The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Eleventh Lecture

[ 1 ] Here, in this very place, I have often spoken of how, in earlier periods of human development, science, art, and religion formed a harmonious unity. Anyone who, in one way or another, can gain insight into the nature of the ancient mysteries knows that within these mysteries, knowledge and understanding were sought as a revelation of the spiritual in its symbolic form—in the manner in which such understanding could be sought in earlier times. This approach can no longer be ours, but in our own age we must once again advance toward an understanding of the spiritual essence of the world.

[ 2 ] All older worldviews are based on a pictorial understanding of the spiritual. However, this perception of the spiritual manifested itself directly in such a way that it was not merely communicated in words, but through the very means that have gradually become our artistic media: physical, pictorial representation in the visual arts, and representation through sound and speech in the musical and spoken arts. But from this second stage, humanity then progressed to the third stage—the religious and ritual revelation of the essence of the world—through which the whole human being felt elevated to the divine spiritual foundation of the world—not merely in an intellectual sense, nor merely in an emotional sense, as through art, but in such a way that thoughts, feelings, and even the innermost impulse of the will surrendered themselves to this divine-spiritual realm. And that through which the outer acts of human will were to be spiritualized were the sacrificial rites, the cultic acts. One sensed the living unity in science—as it was conceived at that time—in art, and in religion.

[ 3 ] The ideal of contemporary spiritual life must be to regain an insight capable of realizing what Goethe had already intuited: that it rises to the level of art—not merely symbolic or allegorical art, but true art, the creation and shaping of sounds and words—and that it also deepens into direct religious experience. Only those who grasp anthroposophical spiritual science in such a way that they see this impulse within it truly grasp its true essence. It goes without saying that humanity will have to take various steps in its spiritual development in order to realize such an ideal. But it is in the patient dedication to these steps that lies what the anthroposophical movement must primarily pursue.

[ 4 ] Now, within the framework of these anthroposophical lectures I am about to give here, I would like to speak—from a particular perspective—specifically about this impulse of the anthroposophical movement that I have just characterized. Once I have finished my remarks, you may perhaps see what the deeper cause of these disputes actually is. And I would like to note in advance that today the anthroposophical movement has long since ceased to coincide with the Anthroposophical Society, but that the Anthroposophical Society, if it wishes to realize its true nature, must in fact fully embody the impulse of the anthroposophical movement.

[ 5 ] The anthroposophical movement has spread beyond the confines of the Anthroposophical Society. This has made it necessary for the nature of the work carried out for the anthroposophical movement to be somewhat different in recent times than it was during the period when the anthroposophical movement was essentially confined to the Anthroposophical Society. But the Anthroposophical Society can only fulfill its purpose if it sees itself as the core of the anthroposophical movement.

[ 6 ] Now, in order to make myself understood not merely in theory but in practice, with regard to what I have just said, I must share with you some of what has happened recently in connection with a movement other than the anthroposophical one, because if I did not do so, misunderstandings could easily arise. I therefore wish to recount today, in a narrative form, how a religious-liturgical movement came into being—one that certainly has much to do with the anthroposophical movement but should not be confused with it: the religious-liturgical movement that calls itself the “Movement for Religious Renewal,” dedicated to the renewal of Christianity. The relationship of this movement to the anthroposophical movement will become clear if we begin—for the sake of establishing this understanding—by examining the forms in which this Movement for Religious Renewal has developed.

[ 7 ] It has been some time now since a small number of enthusiastic young theologians—Christian theologians who were about to complete their theological studies and move on to practical pastoral work—came to see me. They came to me and said something like this: Anyone who, as a student today, approaches the theology taught at the university with a truly devoted Christian heart ultimately feels as if he has no firm ground beneath his feet for the practical pastoral work he can expect to undertake. — The theological-religious movement has gradually taken on forms that do not allow it to truly infuse pastoral work with that which must spring alive from the Mystery of Golgotha, what must flow vividly from the awareness that, through the Mystery of Golgotha, the Christ-essence—which previously dwelt in spiritual worlds—has united itself with human life on earth and continues to work within it. It was pointed out to me, more or less, that in the souls of those who came there lives the feeling that a renewal of the entire theological impulse and the entire religious impulse is necessary if Christianity is to be kept alive, if Christianity is to be preserved in such a way that it can also be the truly living force for our entire spiritual life. And it is clear that the religious impulse has its true significance only insofar as it touches human beings so deeply in their very being that it truly permeates everything else that human beings bring forth through their thinking, feeling, and willing.

