions.” (Pg. 236)
He suggests, “asceticism did not hinder the formation of a unified civilization and did not desire to hinder it, and where it did break through it, it did so only for itself and in a single case, but not for the whole. Indeed, the manifold creations of a semi-monasticism showed that asceticism sought to adjust and accommodate itself, and in so doing it confessed that it was only relatively necessary. Its great movements helped to float the vessel, but they did not provide the crew.” (Pg. 245)
He points out, “Unjust institutions, which are not obedient to the Law of God, may and must be altered; godless rulers must be deposed or warned, and taught to amend their ways. The ‘right of resistance’ and of rebellion is a right of the Christian conscience for the sake of love and of organic harmony… it if can be exercised with causing still greater general disorder. The Church especially is justified in her struggle against godless and insubordinate State authorities, and is therefore justified in revolution. In doing so she is only maintaining the uniformity of the Christian body… In the Canon Law… all have equal rights, and all are obliged to submit to the same judicial procedure… It is a beginning of the idea of subjective public rights.” (Pg. 289)
Of Medieval Catholicism, he notes, “through all of these movements, however, a sociological type of Christian thought was being developed, which was not the same as that of the sect-type; it was, in fact, a new type---the radical individualism of mysticism. This type had no desire for an organized fellowship; all it cared for was freedom for interchange of ideas, a pure fellowship of thought, which indeed only became possible after the invention of printing… The isolated individual, and psychological abstraction and analysis became everything. All that was left of the ‘Lex Christi’ is the example of Christ. This type, however, only attained its universal historical significance in the later protestant Dissenters, and in their connection with Humanism.” (Pg. 377)
This is an important work of early 20th century theology, and will be of interest to those studying such theology.
Read
March 5, 2008I understand that it was important to read this, but I honestly hated every single blessed minute of it.
christianity
May 10, 2024Volume I and II
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews