o England belongs the
credit of the sad fact, that, according to Kohl's report, there live in
Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, and London, thousands of men who have
never enjoyed any teaching in religion, have never been baptized, who
live absolutely without religion in brutal stupidity. Religion must form
the culminating point of Education. It takes up into itself the
didactical and practical elements, and rises through the force of its
content to universality.--
I. _The Theoretical Process of Religious Culture._
Sec. 155. Religion, in common with every content of the spirit, must pass
through three stages of feeling, conception, and comprehension. Whatever
may be the special character of any religion it cannot avoid this
psychological necessity, either in its general history or in the history
of the individual consciousness. The teacher must understand this
process, partly in order that he may make it easier to the youth, partly
that he may guard against the malformation of the religious feeling
which may arise through the fact of the youth's remaining in one stage
after he is ready for another and needs it. Pedagogics must therefore
lay out beforehand the philosophy of religion, on which alone can be
found the complete discussion of this idea.
Sec. 156. (1) Religion exists first as religious feeling. The person is
still immediately identical with the Divine, does not yet distinguish
himself from the absoluteness of his being, and is in so far determined
by it. In so far as he feels the divine, he is a mystery to himself.
This beginning is necessary. Religion cannot be produced in men from the
external side; its genesis belongs rather to the primitive depths in
which God himself and the individual soul are essentially one.
--The educator must not allow himself to suppose that he is able to
make a religion. Religion dwells originally in every individual soul,
for every one is born of God. Education can only aid the religious
feeling in its development. As far as regards the psychological form, it
was quite correct for Schleiermacher and his followers to characterize
the absoluteness of the religious feeling as the feeling of dependence,
for feeling is determined by that which it feels; it depends upon its
content. But in so far as God constitutes the content of the feeling,
there appears the opposite of all dependence or absolute emancipation. I
maintain this in opposition to Schleiermacher. Religion lifts m
|