Customer Reviews

Dynamics of Faith (Perennial Classics)

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Although my philosophical interests are mostly in 20-century analytical thought and the philosophy of science, I've still read my share of theologists, including Kierkegaard, Barth, Bultmann, Rosenzweig, Marcel, Mauritain, Buber, Berdyaef, and Niebuhr, and Tillich is perhaps the greatest of them all. So I still have considerable respect for Tillich, and I thought I'd make a few comments about that.

This little book (only about 140 pages) is still packed with much of the best that Tillich's subtle and profound mind had to offer. The chapter, "The Truth of Faith," is probably the greatest essay on the attempt to reconcile faith with reason, and how an intelligent man can be religious, ever written, a subject which goes back at least to St. Augustine's The City of God over 1500 years ago.

Tillich's basic idea is that faith can become a transformative and even transcendent force in people's lives. As one reviewer here put it so perceptively, "Faith is creative precisely because we act even though we cannot be entirely sure of the outcome. This is the Faith that creates science and art, and produces miracles in everyday life. When that Faith is attached to life's ultimate concern, it becomes sacred and holy."

Overall, a great book from a great philosopher that itself perhaps transcends its subject matter.

Paul Tillich is one of the more important theologians of the twentieth century. Born into a culture being enticed away from the importance of things religious and theological in favour of science and philosophy. In particular, in the early part of the twentieth century, the philosophical school of existentialism became a strong, perhaps even the dominant force in intellectual development; it was against this (and the atheistic, nihilistic tendencies that followed) that Tillich undertook to reintroduce theology and faith as important components of human existence. Tillich, much to the consternation of many seminary students and more general readers, largely addresses the academy in the academy's language - he is very philosophical and precise in his constructions, and like many in the long tradition of German theologians, crafts his theology with his own terminology and internally-defined concepts that often make his theology difficult to follow.

This text, 'Dynamics of Faith', is one of Tillich's more accessible writings, more directly relevant to the situation of individuals and congregations. Tillich here looks at what faith is, and is not, from a theological perspective, but his intention is to make this transformative for the humanity that seeks to understand God.

In the first chapter, Tillich introduces one of his key terms - ultimate concern. Faith is the state of being ultimately concerned about something - God - without conditions or reservations. Ultimate concern can be religious or not, and can be misguided (people are tempted into idolatry, according to Tillich, not only by making things such as money, power and fame the objects of ultimate concern, but also by making particular ideas or views of God and religion into inappropriate ultimate concerns). In the second chapter, Tillich explores the ideas of what faith is not - faith is not merely intellectual understanding, emotional bonding, or even an act of will. Faith is rather (going back to the first chapter) an act of total personality - one's whole being is drawn to the ultimate concern.

Through the remainder of the text, Tillich develops an intriguing idea of the symbolic in faith - symbols are not constructed like marketing logos, but rather assume a life of their own and participate in that to which they point, in a community context over time. Community is important to Tillich for symbols and for faith, as it is through community that we develop the language and understanding skills necessary to codify and understand such things. Tillich looks at the different disciplines of science, history, philosophy and reason, asking (perhaps echoing Pilate in a different manner) what is truth? Tillich clearly states that neither scientific nor historical truth can negate or validate the truth of faith, and vice versa. Philosophical truth is a different matter, given that the 'language' of faith, through theology, is often expressed in philosophical terms - however, even here, philosophical truth and reasoning cannot be used as a trump card. However, for the truth of faith to be affirmed, the faith must be focussed upon the 'real' ultimate concern.

Tillich often irritates modern Christians because of mistaken assumptions about what he means. In other texts (such as his massive 'Systematic Theology', also often used in higher-level seminary and graduate courses on theology), Tillich describes God as a Ground of Being, and as such, having no 'existence' as we commonly use the term; this gets reduced to the soundbite 'God does not exist', and Tillich is written off. In 'Dynamics of Faith', Tillich often refers to 'cults' and 'myths', using these terms in specific scholarly manner, to refer to religious and biblical issues and events - again, the soundbite becomes 'Tillich says that the Bible is a myth', and given the popular non-Tillichian definition of the word 'myth', again Tillich is dismissed.

There is much material packed into this small text. It is worth exploring.

This is a brilliant little book. Written by Tillich in the 1950's, it analyzes and synthesizes a key element in human spirituality. This element --- Faith --- both undergirds contemporary mysticism and New Thought, and stands far ahead of the norm in both fields.

A central idea in the book is the one that led to my own religious conversion experience as a Humanist: That Faith is a creative force as an action, not merely a belief. In fact, Tillich observes, "faith" that rests solely on belief and demands the elimination of doubt is the antithesis of true Faith. Faith is creative precisely because we act even though we cannot be entirely sure of the outcome. This is the Faith that creates science and art, and produces miracles in everyday life. When that Faith is attached to life's ultimate concern, it becomes sacred and holy.

