The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Discussion

[ 1 ] Rudolf Steiner: I think it would be best, to begin with, for the distinguished guests here to express their own views on the matters we have begun to discuss today; in this way, we can get to know each other’s wishes and intentions. You certainly have one or two questions based on what I have presented.

[ 2 ] Emil Bock: This afternoon, the participants asked me to report on the outcome. We first considered the various approaches and ultimately agreed that all options are worth considering; we then clarified that the focus is definitely on gathering people and raising funds, as well as determining how we want to organize ourselves and whether we should aim for only a loose association. We agreed that everyone should take the initiative wherever they deemed it advisable, and then selected an address to which letters should be sent regularly, as soon as the need arises, so that we can establish a newsletter-based organization. Whatever we can do publicly in a religious context can only take place in the church. As for what we do afterward, we’ll have to wait until we have the people. Regarding the question of membership, we have made it clear that membership can only be possible if one of those currently participating in the course acts as a guarantor. The central office for these letters should be entrusted to someone in Berlin, so that the initiative for all possible activities must be gathered and directed from Berlin. The process of bringing people together could begin immediately. Next, the preparation of an administrative office: The only issue here is who should be considered for the role. However, we do not want to collect funds in a way that would be conducted under the name of our association, because that would, in turn, bring us into the public eye. The idea was considered as to whether we could affiliate the administrative office we are to establish with “Kommender Tag,” or what other possibilities might be available. ^{1Editor’s note: The stenographer was familiar with only a few of the participants. Consequently, the names of some of the individual participants are missing from his records. Where the text below refers to “a participant,” this means that the stenographer did not record the name of the person in question.}

[ 3 ] Rudolf Steiner: Yes, so you meant that the best approach would be a loose association of those who might wish to join this committee, a central office in Berlin for collecting letters, and fundraising in a way that would initially be carried out by Kommende Tag. The latter matter is, of course, something we would also need to make more concrete. Well, isn’t it true that this looser association must also be discussed in terms of how quickly those present envision the matter proceeding? After all, most of you are probably of a certain age and will be leaving this life very soon, aren’t you?

[ 4 ] A participant: Various.

[ 5 ] Rudolf Steiner: Of course, it’s different. But besides that, the situation today is such that it is indeed necessary not to waste time when undertaking something like this. There is no doubt that, for example, the Threefold Social Order movement would have achieved much more if time hadn’t been constantly wasted. And so I would also say that the advice here is to try as much as possible not to waste time, but of course it must not be rushed either. Have you formed any idea of how, under certain circumstances, you might still be able to go public with this matter at the very moment you intend to begin the large-scale fundraising campaign? You want to avoid the public eye to a certain extent. Do you have specific reasons for this? Let’s try to discuss this question.

[ 6 ] A participant: I’d just like to say that, based on what I’ve experienced so far in various cities, I have the impression that there’s actually no reason to avoid the public. The lectures are always purely spiritual in nature. I am convinced that more people would join immediately if these were not merely spiritual lectures, but if they were part of a cultural movement.

[ 7 ] Rudolf Steiner: I would particularly like to hear what you have against the public. The reasons may be very important.

[ 8 ] A participant: We have considered that this must inevitably escalate into a cultural struggle, and that we must wait to establish congregations—and indeed, wait to even proclaim the idea itself. As soon as a public appeal for funds is made, that is reason enough for us to face the greatest difficulties. These were our reasons for deciding to wait even with the establishment of congregations themselves; for it is all part of the same issue.

[ 9 ] Another participant: We believe that we cannot act as agents in the process of church planting...

[ 10 ] Rudolf Steiner: Well, then, let’s wait before founding the community... A participant: ... before appearing in public.