[ 8 ] I first noticed those who came to me so that I might help them in what they were striving for—and which they could find nowhere else but where anthroposophical spiritual science is making its way into the world today— I first noticed these people seeking religious renewal and realized that it was necessary not to act out of some isolated enthusiasm, but rather to bring together, so to speak, that which is a shared striving—albeit more or less unconscious—present in wider circles. I pointed out to these individuals that their striving is, of course, not an isolated one, but that, while they may feel it more intensely than many others, yet they felt in their hearts only what many people of the present day feel; but that, when it comes to religious renewal, one must first start from a broad base, within which there is a large number of people from whose hearts the striving for religious renewal springs.

[ 9 ] After some time, the individuals in question came to see me again. They had fully accepted what I had told them as justified, and they then informed me that they had already been joined by a large number of younger theologians who were in the same situation—driven by dissatisfaction with current theological and religious academic pursuits to enter the ministry, that is, to practical pastoral care, and that there was a prospect that this circle would expand. I said: It goes without saying that, at first, it is not merely a matter of having a certain number of preachers and pastoral workers, and that it is not only those who are to teach and provide pastoral care who should be drawn into religious renewal, but above all those who, in the character of pure, devoted believers, are numerous today; that one must be aware that there are numerous people living in the world today who—albeit with a more or less dormant sense of it—possess a strong religious impulse, specifically a Christian-religious impulse; yet this Christian-religious impulse cannot be satisfied by what is available today, given the direction in which theological and religious thought has developed.

[ 10 ] I pointed out that there are, in fact, segments of the population who do not belong to the anthroposophical movement and who, at first, cannot find a path from the state of their soul and the state of their heart toward the anthroposophical movement. I also noted that, for the anthroposophical movement, it is initially essential to clearly and distinctly recognize that we live in an age in which, simply through the development of the world, a body of spiritual truths—truths about a real spiritual content of the world—can be discovered by people if they become spiritual researchers—if they wish to become spiritual researchers; that, however, if they do not wish to become spiritual researchers but strive for the truth as it must reveal itself to people today when they are conscious of their human dignity, such people can understand these truths discovered by spiritual researchers using ordinary, sound—and I mean truly sound—common sense.

[ 11 ] I noticed that the anthroposophical movement is based on the fact that those who find their way to it know from the outset that what matters most is that the spiritual truths accessible to humanity today should take hold of hearts and souls as insights. What essentially matters is that these insights first enter into human spiritual life. It goes without saying that it does not matter to what extent a person within the anthroposophical movement is well-versed in this or that scientific field. One can be part of the anthroposophical movement without having any particular scientific drive or aptitude, for, as I said, the anthroposophical truths are entirely comprehensible to a sound human intellect, provided it is not clouded by prejudice. And I observed: if a sufficiently large number of people today were to find their way to the anthroposophical movement out of the disposition of their hearts and souls, then everything necessary for religious goals and religious ideals would gradually emerge from within the anthroposophical movement itself, in conjunction with anthroposophical knowledge.

[ 12 ] But there are a great many people who feel the urge and impulse mentioned above toward religious renewal—specifically, toward Christian renewal—and who, simply because they are embedded in certain cultural contexts, cannot find their way into the anthroposophical movement. What is necessary for these people today is that they find their way into a spiritual life appropriate to modern humanity in a manner suited to them.

[ 13 ] I realized that what matters here is the formation of communities; that what anthroposophy aims to achieve can, at first, certainly be attained within the individual, but that from this insight—which arises in an individual way—there must follow, entirely out of inner necessity, that social activity—ethical-religious social activity—which the future of humanity needs.

