Foundation Course
Spiritual Discernment, Religious Feeling, Sacramental Action
GA 343
2 October 1921 a.m., Dornach
XII. Prophecy, Dogma and Paganism
[ 1 ] My dear friends! Today we need to pursue what we had started yesterday, by adding details to some of the requests. Above all questions, as difficult as they may be—be it in the religious sense, or anthroposophic sense—will be those related to knowledge which reaches into the future. Such knowledge into the future can only be understood if one is able to discuss all prerequisites for such knowledge, so to speak. You know, of course, that outer materialistic science also has certain knowledge of the future which is quite possible.
[ 2 ] Solar and lunar eclipses can be predicted to the second, and these predictive calculations depend upon having a definite insight into the details of the phenomena. In outer materialistic science it relates to this insight of the context of the phenomena being hidden, because it is presented in formulae; the formulae are learnt and one no longer really knows where they came from; they actually originate from observations made in the very same area to which they are applied. Nobody would be able to calculate the solar and lunar eclipse predictions if solar and lunar eclipses were not originally observed, forming a basis for observation and formulas obtained from these, which now continue as based on the belief of a regularity applied to these phenomena. The psychological process which takes place here is far more complicated than one is often aware of today. Things start becoming particularly complicated if they are not applicable only to outer, spatial mechanical or mathematical kinds of laws, but if they deal with what happens inwardly, in the intrinsic sense, in the course of the world. Because these questions are based on the prerequisites of modern consciousness they can barely be studied, that's why we find modern Bible explanations—and the priest must also be a Bible explainer—so difficult, like chapter 13 of the Mark Gospel and everything relating to this chapter. Besides that, in later translations this particular chapter has become extraordinarily difficult to understand because it relates to circumstances which have become the most corrupt.
[ 3 ] Now I would like, before I proceed into the situation of this chapter, to say something about the predictions in the Christian sense. You have the feeling that within the development of Christendom there had already been, especially in olden times, references to future events, and future events of the most important kind had already played a major role. You also get the feeling that present day people hardly believe such indications, and that they actually can hardly reckon with such indications being anything but illusion. One always gets the feeling, when such things do happen—in modern language use it would be called prophesy—that something else must play along, other than real knowledge of what will happen in the future. You must however make yourself familiar with it, it is after all also present in our time, in the time of intellectualism—and rightly so in this time—it has eradicated certain traditional, inherited, atavistic clairvoyance. There are clairvoyant people of the older kind who are still serving certain theorists, also of the 19th century, as examples from which they wanted to prove the existence of a supernatural world they could not experience for themselves. We only need to consider such a type of prediction, then we will see—quite equitably, whether we believe it or not—what is actually meant. Such cases could happen, and it has, if I take it as typical, and still occurred numerous times in the course of the last century, whereas in the present time it shows a certain decline. Such abilities are still common in country people. It could happen that someone sees in an advantageous moment in a dream, how he, riding a horse, falls and hurts himself. Such seeing is certainly a sight into the future and one can, even by being careful, find out everything with all the scientific chicaneries that exclude an influence on following events, one cannot speak otherwise but admit a true looking into the future exists. This is something which had been recorded by the most earnest theorists everywhere, up to the middle of the 19th century. You can find this writing originating from otherwise quite serious natural scientists from the first half of the 19th century, discussed in numerous journals. As I've said, whoever observes people today must see that such atavistic abilities have gone backwards and become drowned out by intellectual life; a condition which completely excludes looking into the future.
[ 4 ] Now, as we've said, we must at least familiarise ourselves with such abilities which can be called looking into the future, abilities present in ancient times and certainly understood in the surroundings of Christ Jesus, when he spoke in a certain way about the future. In order not to be misunderstood, I want to call your attention straight away to something else. When you take literature which appears as Christian literature according to the actual Gospels, according to the letters of Paul and others, of direct disputes attributed to the disciples, and you take the later literature of the so-called church fathers—under 'church father' it is meant those who were still students of disciples or at least scholars or the apostles not too long ago—when you take the literature of the church fathers, then you will often discover three characteristics.
The first characteristic is that these writings have become dried up of an actual living understanding for the Old Testament. You will clearly notice how everywhere in these writings, up to the "Shepherd of Hermas," the craving comes to the fore to depict the Old Testament intellectually, in this case interpreting it allegorically, therefore it is pulled out of a real encounter to a mere concept, into what is, so to say, intellectual. The restyling of concepts into allegory puts up with the tradition of the Old Testament as a tradition of facts, told as facts—in reality these are to be understood through the intellect. That is the first essential characteristic. [ 5 ] The second essential characteristic is that the Second Coming of the Christ is clearly mentioned everywhere in the writings, that is to say, exactly what is referred to in the 13th chapter of Mark's Gospel in the most delicate sense of the word. It was certainly, one must admit, the belief in the entire spirit of the church fathers' writings from the 4th century that the Second Coming of Christ can be predicted in the near future. They called people's attention to how the old world would fall apart and how the Christ would reappear, and added to this, the imagination was created that Christ would appear in a similar way, in the most wonderful way, strolling over the earth, as it had been the case before.
[ 6 ] The third element in the writings of the church fathers is what actually contributed a great deal to the church doctrine. Everywhere a kind of legal element developed, a warning to obey the bishops, the dogmas, to submit to the constitution in the developing church. So everywhere something was taking place which one could be referred to as this: To the believers it was said that they will fall into bad luck if they develop anything which comes from within themselves, while they are searching for a religious path.—The religious path given by the church's constitution and the legal constitution, which ordered obedience to the church, was something that has continued particularly in Catholicism to the widest extent, which even as an experience today can still oppose one very forcefully.
[ 7 ] I once, for example, had a conversation in Rome with a priest brought up in quite the Jesuit manner—it was very hard, to get this conversation going—indicating all the sources which gave him the basis of his teaching and also showing the way in which he was to arrive at the teaching content. He pointed out that one then had the written words containing the dogmatic church content, and those were all things which needed no proof, they simply had to be believed, in as far as dogma was concerned. He pointed out that only interpretation was allowed, one was not to criticise or prove anything in the Gospels, while reading them again and again; one had the church tradition which flowed into the breviary, and then one had a living example of the life of the saints.
[ 8 ] The former could not very well form the subject of a discussion involving this cleric because one had to admit that what the Catholic Church wanted to protect was presented in such an ingrained sense, that there was no way around it. But the latter, the relationship of the Catholic clerics to the saints, that of course is something which creates certain difficulties even with the Catholic clergy when they think about it, and here an objection could be used. Saints are fixed personalities valued by the church for their faultless manner in their direct, vital relationship to the supersensible worlds, either through the understanding of how they had found the revelation out of the supersensible world through their inner experience, or that they performed deeds which can only be understood through accepting these deeds as having been performed with divine assistance.
You may know that such a canonization in the Catholic Church requires a very detailed ceremony, preceded by the exact determination of how the relevant person lived and what he thought, a process which should not last years, but centuries. Further, this examination must end with a ceremony which exist of all those who come forward, who have something well founded to present regarding the living exchange the personality has in relation to the divine, and to some extent always enter into what is said in such a way, that the so-called Advocatus diaboli, the representative of the demonic world, who has to refute everything that the other side has to say for the relevant canonisation, is brought to attention. So there will be an extensive trial, at which the being who should be regarded as the Diabolus, the devil, will have on the other side, the Christ representative, for the Christ-like will always be drawn into the discussion with the devilish representative, when a saint is to be recognised.
[ 9 ] Now of course I could have interrupted this conversation with him, regarding the church always admitting to the possibility of lively exchanges with the divine, so that supersensible experiences were possible. It is however the dogma of the Catholic Church that such supersensible experiences which could take place, are devilish and that they must be avoided, one must be forced to flee from them. Of course, it is certainly the Catholic Church's dogmatism which says that all of Anthroposophy is objectionable from the basis that it claims to touch on insights in the supersensible worlds. For this reason, Anthroposophy is rejected because such an insight can only be arrived at with the help of the Devil; it is therefore evil. That is something which is judged by the Catholic Church as quite necessary, quite consistent. Things are already such that they must not be blurred. Whoever thinks reconciliation between Anthroposophy and the Catholic Church can without further ado be brought about, is mistaken. The Initiate knows, for the Catholic Church to be consequent from their side, it will regard Anthroposophy as devilish, and more than ever, the Catholic church today has allowed such consequences to become its custom.
[ 10 ] As an answer from the priest I received his claim that any exchange with the supersensible worlds may in no way be wished for; if it happens in this world it must be made clear that the divine principle has been besieged by the devil.—So, I said to him: If you now have such an exchange with the supersensible worlds, would you consider that as devilish?—He answered: Yes, he has on his side the talent to merely work with literature of the saints in order to know that something like that exists; but he doesn't desire to become a saint himself.—This is now the last sentence which would be expressed by these people, this person also did not express it because if he did, then the last sentence would be that he says: To regard me as a saint, the church has the right to wait for two to three centuries.
[ 11 ] We can draw all kinds of conclusions from this. You could for example connect all kinds of evil thinking habits to it which is relevant particularly at present, when someone says that everything which can be said about the causes of the war, one would only really know about after decades when all the archives have been combed through. If you have any sense for reality you would know that in a couple of decades everything would be so blurred that no truth would be discovered in the archives in order to determine something as some tradition, and you would know that one, I could call it, very insidious step could renounce what has been said out of the consciousness of the present. This is also something which must be considered more deeply, but it only belongs in parenthesis here: I only want to draw your attention to it, that with the proclamation of a saint, waiting for such a long time, things in question could have become thoroughly blurred, and you can have insight into the Catholic Church's extraordinarily difficult burden towards its real progress.
[ 12 ] These three characteristics you will find in post apostolic literature during the first four centuries: the allegoric explanation of the Old Testament, the reference to the Second Coming of Christ and the destruction of the old world, and the admonition of obedience to the superiors. We need to focus our present interest primarily on the middle one, the reference to the Second Coming of Christ, because to this reference we need to link line 6 of the 13th chapter of the Gospel of Mark: Many will come as though they came in my name and say: I am he, and will lead many astray.—In this chapter you find a remarkable reference; many will come and appear in the name of Christ, and they will forthwith be referred to one or another person who also designate themselves as Christ. Here you see something extraordinary. On this basis it is extraordinary to see—I will speak more closely about these things but I'm leading up to it—that already at this point in the Mark Gospel the reference is linked to the view of the church fathers of the post apostolic time. By presenting it thus, that the Christ will reappear in this way, it is at the same time the fulfilment of the prophecy that tempters will come who all want to be designated as Christs; and this is what also happened in the first centuries, in this sense many came to the fore, who actually referred to themselves as Christ. An astonishing amount of literature has been lost in the first centuries—these things can actually only be found through spiritual science.
[ 13 ] So we must say - and I have expressly spoken about it—if we look at the totality of facts, the Christian church fathers lived in a misunderstanding of the Gospels, perhaps even a really bad misunderstanding of the Gospels. When we actually bring our feelings into the Gospels, as I have shown you yesterday, when we really with our whole heart and entire soul find ourselves with ever more wonder towards the Gospels, then we would find it inordinately difficult to find our way with our intellect to the first church fathers. We discover with the first church fathers that we relatively early come to the end of understanding because the Gospel itself leads us into immeasurable depths, and we very clearly experience that in a certain way we actually feel uncomfortably touched when after our wonder at the Gospels we now turn to something which appeared in the church fathers.