[ 11 ] Rudolf Steiner: But what should we do while we wait? The task, to begin with, is to find, so to speak, ten times as many people as there are now. That is, after all, the purpose of the letter campaign. I believe that, if the matter is handled skillfully, it might not be all that difficult to get ten times as many people. Among theology students in particular, ten times as many people will likely come forward. You yourselves came together relatively quickly, after all. Among theology students, people will undoubtedly come forward quickly. It all depends on how you try to finance the project. Of course, this is no easy task, because it will only succeed if it is done relatively quickly. And the idea is, of course, quite good: to first form a loose association and, through correspondence, reach out to all those students who are inclined toward such a cause. How many of you are there now?

[ 12 ] A participant: Eighteen.

[ 13 ] Rudolf Steiner: Eighteen students; ten times that number is 180. Once you have 180 to 200, however, it would be time to get to work; and the question then arises as to what could be done to act as quickly as possible. Of course, working through an exemplary cultural program—as good as that is in itself—is not suited to producing rapid results. So the question arises as to whether one should not prepare, during the time when the collection of funds is taking place through correspondence, a proper, calm but very clear presentation of the main points, which could be printed—it need not be published, but it would have to be used to raise funds—and which would be presented by those individuals responsible for fundraising to people believed to have the means to contribute. How this could be done by Kommender Tag is, of course, somewhat difficult to imagine. “Kommender Tag” could, of course, play an administrative role in this, but how “Kommender Tag” could lend its name to such a cause is somewhat questionable. Did you mean that “Kommender Tag” would take the matter into its own hands as “Kommender Tag”?

[ 14 ] A participant: We saw the only advantage in this as being that they already have a lot of contacts and administrative experience there. It doesn't have to be “Kommender Tag.” We need to assign someone to this who, for practical reasons, works at “Kommender Tag.”

[ 15 ] Rudolf Steiner: I see what you mean. It might not even be such an impractical idea to think of someone who might be very interested in this matter. One might think of Heisler specifically for this task. One could certainly consider that he, or someone in a similar situation, might be the best candidate for this position. But what do you think about a kind of calm, objective, and purposeful presentation that would need to be distributed so that people could learn what they would be giving their money for?

[ 16 ] A participant: I believe—speaking for myself—that the moment one decides to secure major funding, one will inevitably have to give up secrecy.

[ 17 ] Rudolf Steiner: It is, however, possible that someone like Heisler might, so to speak, be entrusted with the task of securing funding, and that there would be no hesitation in making the matter itself public. On the other hand, I would suggest that we could avoid making your names—and the names of the others who will join—public, so that no one needs to know, whenever a position for a pastor or preacher is being filled somewhere within the church, that you belong to this movement. There is no need for you to be asked about this at all. The participants in this loose association do not need to be made public; only the idea and the cause itself need to be known.

[ 18 ] As for Heisler, it doesn't matter—he won't be getting another pastoral position anyway.

[ 19 ] A participant: I don't reflect on a specific passage.

[ 20 ] Rudolf Steiner: You’re not considering a position within the church?

[ 21 ] A participant: No, I wouldn't do that.

[ 22 ] Rudolf Steiner: There are certainly some candidates for the pulpit who are already so compromised that they can calmly allow their names to be made public. Otherwise, the names of this loose association need not be made public. Of course, no one denies their membership; but one need only mention it when asked. That seems to me, at any rate, to be what is possible. And don’t you think that among the younger people already holding pastoral positions, there will be a number who would join your circle—that is, who have already entered [a church office]?

[ 23 ] A participant: The question is to what extent people already have a relationship with anthroposophy.