[ 14 ] It is therefore essential to offer something to those people who—and here one must take into account the historical necessity—are not initially in a position to join the anthroposophical movement directly. For them, the spiritual path appropriate to human development today must be sought through the formation of communities based on heartfelt, soulful, and spiritual cooperation. Thus, what I had to say to these seeking individuals at that time, based on the necessities of our human development, can be summarized as follows: It is necessary for the development of humanity today that the anthroposophical movement grow more and more, grow out of its own conditions, and not be hindered in this growth arising from its own conditions—which consist, in particular, in the fact that those spiritual truths that simply wish to come to us from the spiritual world first penetrate directly into the hearts, so that people are strengthened by these spiritual truths. Then they will find the path that will be, on the one hand, an artistic one, and on the other, a religious, ethical, and social one. The anthroposophical movement has been following this path ever since its inception. For this anthroposophical movement, provided this path is properly understood, no other is necessary.

[ 15 ] The need for a different path arises for those people who cannot immediately follow this path, who—through the formation of communities and by working together within the community—must take a different path that, I would say, will only later converge with the anthroposophical one. This opened up the prospect of two movements proceeding side by side: the anthroposophical movement, which will achieve its true goals when it genuinely pursues what was originally inherent in it in accordance with its meaning and power, and does not allow itself to be led astray in this pursuit by any specific fields of work that may arise along the way. Nor, for example, should the field of scientific work impair the impulse of the general anthroposophical movement. We must be clear that it is the anthroposophical impulse that constitutes the anthroposophical movement, and that, while this or that scientific field of work has been established within the anthroposophical movement in recent times, it is absolutely necessary that the strength and energy of the general anthroposophical impulse not be weakened as a result—that, in particular, the anthroposophical impulse not be drawn into the forms of thought and imagination of individual scientific fields into the forms of thought and imagination of individual scientific fields, in such a way that contemporary scientific practice—which is precisely what the anthroposophical impulse is meant to enliven—in turn rubs off on it to such an extent that anthroposophy becomes, so to speak, chemical, like chemistry is today; physical, like physics is today; or biological, like biology is today. That must by no means be allowed to happen. It would strike at the very lifeblood of the anthroposophical movement. The point is that the anthroposophical movement must preserve its spiritual purity, but also its spiritual energy. To do so, it must embody the essence of anthroposophical spirituality, must live and breathe within it, and must do everything that, arising from the spiritual revelations of the present, is also meant to permeate, for example, scientific life.

[ 16 ] Incidentally, I thought at the time, such a movement could be aimed at religious renewal—which, of course, has no significance for those who find their way into anthroposophy, but rather for those who cannot find that way at first. And since there are so many of them, such a movement is, of course, not only justified but also necessary.

[ 17 ] Counting, then, on the fact that the anthroposophical movement would remain what it was and what it is meant to be, I gave, independently of any anthroposophical movement, gave to a number of individuals—who, of their own accord, not at my instigation, wished to work for the movement for religious renewal—what I was able to offer in terms of the content required by a future “theology”: including the content of the liturgical aspects necessary for the formation of such a new community.

[ 18 ] What was given there was given by me in such a way that, as a human being, I gave other people what I could give them based on the conditions of spiritual knowledge in the present. What I gave these individuals has nothing to do with the anthroposophical movement. I gave it to them as a private individual, and I did so in such a way that I emphasized with the necessary decisiveness that the anthroposophical movement must have nothing to do with this movement for religious renewal; that, above all, I am not the founder of this movement for religious renewal; that I expect this to be made absolutely clear to the world, and that I have given the necessary advice to individual figures who, of their own accord, wished to establish this movement for religious renewal—advice that was, indeed, suited to practicing a valid and spiritually powerful worship, filled with spiritual essence, and to celebrating it in a legitimate manner with the forces from the spiritual world. I myself never performed any ritual act while giving this advice, but only showed those who wished to grow into this ritual practice, step by step, how such a ritual act is to be carried out. That was necessary. And today it is also necessary that this be properly understood within the Anthroposophical Society.

[ 19 ] The movement was thus founded independently of me, independently of the Anthroposophical Society, solely on the basis of my advice. And the person who provided the starting point—who, so to speak, performed the first ritual act within this movement—did so according to my instructions; however, I was in no way involved in the founding of this movement. It is a movement that arose of its own accord and received my advice for the reason that, when someone seeks sound advice in any field, it is a human duty—if one is able to give that advice—to actually do so.

[ 20 ] This must be understood in the strictest sense of the word: that alongside the anthroposophical movement, another movement has arisen of its own accord—not out of the anthroposophical movement itself—because there are numerous people outside the Anthroposophical Society who cannot find their own way into the anthroposophical movement, but who may later join it.