[ 14 ] Now, this leads us on to something else. Later we will talk about the justification of prophecy but now we want to find our way into the situation in terms of contemporary history and so it appears to me, that if we want to understand the 13th chapter of Mark's Gospel, before anything else, we need to pose this important question: Can the fulfilment of the prophecy be asserted from a correct pursuit of the facts? Surely you first need to be able to understand in what way the prophecy should be fulfilled, and then you could ask, what are the facts? Then, isn't it true, that with something like the destruction of Jerusalem it is easy to raise a question, but when it comes to the destruction of the world which we are still expecting, and regarding the coming of the kingdom of God, modern thought only has information that it still has not happened, that under all circumstances it must have been an illusion, that you had in all cases to do with false prophesies; and then you only have the choice to either interpret these things out of the Gospels, or to follow what the first church fathers did with the Old Testament through allegorizing, or even to do anything as long as it is abstract. All of this is being done against the total feeling which is necessary in relating to the Gospels, which does not arise here. The most important question seems to me to be the impact of the prophecy, because that helps towards understanding the process of prophecy.
[ 15 ] I tell you, my dear friends, for me, the destruction of the world and the coming of the kingdom of God have simply already been fulfilled. We must swing around to look at the world in such a way that we learn to represent this statement as having been fulfilled. Towards this we certainly must penetrate more deeply with spirit into the words of Christ Jesus, as opposed to what usually happens.
[ 16 ] Those who were around Jesus knew exactly, just as the poor shepherds in the fields knew in their inner sight: Christ had arrived. They still knew precisely that the entire life of human beings on earth would have been different in ancient times and it would become something different at this historical moment, even if little by little. Gentle feelings are still around at present, but only gentle feelings. I have such a quiet feeling about it but that must be trained in an intensive manner, for example, as found in the art historian Herman Grimm, and perhaps it will interest you to look into something like this as well because psychologically it leads to what we need to attain, little by little.
The art historian Herman Grimm had roughly the following view: when we go back with our examination of history, from our time to the Middle Ages and further back to the migration of peoples, back to the Roman empire, we still may have the possibility to understand the history. We have such feelings today, we could say, through which we can understand the roman imperial age and roughly the roman republic. We are still capable today, to understand this. When we go back into Greek history with the same kind of soul understanding then we enter into the highest form of illusion if we believe we can understand an Alkibiades, Sophocles, Homer or someone similar. Between grasping the Roman world and the Greek world there is an abyss, and what has been inherited from the Greek world, so Herman Grimm says, is basically a fairy tale; here starts the world of fairy tales, a world into which we no longer can enter with our present day understanding. We must be satisfied with the inherited images presented to us, but we must take these in a general sense as a world of fairy tales, without intellectual understanding.—It still has a soft echo of something which human beings need to create; an inner feeling towards the historical development of mankind.
[ 17 ] This sensitivity of feeling will of course become completely distorted by those whose opinions are according to modern evolutionary theories, which simply go back from the present and consider modern human beings as the most perfect now than what was initially achieved. Here one arrives at a perspective from which one no longer can understand those who were around Christ. One also understands why, out of what soul foundations, such experiences and imaginations of today have become clothed in the scientific view when for instance you look at the answers the imminent thinker, Huxley, gave an archbishop; his words are quite understandable according to the modern perspective. The archbishop said the human being descended from this divine being; the godhead placed him without sin in the world, and that's who has descended into the present human condition.—This archbishop's opinion couldn't but let Huxley reply to this sentence with: I would surely be ashamed as a human being if I have descended so far from my divine origin, but I can be very proud from my animal standpoint of how far I have worked towards who I now am.—
Here you can precisely see the moral impulses entering into what we call objective science. The need to revert to moral impulses is everywhere for those who tinker with science, if this tinkering it is to be believed.
[ 18 ] You must be very clear about the ancient human being before the time of Christ, the heathen person, who without sin, was aware that everywhere, when he observed nature or when he looked into human life, he encountered the divine and nature simultaneously. In the rock spring he didn't just hear the rushing sound we hear today, but he heard what he perceived and interpreted as the voice of the divine. In every animal he saw something that had, so to speak, been brought about from a supersensible world, but despite its deep fall from the supersensible world, if one really understands it, still totally leads back to the contemplation of this supersensible world. In this way the ancient people could not imagine the supersensible world without the divine, being part of it.
[ 19 ] In Judaism, quite an intense feeling came to the fore. It was this: In whatever form or way the divine appears, man may not claim himself to also have the divine appearing in himself in a perfect form, but only at most as an inspiration, but not in its complete form. This was something the orthodox Jew didn't even want to touch in his thoughts; that which he still permitted for the rest of nature, that everywhere the divine may be revealed, and what he considered facts in his Old Testament, this he didn't allow to happen in people. For the surrounding heathen world, for the old way of observation, it was self-explanatory that the mineral kingdom, the plant and animal kingdoms were consequentially built on one another, and so, just like the rest of nature was divine, so also the human being is an incarnation of the divine. At the same time thousands had a firm belief that the human being was ever more losing the possibility through his outer life, to realize God within.
So, it had been an original human ability to create the divine within, but people gradually lost this ability. Those who surrounded Christ experienced that the divine, which had been in humanity earlier and which also appeared in the outer world, this divine element no longer could appear in humanity; it was given to the earth, it appeared everywhere through the Son of God but stopped appearing in mankind and can no longer appear in human children. It must come once again from elements outside the earth so that the last incarnation of the divine, which actually becomes a new time, can catch up, but it must come from outside—if I might express myself roughly—from the stock out of that which the earth had originally loaned.
[ 20 ] From this point of view—knowledge, at that time, my dear friends, was filled with feeling, which as such took place in immediate experience—from this point of view those around Christ looked on with feeling at that which had invaded the Roman Empire and was now being fulfilled in Asia. What was this, which was accomplished through the invasion of the Roman Empire into Asia? You need to look at what actually penetrated the consciousness of that time. The ongoing war was at that time outer events which in their final dependency were also derived from divine will. However, this was not the most important aspect; the most important thing was that those who sat on the thrones were Roman Caesars who through religion presented themselves as incarnations of gods, and that, as lawful. Caesar Augustus was according to law a recognised incarnation of the godhead. Some Caesars tried, through ceremonies which had been fulfilled in ancient times, to bring about a ritual action which was so close to human truths, to inner human truths, that the Caesars could allow these ceremonies to be fulfilled but transformed into earthly existence, in order for the divine to actually act, for the divine to be made real.
Penetration of these secret divine mysteries into the world can perhaps not be more strongly symbolized than through relating the story of (the Roman Emperor) Commodus, (son of Marcus Aurelius) when he searched for initiation and allowed the ceremony to be fulfilled, because the ceremony also included the symbolic slaughter of an uninitiated person; at his mystery initiation a man was really killed, murdered. In brief, one felt that by this penetration of the Roman Empire, the divine disappeared, and the divine is presumed to be that, thus in the presumption of the divine there is an incarnation of the ungodly, for man must incarnate into something. The divine was not incarnating, it had stopped, so if the divine was not incarnating then in meant the ungodly was incarnating, the enemy of the divine. You could interpret it as you wish, but you will only be right if you understand that those who surrounded Christ Jesus, had said: In the Roman Empire, which is spreading in the world, is the incarnation of the enemy of the divine.
[ 21 ] This is elementary, this is truly a discerning feeling and discernment in Christianity for those who were around Christ Jesus. Never again, from the Christian point of view, would that which had developed further as a dependence on the Roman Empire, be seen as anything other than an earthy bound realm, an empire of the world in opposition to the realm of Heaven. This means in other words: this world which existed then, the divine world, perished, it went under due to the Roman Empire. The downfall was accomplished in the first three centuries up to the middle of the 15th century, as I've mentioned to you. The downfall was accomplished. It is a perished world that now exists, a world that is no longer divine, a world that only gives news of the divine. One must turn to the last, who had become the first, to the divine incarnation of Christ in Jesus, who through his own power gave the possibility, through the handling—if I could use such an expression—through the handling of that which is associated with the fulfilment of the Holy Spirit in one, not by nature, but in a direct way to reach the divine-spirit world, which one can also find in nature when one has found the following of Christ Jesus through the spirit.
The world is coming to an end. The Christ is no longer coming as an earth dweller, but out of the clouds, out of the cosmos he will come again. In this way he comes to everyone who has the awareness of what was meant by the world before, which perished with the Roman Empire.
[ 22 ] My dear friends! It is an unpleasant truth for those who want to be within today's consciousness; they don't know what to do about it; it is an unpleasant truth certainly for those who from an erroneous view want to apologize for Christianity before the present time. It is an extraordinary chapter in the involvement of today's world when people come and say Christianity is impractical, Christianity is something which allows escape from the world, Christianity has a mystical atavistic element which makes it unworldly. Then others come along who want to excuse Christianity by discussing away what some are saying who considered the world in a strong spiritual light and who still have a relationship to the world. The excuse is given that things don't need to be understood, they are really not meant so badly regarding fleeing from the world and with it coming to an end, it has continued its progress from the first centuries up to now; the world is just and anything some fanatical priest or fanatical pastor claims about the downfall of the world from God, is really not so seriously meant, it has only come about through the Catholic influence; one must wipe it out.
In brief, my dear friends, the largest part of pastoral and theological work exists in this. Place your hand on your heart and learn through it, feel out of your heart what I have said regarding the necessity for the renewal of Christianity, for the Christian impulse, because the biggest part of what is being preached and discussed exists in the continuous retreat from the recognition of gross intellectualism and the piecemeal eradication of everything out of Christianity, which actually should be understood in a profound way through strong thinking, through such a powerful thinking that the world finds God through Christ, and when God has been discovered through Christ, which can also become practical because in the discovery of the divine, the divine grasped in thought, the godless world can be included to bring about the re-introduction of the divine.
[ 23 ] These powers must be carried in those of you who today want to speak about the renewal of Christianity, you must be able to say: Yes, today we have to look at the divinized world which started with the Roman Empire and goes back to the Roman Empire; but in this world we must not look for the divine. The world, however, can't remain without the divine. We must grasp that which does not come from the earth, something—speaking symbolically—which comes from the clouds, in a spiritual manner. We must find the Kingdom of Heaven in the place of the divinized earth kingdom. The Kingdom of Heaven has opened up and is to be found; and for this reason, we must be there to bring the divine into our earthly world. The downfall of the earth has taken place and continues to happen more and more. When we look at this earthly realm, we are then looking at the heavenly realm which Jesus Christ has brought. You must see, my dear friends, the realm of Heaven spiritually. We must see its arrival; we must be able to feel the fulfilling of what Christ meant when he spoke about the coming of his kingdom, the kingdom which he had to bring into the world and which does not speak out of nature; when it can however work into nature, then one can speak about this kingdom. This is primarily the feeling he stimulated in those who directly surrounded him. This is also what we must strive for in our words, when we really want to speak about these things.
