Christine Helmer

The study of the Luther-Renaissance at the turn of the 20th century coincided with the origins of the modern study of religion. Yet the deep, at times bitter, division between the disciplines of theology and religious studies today obscures the mutually constitutive relationship between the two fields and prevents fruitful conversation between them about their shared subject matter. The project “Theology and the Modern Study of Religion: Compelling Origins, Ambivalent Legacy” aims to reconstruct the intellectual history of early 20th century theology as it was simultaneously concerned with the recovery of the historical Luther and with new explorations into human experience that led to the creation of the fields of comparative religion and the history of religions. My aim is both constructive and historiographical, examining the inheritances of this rich moment in the history of modern thought and looking towards future possibilities for constructive work. I will also diagnose the reasons for the contemporary divide between theology and religious studies.
The investigation is organized into three areas of study. The first is the reception of Schleiermacher in Luther scholarship at the turn of the 20th century. Luther scholars were interested in the relation between history and religion in their efforts to reconstruct the development of Luther’s religious experiences and the grounds of his theology. But the missing link in this reconstruction has been the thought of Friedrich Schleiermacher, who established for theology the conceptual relations between history and religion one hundred years earlier. The second area is the study of the philosophical framework of neo-Kantianism that framed the ways in which Luther scholars sought the religious categories to reconstruct the “historical Luther” and to develop comparative concepts for the comparative study of religions. Although research on this philosophical movement is only in its beginning phase, it was the predominant conceptual influence for the development of the field throughout the 20th century. The third area is the look at how the major thinkers of this era—Otto, Troeltsch, Soderblom, Christiansen, Müller, and Holl—related history and religion. The enterprise of connecting the two was the product of several factors: the favorable reception of Schleiermacher at the time, which was closely linked with neo-Kantianism; the new research on Luther that precipitated interest in historical methodology; and the interest in the phenomenology of experience.
My goal is to explain the reasons for the ensuing divergence of theology and religious studies. I also propose possible avenues for future reciprocity between the two disciplines that would facilitate a non-reductionist view of religion and an empirically robust view of theology to the humanities and social sciences.