[ 24 ] Rudolf Steiner: Yes, it would certainly be necessary, however, for there to be a certain core of individuals who are anthroposophists. But it doesn’t really seem necessary to me that everyone be an anthroposophist. After all, if there is a certain core of energetic individuals, then the whole endeavor can take on an anthroposophical character simply through the significance of these individuals, without excluding those who are not anthroposophists. You see, the best anthroposophists have generally been those who were initially opponents; or at least among the best are those who were opponents and gradually came to embrace anthroposophy. I don’t think we should delude ourselves into believing that many of those who have sought their own path to a religious worldview in the modern sense can now be brought to anthroposophy in the blink of an eye simply by reading a short text. Many will feel a certain resistance. Above all, it will not be easy to overcome the belief that certain findings of anthroposophy are ruled out by dogma. Many will still believe that the doctrine of repeated earthly lives is irreligious and unchristian. And it is not really desirable today to exclude all those who cannot yet accept this, for what really matters here is to uphold the true religious relationship. Just as, I would say, at the time of Christianity’s founding, one could be a good Christian without knowing that the Earth is round or that America exists—and, conversely, Christianity was not shaken by the discovery of America—so too can someone be a good Christian without having access to the truth of repeated earthly lives. For, fundamentally speaking, an essential aspect—which I would like to discuss further tomorrow—of being a Christian is one’s relationship to Christ Jesus himself, to this very concrete being; that is the essential point. The essence of Christianity is a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. And a doctrine as such—one that is certainly established as doctrine, one that is simply a doctrine about the structure of the world—cannot actually be the hallmark of what is Christian in a person. One is, of course, a Christian through one’s relationship to Christ, just as one is a Buddhist through one’s relationship to Buddha, not actually through the content of a doctrine. We need doctrinal content, as we shall see in the sermon, but one is not actually a Christian through that doctrinal content. No one today can be a Christian in the sense that we must understand it—that is, without having a positive relationship to the supersensible Christ-being.

[ 25 ] That is why, for me, Adolf Harnack is not a Christian. A man who is capable of saying that Christ can be removed from the Gospels—that only the Father has a place in them—is not a Christian. For him, Christ is no different from Yahweh, the God of the Old Testament. If you were to cross out the name “Christ” in Harnack’s book The Essence of Christianity and replace it everywhere with the name “Yahweh,” you would see that the meaning remains unchanged. He simply substitutes Jesus’ faith in the Father for an understanding of the essence of Jesus himself. In fact, he recognizes in Christ only a great teacher of the Father’s religion. But that is actually the negation of Christianity, not the essence of Christianity. And that is why I believe it is not necessary for us, so to speak, to make people swear allegiance to the doctrine of reincarnation or to karma, for that is something people find difficult to bring themselves to accept; they will come to accept it in time; but I believe that, since you yourselves are anthroposophists and will be able to win over a large number of anthroposophists, the endeavor will thereby already possess the necessary anthroposophical character. The very content of anthroposophy ensures that the endeavor will have an anthroposophical character, if it succeeds at all. And it must succeed, because it contains within itself many conditions for success.

[ 26 ] A participant: At the University of Münster, the theologians wanted to break free. There, one would certainly find theologians who meet our needs. Whether there will be many anthroposophists there—that is the question.

[ 27 ] Rudolf Steiner: I believe that Gideon Spicker laid the groundwork in Münster; after all, he was a professor of philosophy there. You don’t know anything about him?

[ 28 ] One participant: It’s just that the exams were structured differently back then. Another participant: It’s exactly the same in Leipzig.

[ 29 ] “Rudolf Steiner: You will certainly find fertile ground among the younger theologians.

[ 30 ] A participant: The theologians who wish to break away from the Church are mostly individuals who can no longer accept the doctrine of the Trinity and refuse to recognize Christ as a supernatural being, or they are members of the Community Movement.

[ 31 ] Rudolf Steiner: If there is a core group of anthroposophists, it is not a hindrance to have these individuals as well in the loose association. There does seem to be evidence of this, for example, in the fact that Mr. Rittelmeyer came to anthroposophy immediately after writing this little work on the personality of Jesus. From the perspective you have just described, it was actually written with that in mind. It was written entirely with the intention of presenting Jesus Christ as a powerful religious figure, while leaving the entire question of the supersensible, of symbolism, and so on, entirely outside the discussion. So it was very much what one might call enlightened Protestantism. And then he joined us and recognized, relatively quickly, the necessity of understanding the Mystery of Golgotha and of striving to arrive at a supersensible understanding of this Mystery of Golgotha. So I believe that as long as they are serious students—they don’t have to be overachievers, but they must be serious students—it does no harm if they come from a background of enlightened Protestantism. You see, the best candidates you could hope for would actually be those younger people—there just aren’t many of them, they’re few and far between at best—who have just completed their studies in Catholic theology and have thoroughly broken with the Catholic Church; those would be the best candidates you could hope for. It cannot be denied that Catholic theology, as a discipline and in terms of content, possesses an extraordinary amount of substance. People are well trained, and that stays with them. And then, once they’re out in the world—as a Catholic theologian, one is naturally bound by iron shackles—but once they’re out there, anything is possible with them. I mention this only—there aren’t many such people; they are few and far between—to emphasize the possibility. And then, the enlightened Protestants should not be underestimated.

