Abstract
This close reading of Heidegger’s “Phenomenology and Theology” is motivated by critical questions concerning his basic statements about the presence and absence of certain relations between faith and philosophy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Heidegger (1969), 45–78.
- 2.
In 1969 the German text, accompanied by a French translation, was published in the Archives de Philosophie 32 (1969), 356ff, and the letter of 1964 has there received the title «Some hints concerning the main perspectives for the theological conversation about “The problem of a non-objectifying thinking and speaking in contemporary theology”». Both texts are reprinted in Wegmarken, GA 9, 47–67 and 68–77. To the latter version Heidegger added a short preface (45–46) and an “Appendix” (78). I will quote from this edition. An English translation of the text is available (1976), 5–21.
- 3.
Cf. Kockelmans (1973), 85–108, on Heidegger’s “Phenomenology and Theology,” to which the present essay is my belated response, too late—alas!—for further discussions with Joe.
- 4.
- 5.
Heidegger (1969), 61 (Further citations are given parenthetically in the text itself). As we will see, the latter statement must be qualified. Is it really possible to isolate the formal elements of theology from all its claims about its content?
- 6.
The meaning of the word Wissenschaft, which Heidegger uses constantly in this essay, is closer to the medieval scientia and the ancient epistēmē than to the modern Anglo-Saxon meaning of “science.” Among the academic disciplines, theology and philosophy are here still called Wissenschaften by Heidegger, but later, like in his letter of 1964 (74), he opposes their formal character quite strongly to that of the natural sciences and mathematics.
- 7.
The statement that theology is not concerned with “ontological” questions implies that it cannot compete with philosophy, because it does not and cannot have any competence for pursuing questions with regard to Heidegger’s main philosophical concern, called “being” [Sein]: “being as such” or “being itself.” Below I will suggest that Heidegger’s discarding of 2000 years of ontology from philosophical and biblical theology is quite dogmatic and unjustified, especially if it is not preceded by a thorough discussion of late Greek and medieval theology of creation and providence, which cannot be simply dismissed as containing nothing else than “metaphysical speculation.”
- 8.
Cf., 52: “not generated by Dasein and not developed (or brought to maturity) through it in complete liberty” [“nicht aus dem Dasein und nicht durch es aus freien Stücken gezeitigt”).
- 9.
Faith implies “a turnaround [or conversion, Umgestelltwerden] of someone’s existence in and through God’s faithfully assumed mercy” (53).
- 10.
Throughout “Phänomenologie und Theologie” Heidegger frequently uses the words “Begreifen,” “Begriffe,” and “begrifflich” to indicate scientific knowledge as distinct from the prescientific acquaintance with phenomena. See, for example, 50, 54, 56, 57, 60, 63, and 65.
- 11.
The German phrases on 52: “der gekreuzigt Gott,” “das so durch Christus bestimmte Verhältnis des Glaubens zum Kreuz” (the relation to the cross that thus is determined by Christ), and “die Kreuzigung” (the crucifixion) do not by themselves clarify whether the one who is crucified is God or only a kind of god or pseudogod in the line of Zeus, Prometheus, Apollo or Ares.
- 12.
Heidegger mentions the Christian Gemeinde [religious community] a few times, for instance on 52 and 56, but he silences all questions regarding the universality and internal diversity of the Church.
- 13.
On 57, Heidegger restricts the Bible, out of which all Christian theology thinks, to the New Testament alone. The first part of the Bible and the meaning of Israel are not even mentioned (Does he ever refer to them?).
- 14.
The passive moment of Sichgefangengeben (53) can be strengthened by translating the expression as: “to allow (or let) oneself (to) be imprisoned.”
- 15.
These activities of God are presupposed in a “new creation” [neue Schöpfung, 63], if this expression is meant seriously, but neither creation nor the entire pre-Christian history are mentioned.
- 16.
That Heidegger sees “phenomenology” as another name of philosophy is clear not only from the title, but also for example, from 67.
- 17.
Heidegger does not refer to the traditional formula of “fides quaerens intellectum.” Probably he would hear it as a justification of the (neo-)scholastic mode of mobilizing reason for the conquest of insights into (parts of) the patrimonium of Christian faith. With regard to a metaphilosophical interpretation of philosophy as search for understanding of an explicitly or implicitly religious faith or trust, see Peperzak, (2013), Chaps. 7 and 8.
- 18.
Ibid., 67. Giancarlo Tarantino, whom I want to thank here for his assistance in producing this chapter, reminded me of a possible link between these expressions and Heidegger’s explanation of Aristotle’s analysis of phronēsis in book VI of his Nicomachean Ethics. See Heidegger’s course on Plato’s Sophist, GA 19, 48–57 and 138–165.
- 19.
In the original essay, “Phänomenologie und Theologie,” Heidegger uses Gegenstand and Vergegenständlichung instead of the words Objekt and Objektivierung. I neglect his distinction here, because it is not immediately relevant for the present discussion.
- 20.
Heidegger does not explain the implicit distinction between the form (formale structures and procedures) and the content [Gegenstand] which are united in each science, nor does he analyze the peculiar way in which they (as formally free and rational action regarding a neither free nor rational faith) constitute one scientific and at the same time faithful, but not schizoid and still intelligent mode of existence.
- 21.
Cf. Martin Heidegger and Elisabeth Blochmann (1990), 25.
- 22.
Cf. 26. The same letter of August 8, 1928 clearly shows that Phenomenology and Theology represents only a phase of Heidegger’s struggle with the problem on which it focuses. Especially the following statements would prompt a further development (or even a radical overhaul, especially with regard to philosophy) of the printed essay: “It belongs to the essence of human Dasein that it, insofar as it exists, philosophizes. To be human already means to philosophize […]” (25). And “Religion is a fundamental possibility [eine Grundmöglichkeit] of human existence, although of a completely other kind than philosophy. This [philosophy], in turn, has its [own] faith [ Glauben ] [my emphasis, A.P.]—which is the freedom [Freiheit] of Dasein itself, which, of course [ja], becomes existent only in being free [im Frei sein]” (25).
References
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics.
Heidegger, Martin. 1969. Phänomenologie und Theologie. In Wegmarken, GA 9, ed. Friedrich Wilhelm von Hermann, 45–78. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.
Heidegger, Martin. 1976. Phenomenology and Theology. In The Piety of Thinking. Trans. James Hart, and John Maraldo, 5–21. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Heidegger, Martin. 1992. Platon: Sophistes. GA 19, ed. Ingeborg Schußler. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.
Heidegger, Martin. 2003. Plato’s Sophist. Trans. Richard Rojcewicz and Andre Schuwer. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Heidegger, Martin and Elisabeth, Blochmann. 1990. Briefwechsel 1918–1969, 2nd ed, ed. Joachim W. Storck. Marbach am Neckar: Deutsche Schillergesellschaft.
Kockelmans, Joseph. 1973. Heidegger and theology. The Southern Journal of Philosophy 4(3): 85–108.
Overbeck, Franz. 1903. Über die Christlichkeit unserer heutigen Theologie. Leipzig: Naumann.
Overbeck, Franz. 1989. Über die Christlichkeit unserer heutigen Theologie. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Peperzak, Adriaan T. 2013. Trust. Who or what might support us? New York: Fordham University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Peperzak, A.T. (2014). A Re-Reading of Heidegger’s “Phenomenology and Theology”. In: Babich, B., Ginev, D. (eds) The Multidimensionality of Hermeneutic Phenomenology. Contributions to Phenomenology, vol 70. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01707-5_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01707-5_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-01706-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-01707-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)