or THE SPIRIT. 



351 



porary theory of science. An insistence upon this 

 radical distinction of religious from philosophical and 

 scientific thought has, in one form or other, been the 

 theme of religious philosophy in Germany ever since 

 the time of Eitschl, who has thus emphasised the most 

 important side of Schleiermacher's teaching. Nothing 

 essentially new has been added, though the variations 

 in which this theme has been elaborated are numerous 

 and interesting.-^ 



46. 

 Radical 

 distinction 

 of reli^'ious 

 from 

 scientific 

 and philo- 

 sophical 

 thought. 



^ We have seen in earlier chapters 

 of this History how in the course 

 of the second half of the century 

 clearer ideas were gained as to the 

 independence of scientific research 

 in i-elatioii to philosophical discus- 

 sions. W'e have seen how a few 

 clearly - defined principles have be- 

 come the foundations of large 

 regions of natural knowledge ; such 

 principles had to justify them- 

 selves through experience ; for sci- 

 entific purposes this has proved 

 sufficient. The scientific interest 

 was satisfied if such principles were 

 clearly stated, and could be use- 

 fully applied in describing, measur- 

 ing, and foretelling natural phe- 

 nomena. A similar demarcation of 

 interests has been attempted in 

 quite a different region. Religious 

 Thought has striven in a similar 

 way to vindicate its independence 

 of philosophical considerations 

 by similarly justifying itself be- 

 fore an independent tribunal, this 

 being religious (including moral) 

 experience. To have helped in 

 this direction is probablj' the prin- 

 cipal merit of Ritschl's doctrine, 

 and as this point is equally im- 

 portant to the liberal and the 

 conservative schools of religious 

 thought, Ritschl has, in a sense, 

 brought these two schools to- 

 gether. Neither of them may 

 have, in the sequel, adopted, in 



its integrity, the view he took, 

 but that he made them consider 

 the logical and psychological foun- 

 dations of their respective systems, 

 assures to him a permanent place 

 in the history of recent theology 

 from whichever side it may be 

 written. This is very clearly shown 

 bj' the enormous literature deal- 

 ing with Ritschl's theology, and 

 especially with the point referred 

 to. I confine myself to mentioning 

 the ' History of Recent Theology in 

 Germany,' by Fr. H. R. von Frank 

 (revised and continued by Griitz- 

 macher, 4th edition, 1908), which 

 devotes 76 out of 376 pages to 

 Ritschl's theology and the move- 

 ment created by it. The author 

 belonged to the conservative " Er- 

 langen School," and is on the 

 whole, though not without sym- 

 pathethic understanding, opposed 

 to Ritschlianisra. It will also be 

 quite clear to my readers that the 

 history of philosophic thought has 

 no concern with the structures 

 which religious thought, be it 

 doctrinal or practical, has reared 

 upon the foundations laid down, 

 just as little as it has been our 

 concern to follow admitted scien- 

 tific principles into the rapidly in- 

 creasing and changing details of 

 natural knowledge and natural 

 philosophy in themselves. 