[ 24 ] We see how it is stated in about the first 3 sentences of the Mark Gospel: After Christ left the temple—the temple in which one also heard something within the outer world of the divine—one of his disciples says to him: 'Look, what magnificent stones, and wonderful buildings.' Jesus however said to him: 'You see only the large buildings. There will not be one stone left on top of another, without man taking part in the process of destruction because from now on, all of the outer, ungodly world begins to become a world of destruction.' And he went away and spoke intimately. On the Mount of Olives, he spoke either intimately by himself through teaching people how to pray, or he spoke only to his most intimate disciples, to Peter, James, John and Andrew. To Peter, James, John and Andrew he only spoke about spiritual events as observed from the perspective of divine realms in contrast to destructive events in the world facing destruction.
[ 25 ] You see, I'm neither speaking allegorically, nor symbolically. If you felt that way, you would be putting it in my words. I'm speaking directly out of the situation experienced as it occurred, by me trying, certainly in the words of current speech, to indicate these things. I ask you to now take note of the situation. In order to experience the content of the 13th chapter of St Mark we are taken up the Mount of Olives. It ends with the word: "Awake!"—immediately followed by us being taken to the Last Supper—we are led to the first impetus for the coming of the divine kingdom through Christ placing it in front of us.
[ 26 ] Tomorrow we will continue speaking about it. What I'm saying to you is quite new, by addressing our current consciousness. I certainly want to speak honestly, as these things present themselves to me, because I believe that by only pointing to the very first elements can one come to a true and honest conviction of what is necessary today.
Zwölfter Vortrag
[ 1 ] Meine lieben Freunde! Es wird sich heute darum handeln müssen, im Sinne von gewissen vorgebrachten Wünschen einiges zu dem hinzuzufügen, das wir gestern ausgeführt haben. Schwierig werden vor allen Dingen alle Fragen, die — sei es im religiösen, sei es im anthroposophischen Sinn — gestellt werden mit Bezug auf das Wissen in die Zukunft hinein. Ein solches Wissen in die Zukunft hinein kann nur verstanden werden, wenn man alle Voraussetzungen gewissermaßen zu einem solchen auch zu besprechen in der Lage ist.
[ 2 ] Nun wissen Sie ja, daß auch der äußeren materialistischen Wissenschaft ein gewisses Wissen in die Zukunft hinein ja durchaus möglich ist. Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse können auf die Sekunde genau vorausberechnet werden, und diese Vorausberechnung beruht eben darauf, daß man einen gewissen Einblick in den Zusammenhang der Erscheinungen hat. Bei der äußeren materialistischen Wissenschaft handelt es sich darum, daß dieser Einblick in den Zusammenhang heute verdeckt ist, denn er ist in Formeln gebracht, die Formeln werden gelernt, und man weiß nicht mehr, woher die Formeln eigentlich stammen und daß sie im Grunde aus der Beobachtung ganz genau desselben Gebietes stammen, auf das sie angewendet werden. Niemand würde rechnerisch Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse voraussagen können, wenn nicht ursprünglich stattgehabte Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse der Beobachtung zugrundegelegt worden wären und daraus Formeln gewonnen worden wären, die nun weiterhin im Glauben an die Regelmäßigkeit der Erscheinungen angewendet würden. Der psychologische Prozeß, der sich da abspielt, der ist schon ein viel komplizierterer, als man sich heute vielfach bewußt ist. Nun werden ja aber die Dinge ganz besonders schwierig, wenn es sich nicht um äußere, im Raume nach mechanischen oder mathematischen Gesetzmäßigkeiten sich abspielende Dinge handelt, sondern wenn es sich handelt um dasjenige, was innerlich im wesenhaften Sinne im Weltenverlauf geschieht. Und weil diese Frage aus den Voraussetzungen des modernen Bewußtseins heraus eigentlich kaum studiert werden kann, deshalb machen der modernen Bibelerklärung — und ein Bibelerklärer muß ja auch der Seelsorger sein — gerade solche Kapitel besondere Schwierigkeiten wie das 13. Kapitel des Markus-Evangeliums und alles, was an dieses Kapitel anklingt, abgesehen davon, daß gerade dieses Kapitel in späteren Übersetzungen außerordentlich schwierig zu verstehen ist, weil es zu denen gehört, die durch die Verhältnisse am meisten korrumpiert sind.
[ 3 ] Nun will ich, bevor ich auf die Situation dieses Kapitels eingehe, einiges überhaupt über die Vorhersage im christlichen Sinne sprechen. Sie haben ja ein Gefühl, daß innerhalb der Entwickelung des Christentums schon einmal, besonders in älteren Zeiten, eine große Rolle gespielt hat die Hinweisung auf künftige Geschehnisse, und zwar auf künftige Geschehnisse allerwichtigster Art. Sie haben aber auch das Gefühl, daß der heutige Mensch an solche Hinweise wenig glauben kann, und daß er eigentlich wenig damit rechnen kann, daß solche Hinweise etwas anderes sein können als Illusionen. Man hat ja immer das Gefühl, wenn solche Dinge eintreten, die man im modernen Sprachgebrauch etwa Prophezeiungen nennen könnte, dann muß etwas anderes im Spiele sein als wirklich ein Wissen um das zukünftige Geschehen. Aber Sie sollten sich auch damit bekanntmachen, daß es immerhin auch in unserer heutigen Zeit, in der Zeit des Intellektualismus, die - und zwar diesmal mit Recht ausgetilgt hat gewisse altherkömmliche, ererbte, atavistische Hellsichtigkeiten, hellsichtige Menschen der älteren Art gibt, die noch gewissen Theoretikern auch des 19. Jahrhunderts gedient haben als Beispiele, aus denen heraus sie eine übersinnliche Welt, die sie nicht selber erfahren konnten, beweisen wollten. Wir brauchen nur einen solchen Typus einer Vorhersage einmal ins Auge zu fassen, so werden wir sehen — ganz gleichgültig, ob wir uns nun gläubig oder ungläubig dazu stellen —, was eigentlich gemeint ist, Es kann durchaus ein solcher Fall vorkommen, und er ist, wenn ich ihn typisch fasse, zahlreich im Verlaufe des vorigen Jahrhunderts noch vorgekommen, während in der heutigen Zeit das in einer gewisse Abnahme lebt. Solche Fähigkeiten weisen verbreitet noch Landleute auf. Es kann der Fall vorkommen, daß irgend jemand in einem besonders günstigen Traummoment sieht, wie er als Reiter vom Pferde stürzt und sich verletzt. Ein solches Sehen ist durchaus ein Sehen in die Zukunft, und man kann, auch wenn wir auf das allersorgfältigste, mit allen Wissenschaftsschikanen alles herausfinden, was einen Einfluß auf das folgende Ereignis ausschließt, nicht anders sprechen, als daß da eben ein wirkliches Schauen in die Zukunft vorhanden ist. Das ist ja etwas, was von ernsten Theoretikern bis um die Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts herauf überall verzeichnet worden ist. Sie können das in Schriften finden, die von sonst durchaus ernsten Naturforschern herrühren noch aus der ersten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts und in Zeitschriften zahlreich besprochen finden. Wie gesagt, wer heute das Leben betrachtet, muß sehen, daß solche Fähigkeiten als atavistische Fähigkeiten einfach zurückgegangen sind und übertönt worden sind von dem intellektualistischen Leben, das ja in einer Verfassung ist, welche ein Schauen in die Zukunft ganz ausschließt.
[ 4 ] Nun, wie gesagt, wir müssen uns wenigstens damit bekanntmachen, daß solche Fähigkeiten, die man als Schauen in die Zukunft bezeichnen kann, in älteren Zeiten vorhanden waren, und daß es durchaus in der Umgebung des Christus Jesus verstanden worden ist, wenn er in einer gewissen Weise von der Zukunft gesprochen hat. Aber um nicht mißverstanden zu werden, muß ich gleich auf etwas anderes aufmerksam machen. Wenn Sie die Literatur nehmen, welche als christliche Literatur vorhanden ist nach den eigentlichen Evangelien, nach den Paulus-Briefen und nach den anderen, direkt den Aposteln zugeschriebenen Auseinandersetzungen, wenn Sie die spätere Literatur der sogenannten Kirchenväter nehmen — unter «Kirchenväter» versteht man ja durchaus diejenigen Persönlichkeiten, die noch Schüler der Apostel oder wenigstens Schüler der Schüler der Apostel waren in nicht zu fernliegender Zeit —, wenn Sie diese Literatur der Kirchenväter nehmen, so werden Sie sie durch drei Merkmale charakterisiert finden. Das erste Merkmal ist, daß in diesen Schriften verdorrt ist das eigentlich lebendige Verständnis für das Alte Testament. Sie können deutlich wahrnehmen, wie überall in diesen Schriften, bis zu dem «Hirt des Hermas» hin, die Sucht auftritt, das Alte Testament intellektualistisch, nämlich in diesem Falle allegorisch zu deuten, also es heraufzuholen aus der [wirklichen] Begebenheit in den bloßen Begriff, also in dasjenige, was gewissermaßen intellektualistisch ist. Aber dadurch, daß man die Begriffe allegorisch umfrisiert, hütet man sich davor, eine Überlieferung des Alten Testamentes als eine Überlieferung von Tatsachen zu nehmen, sondern man nimmt sie als erzählte Tatsachen, deren wirklicher Sinn durch den Intellekt in einer übertragenen Weise erfaßt werden muß. Das ist das erste wesentliche Kennzeichen.
[ 5 ] Das zweite wesentliche Kennzeichen ist das, daß überall in diesen Schriften auftritt der deutlichste Hinweis auf die Wiederkunft des Christus, also gerade auf dasjenige, worauf das 13. Kapitel des Markus-Evangeliums in dem allerzartesten Sinne hinweist. Es war durchaus, muß man sagen, aus dem ganzen Geiste der Schriften der Kirchenväter heraus der Glaube bis in das 4. Jahrhundert hinein, daß ganz nahe bevorstehe das Wiedererscheinen des Christus. Die Schriften sprechen im intensivsten Maße von diesem Wiedererscheinen des Christus. Sie machen darauf aufmerksam, wie die alte Welt zugrundegeht, und wie der Christus wiedererscheinen wird, wobei man durchaus die Vorstellung zu gewinnen hat, daß der Christus in einer ähnlichen Weise wiederum erscheinen wird, nur auf eine wunderbarere Weise auf Erden wandelnd, als er das erste Mal dagewesen ist.
[ 6 ] Und als drittes charakteristisches Element in den Schriften dieser Kirchenväter tritt das auf, was dann eigentlich im wesentlichen zur Kirchenbildung schr viel beigetragen hat. Es tritt überall ein gewisses gesetzgeberisches Element auf, eine Mahnung, den Bischöfen, den Dogmen zu gehorchen, sich zu fügen in die Konstitution der sich bildenden Kirche. Also überall tritt eigentlich das auf, was man in der folgenden Art bezeichnen könnte: Es gereicht euch zum Unheil, sagte man den Gläubigen, wenn ihr irgendwie das ausbildet, was in euch selber sich offenbart, wenn ihr nach einem eigenen religiösen Weg sucht. — Der religiöse Weg soll gegeben werden durch eine Kirchenkonstitution, und die Rechtsverfassung, die den Gehorsam gegenüber der Kirche anordnet, die ist ja eben etwas, was sich ganz besonders im Katholizismus im weitesten Ausmaß fortgesetzt hat, was einem auch als Erfahrung heute noch sehr stark entgegentreten kann.