[ 32 ] A participant: ... People who strive to have something certain in science reach a point where they can no longer acknowledge the supernatural essence of Christ, and yet somehow still have a longing for it ...

[ 33 ] Rudolf Steiner: That was the case with Rittelmeyer. He could not possibly have arrived at anything other than a Weinel-style conception—albeit a somewhat more vigorous and also very spirited one—of the simple man from Nazareth. That was Rittelmeyer’s conception of the personality of Christ. And very quickly he brought himself to embrace the supersensible conception of Christ. So I believe that you need not shy away from drawing people in.

[ 34 ] A participant: The most difficult issue remains funding.

[ 35 ] Rudolf Steiner: Yes, the question of financing remains difficult, but it will remain difficult until we have the money; the fact is that every new ten thousand marks is bound to present new difficulties. These are difficulties that simply must be overcome. I do believe, however, that some bitter experiences will have to be overcome; some bitter experiences will be had. But I believe that perhaps someone like Heisler might not be such a bad person after all, because while he is naturally embittered by his own fate, he is also convinced of the necessity that something like this must happen. And he is, after all, of a respectable age—forgive me, you are all younger than he is—which one must have if one is to endure everything that comes with raising money. That is no pleasant matter.

[ 36 ] Emil Bock: The question now is whether anthroposophists who are not theologians could be enlisted for our purposes.

[ 37 ] Rudolf Steiner: [Do you mean by] this question whether this looser association should include anthroposophists who are not actually in a position to enter the priesthood?

[ 38 ] Emil Bock: ... those who are in a position where they are currently still working in a different profession.

[ 39 ] Rudolf Steiner: Yes, of course the question then is, what are such people supposed to do there? At most, they might be considered for fundraising. But it’s not easy to muster the necessary enthusiasm for that if you’re not deeply involved in the cause. Of course, there may be a few individuals, but I believe these individuals are already so overwhelmed with all sorts of work that they could hardly devote themselves to such a cause other than, at most, as a side job. But I don’t actually know of anyone who—without aspiring to a preaching role themselves, even in the freest of forms—would be suitable as an anthroposophist. For anthroposophists, in general, precisely because they find in anthroposophy itself something like a kind of religion—yes, how shall I put it?—a kind of religious fulfillment, are not so very interested in regenerating the religious community itself. They would have to be theological anthroposophists, and it is among them that one would have to look first. Since Rittelmeyer’s work began, such individuals are certainly not all that rare. I believe you will find many among theologians; and especially since the book that Rittelmeyer edited as an anthology, you will find many among theologians. Whether they are all suitable is another question. But otherwise, I believe, it would greatly improve the movement.

[ 40 ] Emil Bock: Of course, they'd have to change their tune once they learn about the idea.

[ 41 ] Rudolf Steiner: Do you think many of the students would like to switch paths? Do you mean students from the Association for Anthroposophical University Work?

[ 42 ] A participant: Students who do not study theology because, although they have a strong religious interest, they are not interested in what is offered in the Church today.

[ 43 ] Rudolf Steiner: Do you mean that they also muster active enthusiasm?

[ 44 ] A participant: Yes, if there is an opportunity to act in that way.

