A Seminar Paper on Paul Tillich

Submitted to: Rev Dr M Stephen Submitted by: Mathew Varghese

Introduction
Paul Tillich was a remarkable and a singular theologian who was as much at home in a
philosophical discussion as he was in the pulpit and seemed as keenly interested in art and politics as
he was in his work as a professional theologian. He promoted socialism, while enjoying the benefits
of an upper middle class life style. He was renounced as a great ecumenical Christian and yet rarely
attended church and apparently lived a fairly promiscuous lifestyle. His philosophical theology
reflected platonic, mystical, idealist and existential features. He was renowned a great ecumenical
Christian and yet rarely attended church and apparently lived a fairly promiscuous life style.

Life Sketch
Paul Tillich was born in to the family of a Lutheran Pastor in the German town of Starzeddel
near Berlin on August 20, 1886. He seems to have had a serious interest in theology and philosophy
from an early age possibly even as young as 8- and began moving toward a career in ministry at the
age of 18. Tillich studies at several major German universities including Halle and Berlin. During his
education for ministerial ordination, he determined to become a professor or theologian and
eventually received not only ordination in the Protestant state church but also appointment as
‘Privatdozent’ (Tutor) at the University of Halle. In 1951, Tillich published the first volume of
Systematic Theology. He died in 1965.1

Tillich Pre-supposition
One of Tillich’s basic assumptions was that Theology must be Apologetic. It must formulate
and communicate its concept in a way that truly speaks of the modern situation. ‘By situation’ Tillich
meant particular questions and concerns of people in culture, ‘the scientific and artistic, economic,
political and ethical forms in which they express their interpretation of existence.’ The existence of
such a common ground is another basic assumption of his theology. The third basic assumption is the
crucial role played by philosophy in theology is Apologetic. Tillich defined philosophy so as to make it
virtually synonymous with ontology: philosophy is ‘that cognitive approach to reality in which reality
as such is the object’ and ontology is the ‘analysis of those structures of being which we encounter in
every meaning with reality.2

Nature and Method of Theology

His purpose is to present the method and the structure of a theological system written from
an apologetic point of view and carried through in a continuous correlation with philosophy. A
theological system, he says must serve two different needs-‘the statement of the truth of the
Christian message and an interpretation of this truth for every generation’. He is so impressed by the
kerygmatic character of theology that he insists that the theologian must work within the theological
circle. Tillich recognizes two formal criteria of every theology. ‘The object of theology is what
concerns us ultimately. Only those propositions are theological which deal with their objects in so far
as it can become a matter of ultimate concern for us.’ The second formal criterion is that ‘only those
statements are theological which deal with their object in so far as it can become a matter of being
or not being for us.’ These two criteria express Tillich’s existentialist approach to the theology, and it
is the character of this approach, which determines his conception of the method of theology.
Dealing with the source of systematic theology Tillich rejects what he calls ‘the assertion of neo
orthodox Biblicism’ that the bible is the only source. He maintains the biblical message could not be
understood and could never have been received had there not been preparation for it in human
history. 3

1
Stanley J Grenz and Roger E Olson, 20th Century Theology (Secundrabad: OM Books, 2004), 116.
2
Paul, Tillich, Systematic Theology: Reason and revelation being and God (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1951), 3-4.
3
Heywood J Thomas, Paul Tillich: An Appraisal (London: SCM Press, 1960), 21-28.
The method of Correlation
The term correlation may be used in different meaning. The first meaning of correlation
refers to the central problem of religious knowledge. The second meaning of correlation determines
the statements about God and the world. The third meaning of correlation qualifies the divine
human relationship within religious experience. This method replaces three inadequate methods of
relating the contents of the Christian faith to man’s spiritual existence. The first method can be called
supernaturalistic, in that it takes the Christian message to be a sum of revealed truth which has fallen
in to the human situation like strange bodies from a strange world. No mediation to the human
situation is possible. Man must become something else than human in order to receive divinity. The
second method to be rejected can be called naturalistic or humanistic. It derives the Christian
message from man’s natural state. It identified man’s existential with his essential state, overlooking
the break between them which is reflected in the universal human condition of self-estrangement
and self contradiction. Third method can be rejected can be called dualistic. In as much as its builds a
supernatural structure on a natural sub-structure. It realizes that in spite of the infinity gap between
man’s spirit and God’s spirit, there must be a positive relation between them. It tries to express this
relation by positing a body of theological truth which man can reach through his own effort or in
terms of a self contradictory expression through natural revelation.4

