Search

The article compares the doctrine of election in the theology of Friedrich Schleiermacher, particularly his magisterial essay on the topic from 1819, and the theology of Karl Barth between 1920 and 1925. It argues that both positions are strikingly similar, in regard to both their critical evaluation of the tradition and their constructive proposals for a new foundation. Both theologians offer a theocentric reassessment that shuns the particularism of previous approaches and affirms the unity of the divine will. Schleiermacher defends the Augustinian-Calvinist view of election as a bulwark against Manichaeism and Pelagianism. Still, he criticizes the idea of eternal damnation and argues that the concept of reprobation instead should be understood as a temporal 'passing over'. The kingdom of God is realized gradually, not in one instant. Similarly, for Barth predestination is not a pre-temporal decree that divides human beings into two separate groups of persons but is actualized ever anew in history, when God's address entails the miracle of faith through the work of the Holy Spirit. The twofold possibility of faith and unbelief is constitutive for the human encounter with God, and it concerns believers and unbelievers alike, since no person is forever exclusively elect or reprobate. Barth also insists that the relation between reprobation and election is non-dualistic and teleological: predestination is a movement from reprobation to election, and never the other way around. The ultimate goal is salvation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses Schleiermacher's essay on election, which has not received the attention it deserves. I argue that it presents a significant advance in the debate about unconditional grace and the relation between redemption and predestination. While Schleiermacher defends the Augustinian-Calvinist view of election, he criticizes the ideas of double predestination and eternal damnation (for the unbelievers). Thus, he wants to provide a new basis for Lutherans and Calvinists to settle or, at least, reconsider their longstanding controversy over the matter. After the publication of the essay in 1819, Schleiermacher's doctrine of election remained unchanged, except for minor modifications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]