[ 7 ] Ich hatte zum Beispiel einmal in Rom ein Gespräch mit einem ganz jesuitisch erzogenen Priester - man hatte sich sehr bemüht, dieses Gespräch herbeizuführen —, der durchaus auf die Quellen hinwies, die sich für ihn als die Quellen seines Lehrinhaltes ergaben, und der auch auf die Wege hinwies, wie er nach seiner Erziehung zu seinem Lehrinhalt kommt. Er wies darauf hin, daß man ja zunächst das Schriftwort habe, daß man den kirchlich dogmatischen Inhalt habe, und das sei alles etwas, was keiner Prüfung bedarf, was einfach gläubig hingenommen werden müsse, insofern es das Dogma betrifft. Er wies darauf hin, daß man nur zu interpretieren habe, daß man nicht zu kritisieren und nicht zu prüfen habe die Evangelien, indem man sie immer wieder und wieder liest; man habe die kirchliche Tradition, indem sie einfließt in das Brevier, und dann habe man als ein lebendiges Beispiel das Leben der Heiligen.
[ 8 ] Das erstere konnte ja alles gegenüber diesem Kleriker nicht gut den Gegenstand einer Diskussion bilden, denn man mußte sich sagen, daß das, was die katholische Kirche sich bewahren will, in einem solch festgeprägten Sinne vorliegt, daß eigentlich nichts zu machen ist. Aber das letztere, das Verhältnis des katholischen Klerikers zu den Heiligen, das ist natürlich etwas, was auch dem katholischen Kleriker, wenn er anfängt zu denken, gewisse Schwierigkeiten macht, und da konnte nun auch mit einem Einwand eingesetzt werden. Heilige sind von der katholischen Kirche festgesetzte Persönlichkeiten, bei welchen es für die Kirche in einwandfreier Weise gilt, daß sie in einer unmittelbaren lebendigen Beziehung zu der übersinnlichen Welt gestanden haben, entweder indem es klar geworden ist, daß sie Offenbarungen aus der übersinnlichen Welt durch inneres Erleben bekommen haben, oder daß durch sie Taten vollbracht worden sind, die nur dadurch zu erklären sind, daß göttliche Mithilfe dabei vorhanden war. Sie wissen ja vielleicht, daß eine solche Heiligsprechung in der katholischen Kirche eine sehr ausführliche Zeremonie erfordert, daß da vorangehen muß eine genaue Feststellung zunächst, die nicht Jahre, sondern jahrhundertelang dauern soll, eine genaue Feststellung desjenigen, wie der Betreffende gedacht und gelebt hat; ferner muß diese Untersuchung mit einer Zeremonie abschließen, die darin besteht, daß alle diejenigen auftreten, welche etwas Begründetes vorzubringen haben für den lebendigen Verkehr der betreffenden Persönlichkeit mit dem Göttlichen, und daß dann aufzutreten hat und gewissermaßen immer hineinzufahren hat in das, was so vorgebracht wird, der sogenannte Advocatus diaboli, der Vertreter der dämonischen Welt, der alles zu widerlegen hat, was von der anderen Seite für den betreffenden Heiligzusprechenden vorgebracht wurde. Es wird also eine ausführliche Gerichtsverhandlung veranstaltet, bei der diejenige Wesenheit, welche man anzusehen hat als den Diabolus, als den Teufel, durchaus ebenso ihren Vertreter hat, wie auf der anderen Seite der Vertreter des Christus steht; und es wird jedesmal das Christusmäßige mit dem Teufelsmäßigen in Diskussion gebracht, wenn ein solcher Heiliger anerkannt werden soll.
[ 9 ] Nun, da konnte ich [in dem Gespräch] natürlich einwenden, daß ja dadurch immerhin von der Kirche anerkannt ist, daß man in einen lebendigen Verkehr mit der Gottheit treten kann, daß also eine übersinnliche Erfahrung für den Menschen möglich ist. Es ist aber ein Dogma der katholischen Kirche, daß alle solche übersinnlichen Erfahrungen, die eintreten können, teuflisch sind, und daß sie gemieden werden müssen, geflohen werden müssen. Und es ist natürlich auch durchaus in die Dogmatik der katholischen Kirche fallend, wenn von der katholischen Kirche gesagt wird, die ganze Anthroposophie ist verwerflich, aus dem Grund, weil sie vorgibt, auf einer Einsicht in die übersinnliche Welt zu beruhen. Deshalb ist Anthroposophie verwerflich, denn eine solche Einsicht kann bei dem Menschen nur kommen mit Beihilfe des Teufels; sie ist also teuflisch. Das ist etwas, was ganz notwendig, ganz konsequent von der katholischen Kirche als Urteil gefällt werden muß. Die Dinge sind schon so, daß man sie nicht verwischen darf. Diejenigen haben Unrecht, die glauben, daß ohne weiteres eine Aussöhnung zwischen der Anthroposophie und der katholischen Kirche möglich sei. Der Eingeweihte weiß, die katholische Kirche, wenn sie ihrerseits konsequent ist, ist darauf angewiesen, Anthroposophie als ein Teufelswerk anzusehen, und mehr als je wird die katholische Kirche heute solche Konsequenzen zu ihrer Usance machen.
[ 10 ] Ich bekam [von dem Priester] zur Antwort, dasjenige, was Verkehr mit der übersinnlichen Welt ist, das dürfe auf keine Weise gewollt werden; wenn es hier in dieser Welt sich vollzieht, so müsse deutlich zutage treten, daß da erst von dem göttlichen Prinzip das Teuflische besiegt worden ist. - Und als ich zu ihm sagte: Wenn Sie nun einen solchen Verkehr mit der übersinnlichen Welt hätten, würden Sie ihn da auch für teuflisch ansehen? —, antwortete er mir: Ja; er habe seinerseits die Aufgabe, sich bloß zu beschäftigen mit der Literatur der Heiligen und zu wissen, daß es so etwas gibt; er verlange nicht, selber ein Heiliger zu werden. —- Was nun der letzte Satz ist, das wird von diesen Leuten nicht wirklich ausgesprochen, der Betreffende hat ihn auch nicht ausgesprochen, denn es würde ja die notwendige Konsequenz dann die sein, daß er sagte: mich als einen Heiligen anzusehen, hat die Kirche erst nach zwei bis drei Jahrhunderten das Recht.
[ 11 ] Daran können Sie ja nun alle möglichen Konsequenzen knüpfen. Sie können zum Beispiel daran eine sehr übliche Denkgewohnheit knüpfen, die sich besonders in der Gegenwart geltend macht, indem man [beispielsweise] sagt, alles das, was über die Kriegsursachen zu sagen sei, das wird man erst nach Jahrzehnten, wenn alle Archive durchstöbert sind, wissen. Wer Wirklichkeitssinn hat, der weiß, daß in einigen Jahrzehnten alles so verwischt ist, daß man aus den Archiven durchaus nicht wird eine Wahrheit finden können, so daß sich irgend etwas als Tradition festsetzen wird, und der weiß, daß es ein, ich möchte sagen, sehr verfänglicher Schritt ist, zu verzichten auf das, was gerade aus dem Bewußtsein der Gegenwart heraus über die Ursachen gesagt werden kann. Das ist etwas, was schon auch tiefer durchdacht werden muß, aber es gehört nur in Parenthese hierher; ich möchte nur aufmerksam darauf machen, daß bei der Heiligsprechung so lange gewartet werden muß, so daß die Dinge sehr stark verwischt sind, um die es sich handelt, und daß man da hineinsieht in etwas, was außerordentlich schwer lastet auf dem realen Fortgang der katholischen Kirche.
[ 12 ] Nun, diese drei Charakteristika finden Sie eben durchaus in der unmittelbar nachapostolischen Literatur der ersten drei bis vier Jahrhunderte: die allegorische Auslegung des Alten Testamentes, der Hinweis auf das Wiederkommen des Christus und auf die Zertrümmerung der alten Welt, und die Ermahnung zum Gehorsam gegenüber den Oberen. Uns muß in diesem heutigen Zusammenhang vor allen Dingen das mittlere interessieren, der Hinweis auf den kommenden Christus, denn wir müssen diesen Hinweis auf den kommenden Christus in Zusammenhang bringen mit dem Satz 6 des 13. Kapitels des Markus-Evangeliums, in dem es heißt: Viele werden unter meinem Namen auftreten und sagen: Ich bin es, und werden viele irreführen. - Sie finden ja in diesem Kapitel den außerordentlich merkwürdigen Hinweis, daß viele kommen werden, [die im Namen des Christus auftreten,] und Sie werden geradezu hingewiesen auf den einen oder anderen, der sich selbst als Christus bezeichnet. Nun, darauf ist besonders zu sehen. Es ist aus dem Grund besonders darauf zu sehen — ich werde auf diese Dinge noch näher zu sprechen kommen, also ich leite zunächst dazu über —, weil ja schon in dieser Stelle des Markus-Evangeliums der Hinweis liegt auf den Standpunkt der Kirchenväter der nachapostolischen Zeit. Indem diese vorbringen, daß der Christus so, wie sie es sich vorstellen, erscheinen wird, ist das [für sie zugleich] die Erfüllung [der Prophezeiung], daß die Verführer kommen werden, auf die man hinweisen will als auf die, die sich als Christusse bezeichnen; und solches ist auch in den ersten Jahrhunderten geschehen, aus dieser Stimmung heraus sind viele aufgetreten, die sich tatsächlich als den wiedergekommenen Christus bezeichneten. Es ist ja so außerordentlich viel verlorengegangen von der Literatur der ersten Jahrhunderte, daß eben diese Dinge heute eigentlich nur noch geisteswissenschaftlich gefunden werden können.
[ 13 ] Und so müssen wir ja sagen — und dazu habe ich das eben Ausgesprochene vorgebracht —, daß, wenn wir den ganzen Tatbestand überblicken, schon die ersten christlichen Kirchenväter in einem Mißverständnis des Evangeliums lebten, und zwar vielleicht in einem sehr schlimmen Mißverständnis des Evangeliums. Wenn wir wirklich evangelisch fühlen, so wie ich es Ihnen gestern zeigen konnte, wenn wir uns wirklich mit ganzem Herzen und ganzer Seele immer mehr bewundernd in die Evangelien hineinfinden können, dann können wir uns außerordentlich schwer anders als mit unserem Intellekt in die ersten Kirchenväter hineinfinden. Wir finden bei den ersten Kirchenvätern, daß wir schon verhältnismäßig früh mit dem Verständnis zu Ende kommen, während uns das Evangelium selbst in unermeßliche Tiefen hineinführt, und wir empfinden dann ganz deutlich, daß wir eigentlich in einer gewissen Weise uns unbehaglich berührt fühlen, wenn wir nach der Bewunderung der Evangelien nun an dasjenige herankommen sollen, was bei den Kirchenvätern auftritt.
