Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Freedom and Servitude in Heidegger’s Dasein and Luther’s Christian

  • Published:
Sophia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Heidegger scholarship has done an admirable job accounting for Luther’s influence on key Heideggerian concepts such as his method of destruction and anxiety. Yet given Heidegger’s statements concerning Luther’s immense personal and philosophical importance, it is likely that Luther’s influence extends further and deeper than might first appear. I argue that this influence also manifests in Heidegger’s concept of authentic existence. In particular, I argue that Luther’s understanding of Christian freedom and servitude form ontic material from which Heidegger draws to come to his general ontological understanding of Dasein’s freedom as power over its existence and servitude to its communal involvements. As Luther understands the freedom of a Christian, everything comes to aid the Christian in salvation, much like Dasein gains power over its existential possibilities in coming to authenticity. Yet this newly created freedom also creates additional ontological or existential connections with one’s community. The consequence of such connections is the addition of new responsibilities, or form of servitude, to one’s community wherein one aids others in coming to faith or authenticity, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Martin Heidegger, Ontologie (Hermeneutik der Faktizität), vol. 63, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1995), 5.

  2. For strong representative works dealing with these relations see Theodore Kisiel, The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995); John van Buren, The Young Heidegger: Rumor of the Hidden King (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994); Benjamin Crowe, Heidegger’s Religious Origins: Destruction and Authenticity (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006); David Vessey, ‘Heidegger’s Existential Domestication of Luther’, in The Devil’s Whore: Reason and Philosophy in the Lutheran Tradition, ed. Jennifer Hockenbery Dragseth (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2011), 131–39; Judith Wolfe, Heidegger’s Eschatology: Theological Horizons in Martin Heidegger’s Early Work (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013); Judith Wolfe, Heidegger and Theology (New York: Bloomsbury, 2014); SJ McGrath, The Early Heidegger & Medieval Philosophy: Phenomenology for the Godforsaken (Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2006).

  3. Otto Pöggler, ‘Heideggers Luther-Lektüre im Freiburger Theologenkonvikt‘, in Heidegger und die Anfänge seines Denkens, ed. Alfred Denker, Hans-Helmuth Gander, and Holger Zaborowski, vol. 1, Heidegger Jahrbuch (München: Karl Alber, 2004), 192.

  4. Martin Heidegger, ‘Das Problem der Sünde bei Luther‘, in Sachgemässe Exegese: Die Protokolle aus Rudolf Bultmanns Neutestamentlichen Seminaren 1921-1951, ed. Wilfried Härle and Dieter Lührmann (Marburg: N.G. Elwert Verlag, 1996), 28–33.

  5. van Buren, The Young Heidegger, 149; Kisiel, The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time, 228. However, it is important to note that Heidegger, when citing Luther, often references the Weimar edition. This is important because the Weimar edition is generally regarded as the better scholarly edition and includes works previously lost until the early 20th century. The rediscovery of these lost works was an important catalyst for the ‘Luther renaissance’ of the 1920s.

  6. John van Buren, ‘Heidegger’s Early Freiburg Courses, 1915-1923’, Research in Phenomenology 23 (1993): 138.

  7. Bernhard Lohse, Martin Luther: An Introduction to His Life and Work, trans. Robert Schultz (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986), 48–9.

  8. Kisiel, The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time, 270.

  9. Heidegger, ‘Das Problem der Sünde bei Luther‘; Heinrich Schlier, ‘Denken im Nachdenken‘, in Erinnerungen an Martin Heidegger, ed. Günther Neske (Pfullingen: Neske, 1977), 219. Unfortunately, nothing remains of the 1927 lecture except a student’s recollection that those present were surprised by the extent of Heidegger’s knowledge of Luther.

  10. For destruction see for example Martin Heidegger, Einführung in die phänomenologische Forschung, vol. 17, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 2006), 118; Martin Heidegger, Phänomenologische Interpretationen ausgewählter Abhandlungen des Aristoteles zur Ontologie und Logik, vol. 62, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 2005), 372; for anxiety see for example Martin Heidegger, Sein und Zeit, 17th ed. (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 2006), 190n1; Martin Heidegger, Grundbegriffe der aristotelischen Philosophie, vol. 18, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 2002); Martin Heidegger, Prolegomena zur Geschicht des Zeitbegriffs, vol. 20, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1994), 394 and 404; Martin Heidegger, Der Begriff der Zeit, vol. 64, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klosterman, 2004), 46. Future references to Sein und Zeit will be in text and abbreviated as SZ followed by the page number.

