THE LESSON OF CARL SCHMITT Four Chapters on the Distinction between Political Theology and Political Philosophy Expanded Edition HEINRICH MEIER Translated by Marcus Brainard Essays Translated by Robert Berman THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS Chicago and Londontn entre Heinrich Meier is director of the Carl Friedri professor of philosophy at th Iniversity of Munich. and permanet in the Committee on Social Thought at the University of Chicago. ‘The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press. Ltd.. London © 1998, 2011 by The Uni Al rights reserved. P sity of Cl lished 2011 Printed in the United States of Auneriea 219181716 151413 121112345 1886-2 (paper) 1880-8 (paper) Heinrich Meies, Die Lehre Carl Schmitt, Hier Kapitel zur Uinterscheidung Politischer . Theologie wd Politischer Philosophie. 3.. durchgesehene und erweiterte Auflage (ise 278-4-476-02314-8). published by J. B. Metalersehe Verlagshuchhandlung und Cat mt Porsche! Verlag GmbH, Suutigart, Germany. Copyright © 2000, “ago Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Meier, Heinrich, 1953— Lehre Carl Schmitts. English) ‘The lesson of Carl Schmitt: four chapters on the distinction between political theology Ane politial philosophy expanded edition / Heinrich Meier: translated by Marcus Brainard ; new essays translated by Robert Berman peem, Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-0-226.51886-2 (pbk. : alk. paper) SBN -10:0-226-51886-8 (pbk : alk. paper) 1. Schmitt, Cark, 1888-1985. Political seience—Germany—Philosophy. 3. Stave Chureh and state, L Tite 46263.934M99514 2011 320,092—4e22 ianity and pol 2011000448 © This pay Paper) Pt meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO 7,39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper)To Joseph Cropser ' in friendship her ISBN Carl hvwlosy dirsiv CONTENTS ‘Translator’s Foreword (1998) ix Preface to the American Edition (1998) xi Preface to the Gert dition (1993) xxi Abbreviations of Frequently Gited Texts by Carl Selunitt xxiii RALITY, OR ONE’S OWN QUESTION AS A FIGURE 1 POLITICS, OR WHAT IS TRUTH? 26 REVELATION, OR HE THAT IS NOT WITH ME IS AGAINST ME 66 HISTORY, OR THE CHRISTIAN EPIMETHEUS 122 ‘Translator’s Notes 175, Afterword to the Second German Edition (2004 translated by Robert Berman) 7The Quarrel ayer Patnival Pheatosys Vbeek Back (2009, translated by Reber Bernat 1s Inde of Nantes 207STENTS ok ) TRANSLATOR’S FOREWORD T. CHALLENGES posed to the translator by the present work begin already with its main title, Die Lehre Carl Schmitts, precisely because of the ambiguity of Lehre. Among its possible translations are ‘doctrine’, ‘teaching’, ‘theory’, and ‘lesson’, Generally speaking, the German reader will understand Lehre first of all as ‘doctrine’ or ‘teaching’, and only sec- ondarily as whatone is to learn, that is, asa lesson. Since the ambiguity of this term cannot be replicated in English and since the author's intention is tomake visible the lesson of Carl Schmitt's teaching, hehas chosen The Lesson of Carl Schmitt as the title of this volume. By contrast, Schmitt certainly did not intend that Lehre in the subtitle of his Politische The- ologie, namely, Vier Kapitel zur Lehre von der Souveriinitéit, denote ‘les- son’ butrather‘teaching’. Although in the present volume Lehre hasbeen translated by all of the aforementioned terms, wherever Schmit’s thought is specifically at issue, it is translated by either ‘teaching’ or ‘I son’; in the few cases in which reference is made to his doctrine, the word translated is Doktrin. However, the reader should be aware of the fact that beyond the immediate context of Schmitt’s thought, or rather when matters that are not exclusive to it are at issue, ‘doctrine’ is likewise used to render Doktrin, but also Lehre—chiefly in constructions such as Erb- siindenlehre (doctrine of original sin). Aside from the translation of Schmitt's Verfassungslehre (Constitutional Theory), ‘theory’ always ren- ders Theorie. Similarly, the translation of Sache presents difficulties due to ambigu- ity. It has at least three related meanings—that for which one struggles, the focal pointor object of inquiry, and what one makes one’s own or what is one’s affair—and may be renderedas ‘concern’, “issue”, ‘cause’, affair’, “what is contested? or ‘controversial’, ‘subject matter’, or ‘case’. The sen- tence with which Chapter I opens, for example, reads “Moralische Ent- riistung ist nicht die Sache der Politischen Philosophie” and is rendered “Moral indignation is no affair of political philosophy.” Here Sache