Reason and Revelation

The first part of Tillich’s systematic theology attempts to establish a correlation between
reason and revelation. His goal was to show that ‘revelation is the answer to the question implied in
the existential conflicts of reason’. In contrast to those who see reason and revelation as opposed to
one another, he believed that reason does not resist revelation. It asks for revelation, for revelation
means the reintegration of reason. Tillich’s concept of reason it is necessary to grasp something of
his fundamental ontology of ‘essence and existence’. Essence is the potential, unactualized
perfection of things. It has ontological reality but not actual existence. Existence on the other hand, it
is actual and fallen from essence because it is cut off from its perfection while still being dependent
on it, it is not itself. Essential reason or reason itself is transcendent. ‘It is the structure of the mind
which enables the mind to grasp and to transform reality.’ Actual reason or reason in the
predicament of existence is different. Like everything that exist it is limited and estranged from its
true essence, which give rise to conflicts.
The unity of the polarities of reason is the task of revelation. Revelation is the manifestation
of power that reunites what is tragically and destructively separated, thereby saving, healing and
bringing harmony out of conflict. Tillich differentiated revelation in to ‘actual revelation and final
revelation’. The former designates all events and experiences that manifest the power of being
wherever and whenever they may happen. The latter designates the ultimate unsurpassable event
of the healing power of the new being to which all other revelatory even and experiences point. 5

Doctrine of God
Tillich doctrine of god has created more controversy than any other area of his theology. ‘God
does not exist he is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exist is to
deny him.’ He engaged in a complex and subtle ontological analysis of the structure of finitude in
order to show that it raises the question of power of being or being itself that can overcome the
threat of non-being inherent in itself. God, he says is that which ultimately or unconditionally
concerns us. This is Tillich’s philosophical translation of the first commandment-‘Thou shalt love the
Lord thy God with all thy heart’. The whole description of God other than this are symbolical and not
literal, though it must be said that Tillich often speak of such terms as eternity, absolute,
unconditioned as if there were synonyms with being itself. Life is the process in which potential being
becomes actual being. God is living in so far as he is the ground of life. Ground is something which
underlies all things in some way or other which we can only symbolically describe as caution or

4
Tillich, Op.Cit., 65.
5
Grenz, Op.Cit., 122-124.
substantiality. God is not an object, He has selfhood. He is the absolute participant and super-
personal. 6

Christology and Historical Criticisms

Tillich Christology is similarly determined by the form of the question with which it is
correlated. In ‘existence and the Christ’, the third part of his systematic theology, he presented a
colorful and controversial phenomenology of human existence. At its foundation is his interpretation
of the fall of humanity, which he viewed as the universal transition from essence to existence that ‘is
not an event in time and space but the trans-historical quality of all events in time and space.’ He
said that Jesus ‘proves and confirm his character as the Christ in the sacrifice of himself as Jesus to
himself as the Christ’. This clearly implies a dualistic Christology that separate Jesus and Christ from
one another. He claimed that he was trying to develop a constructive contemporary Christology that
would preserve both the ‘Christ character and Jesus Character’ of the event. His view of Christ is
docetic: ‘Christ’ is not identical with the man Jesus and needed not even be Jesus at all for the
humanity and particularity of Jesus seen unnecessary to Christ.
His position with regard to an actual historical Jesus has been interpreted by A T Mollegen as
the assertion of five points, and Tillich has agreed that these are a just summary of his position.
 The Incarnation was a fact.
 The New Testament portrays of Jesus is the Jesus received as the Christ.
 The historian’s quest yields only probability which is not enough for religion.
 The revelation portrayed in the NT is historical.
 Faith certainty comes to the individual through his experience as a member of the church.
The rise of historical criticism was, he says an expression of Protestant courage and is an element of
which Protestantism can be proud. Historical criticism is relevant to theology as it reveals the
difference between historical, legendary and mythical elements in the gospel records. 7