[ 21 ] Therefore, a strict distinction must be made between what the anthroposophical movement is, what the Anthroposophical Society is, and what the movement for religious renewal is. And it is important not to regard anthroposophy as the founder of this movement for religious renewal.

[ 22 ] This has nothing to do with the fact that—out of love and with complete devotion to those spiritual powers that can bring such a religious movement into the world today—advice has been given to make this religious movement a true spiritual community in a sense appropriate to human development today. Thus, this movement has arisen in the proper way when it regards what exists within the anthroposophical movement as that which precedes it, which provides it with a secure foundation; when it, for its part, draws upon the anthroposophical movement; when it seeks help and counsel from those who are part of the anthroposophical movement; and so on. Precisely in view of the fact that opposition to the anthroposophical movement today is such that any point of attack is fair game, such matters must be entirely clear. And I must say that, in fact, anyone who is sincere about the anthroposophical movement should reject such claims wherever they arise—for example, if it were said: “In Dornach, at the Goetheanum and through the Goetheanum, the movement for religious renewal was founded”—if the anthroposophical movement were presented as the founder. For that is not the case. It is as I have just described.

[ 23 ] And so, precisely because of the way in which I myself helped get this movement for religious renewal off the ground, I had to imagine that this movement would seek support from the anthroposophical movement, that it would regard the anthroposophical movement as its precursor, that it would seek adherents outside the Anthroposophical Society, and that it would regard it as a grave mistake if, for example, it were to interfere with the Anthroposophical Society through the very efforts that are currently necessary outside the Anthroposophical Society. For the Anthroposophical Society is not understood by those who do not see themselves as being able to serve as advisors and helpers to this religious movement, but who cannot immerse themselves directly within it. If he does this, he is working toward two things: first, he is working toward the shattering and destruction of the Anthroposophical Society; second, he is working toward the futility of the movement for religious renewal. For within humanity, all movements that arise legitimately must interact as part of an organic whole. But this must happen in the right way.

[ 24 ] It is absolutely impossible for the human organism for the circulatory system to become the nervous system and for the nervous system to become the circulatory system. The individual systems must function in the human organism in clear separation from one another. Then they will interact in precisely the right way. Therefore, it is necessary that the Anthroposophical Society, with its content, remain anthroposophy without reservation, unweakened by the newer movement; that those who understand what the anthroposophical movement is—not in some arrogant or haughty sense, but in a sense that truly takes the tasks of our time into account—summarize what matters in these words: Those who have once found their way into the Anthroposophical Society do not need religious renewal. For what would the Anthroposophical Society be if it were to need religious renewal in the first place!

[ 25 ] But the world needs religious renewal, and because it is needed—because it is a profound necessity—a hand was extended to bring it about. Things will therefore proceed correctly if the Anthroposophical Society remains as it is, if those who wish to understand it truly grasp its essence and do not believe that they need to belong to another movement, which does indeed have its own content, even though it is factually correct that it was not anthroposophy that founded this movement of religious renewal; but the religious renewal movement, which founded itself, has drawn its content from anthroposophy.

[ 26 ] Anyone who fails to distinguish between these things in their proper context is, by becoming more lax toward the true impulse of the anthroposophical movement, working to undermine the foundation and backbone of the religious renewal movement as well, and to shatter the anthroposophical movement. Anyone who, standing on the ground of the religious renewal movement, believes, for example, that he must extend it to the anthroposophical movement, is cutting the ground from under his own feet. For that which is ritualistic must ultimately dissolve when the backbone of knowledge is removed.

[ 27 ] It is precisely for the flourishing of both movements that it is necessary to keep them clearly separate. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary at the outset—because in our time, when everything depends on our developing the strength for what we want— it is absolutely necessary in the early stages to ensure strictly that the movement for religious renewal operates in all directions within circles that lie outside the anthroposophical movement. That is to say, it must not—neither in terms of securing its material resources—I must, for the sake of clarity, I must also speak of these things—nor, on the other hand, because it does not immediately succeed in finding adherents among non-anthroposophists, turn to recruiting its converts from within the ranks of the anthroposophists. This amounts to doing the impossible—doing precisely what would lead to the downfall of both movements.