The book is not a product of a simple mind, and therefore is not a simple read. Yet like Martin Buber's spiritual classic I and Thou, it packs more into its 136 little pages than most books many times its size. It belongs on the permanent shelf of anyone who cares about spiritual growth, personal fulfillment and service to others.

The last time I read Tillich was over 20 years ago in the Seminary. Frankly, I read what was required, memorized enough for the tests, and then dumped it - Wow did i make a mistake!
My current academic advisor / clinical supervisor structured a summer reading program of several of Tillich's books. The 'Dynamics of Faith' will challenge the reader to re-examine the depths of their emotion, focus / energy, and being. Woven through each chapter is the concept of faith as a 'total and centered act of the personal self, the act of unconditional, infinite and ultimate concern.' In our fast paced - immediate gratification - superficial age that impacts all that we do (From the foods we eat to the God we worship); Tillich challenges us to go deep, to savor, to discover the glory of The Ultimate. A 'Must Read' or 'Must Reread' for Pastors.

The Dynamics of Faith by Paul Tillich was originally published in 1957. For readers unfamiliar with the author, Tillich is a well known mid-twentieth century liberal commentator.

In this small book (slightly more than 100 pages) Tillich examines the issue of faith: what it is, what it isn't, its limits etc. From my perspective this is a good representative sample of Tillich's work. Although I have never been particularly attracted to Tillich, over time I have developed a respect for efforts. In particular, I think his recognition of the nuance and ambiguity associated with religious language and concepts is worthwhile. These can be helpful when considering excessively literal interpretations. Despite this welcome aspect, significant portions of Tillich's writing may still strike many readers as vacuous sophistry - his attempts to redefine terminology to make it inoffensive often results in an accompanying lack of meaning.

Overall, this is a solid and short introduction to Tillich's work. I would recommend it as an entry point for readers unfamiliar with Tillich.

In this book Tillich provides an amazingly objective and penetrating perspective on the concept of faith, in all its multivarious forms. Tillich draws sharp contrasts between that which is usually perceived as faith--belief--and that which faith really is, as he puts it--"the state of being ultimately concerned." This book has had a profound impact on my life and has changed the way I work through the day to day as both a struggling soul and human being and a spiritual guide for others.

I truly found Tillich's work meaningful and helpful in sorting out confusing thoughts on the subject. I'm currently re-reading because it is rich and complex and has more to offer in subsequent readings. I found some personal peace in reading this book and am thankful for that. I recommend this book for its open mindedness, utter sincerity, and special insight.

What is so valuable about this book is its power to clarify and organize the various issues surrounding the spiritual experience. Here are some of Tillich's ideas:

Faith as Ultimate Concern. Faith is the centered movement of the whole personality toward our ultimate concern, which is God. That concern alone gives life ultimate meaning and significance.

God. God is not a being, acting in time and space, dwelling in a special place, affecting the course of events and being affected by them like any other being in the universe. Such literalism deprives God of ultimacy. It draws him down to the level of the finite and conditional. There are two elements in the notion of God:
1. Our personal experience of the holy, an awareness of the presence of the divine.
2. The acceptance of the symbols. All the qualities we attribute to God--such as power, love, justice--are symbols taken from our daily experience, and are not information about what God did or will do. If faith calls God "almighty," it uses the human experience of power in order to symbolize the content of its infinite concern, but it does not describe a highest being who can do as he pleases. God is a symbol of God.

Discussions about the existence or nonexistence of God are meaningless. The right question is which of the innumerable symbols of faith are most adequate to the meaning of faith, or which symbols of ultimacy express the ultimate without idolatrous elements.

Symbols. The holy can never be experienced or expressed directly but can only be experienced and expressed symbolically, through words, rituals, and objects. The symbol is not holy itself, but it points to the holy. Symbols cannot be invented; they grow out of the individual or collective unconscious and cannot function without being accepted by the unconscious dimension of our being. They grow when the situation is ripe for them, and they die when the situation changes.

Myths. Myths are symbols of faith combined in stories about divine-human encounters. The fundamental creation of every religious community is a myth that functions as the symbolic expression of ultimate concern. Myth cannot be replaced by philosophy or by an independent code of morals. It keeps faith alive.

Atheism. Atheism can only mean the attempt to remove any ultimate concern--to remain unconcerned about the meaning of one's existence. Indifference toward the ultimate question is the only imaginable form of atheism. Perhaps no one can be an atheist.