[ 45 ] Rudolf Steiner: Yes, it is certainly possible, once you have examined these personalities, to engage with them and approach them. I have observed that the Association for Anthroposophical University Work, especially when it endeavors to spread anthroposophy itself within the various branches of anthroposophical university work, places more emphasis on scientific interest than on theology proper. On the other hand, one would have to arouse the interest of the theologians themselves.

[ 46 ] A participant: Will we be able to wait until some of us have completed the special theological exams?

[ 47 ] Rudolf Steiner: Do you think it would take too long? A participant: I don't know to what extent it is necessary.

[ 48 ] Another participant: There are some among us who have not yet expected to complete their theological exams, but who wish to use the preparatory studies to set out to pursue the goal that is to be addressed here.

[ 49 ] Rudolf Steiner: The question now is whether those you are referring to, realizing just how necessary this is, might not turn to the ministry after all—even if they had previously thought they would not complete the exam but would do something else instead. Of course, isn’t that connected to a very general concept of culture? You see, the ideas that Spengler described in his The Decline of the West are actually more well-founded than one might think. They are so well-founded that one can say: if cultural trends were to continue unchecked, without any new impetus, then what Spengler predicts would indeed come to pass. We are in the midst of a full-scale decline, caught up in a current of total decline. On the other hand, you must not forget the corruption of culture. The corruption of intellectual life in general is not limited to the more educated classes, but is very widespread. It is indeed the case that the majority of the population is consumed by it, and the religious impulses that may still have existed in the 1970s and 1980s have already vanished even among the less educated people today. So we are in the midst of a complete current of decline, and it is hardly possible to escape it unless religious life as such creates new impulses. And so I do believe that those who, having completed theological studies and having the opportunity to serve as priests, should indeed do so. It is indeed necessary that precisely those who have studied theology should serve as priests, because we need this so very much.

[ 50 ] A participant: ... but also within the Church?

[ 51 ] Rudolf Steiner: Within the Church? I would like to stick to what I have said. One can remain within the Church if one can gradually lead the members of existing church communities out of it; one can thus turn to the establishment of free congregations. I do not believe that the Church as such can be reformed or regenerated in any way; that is not the case. The church community is so corrupt that we can only hope to lead the... [incomplete and unintelligible transcription of the text in the postscript] out and found something new with them... [further gap]. On the other hand, to even consider a reform of the Church itself—and here I must say—this is not merely my opinion, but an objective assessment of the facts—that these church communities are doomed to decline. Except, of course, for the Catholic Church, which must be understood in such a way that it is by no means doomed to extinction, because it operates with extensive resources and must therefore be regarded as something entirely different.

[ 52 ] A participant: We are partly philosophers, partly scientists, having dropped out of an unsatisfactory theology program. Should we pursue a doctorate and then return to studying theology after completing our doctoral exams? Or should we say that, based on our prior education, we can begin religious work right away?

[ 53 ] Rudolf Steiner: You see, this is simply a question of the success we will achieve. In this regard, one must not underestimate the transitional nature of this process. When the Waldorf School was founded, I had nothing else in mind when selecting teachers other than their purely personal suitability, and whatever training in pedagogy and didactics was needed was provided in a relatively short period of a few weeks. Something like that simply has to be possible during a transitional phase. I do not believe that any of you who, let’s say, failed in your theological studies and turned to some other field of study—becoming a philosopher or a natural scientist—needs to strive for anything other than formally completing your academic degree. That is something that is certainly desirable, but not absolutely necessary. It is certainly desirable that one’s academic studies be completed in some way—say, with a dissertation. On the other hand, we need not give the slightest thought to the idea that anyone would need to return to theological studies. We must even regard it as absolutely correct, even during this transitional period, that we do not adhere to the old examination system and the like; that is beyond any doubt. If, for example, Mr. Husemann were to complete his studies in chemistry and pass his rigorous examination in that field, then nothing would prevent him—if he otherwise felt inclined to become a pastor—from becoming a pastor while retaining his status as a chemist.