The meaning of Incarnation

The use of the term incarnation in Christian theology points, says Tillich, to the paradox that
he who transcends the universe appears in it and under its conditions. But if we press the language,
we get not Christian doctrine but pagan transmutation myths and the corollary problem of how what
‘something else yet remains itself’. So, Tillich concludes that incarnation means ‘manifestation in a
personal life’ in which is, a dynamic process involving tensions, risks, dangers and determination by
freedom as well as by destiny. This is the adoption side, without which the incarnation accent would
make unreal the living picture of the Christ.8

The Doctrine of Man

Tillich does not understand man’s self-hood to be something completely independent of the
world. Man is directly aware of the structures which make cognition possible because he lives in
them and acts through them. For the structure of man’s essential nature is the structure of finite
freedom. The concept of finitude is the core of Tillich’s doctrine of man, and it is one of the most
difficult to understand and explain. He understood the ‘Nihilo’ to describe the source of human
nature. The doctrine of man’s existential nature is not a description of man’s actual being but is the
analysis of those qualities of man’s nature which express the contrast between what he actually is
and what he essentially is. Tillich’s contrast is expressed in the doctrine of the fall which is described
by Tillich as the transition from essence to existence. Finally he says we must realize that the
transition from essence to existence is possible because finite freedom works within the frame of the
universal destiny that is the final step towards the answer.9

6
Thomas, Op.Cit., 54-55.
7
Ibid., 78-88.
8
Ibid., 91-93.
9
Ibid., 112-120.
The Doctrine of Church
The church is a subject of both systematic and practical theology, but the systematic doctrine
of the church is ‘the immediate basis of all practical theology’. The systematic theologian is
concerned to understand the nature and functions of the church while the practical theologian asks
how a function has been performed and how it should be performed. Tillich here introduces his
distinction between the church manifest and the church latent. The main difference between this
distinction and the customary opposition of invisible and visible church is the both latent and the
manifest church are historical phenomena. The ‘manifest Church’ Tillich means the historical
communities which have called themselves Christian and in which the living Christ has been revealed.
The latent church is not such a specifiable historical group and is made up of those groups within
paganism, Judaism which also reveal the new being. Tillich insists that this does not mean that the
church is not the community in which the new being in Christ in actual. He begins by saying that the
church is universal because of the universality of its foundation, the new being in Christ. 10

History and the Kingdom of God

Tillich emphasizes the uniqueness of each movement in history. The symbol of kingdom of
God indicates the fulfillment of history. The Kingdom of God is the transcendent fulfillment, the
name for the ultimate from the point of view of fulfillment. The symbol of the kingdom of God
therefore expresses the relationship of the unconditioned meaning of existence to actual existence,
and so answers the question of the meaning of history. The symbol of the kingdom of God affirms
the independent meaning of history in three ways:
 By excluding the ultimate significance of the spatian realms and their polytheistic expression.
 By excluding the ultimate significance of the non-historical manifestation of the divine and
their sacramental expressions,
 By excluding the ultimate significance of finite creations and their romantic expressions. 11

Evaluation and Conclusion

The ultimate judgment on Tillich’s theology is clear. In-spite of the basic soundness of his
theological method and his good intention to carry it out faithfully, he went too far in allowing the
form of the questions to determine the content of the theological answers. His phrase ‘God above
God’ become a more literal description of his doctrine than he intended. We have already seen the
overall cast of his theology favors the latter. His attempt to define and unravel the epistemological
problems involved in theological thinking makes his theology relevant to the philosopher. He places
such a systematic theology of religion upon his method of correlation which transforms its two poles
from the Christian message and the situation to the holy and secular. He concludes that the world
without the dynamics of power and the tragedy of life and history is not the kingdom of God is not
the fulfillment of man and his world.

Bibliography
Braten, Carl E. ed. A History of Christian thought. London: SCM Press, 1968.

Grenz, Stanley J and Roger E Olson. 20th Century Theology. Secundrabad: OM Books, 2004.

Stephen, M. New Trends in Christian Theology. New Delhi: Serial Publications, 2009.

Thomas, Heywood J. Paul Tillich: An Appraisal. London: SCM Press, 1960.

Tillich, Paul. Systematic Theology: Reason and revelation being and God. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1951.

10
Ibid., 140-142.
11
Ibid., 159-160