Idolatrous Faith. Making a nation or success one's ultimate concern is idolatry, as is making Jesus or the God of the Old Testament an ultimate concern. Idolatry elevates finite realities to the rank of ultimacy.

Risk, Doubt, Courage. There is always a risk that what one has considered a matter of ultimate concern will prove to be a matter of preliminary and transitory concern. If one becomes aware that one has devoted one's life to an idolatrous concern, the meaning of one's life breaks down; the reaction is despair. We always risk making this mistake. A consequence of the risk of faith is doubt. To affirm our faith in spite of our doubt requires courage.

Community. Only as a member of a community of faith (even if in isolation or expulsion) can man actualize his faith. The community creates the language of symbol and myth, which cannot be fully understood outside of the community. Without symbol and myth, there is no act of faith, no religious experience.

Creeds. Every community of faith tries to formulate the content of its faith in a creed. The purpose of the creed is to protect members of the community from idolatrous concern, which destroys the center of the personality. However, a community's creed must never exclude the presence of doubt. The community of faith that demands unquestioning surrender to its creed as formulated by the religious authorities has become static. The fight against the idolatrous implication of this kind of static faith was waged first by Protestantism and then, when Protestantism itself became static, by the Enlightenment.

Protestant Principle. No creedal expression of the ultimate concern of the community--whether in liturgy, doctrine, or ethical precept--is ultimate. Rather, its function is to point to the ultimate which is beyond all of them. No church or person is infallible. No church has the right to put itself in the place of the ultimate. Its truth is judged by the ultimate. No truth or faith can be rejected, no matter what form it may appear in the history of faith, and no truth of faith is ultimate except the one that no man possesses it. This is the "Protestant principle."

What Faith Is Not. Faith is not intellectual; it is not belief; and it is not a matter of will. Faith has no connection with theoretical knowledge, whether it is a knowledge on the basis of immediate, prescientific or scientific evidence, or whether it is on the basis of trust in authorities who themselves are dependent on direct or indirect evidence. Faith is not belief, which is knowledge with a low degree of probability. Faith is not a matter of will. No arguments for belief, no command to believe, and no will to believe can create faith.

Types of Faith. Every faith is either an ontological or moral type of faith. The ontological type of faith is concerned with the sense of the presence of the holy here and now. There are three types of ontological faith: sacramental faith, mystical faith, and humanism. Moral types of faith are characterized the idea of the law. Again there are three types of moral faith: Juristic (developed in Talmudic Judaism and Islam), conventional (most prominent in Confucianist China), and ethical (represented by the Jewish prophets). As Protestantism developed, it became more and more a representative of the moral type of ultimate concern. In this way it lost many of the ritual traditions of the Catholic churches, as well as a full understanding of the presence of the holy in sacramental and mystical experiences.

Reason. There can be no conflict between reason and faith as ultimate concern. Reason conflicts with faith only when the faith is idolatrous.

Scientific Truth. Scientific truth and the truth of faith belong to different dimensions of meaning. Science has no right and no power to interfere with faith. Nor can theologians use the latest physical or biological or psychological discoveries to confirm faith.

Historical Truth. Faith cannot be shaken or confirmed by historical research. Whether Moses actually existed or whether the New Testament miracle stories actually happened or whether the presently used edition of the Koran is identical with the original text are questions of historical truth, not of the truth of faith.

Philosophical Truth. Philosophical truth consists in true concepts concerning the ultimate; the truth of faith consists in true symbols concerning the ultimate.

Conventional Faith. Many people have a conventional faith, a traditional attitude without tensions. Their faith is dead. They have no doubt and need no courage to practice this faith. But their faith can come alive again through contact with religious symbols.

Integration of the Personality. The integration of the personality can be brought about only by faith. The life of faith can be the way of discipline which regulates the daily life; it can be the way of meditation and contemplation; or it can be the way of concentration on ordinary work, on a special aim or on another human being.

Faith, Love, and Action. Faith implies love, which is the desire to be reunited with the divine. The immediate expression of love is action. Faith implies love and is the expression of love in action. While it is true that no human action can produce reunion with God, there is no faith without love and no love without works.

Religious Tolerance. All religions try to express the same ultimate concern; they conflict only about the proper expression of this ultimate concern. Most communities of faith are tolerant of each other. Some important exceptions, however, are the Roman Church's assertion that it alone possesses the truth and Protestant fundamentalism's disdain of all other forms of Christianity and religion.

I found the Dynamics of Faith to be less engaging for myself than The New Being, also by Tillich. This book seems to be mostly philosophical in nature, where I think The New Being was based on sermons and included Bible verses at the opening of many chapters.