  11. Charles B. Guignon, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger, 1st ed. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 41n34.

  12. For representative statements see Heidegger, Einführung in die phänomenologische Forschung, 17:118; Martin Heidegger, Schelling: Vom Wesen der Menschlichen Freiheit, vol. 42, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1988), 54; Martin Heidegger, Zur Bestimmung der Philosophie, vol. 56/57, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1987), 18; Martin Heidegger, Grundprobleme der Phänomenologie, vol. 58, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 2010), 62 and 205; Heidegger, Phänomenologische Interpretationen ausgewählter Abhandlungen des Aristoteles zur Ontologie und Logik, 62:336.

  13. For the remainder of this section, I am drawing primarily on Heidegger’s ‘Phenomenology and Theology’. At this point in his development, this is the most sustained account of his understanding of the relation between his phenomenology and theology. I am not taking this as the definitive account for Heidegger’s entire career. Heidegger’s understanding of the relation between the two was constantly developing and much of what he says in ‘Phenomenology and Theology’ is not applicable to his later work. For an excellent account of his later views on this subject see Wolfe, Heidegger and Theology, esp. chapters 5 and 6.

  14. Martin Heidegger, ‘Phänomenologie und Theologie‘, in Wegmarken, vol. 9, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1976), 55–6.

  15. Martin Heidegger, ‘Phenomenological Interpretations in Connection with Aristotle: An Indication of the Hermeneutical Situation (1922)’, in Supplements: From the Earliest Essays to Being and Time and Beyond, ed. and trans. John van Buren (New York: State University of New York Press, 2002), 193–4.

  16. For general accounts of the many instances of Heidegger’s use of the Christian life in the development of his phenomenology see the sources listed in note 2 above. One may object that for Luther faith is ontological or existential, and, therefore, Heidegger’s existential use of existentiell faith goes awry as soon as it begins. It is important to keep in mind, however, what Heidegger means when he labels something as existential. A structure is existential if it is necessary for something to count as or to be Dasein. Attunement, understanding, and discourse, as prominent examples, are existential. One cannot be Dasein without these. Is this true for Luther and faith? For Luther, one can certainly be human without faith. Faith is already not ontological or existential in Heidegger’s sense. To argue that faith is ontological for Luther is additionally complicated by Luther often describing faith as a freely given gift that, though it is a gift, is not actually possessed by humans; for example see, Martin Luther, Lectures on Galatians, 1535, Chapters 1-4, ed. and trans. Jaroslav Pelikan, vol. 26, Luther’s Works (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1963), 6 and 8. Heidegger’s understanding of sin as ontic or existentiell is another matter. Because sin is essential for post-lapsarian human existence for Luther, it is reasonable to critique Heidegger here.

  17. How formal and devoid of faithful content Heidegger’s account actually is a matter of contention. For example, see Karl Lӧwith, ‘Phänomenologische Ontologie und Protestantische Theologie‘, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 11 (1930): 365–99.

  18. Heidegger, ‘Phänomenologie und Theologie’, 52. This is an important point of disparity between Heidegger‘s authenticity and Luther’s faith. The former arises from Dasein, while the latter is completely passively received from outside of human existence. But because of the general similarities concerning the points of division between philosophy and theology Heidegger and Luther share, the latter is outside philosophy’s domain.

  19. Ibid., 64.

  20. Rudolf Bultmann, ‘The Historicity of Man [Dasein] and Faith’, in Existence and Faith: Shorter Writings of Rudolf Bultmann, trans. Schubert Ogden (New York: Meridian Books, 1960), 92–110; Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Akt und Sein: Transzendentalphilosophie und Ontologie in der systematischen Theologie, ed. Hans-Richard Reuter (Munich: Chr. Kaiser, 1988), 71n89; Karl Barth, ‘No!’, in Natural Theology, trans. Peter Fraenkel (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 1946), 113–14.