[ 14 ] Nun, das aber führt uns hinüber zu etwas anderem. Wir werden später über die Berechtigung der Prophetie sprechen, aber wir wollen jetzt uns einmal zeitgeschichtlich in die Situation hineinfinden, und da scheint mir, wenn man so etwas wie das 13.Kapitel des Markus-Evangeliums verstehen will, ja vor allen Dingen ganz besonders wichtig die Frage: Kann denn aus einer richtigen Verfolgung der Tatsachen die Erfüllung der Prophezeiung behauptet werden? Man muß doch zuerst verstehen können, in welcher Weise die Prophezeiung sich erfüllen sollte, und dann kann man fragen, was liegt denn da eigentlich an Tatsachen vor? Denn, nicht wahr, bei solchen Dingen wie der Zerstörung Jerusalems ist es leicht, diese Frage aufzuwerfen, aber gegenüber dem Weltuntergang, den man noch erwartet, und gegenüber dem Herankommen des Gottesreiches hat ja das moderne Denken nur die Auskunft, daß das alles nicht geschehen ist, daß es auf alle Fälle eine Illusion gewesen sein muß, daß man es also auf alle Fälle mit einer falschen Prophetie zu tun haben muß; und dann hat man nur die Wahl, entweder diese Dinge aus den Evangelien herauszuinterpretieren, oder aber nun dasjenige weiterzutreiben, was die ersten Kirchenväter mit dem Alten Testament gemacht haben, allegorisch zu werden, oder eben irgend etwas anderes zu unternehmen, was Angelegenheit des Abstrakten ist. Das alles aber kann gegenüber dem gesamten Gefühl, das man haben muß gegenüber den Evangelien, eigentlich zunächst nicht aufkommen. Die allerwichtigste Frage erscheint mir das Inwirkungtreten der Prophezeiung, denn das hilft etwas zum richtigen Verstehen der Prophezeiung.
[ 15 ] Und ich sage Ihnen, meine lieben Freunde, für mich hat sich dasjenige, was gerade Weltuntergang ist, und was Herabkommen des Gottesreiches ist, eben einfach erfüllt. Wir müssen uns schon aufschwingen, die Welt so anzusehen, daß wir den Satz vertreten lernen können, diese Vorhersage habe sich erfüllt. Dazu müssen wir dann allerdings tiefer hineindringen in den Geist, aus dem heraus der Christus Jesus spricht, als das gewöhnlich geschieht.
[ 16 ] Diejenigen, die um Jesus waren, die wußten noch genau, ebenso wie es die armen Hirten auf dem Felde aus ihren inneren Gesichten wußten: der Christus ist angekommen. Die wußten noch genau: Das ganze Leben der Menschheit und der Erde ist ein anderes gewesen in alten Zeiten, und es wird jetzt in diesem historischen Augenblick eben ein anderes, wenn auch nach und nach. Leise Gefühle sind von alledem in der Gegenwart noch vorhanden, aber eben nur ganz leise Gefühle. Ich habe solch ein leises Gefühl davon, das aber in intensiver Weise ausgebildet werden muß, zum Beispiel noch gefunden bei dem Kunsthistoriker Herman Grimm, und vielleicht kann es Sie doch interessieren, auf so etwas auch hinzuweisen, weil es psychologisch zu dem führt, an was wir nach und nach ja [herankommen] müssen. Der Kunsthistoriker Herman Grimm hatte ungefähr die folgende Ansicht: Wenn wir in der Betrachtung der Geschichte zurückgehen, also von unserer Zeit zurückgehen nach dem Mittelalter und immer weiter zurück über die Völkerwanderung zum Römerreich, so haben wir da noch die Möglichkeit, die Geschichte zu verstehen. Wir haben noch solche Gefühle heute, wodurch wir, sagen wir, die Geschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit und annähernd noch die der römischen Republik verstehen. Wir sind noch imstande, das zu verstehen. Wenn wir aber mit derselben Geistesverfassung zurückgehen in die griechische Geschichte, so geben wir uns der höchsten Illusion hin, wenn wir glauben, einen Perikles, einen Alkibiades, Sophokles oder Homer oder dergleichen zu verstehen. Zwischen dem Erfassen der römischen Welt und der griechischen Welt liegt ein Abgrund, und das, was uns überliefert ist von der griechischen Welt, so sagt Herman Grimm, ist im Grunde genommen ein Märchen; da beginnt die Märchenwelt, da beginnt die Welt, wo wir nicht mehr mit dem heutigen Verständnis hinkommen können. Da müssen wir zufrieden sein, wenn die überlieferten Bilder vor uns hingestellt werden, aber wir müssen im allgemeinen diese alte Welt wie eine Märchenwelt aufnehmen, ohne das intellektuelle Verständnis. — Es ist das noch ein leiser Anklang an etwas, was man sich als inneres Empfinden gegenüber der geschichtlichen Entwickelung der Menschheit durchaus verschaffen muß.
[ 17 ] Völlig zerstört natürlich wurde dieses Empfinden durch jene Weltanschauung, die auf der modernen Evolutionslehre der Naturwissenschaft fußt, die einfach von der Gegenwart zurückgeht und den gegenwärtigen Menschen als das Allervollkommenste ansieht, was zunächst erreicht worden ist. Da kommt man zu Perspektiven, woraus man allerdings dann diejenigen, die um den Christus waren, nicht mehr verstehen kann. Und man begreift auch, aus welchen seelischen Untergründen solche heutige Empfindungen und Vorstellungen, die dann ins Wissenschaftliche gekleidet werden, entstanden sind, wenn man zum Beispiel die Antwort ins Auge faßt, die ein eminent naturwissenschaftlicher Denker, Huxley, einem Erzbischof gegeben hat; sie ist ganz begreiflich aus der heutigen Perspektive heraus. Der Erzbischof hatte gesagt: Der Mensch stammt von jenem göttlichen Wesen, das die Gottheit zunächst unschuldig in die Welt gestellt hat, und das heruntergekommen ist bis zu der gegenwärtigen Menschheitsverfassung. — Dieser erzbischöflichen Meinung stellte Huxley nichts anderes als den Satz entgegen: Ich müßte mich ja als Mensch sehr schämen, wenn ich von diesem meinem göttlichen Ursprung soweit heruntergekommen wäre; aber ich kann stolz sein, wenn ich mich von meinem tierischen Standpunkt soweit heraufgearbeitet habe, wie ich bin. — Sie sehen da sehr genau die moralischen Impulse hineinspielen in das, was man sonst objektive Wissenschaft nennt. Man muß überall zurückgehen zu moralischen Impulsen, die die Wissenschaft mehr tingieren, als sie tingiert zu sein glaubt.
[ 18 ] Man muß sich klar sein darüber, daß der alte Mensch der vorchristlichen Zeit, der heidnische Mensch, namentlich wenn er nicht ein Sünder war, sich bewußt war, daß überall, wo er in die Natur hineinschaute und wo er in das Menschenleben hineinschaute, ihm ein Göttliches zugleich mit dem Natürlichen entgegentrat. Im Felsenquell vernahm er nicht bloß das Rauschen, das wir heute hören, sondern er vernahm dasjenige, was er sich deutete und als die Stimme des Göttlichen auffaßte. In jeder Tierheit sah er etwas, was gewissermaßen herausgestellt worden ist aus einer übersinnlichen Welt, was aber, trotz des tiefen Falles von dieser übersinnlichen Welt, wenn man es richtig auffaßt, doch überall hinaufleitet zur Anschauung dieser übersinnlichen Welt. Und so konnte sich der alte Mensch diese übersinnliche Welt gar nicht vorstellen, ohne daß überall das Göttliche darinnen ist.
[ 19 ] Nur im Judentum war eine Empfindung ganz intensiv aufgetreten, das war die: Wie auch das Göttliche erscheint, der Mensch selbst darf sich nicht anmaßen, daß auch in ihm das Göttliche in seiner Vollendung erscheint, höchstens in Inspirationen und so weiter, aber nur ja nicht in seiner vollen Gestalt. Das war etwas, woran der rechtgläubige Jude nicht einmal mit dem Gedanken heranstreifen wollte; dasjenige, was er noch zuließ für die übrige Natur, daß überall sich das Göttliche offenbart, und dasjenige, was er sah in den Tatsachen seines Alten Testamentes, das ließ er nicht zu für den Menschen. Für die umliegende Heidenwelt, für die alte Anschauung war es eine Selbstverständlichkeit, daß Mineralreich, Pflanzenreich, Tierreich eine einheitliche Aufeinanderfolge bilden, und daß, ebenso wie in allen übrigen Naturreichen das Göttliche ist, auch der Mensch eine Inkarnation des Göttlichen ist, Aber für Tausende war das zugleich ein feststehender Glaube, daß der Mensch immer mehr und mehr die Möglichkeit verloren hat durch sein äußeres Leben, den Gott in sich zu verwirklichen. Also es war eine ursprüngliche Fähigkeit des Menschen, das Göttliche in sich zu gestalten, aber der Mensch hatte nach und nach diese Fähigkeit verloren. Und diejenigen, die um den Christus waren, die empfanden, daß das Göttliche, das früher in dem Menschen und auch in der Außenwelt erschienen ist, daß dieses Göttliche nicht mehr in dem Menschen erscheinen kann; es ist der Erde mitgegeben worden, es ist in dem Sohn Gottes überall erschienen, aber es hat aufgehört [im Menschen zu erscheinen], es kann nicht mehr in den Menschenkindern erscheinen. Und es mußte aus dem Außerirdischen einmal wiederkommen, damit die letzte Inkarnation der Gottheit, die eben die erste einer neuen Zeit wurde, herbeikomme, aber von außen mußte sie kommen — wenn ich mich grob ausdrücken darf -, aus dem Vorrat, der der Erde ursprünglich verliehen war.
[ 20 ] Von diesem Gesichtspunkt aus — und das Erkennen, meine lieben Freunde, war dazumal noch ein fühlendes Erkennen, ein solches, das in unmittelbarem Erleben sich vollzog —, von diesem Gesichtspunkt aus blickte fühlend hin derjenige, der um den Christus war, auf das, was sich in dem Eindringen des römischen Reiches nach Asien hinüber vollzog. Was vollzog sich für das damalige Empfinden in dem Eindringen des römischen Reiches nach Asien hinüber? Man muß sich nur vor Augen halten, was für das damalige Bewußtsein da eigentlich eindrang. Die Kriege, die geführt wurden, waren für die damalige Zeit eben äußere Ereignisse, die man in ihrer letzten Dependenz auch ableitete von dem göttlichen Willen. Aber das war nicht das Wichtigste; das Wichtigste war, daß diejenigen, die auf den Stühlen der römischen Cäsaren saßen, von Religions wegen sich als Inkarnationen von Göttern gaben und zwar gesetzmäßig. Der Cäsar Augustus war die vom Gesetz anerkannte Inkarnation der Gottheit. Das suchten ja einzelne Cäsaren dadurch zu erreichen, daß sie die Zeremonien durchmachten, die in älteren Zeiten in den Mysterien vollzogen [wurden und die] in Kultushandlungen bestanden, die aber so nahe an menschliche Wahrheiten, an innerlich menschliche Wahrheiten herangingen, daß die Cäsaren diese Zeremonien an sich vollziehen lassen konnten, um nun umgewendet zu werden in ihrem irdischen Dasein, so daß sie das Göttliche auch wirklich ausführen konnten, daß sie das Göttliche in sich verwirklichen konnten. Das Eindringen der Welt in diese geheimen göttlichen Mysterien kann vielleicht nicht stärker symbolisch angedeutet werden als [durch die Erzählung], daß Commodus, als er die Einweihung suchte und die Zeremonien an sich vollziehen ließ, weil zu der Zeremonie auch das symbolische Erschlagen eines Uneingeweihten gehörte, bei seiner Mysterieneinweihung wirklich einen Menschen erschlagen hat, ermordet hat. Kurz, man fühlt in diesem Eindringen des Römerreiches, daß da das Göttliche verschwunden ist, und daß man das Göttliche sich anmaßt, daß also in der Anmaßung des Göttlichen ein Widergöttliches inkarniert ist, denn inkarnieren muß der Mensch etwas. Inkarniert er nicht das Göttliche, hat es aufgehört, daß er das Göttliche inkarniert, so inkarniert er ein Widergöttliches, so inkarniert er den Feind des Göttlichen. Und Sie mögen interpretieren, wie Sie wollen, recht werden Sie nur haben, wenn Sie verstehen, daß diejenigen, die um den Christus Jesus waren, gesagt haben: In dem Römerreich, das sich in der Welt ausbreitet, liegt die Inkarnation des Feindes des Göttlichen.