[ 28 ] What really matters today is not that we proceed with a certain fanaticism, but that we are aware that we do what is essential for humanity only when we act out of the necessity of the matter itself. What I am now describing as consequences was, at the same time, the prerequisite for offering to help found the Movement for Religious Renewal, for it was only under these conditions that one could offer such assistance. Had this prerequisite not existed, the Movement for Religious Renewal would never have come into being as a result of my advice.

[ 29 ] Therefore, I ask you to understand that it is necessary for the movement for religious renewal to realize that it must remain at its starting point, that it has promised to seek its followers outside the circles of the anthroposophical movement, because that is where they can be found naturally and because that is where they must be sought.

[ 30 ] What I have said to you, I did not say because I am concerned that anything might be taken away from the anthroposophical movement; I certainly did not say it out of any personal motives, but out of the necessity of the matter itself. Linked to this necessity is the need to understand how it is possible to work correctly in one field as well as in another. It is indeed necessary to state clearly what is at stake when it comes to important matters, for there is far too much of a tendency today to obscure things and not to take them seriously. But clarity is necessary today in all fields.

[ 31 ] If, therefore, someone were to say: ‘Now he himself has set this movement for religious renewal in motion and is now speaking like this’—yes, my esteemed audience and dear friends, the point is that if I had ever spoken differently about these matters, I would not have offered my hand to establish this movement for religious renewal. It must remain at its starting point. What I am saying is, of course, intended solely to ensure that things are properly understood within the Anthroposophical Society, so that it is not said—as is said to have happened—that the Anthroposophical Movement did not work out, and that the Movement for Religious Renewal was now founded as the correct path. — I am, however, convinced that the outstanding, exceptional individuals who founded the Movement for Religious Renewal will oppose any such legend with all their might, and that these outstanding, exceptional individuals will resolutely refuse to make proselytes within the Anthroposophical Movement. But the truth must be understood within the Anthroposophical Movement.

[ 32 ] I know that there are always a few individuals who find such discussions—which become necessary from time to time, not to lodge a complaint in one direction or another, nor to offer criticism, but merely to present what ought to be grasped with complete clarity— I know that there are always a few individuals who find it unpleasant when one seeks to replace nebulous ambiguity with clarity. But this is absolutely necessary for the flourishing and well-being of both the anthroposophical movement and the movement for religious renewal. The movement for religious renewal cannot flourish if it in any way impairs the anthroposophical movement.

[ 33 ] But this is something that anthroposophists, in particular, must understand thoroughly, so that wherever the need arises to stand up for the truth of the matter, they can truly do so. Therefore, when it comes to an anthroposophist’s stance on religious renewal, it can only be this: that he is an advisor, that he offers whatever spiritual assets he can, and that, when it comes to participating in religious rituals, he always remains conscious that he is doing so to help set these rituals on their path. The only person who can be a spiritual helper for this movement of religious renewal is one who understands himself as an anthroposophist. But in every respect, this movement for religious renewal must be carried forward by people who, due to the particular configuration and disposition of their spiritual life, are not yet able to find their own way into the Anthroposophical Society.

[ 34 ] So I hope that no one will now go to anyone who is actively involved in the religious renewal movement and say: “In Dornach, this or that has been said against you.” — Nothing has been said against them; they have been guided by love and devotion to the spiritual world and, quite rightly, have received guidance from the spiritual world in such a way that they were able to establish themselves. But it must be understood about anthroposophists that they have established themselves from within; that, while they did not determine the content of their worship, they did shape the very fact of their worship through their own efforts and on their own initiative; that the nature of the anthroposophical movement has nothing to do with the movement for religious renewal. There is certainly no desire greater than my own that the Movement for Religious Renewal may flourish immeasurably—but only while adhering to its original conditions. The anthroposophical branches must not be transformed into communities for religious renewal, neither in a material nor in a spiritual sense.

[ 35 ] I felt compelled to say this today because advice was to be given regarding a form of worship whose flourishing in the present I very, very much desire. To prevent misunderstandings from arising regarding this particular form of worship—especially since I will be speaking tomorrow about the conditions of spiritual life in the spiritual world—I felt it necessary to include this as an aside today. It is a brief digression intended to facilitate a better understanding of what I will have to say tomorrow as a continuation of the discussions I presented yesterday.