is used in the third sense listed above. However, while moral indignation is ixTRANSLATOR > FOREWORD notits affair, itis, as becomes clearin the subsequent sentences. an object of inquiry for political philosophy. Except in this ini is rendered here only as ‘cause’: and it should be noted that lates only this word and must not be confused with “cause” (Crsache) in the sense of that which produces an effect. Such a confusion would ob- scure the centrality of the Sache to the author's presentation. dicated by this work's subtitle: Four Chapters on the Distinction between Political Theology and Political Philosophy. At issue is nothing less than the distinction berween the cause of political theology and that of politi- cal philosophy Regarding the choice of translations for individual terms and phr Ihave profited much from J. Harvey Lomax’s translation of the author's Carl Schmite and Leo Strauss: The Hidden Dialogue (Chicago 1995). As far as was possible, Ihave adopted his translations of key terms—such as ‘figure’ for Gestalt and ‘carnality’ for “Leib’haftigkeit (ef. his notes im ibid., 133 £.). The purpose of doing so was to aid the reader who wishes to read the present book in conjunction with the former. which is the au- thor’s express intention. Furthermore. throughout the present volume words have been translated consistently as far as was possible, Wherever itwas thought tobe helpful to the reader, the German word or phrase has been provided after the first English translation of it, In those cas which additional explanation seemed called for. translator's notes (desig- nated in the text by TN1, TN2, etc.) have been included My thanks go to Guido Heinrich (with whom I discussed many of my linguistic queries about this complex text). Raquel Ajona (who gra- ciously located several English texts and translations for me). and J. Harvey Lomax (who was kind enough to read the first two chapters of the present translation and to provide me with a number of helpful com- ments and suggestions). All have helped to improve this translation greatly. neal eal like to express my gratitude to the Lynde and Harry ’ ion, which provided me with a fellowship that hasmade the completion of this translation possible. al sentence. Sache use’ trans- ses,PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION Tan YEARS aco I mentioned, at the beginning of the Preface to the American edition of my book Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss: The Hid- den Dialogue, that a critic, who had perused the recent literature on Schmitt. came tothe conclusion that over the past decade theslim volume had set the increasingly animated discussion surrounding Carl Schmitt on anew course and brought about “a theological turn of the debate.” In the meantime, the interpretation of Schmitt as a representative of politi- cal theology—which was begun in 1988 in Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss and further developed in 1994 in The Lesson of Carl Schmitt: Four Chap- ters on the Distinction between Political Theology and Political Philoso- phy!—has met with such a broad response, and the thesis that the center of Schmitt’s thought is his faith in revelation has become for many al- ready such a matter of course, that not long ago another critic thought he could tell the public that no one had ever claimedanything else about that center. In view of this development, I should like to take the opportunity afforded by the American edition of my final book on Schmitt to separate the present interpretation from various readings which have concealed or blurred it over the past years. Since the philosophical turn of the de- bate apparently has yet to occur or at least is not altogether evident, it seems fitting to note that the confrontation with precisely those aspects of The Lesson of Carl Schmitt which could contribute to a philosophical turn has hardly begun in Europe. Among the aspects I have in mind are, for example’ the investigation that revolves around the significance of politics to self-knowledge and that, in particular, concerns the attempt to define one’s own identity by defining the enemy; or the analysis of Schmitt's complex relationship to Thomas Hobbes not to mention the critique of morality or even more obvious topics. However, readers inter 1. Carl Schmitt, Leo Strauss und *Der Begriff des Politischen”. Zu einem Dialog unter Abwesenden (Stuttgart 1988) and Die Lehre Carl Schmitts. Vier Kapitel zur Unterschei- dung Politischer Theologie und Politischer Philosophie (Startgart/Weimar 1994). xi