[ 21 ] Das ist elementares, das ist wirklich erkennendes Fühlen und fühlendes Erkennen in der Christenheit, die um den Christus Jesus war. Und niemals wieder würde von diesem christlichen Gesichtspunkt aus in dem, was in Dependenz von dem Römerreich sich weiter entwickelt hat, etwas anderes [gesehen worden sein] als das bloß irdisch gewordene Reich, das Reich der Welt, im Gegensatz zu den Reichen der Himmel. Das heißt aber mit anderen Worten: Diejenige Welt, die einmal da war, die göttliche Welt, ist untergegangen, und sie geht unter mit dem Römerreich. Der Untergang vollzieht sich in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten bis zu der Mitte des 15. Jahrhunderts, von der ich Ihnen gestern gesprochen habe. Der Untergang vollzieht sich. Es ist eine untergegangene Welt, die da sein wird, eine Welt, die von sich allein nicht mehr das Göttliche hergibt, eine Welt, die nur noch Kunde von dem Göttlichen gibt. Man muß sich wenden an den Letzten, der der Erste geworden ist, an die göttliche Inkarnation des Christus in dem Jesus, die durch ihre Kraft die Möglichkeit gibt, durch die Handhabung — wenn ich mich des Ausdruckes bedienen darf —, durch die Handhabung desjenigen, was mit der Erfüllung durch den Heiligen Geist in einem vorgeht, nun nicht durch Natur, sondern in unmittelbarer Art zu der göttlich-geistigen Welt zu kommen, die man dann auch wiederum in der Natur finden kann, wenn man sie in Anlehnung an den Christus Jesus durch die Vermittlung des Geistes gefunden hat. Die Welt geht unter. Der Christus kommt nicht als ein Erdenbürger mehr, aber aus den Wolken, aus dem Kosmos her kommt er wieder. Und so kommt er zu allen, die ein Bewußtsein davon haben, daß dasjenige, was im alten Sinne Welt genannt worden ist, mit dem Römerreich zugrundegegangen ist.
[ 22 ] Meine lieben Freunde! Eine unangenehme Wahrheit für diejenigen, die ganz im heutigen Zeitbewußtsein drinnenstehen wollen, sie wissen nichts damit anzufangen; eine unangenehme Wahrheit allerdings für diejenigen, die aus einer falschen Auffassung heraus das Christentum vor der heutigen Zeit entschuldigen wollen. Das ist ein besonderes Kapitel des Darinnenstehens in der heutigen Welt, wenn die Menschen kommen und sagen, das Christentum sei etwas Unpraktisches, das Christentum sei etwas, was von der Welt wegführt, das Christentum habe ein mystisch-atavistisches Element in sich, das weltfremd macht. Und dann kommen diejenigen, die das Christentum entschuldigen wie sie es können, indem sie hinwegdiskutieren, was diejenigen sagten, die aus einer starken Geistigkeit so gedacht haben über die Welt und die doch noch zur Welt ein Verhältnis hatten. Es wird die Entschuldigung vorgebracht, daß man sagt, die Dinge seien nicht so zu verstehen, es sei gar nicht so schlimm gemeint mit dem Fliehen der Welt und mit dem Untergang der Welt, es gehe ein kontinuierlicher Fortgang über die ersten Jahrhunderte bis in unsere Gegenwart herein; die Welt sei gerecht, und alles, was irgendein fanatischer Priester oder irgendein fanatischer Seelsorger vorbringe über den Abfall der Welt von Gott, das sei ja nun wirklich nicht so schlimm gemeint, das sei durch den katholischen Einfluß hereingekommen, man müsse es ausmerzen. Kurz, meine lieben Freunde, ein großer Teil des seelsorgerischen und theologischen Wirkens besteht ja darin. Legen Sie die Hand aufs Herz und erkennen und fühlen Sie aus dem heraus, [was ich gesagt habe,] die Notwendigkeit einer Erneuerung des Christentums, der christlichen Impulse, denn ein großer Teil desjenigen, was heute über das Christentum gepredigt und diskutiert wird, besteht ja in einem fortwährenden Zurückweichen vor dem Anerkennen des groben Intellektualismus und dem stückweisen Ausmerzen alles dessen aus dem Christentum, was gerade in tiefster Weise durch ein starkes Denken erfaßt werden sollte, durch ein so starkes Denken, daß die Welt Gott findet durch Christus, und wenn sie Gott durch Christus gefunden hat, das auch wiederum praktisch werden lassen kann, indem sie nun das gefundene Göttliche, das im Denken ergriffene Göttliche, auch in die gottlose Welt hineintragen kann, um sie zur Wiedervergöttlichung zu bringen.
[ 23 ] Diese Stärke muß derjenige in sich tragen, der heute von einer Erneuerung des Christentums sprechen will, er muß sich sagen können: Ja, wir müssen heute hinschauen auf die entgöttlichte Welt, die mit dem Römerreich begonnen hat, die bis zum Römerreich zurückreicht; in dieser Welt aber dürfen wir nicht das Göttliche suchen. Ohne das Göttliche darf aber die Welt nicht bleiben. Wir müssen uns an dasjenige halten, was nun nicht von der Erde kommen kann, was — symbolisch gesprochen - aus den Wolken kommt, was auf geistige Art kommen muß. Die Reiche der Himmel müssen wir finden an der Stelle der entgöttlichten Erdenreiche. Angebrochen sind die Reiche der Himmel, sie sind da, und um so mehr müssen sie da sein, je mehr wir unsere Erde entgöttlichen. Der Untergang der Welt hat sich vollzogen und vollzieht sich weiter und weiter. Und wenn wir aufschauen von diesem Reiche der Erde, dann blicken wir auf die Reiche der Himmel, die der Christus Jesus gebracht hat. Sie müssen sehen, meine lieben Freunde, das Reich der Himmel im Geiste. Wir müssen seine Ankunft erblicken; wir müssen fühlen können die Erfüllung desjenigen, was der Christus meint, wenn er von dem Herankommen seines Reiches spricht, des Reiches, das er der Welt zu bringen hatte, und das nun nicht aus der Natur spricht; wenn es aber in die Natur hineinwirken kann, dann kann man von diesem Reiche sprechen. Das ist es, was er zunächst als eine Empfindung anregen muß bei denjenigen, die ihn unmittelbar umgeben. Das ist es auch, was wir suchen müssen in unser Wort aufzunehmen, wenn wir wirklich von jenen Dingen sprechen wollen.
[ 24 ] Wir sehen, wie es etwa im 3.Satz des 13. Markus-EvangeliumKapitels heißt: Nachdem Christus aus dem Tempel gegangen ist — dem Tempel, in dem man auch etwas vernommen hat innerhalb der äußeren Welt von dem Göttlichen —, sagte einer seiner Jünger zu ihm: Siehe, welche Gebäude, welche Steine. — Jesus aber sprach zu ihm: Du siehst allein diese großen Gebäude. Kein Stein kann über dem anderen bleiben, ohne daß man teilnimmt an dem Werke der Zerstörung, denn von jetzt ab beginnt alle äußere, ungöttlich gewordene Welt, eine sich zerstörende Welt zu werden. — Und er ging hinweg und sprach ganz intim. Denn auf dem Ölberg spricht er entweder nur intim mit sich selber, indem er die Menschen beten lehrt, oder er spricht nur zu seinen Intimsten, zu Petrus, Jakobus, Johannes und Andreas. Und zu Petrus, Jakobus, Johannes und Andreas spricht er nun dasjenige, was er zu sprechen hat als die Ereignisse des geistigen Geschehens, die angesehen werden von der Perspektive des göttlichen Reiches, im Gegensatz zu den Ereignissen der der Zerstörung entgegengehenden Welt.
[ 25 ] Sie sehen, ich rede nicht allegorisierend, ich rede nicht symbolisierend. Wenn Sie das so empfinden würden, würden Sie das in meine Worte erst hineintragen. Ich rede unmittelbar aus der Situation und dem Erleben des damals Stattgehabten heraus, indem ich versuche, allerdings mit Worten der heutigen Sprache, auf alle diese Dinge hinzudeuten. Und ich bitte Sie, nun zunächst auf die Situation zu achten. Wir werden, um den Inhalt des 13. Markus-Evangelium-Kapitels geoffenbart zu erhalten, auf den Ölberg geführt. Es schließt mit dem Worte: Wachet! —- Und unmittelbar nachher werden wir im Sinne des Markus-Evangeliums zu dem letzten Abendmahl geführt; wir werden also zu demjenigen geführt, womit der erste Anstoß zum Herankommen des Gottesreiches durch Christus vor uns hingestellt wird.
[ 26 ] Davon werde ich dann morgen weiter sprechen. Es ist schon so, daß ich zu Ihnen ganz neu spreche, zu dem heutigen Bewußtsein. Ich will durchaus ehrlich sprechen, so wie sich mir die Dinge darstellen, denn ich glaube, daß man nur so, indem man auf allererste Elemente hinweist, zu einer wahren und ehrlichen Überzeugung von dem kommen kann, was heute notwendig ist.
Twelfth Lecture
[ 1 ] My dear friends! Today we will have to add a few things to what we said yesterday in response to certain requests that have been made. Above all, all questions that are asked — whether in a religious or anthroposophical sense — with regard to knowledge into the future will be difficult. Such knowledge into the future can only be understood if one is able to discuss all the prerequisites, so to speak, for such knowledge.
[ 2 ] Now you know that a certain knowledge of the future is indeed possible for external materialistic science. Solar and lunar eclipses can be calculated to the second, and this calculation is based on the fact that one has a certain insight into the context of the phenomena. The point is that in external materialistic science this insight into the context is hidden today, because it is put into formulas, the formulas are learned, and one no longer knows where the formulas actually come from and that they basically come from the observation of exactly the same area to which they are applied. No one would be able to predict solar and lunar eclipses by calculation if originally observed solar and lunar eclipses had not been used as a basis for observation and formulas had not been derived from them, which would now continue to be applied in the belief in the regularity of the phenomena. The psychological process that takes place here is much more complicated than we are often aware of today. But things become particularly difficult when it is not a matter of external things that take place in space according to mechanical or mathematical laws, but when it is a matter of what happens internally in the essential sense in the course of the world. And because this question can hardly be studied from the presuppositions of modern consciousness, modern Bible exegesis — and a Bible exegete must also be a pastor — has particular difficulties with chapters such as the 13th chapter of the Gospel of Mark and everything that echoes this chapter, apart from the fact that this chapter in particular is extremely difficult to understand in later translations because it is one of those that have been most corrupted by the circumstances.