For instance, in the Dynamics of Faith, Tillich explores definitions and relations of "faith" without so much as mentioning Abraham and Isaac, or the book of Hebrews. I feel this book would have gained clarity if Tillich had made these connections, which would give the reader who is familiar with the Bible a basis for comparison and thought into the otherwise esoteric linguistic puzzle that Tillich can sometimes be lost in (At least for a non-theologian like myself).

Tillich probably did this for a reason, as the text discusses faith as the "ultimate concern" in contrast to doctrine or sacrament. In other words, the true faith is in the Ultimate or the Unconditional, not even in sacred writings such as the Bible or in other symbols or documents. The net effect, however, is that this book comes off as much more secular or humanistic than books like the New Being.

This is in contrast to The Courage to Be, which is a phenomenal book, and requires no such "anchor" as it stands more in the arenas of philosophy and psychology.

So I acutally wouldn't recommend this as an introduction to Tillich, instead read The Courage to Be. Unless, of course, your main interest is specifically in "Faith," in which case this text will doubtless provide fresh insight. Even Tillich not at his best is better than 99% of writings out there.

Since I only read two books by Tillich, this one plus "The Courage to Be", it may be somewhat risky to comment upon his ideas. This review should therefore be seen as preliminary. It's really a review of both books, although most of the contents covered are found in "The Dynamics of Faith". For those entirely new to the subject, Tillich was a Christian theologian, usually regarded as very liberal and existentialist. He was German, but fled Germany after the Nazi take-over in 1933, becoming a US citizen in 1940.

Tillich does ask interesting questions and make intruiging observations. The key sentence in "The Dynamics of Faith" is: "Faith is the state of being ultimately concerned". Since every human is ultimately concerned about something, this means that all humans have faith. The existence of faith cannot be disproven, since all attempts to do so are circular. To "disprove" faith, one must assume that there isn't anything to be ultimately concerned about. But this is in itself an ultimate statement. Besides, the philosopher who frantically attempts to prove that everything is meaningless is also ultimately concerned about something, namely the truth of his nihilism. Thus, faith is as self-evident as the Cartesian "Cogito, ergo sum".

Tillich's point, of course, is that all humans assume that there is something higher than themselves, transcending our everyday existence, something of cosmic importance. And this is not simply an abstract idea. All humans actively seek self-transcendence. All humans have faith, even the atheists. Tillich also makes an observation familiar to readers of C.S. Lewis: All humans operate on the assumption that there are universal moral laws, transcending the individual. Even more curiously, humans seemingly create moral laws that are impossible to live up to, and then feel guilty and condemned when they fail. How is this possible?

Naturally, to Tillich this all points to the existence of God. But it is here that his reasoning becomes problematic. There are myriad different conceptions of God. There are also many different opinions on morality. What religion is the true one? And what morality should we live by? Tillich cannot really answer these questions. His conception of God is strikingly similar to that found in certain forms of Hinduism. Tillich's God is really Brahman, the nameless and formless Being beyond all Being (and Non-Being). All religions are reflections of this God, but all religions are purely symbolic. Even Jesus Christ is simply a symbol. But how can we know which symbols are true, "true" in the sense of expressing the truth about God? Tillich never really answers this question. At one point, he seems to be suggesting that we don't know which faith is the true one. All faith therefore entails a risk, the risk of being wrong. At other times, Tillich says that the liberal form of Protestant Christianity is the highest religion, and that the Cross is a more authentic symbol than the symbols of other religions. However, he never explains why this is the case.

Sometimes, I get the impression that Tillich is somewhat disingenous. He defines "God" in such an abstract and nebulous manner, that any "ultimate concern" becomes "God". He also defines God as "being-itself" (perhaps Being-in-itself would be a better term). Thus, everything that exists, is God, simply by definition. By defining God in this manner, Tillich makes it impossible to falsify the idea of God. And by making Christianity symbolic, Tillich makes it impossible to falsify Christianity as well! This sounds like an attempt to save Christianity from being exposed by atheism, by making the Christian concepts completely evasive - a constantly moving target. Paul Tillich's God is all things to all people. But isn't such a God really a nullity?

But perhaps this is a rash criticism of "The Dynamics of Faith" and "The Courage to Be". Still, one wonders what solutions Tillich has to the existential problems he has raised. He doesn't believe in the traditional scenario, where a resurrected Jesus will return one day and set up a Millenium. Nor does he believe in the immortality of the soul. Indeed, he seems to regard the immortal soul as a bad idea, even symbolically speaking! In the end, he can only tell us to be courageously self-assertive in the face of Non-Being, go on living despite our feelings of meaninglessness and guilt, and risk being wrong.

This, of course, could have been said by any atheist of an existentialist bent. Which makes you wonder why "God" is needed as part of the equation at all. Even apart from it not being a very comforting answer...