[ 54 ] You know, the compartmentalized study of theology—and please don’t take this as something that might be offensive—actually hinders the work of the preacher and the pastor within the congregation. The fact is that theology students learn too little about the world; they are actually far too unfamiliar with what their task actually is. They are placed in positions where they are expected to carry out the kinds of responsibilities I have described in the business world. A specialized course of study like today’s “theology program”—where one certainly becomes an impractical person—is therefore not suited for this. It is indeed the case—I have experienced it myself—that, for example, outstanding theology graduates barely knew what the Pythagorean theorem states. These are exceptional cases, but they do occur. But quite apart from being immersed in real, practical life—which is what we need above all else—debating the validity of dogmatics or discussing what goes on in theological faculties certainly won’t solve the world’s problems. One could even quite easily imagine that there might be people among us who have never studied at all but possess a certain religious genius; that’s quite conceivable.

[ 55 ] What we naturally need is for you, before you leave here, to find—on your own—the person to whom you would, so to speak, entrust the secretariat of your informal association. It would be good if we could then stay in touch with this person, specifically through The Coming Day. But you do have the Central Office for Letters in Berlin.

[ 56 ] A participant: We had thought of another location in Tübingen, which is, after all, near Stuttgart.

[ 57 ] Rudolf Steiner: And what tasks would this central office be responsible for?

[ 58 ] A participant: So that these matters, which could be resolved in connection with Stuttgart, might be resolved through personal contact.

[ 59 ] Rudolf Steiner: What other tasks would the central office have? The search for such individuals—and then, wouldn’t you agree, think separately of an office such as the one Mr. Bock envisions as an extension of Der Kommende Tag.

[ 60 ] Emil Bock: First of all, we would have to tackle the issue of financing and work on various fronts. Various matters would have to be coordinated through a central office, so that office would need to have the authority to act. We chose Berlin because that is where most of us are based.

[ 61 ] Rudolf Steiner: So you would think of having central offices in Berlin and Tübingen to identify suitable candidates, and here in Stuttgart, someone who would handle the financing?

[ 62 ] Well, I can’t make any kind of binding statement about the “Day to Come” at this moment, but it is my opinion that such a thing, if carefully considered, could be carried out. Couldn’t it be the case—of course, I don’t even want to offer any binding advice regarding the choice of a person; I’m therefore citing Heisler merely as an example—that: If Heisler were tasked with addressing the financing issue and this were done in connection with the “Kommender Tag,” we would have to immediately consider establishing the right position for Heisler, and I would, of course, have to bring this up for discussion in the “Kommender Tag” so that you already know, when you leave here, what the “Kommender Tag” can do. So I do think that too many transitions from one thing to another naturally lead a bit into the unknown. It does seem to me that it wouldn’t be a bad idea if we were to establish such a central office right away, one that would, so to speak, begin the work. Of course, this cannot be done prematurely, for I acknowledge all the reasons against proceeding too quickly. But really, whatever can be done from such a central office after a year or two can also be done today. — I can’t make any binding statement on behalf of “The Coming Day” today, but it seems to me that if there is any thought of [working]—not under the name of “The Coming Day,” but in connection with it—then one would actually have to do so immediately.

[ 63 ] A participant: Do we have the financial resources? If you hire someone, you have to be able to pay their salary.

[ 64 ] Rudolf Steiner: Well, the question is, of course, whether a solution might not be found along these lines after all—whether, so to speak, the issue of funding for this particular individual would already be addressed immediately. Will you still be here the day after tomorrow? We can certainly discuss tomorrow or the day after tomorrow how to resolve this so that such a person can be found right away. Of course, it’s not possible for you to secure funding so quickly for the person who, in turn, is supposed to take charge of the financing. We can talk about it tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. But in principle, are you not averse to getting started on this right away, if possible?

[ 65 ] A participant: I'd like to ask whether we could now reach a consensus on the nature of the position.

[ 66 ] Rudolf Steiner: I’ll just say this: I always proceed from realistic, practical considerations, and there are reasons that would likely make implementation happen very quickly if Dr. Heisler were to be considered. With him, the matter could probably be carried out more quickly than if it were a matter of choosing any other individual.