[ 3 ] Now, before I go into the situation of this chapter, I want to say a few words about prediction in the Christian sense in general. You have a feeling that within the development of Christianity, particularly in older times, a great role was played by the pointing to future events, and to future events of the very greatest importance. But you also have the feeling that the man of today can believe little in such pointers, and that he can actually count on little, that such pointers can be something other than illusions. One always has the feeling that when such things occur, which in modern parlance could be called prophecies, then something else must be at play than a real knowledge of future events. But you should also be aware that even in our present time, in the age of intellectualism, which has rightly eradicated certain traditional, inherited, atavistic clairvoyants of the older type, who served certain 19th-century theorists as examples from which they wanted to prove a supersensible world that they could not experience themselves. We need only consider one such case of prediction to see, whether we believe in it or not, what is actually meant. Such a case can certainly occur, and, if I may generalize, it still occurred frequently during the last century, whereas in modern times it is on the decline. Such abilities are still widespread among country folk. It may happen that someone, in a particularly favorable moment, sees in a dream how he falls from his horse and injures himself. Such a vision is absolutely a vision into the future, and even if we find out everything with the most careful scientific rigmarole that excludes any influence on the subsequent event, we cannot speak otherwise than that there is a real vision of the future. This is something that was widely noted by serious theorists until around the middle of the 19th century. You can find this in writings by otherwise thoroughly serious naturalists from the first half of the 19th century, discussed in numerous journals. As I said, anyone who looks at life today must see that such abilities as atavistic abilities have simply declined and been drowned out by the intellectualistic life, which is in a state that completely excludes looking into the future.
[ 4 ] Now, as I said, we must at least acknowledge that such abilities, which can be described as seeing into the future, existed in older times, and that it was perfectly understood in the environment of Christ Jesus when he spoke of the future in a certain way. But in order not to be misunderstood, I must immediately draw attention to something else. If you take the literature that is available as Christian literature after the actual Gospels, after the letters of Paul and after the other discussions directly attributed to the apostles, if you take the later literature of the so-called Church Fathers – by “Church fathers” are indeed understood to mean those personalities who were still disciples of the apostles or at least disciples of the disciples of the apostles in not too distant times – if you take this literature of the church fathers, you will find it characterized by three features. The first feature is that in these writings the actual living understanding of the Old Testament has withered away. You can clearly see how, everywhere in these writings, up to the “Shepherd of Hermas”, there is an obsession with interpreting the Old Testament in an intellectualistic way, namely, in this case, allegorically, that is, to bring it up out of the [real] event into the mere concept, that is, into that which is, so to speak, intellectualistic. But by allegorically rewriting the concepts, one takes care not to take an Old Testament tradition as a tradition of facts, but rather takes it as narrated facts whose real meaning must be grasped by the intellect in a figurative way. This is the first essential characteristic.
[ 5 ] The second essential characteristic is that the clearest reference to the return of Christ appears everywhere in these writings, that is, precisely what the thirteenth chapter of the Gospel of Mark points to in the most delicate sense. It was entirely, one must say, out of the entire spirit of the writings of the church fathers, that belief in the imminent reappearance of Christ persisted well into the 4th century. The scriptures speak of this reappearance of Christ in the most intense terms. They point out how the old world is perishing and how Christ will reappear, whereby one can certainly gain the impression that Christ will appear again in a similar way, only walking on earth in a more wonderful way than he was the first time.
[6] And the third characteristic element in the writings of these church fathers is what actually contributed significantly to the formation of the church. A certain legislative element appears everywhere, a warning to obey the bishops and the dogmas, to submit to the constitution of the forming church. So actually, everywhere you see something that could be described in the following way: “It will be to your detriment,” the faithful were told, “if you somehow develop what is revealed within you, if you seek your own religious path.” The religious path was to be provided by a church constitution, and the legal constitution that enforces obedience to the church is something that has been particularly perpetuated in Catholicism to the greatest extent, and which can still be very strongly encountered today.
[ 7 ] For example, I once had a conversation in Rome with a priest who had been educated in the Jesuit tradition. A great deal of effort had been made to bring about this conversation. He referred to the sources that had emerged as the sources of his teaching content, and he also pointed out the ways in which he came to his teaching content after his education. He pointed out that, first of all, there was the Scripture, then the dogmatic content of the Church, and that was all something that needed no examination, that simply had to be accepted in faith, as far as the dogma was concerned. He pointed out that one only had to interpret, not criticize or examine, the Gospels by reading them over and over again; one had the ecclesiastical tradition by incorporating it into the breviary, and then one had the lives of the saints as a living example.
[ 8 ] The former could not well be the subject of discussion with this cleric, because one had to say that what the Catholic Church wants to preserve is so firmly established that nothing can be done. But the latter, the Catholic cleric's relationship to the saints, is naturally something that also presents certain difficulties to the Catholic cleric when he begins to think, and here an objection could also be raised. Saints are personalities designated by the Catholic Church as having had a direct and living relationship with the transcendental world, either through revelations from the transcendental world through inner experiences or through divine intervention in their accomplishments. You may know that in the Catholic Church such a canonization requires a very elaborate ceremony, and that it must be preceded by a precise determination, which should not take years but centuries, a precise determination of how the person in question thought and lived. Furthermore, this investigation must end with a ceremony in which all those who have something well-founded to for the living intercourse of the personality concerned with the Divine, and that then the so-called Advocatus diaboli, the representative of the demonic world, must appear and refute everything that has been presented from the other side for the person concerned to be canonized. So a detailed court hearing is held, in which the entity who is to be regarded as Diabolus, as the devil, also has a representative, just as the representative of Christ is on the other side; and each time the Christ-like is discussed with the devil-like when such a saint is to be recognized.
[ 9 ] Now, of course, I could object [in the conversation] that the Church does, after all, recognize that one can enter into a living relationship with the Godhead, that a supersensible experience is possible for man. But it is a dogma of the Catholic Church that all such transcendental experiences that may occur are devilish and must be avoided, must be fled from. And it is, of course, also entirely in keeping with the dogmatics of the Catholic Church when it is said of the Catholic Church that the whole of anthroposophy is reprehensible because it purports to be based on an insight into the transcendental world. Therefore, Anthroposophy is reprehensible because such insight can only come to a person with the help of the devil; it is therefore devilish. This is something that must be judged by the Catholic Church as a matter of necessity and consistency. Things are already so that they must not be blurred. Those are wrong who believe that a reconciliation between Anthroposophy and the Catholic Church is readily possible. The initiate knows that the Catholic Church, if it is consistent in its approach, is obliged to regard Anthroposophy as the work of the devil, and more than ever before, the Catholic Church is making such consequences its practice.
[ 10 ] The priest replied that any contact with the supernatural world must be avoided at all costs; if it takes place in this world, it must be clearly evident that the devilish has been defeated by the divine principle. And when I said to him, 'If you now had such contact with the supersensible world, would you also regard it as devilish?' he answered, 'Yes.' He said that his task was merely to occupy himself with the literature of the saints and to know that such a thing existed. He did not demand to become a saint himself. What is now the last sentence is not really expressed by these people, nor did the person concerned express it, because the necessary consequence would then be that he said: only after two to three centuries does the Church have the right to regard me as a saint.
[ 11 ] From this you can now draw all kinds of conclusions. For example, you can link it to a very common way of thinking, which is particularly prevalent in the present day, by saying that everything that can be said about the causes of the war will only be known after decades, when all the archives have been searched. Anyone with a sense of reality knows that in a few decades everything is so blurred that you will not be able to find the truth in the archives, so that something will become established as tradition, and he knows that it is a, I would say, very precarious step to renounce what can be said about the causes precisely from the consciousness of the present. This is something that also needs to be thought through more deeply, but it only belongs here in parentheses; I just want to point out that the canonization has to wait so long that the things involved are very much blurred, and that one sees into something that weighs extremely heavily on the real progress of the Catholic Church.
[ 12 ] Now, these three characteristics can be found in the immediate post-apostolic literature of the first three to four centuries: the allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament, the reference to the return of Christ and to the destruction of the old world, and the exhortation to obedience to the superiors. In today's context, we must be primarily interested in the latter part, the reference to the coming Christ, because we must relate this reference to the coming Christ to sentence 6 of the 13th chapter of the Gospel of Mark, which says: “Many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he,’ and will mislead many. In this chapter you will find the extraordinarily remarkable indication that many will come, [who appear in the name of Christ,] and you will be pointed almost directly to one or the other who calls himself Christ. Now, this is to be watched for especially. It is to be watched for especially for the reason – I will speak about these things in more detail, so I will first lead up to this – because already in this passage of the Gospel of Mark lies the reference to the standpoint of the church fathers of the post-apostolic period. By arguing that the Christ will appear as they imagine him to be, this is [at the same time] the fulfillment [of the prophecy] that the deceivers will come, who are to be pointed out as those who call themselves Christs; and such things also happened in the first centuries. So much of the literature of the early centuries has been lost that these things can only be found today through spiritual science.
[ 13 ] And so we have to say – and this is why I have just said what I have – that, if we look at the whole situation, the first Christian church fathers already lived in a misunderstanding of the gospel, and perhaps in a very bad misunderstanding of the gospel. If we really feel Protestant, as I was able to show you yesterday, if we can really find our way more and more admiringly into the Gospels with all our hearts and all our souls, then it is extraordinarily difficult for us to find our way into the first church fathers with anything but our intellect. We find with the first church fathers that we reach the end of our understanding relatively early on, whereas the gospel itself leads us into immeasurable depths, and we then feel quite clearly that we actually feel somewhat uneasy when we are now to approach what occurs in the church fathers after our admiration of the gospels.
[ 14 ] Well, but that leads us to something else. We will talk about the legitimacy of prophecy later, but now we want to get a sense of the situation in terms of contemporary history, and it seems to me that if one wants to understand something like the 13th chapter of the Gospel of Mark, the question seems particularly important: Can the fulfillment of prophecy be asserted from a correct account of the facts? One must first be able to understand how the prophecy should be fulfilled, and then one can ask what the actual facts are. Because, it is easy to raise this question when it comes to things like the destruction of Jerusalem, but when it comes to the end of the world, which is still expected, and the coming of the Kingdom of God, modern thought has only the information that none of this has happened, that it must have been an illusion in any case, so that must be dealing with a false prophecy; and then one has only the choice of either interpreting these things out of the Gospels, or else of now pursuing what the first church fathers did with the Old Testament, of becoming allegorical, or indeed of undertaking something else that is a matter of the abstract. But all this cannot initially be raised in the face of the overall feeling that one must have in the face of the Gospels. The most important question seems to me to be the coming into effect of the prophecy, because that helps a little towards a correct understanding of the prophecy.
[ 15 ] And I say to you, my dear friends, for me, what is the end of the world and what is the coming down of the kingdom of God has simply been fulfilled. We must rise to the occasion and view the world in such a way that we can learn to support the proposition that this prediction has been fulfilled. To do this, however, we must penetrate more deeply into the spirit in which Christ Jesus speaks than is usually the case.
[ 16 ] Those who were around Jesus still knew exactly, just as the poor shepherds in the field knew from their inner visions: the Christ has arrived. They still knew exactly: the whole life of humanity and the earth was different in ancient times, and it will be different now in this historical moment, albeit little by little. Quiet feelings of it still linger in the present, but only very quiet feelings. I have such a quiet feeling about it, but it needs to be developed in an intensive way, for example, as can still be found in the art historian Herman Grimm, and perhaps it may interest you to be pointed in the direction of something like that, because psychologically it leads to what we must gradually approach. The art historian Herman Grimm had roughly the following view: if we go back in time, that is, from our time back to the Middle Ages and further and further back to the Roman Empire via the migration of peoples, we still have the opportunity to understand history. We still have such feelings today that allow us to understand, say, the history of the Roman Empire and, to some extent, that of the Roman Republic. We are still capable of understanding that. But if we go back to Greek history with the same state of mind, we are under the greatest illusion if we believe we can understand a Pericles, an Alcibiades, a Sophocles or Homer or the like. There is an abyss between the comprehension of the Roman and the Greek world, and what has been handed down to us from the Greek world, as Herman Grimm says, is basically a fairy tale; that is where the world of fairy tales begins, that is where the world begins where we can no longer get to with today's understanding. We must be content when the traditional images are presented to us, but in general we must accept this ancient world as a fairytale world, without intellectual understanding. — There is still a faint echo of something that one must acquire as an inner feeling in relation to the historical development of humanity.
[ 17 ] This feeling was completely destroyed, of course, by that world view based on the modern evolutionary theory of natural science, which simply goes back from the present and regards the present human being as the most perfect that has been achieved so far. From this perspective, however, one can no longer understand those who were around Christ. And one also understands the psychological background from which such modern perceptions and ideas, which are then clothed in science, have arisen when, for example, one considers the answer that an eminent scientific thinker, Huxley, gave to an archbishop; it is quite understandable from today's perspective. The archbishop had said: Man comes from that divine being whom the deity innocently placed in the world, and who has degenerated to the present state of humanity. — Huxley countered this archbishop's opinion with nothing more than the sentence: I would have to be very ashamed as a human being if I had come down so far from this divine origin of mine; but I can be proud if I have worked my way up from my animal point of view to the level I am at. — You can see very clearly how moral impulses play into what is otherwise called objective science. Everywhere one must go back to moral impulses, which color science more than it believes it to be colored.
[ 18 ] We must realize that the ancient man of pre-Christian times, the pagan man, especially if he was not a sinner, was aware that wherever he looked into nature and wherever he looked into human life, a divine element presented itself to him at the same time as the natural. When he drank from the rock spring, he did not just hear the rushing sound that we hear today, but he heard what he interpreted and understood as the voice of the divine. In every animal he saw something that had been brought forth out of a supersensible world, but which, in spite of the deep fall from this supersensible world, if rightly understood, leads everywhere upward to the contemplation of this supersensible world. And so the old man could not imagine this supersensible world at all without the Divine being everywhere in it.
[ 19 ] Only in Judaism had a feeling arisen quite intensely, and that was: however the Divine appears, man himself must not presume that the Divine in its perfection will also appear in him, at most in inspirations and so on, but certainly not in its full form. That was something that the devout Jew did not even want to touch upon; what he still allowed for the rest of nature, that the divine reveals itself everywhere, and what he saw in the facts of his Old Testament, he did not allow for man. For the surrounding pagan world, for the old view, it was a matter of course that the mineral, plant and animal kingdoms form a unified succession, and that, just as the divine is in all the other kingdoms of nature, man is also an incarnation of the divine. But for thousands of people, this was also an established belief that man has increasingly lost the opportunity to realize the God within himself through his outer life. So it was an original ability of man to shape the divine within himself, but man had gradually lost this ability. And those who were around Christ felt that the divine that had previously appeared in man and also in the outside world could no longer appear in man; it had been given to Earth, it had appeared everywhere in the Son of God, but it had ceased [to appear in man], it could no longer appear in the children of men. And it had to come again from the extraterrestrial, so that the last incarnation of the deity, which was the first of a new era, would come, but it had to come from outside - if I may express myself crudely - from the store that was originally given to Earth.
[ 20 ] From this point of view - and the perception, my dear friends, was still a feeling perception at that time, one that took place in direct experience - from this point of view, the one who was around the Christ looked with feeling at what took place in the penetration of the Roman Empire into Asia. What was the effect on the people of that time of the penetration of the Roman Empire into Asia? We must only visualize what actually penetrated into their consciousness at that time. The wars that were waged were, for the people of that time, simply external events, which in their ultimate dependence were also derived from the divine will. But that was not the most important thing; the most important thing was that those who sat on the thrones of the Roman Caesars, by reason of their religion, claimed to be incarnations of the gods, and that they did so legitimately. Caesar Augustus was the incarnation of the deity recognized by law. Some Caesars sought to achieve this by undergoing the ceremonies that were performed in the mysteries in ancient times and that consisted of cultic acts, but which came so close to human truths, to inner human truths that the Caesars could have these ceremonies performed on themselves, in order to be transformed in their earthly existence, so that they could truly perform the divine, so that they could realize the divine within themselves. The intrusion of the world into these secret divine mysteries can perhaps be no more strongly symbolically indicated than [by the story] that Commodus, when he sought initiation and had the ceremonies performed on himself, because the ceremony also included the symbolic slaying of an uninitiated person, actually slew a man, murdered him, at his mystery initiation. In short, one senses that in this penetration of the Roman Empire, the divine has disappeared and that the divine is usurped, that a counter-divine has been incarnated in the usurpation of the divine, because the human being must incarnate something. If he does not incarnate the Divine, if he has ceased to incarnate the Divine, then he incarnates the anti-divine, he incarnates the enemy of the Divine. And you may interpret as you wish, you will only be right if you understand that those who were around Christ Jesus said: In the Roman Empire, which is spreading throughout the world, lies the incarnation of the enemy of the Divine.
[ 21 ] This is elementary, this is truly knowing feeling and feeling recognition in Christianity, which was around the Christ Jesus. And never again, from this Christian point of view, would anything be seen in what had developed further in dependence on the Roman Empire as anything other than the mere earthly realm, the realm of the world, in contrast to the realms of heaven. But that means in other words: the world that was once there, the divine world, has perished, and it perishes with the Roman Empire. The downfall takes place in the first three centuries up to the middle of the 15th century, of which I spoke to you yesterday. The downfall is taking place. It is a perished world that will come into being, a world that no longer produces the divine by itself, a world that only gives knowledge of the divine. One must turn to the Last, who has become the First, to the divine incarnation of the Christ in Jesus, which through its power makes it possible, through the practice – if I may use the term – through the practice of what has been fulfilled through the Holy Spirit, to come not through nature but in a direct way to the divine spiritual world, which one can then also find in nature again, if one has found it in imitation of Christ Jesus through the mediation of the spirit. The world is coming to an end. The Christ will no longer come as a citizen of the earth, but from the clouds, from the cosmos he will come again. And so he comes to all who are aware that what was called the world in the old sense perished with the Roman Empire.
[ 22 ] My dear friends! This is an unpleasant truth for those who want to be fully immersed in today's consciousness, they don't know what to do with it; an unpleasant truth, however, for those who, based on a false understanding, want to excuse Christianity from today's times. It is a special aspect of being part of today's world when people come and say that Christianity is impractical, that Christianity is something that leads away from the world, that Christianity has a mystical, atavistic element in it that makes one unworldly. And then there are those who excuse Christianity as best they can by arguing away what those who thought in this way about the world and yet still had a relationship to the world said. The excuse is put forward that one says, the things are not to be understood like that, it is not meant to be at all so bad with the fleeing of the world and with the downfall of the world, a continuous progress goes over the first centuries until our present time; the world is just, and everything that some fanatical priest or some fanatical pastor says about the world's apostasy from God is really not meant badly, it has come about through Catholic influence, it must be eradicated. In short, my dear friends, a large part of pastoral and theological work consists of this. Put your hand on your heart and recognize and feel from within [what I have said] the necessity of a renewal of Christianity, of Christian impulses, because a large part of what is preached and discussed about Christianity today consists of a continuous retreat from the recognition of crude intellectualism and the piecemeal eradication of everything from Christianity that which should be grasped in the deepest way by strong thinking, by thinking so strong that the world finds God through Christ, and when it has found God through Christ, can also make this practical by now carrying the found divine, the divine grasped in thinking, into the godless world, in order to bring about re-divinization.
[ 23 ] Those who want to speak of a renewal of Christianity today must have this strength within them; they must be able to say to themselves: Yes, today we must look to the de-divinized world that began with the Roman Empire and goes back to the Roman Empire; but we must not seek the divine in this world. But the world must not remain without the divine. We must turn to that which now cannot come from the earth, which – symbolically speaking – comes from the clouds, which must come in a spiritual way. We must find the Kingdoms of Heaven in the place of the de-divinized earthly kingdoms. The Kingdom of Heaven has dawned, it is here, and the more we de-divinize our earth, the more it must be here. The end of the world has taken place and continues to take place. And when we look up from this kingdom of earth, we look up to the Kingdoms of Heaven, which the Christ Jesus has brought. You must see, my dear friends, the Kingdom of Heaven in the spirit. We must see its arrival; we must be able to feel the fulfillment of what the Christ means when he speaks of the coming of his kingdom, the kingdom he had to bring to the world, and which now does not speak from nature; but when it can work in nature, then one can speak of this kingdom. That is what he must first inspire as a feeling in those who are immediately around him. That is also what we must seek to include in our words if we really want to speak of those things.
[ 24 ] We see how it is stated in the third sentence of the thirteenth chapter of the Gospel of Mark: After Christ had gone out of the temple – the temple in which one also heard something within the outer world from the divine— one of his disciples said to him: See, what buildings, what stones. But Jesus said to him: You alone see these great buildings. No stone can remain over the other without participating in the work of destruction, because from now on all the outer world that has become ungodly begins to become a destructive world. And He departed, speaking quite intimately. For on the Mount of Olives He either speaks only intimately with Himself, teaching men to pray, or He speaks only to His most intimate friends, to Peter, James, John and Andrew. And to Peter, James, John and Andrew, he now speaks that which he has to say as the events of the spiritual happenings, which are viewed from the perspective of the divine kingdom, in contrast to the events of the world that is heading towards destruction.
[ 25 ] You see, I do not speak allegorically, I do not speak symbolically. If you were to perceive it that way, you would only read it into my words. I speak directly from the situation and the experience of what took place at that time, in that I attempt to point to all these things, albeit with words of today's language. And I ask you to pay attention to the situation first. We are led to the Mount of Olives to receive the content of the 13th chapter of the Gospel of Mark. It concludes with the words: “Watch!” —- And immediately afterwards, we are led to the Last Supper in the sense of the Gospel of Mark; we are thus led to the event that represents the first step towards the coming of the Kingdom of God through Christ before us.
[ 26 ] I will speak more about this tomorrow. It is true that I am speaking to you quite anew, to today's consciousness. I want to speak quite honestly, as the things present themselves to me, because I believe that only in this way, by pointing out the very first elements, can one come to a true and honest conviction of what is necessary today.