Philosophy of religion F. Schleiermacher in the works of representatives of the theological academies of the late 19th — early 20th century: the concept of religious experience

Nadezhda Koreneva
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023105.69-82
2023-02-28
Abstract:The concept of religious feeling in the beginning XX century Russian thinkers dealing with the philosophy of religion are increasingly becoming the focus of attention, but the meaning of this concept is often not explicated, which makes it necessary to study the sources of this concept, one of which (the most important) are the works of F. Schleiermacher. This article is devoted to the analysis of the perception of his concept of religious feeling in theological academies: spiritual and academic periodicals, individual works on the philosophy of religion and textbooks of basic theology (apologetics) are considered. Basically, Schleirmacher's ideas are criticized, there are several ways to understand the "religious feeling": a number of authors adhere to the position of G.V.F. Hegel, feeling is considered by them as something secondary to reason and will (V.D. Kudryavtsev-Platonov, Proto. T. Butkevich); the concept of religious feeling can also be understood in a negative way as the aestheticization of religion (N.M. Bogolyubov, D.S. Leonardov, etc.), but most often the concept of religious feeling by Schleiermacher is understood as psychologism, as the subjectivization of religion, excluding the concept of revelation (S.A. Ornatsky, F. Aleksinsky, etc.). Finally, representatives of theological academies, whose works were written already at the beginning of the XX century, share the point of view of V. Dilthey, giving a fundamentally new interpretation of the concept of religious feeling as a pre-rational unity of consciousness (S.S. Glagolev). Finally, the author of the article concludes about the philosophical productivity of the considered interpretations of the concept of "religious feeling", and also briefly characterizes its significance for the Russian philosophy of the period in question as a whole.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?