  21. Heidegger, ‘Phänomenologie und Theologie’, 63.

  22. At this point, it may be helpful to point out some of the linguistic nuances of Heidegger’s Eigentlichkeit. By eigentlich, Heidegger does not mean coming to know a truer, yet hidden, self, nor a morally superior self. Rather it means coming to relate to existence in a new way. It is better to understand Eigentlichkeit as a modified way of owning one’s existence or self. William Blattner, for example, offers the, in some ways preferable, translation of Eigentlichkeit as ‘ownedness’. See William Blattner, Heidegger’s Being and Time: A Reader’s Guide (New York: Continuum, 2006), 127-30. Because ‘authenticity’ is better known and ownedness and its cognates can be a bit grammatically unwieldy, I have decided to maintain the common translation of authenticity; however, the alternative, ‘ownedness’, should be kept in mind.

  23. Martin Luther, ‘The First Sermon, March 9, 1522, Invocavit Sunday’, in Sermons I, ed. and trans. John W. Doberstein, vol. 51, Luther’s Works (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1959), 70; this is one of many points where Luther is not always consistent. For example, in his ‘Sermon on Preparing to Die’, he states that ‘in the hour of death no Christian should doubt that he is not alone’. For the eyes of God, Christ, the angels, the saints, and all Christians are on him Martin Luther, ‘Sermon on Preparing to Die’, in Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, ed. Timothy E. Lull (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989), 643.

  24. Martin Luther, Lectures on Galatians, 1535, Chapters 5-6; Lectures on Galatians, 1519, Chapters 1-6, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan, trans. Richard Jungkuntz and Jaroslav Pelikan, vol. 27, Luther’s Works (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1964), 238.

  25. Luther, Martin, The Freedom of a Christian, in Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, ed. Timothy E. Lull (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989), 606; hereafter this work will be cited in text abbreviated as FC followed by the page number.

  26. Luther, Lectures on Galatians, 1535, Chapters 1-4, 26:63–4.

  27. Luther, Lectures on Galatians, 1535, Chapters 5-6; Lectures on Galatians, 1519, Chapters 1-6, 27:27.

  28. Luther, ‘Sermon on Preparing to Die’, 643.

  29. Martin Luther, Lectures on Romans: Glosses and Scholia, ed. Hilton C. Oswald, trans. Walter Tillmanns, vol. 25, Luther’s Works (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1972), 179.

  30. Byle, Nik. “Divine Temporality: Bonhoeffer’s Theological Appropriation of Heidegger’s Existential Analytic of Dasein.” Ph.D. diss., University of South Florida, 2016, 166.

  31. Martin Luther, ‘The Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ-Against the Fanatics’, in Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, ed. Timothy E. Lull (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1989), 248; emphasis added.

  32. Heidegger lists Luther among important historical sources for understanding freedom; Martin Heidegger, Vom Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit: Einleitung in die Philosophie, vol. 31, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1982), 21; Martin Heidegger, Zu Ernst Jünger, ed. Peter Trawny, Gesamtausgabe 90 (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 2004), 307.

  33. Also see Luther, Lectures on Galatians, 1535, Chapters 5-6; Lectures on Galatians, 1519, Chapters 1-6, 27:49–50.

  34. Luther, ‘The First Sermon, March 9, 1522, Invocavit Sunday’, 392.

  35. Martin Luther, Devotional Writings I, ed. Martin Dietrich, trans. Martin Bertram, vol. 42, Luther’s Works (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969), 99.

  36. Martin Luther, ‘The Sacrament of Penance, 1519’, ed. and trans. E. Theodore Bachmann, vol. 35, Luther’s Works (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1960), 12; emphasis added.

  37. Martin Luther, ‘The Blessed Sacrament of the Holy and True Body of Christ, and the Brotherhoods, 1519’, ed. E. Theodore Bachmann, trans. Jeremiah Schindel, vol. 35, Luther’s Works (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1960), 51.

  38. Decades later Heidegger associates this understanding of history and destiny with Luther. Martin Heidegger, Parmenides, vol. 54, Gesamtausgabe (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1992), 81.

  39. Martin Heidegger, Ontologie (Hermeneutik der Faktizität), 63:95.

  40. Kisiel, The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time, 452.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. PO Box 4387, Somerton, AZ, 85350, USA

    Nik Byle

Authors
  1. Nik Byle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nik Byle.

Additional information

I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers. Their comments were refreshingly thorough, thoughtful, and helpful. Of course, any failings in what follows are solely my responsibility.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Byle, N. Freedom and Servitude in Heidegger’s Dasein and Luther’s Christian. SOPHIA 58, 137–151 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-017-0603-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-017-0603-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation