It is from these circumstances that the anti-Christian and irreligious bias of German scholarship has sprung. Anyone who calls a Weltanschauung his own possesses it either as a gift of the religion of his youth or as something he acquired through tough manhood struggles with a new faith. Each Weltanschauung is religious, because the world can only be seen as a whole entity, as something settled and integrated, by an overriding nature or a supreme, clear, and pure will: each religious viewpoint claims to be the only one that is correct and sufficient, or at least to be one absolutely correct and important aspect of a whole entity that is yet unknown. For this reason, every campaign that non-liberals unaffiliated with the reactionary party lead against liberals has the heat of a crusade, whereas every campaign that liberals mount against the former is characterized by scornful coldness and the bigoted hatred of unbelief. The scholars in their prime today will not deny that, when faced with any scholar of non-liberal inclination – no matter if he be the most free-thinking, benevolent, and industrious person imaginable – they begin to feel utter discomfort to the very core: to them, that entire world view smacks of the Middle Ages. In theory, they may strive to do the most justice possible to Christianity and religion; yet, at the bottom of their souls, they remain heathens and are even happy to be heathens. This, however, constitutes a step backwards: One has the right to transcend Christianity but not to regress from it.
[ . . . ]
The facts of the case become even clearer if we consider the Jews living right next to us. It is well known that they strive in large numbers and with great fervor to acquire modern education: The success of their efforts has not been such as to elevate them above their own place. Apart from honorable exceptions that merely prove the rule, they have remained Jews despite their education. Our people, which has grown together from such diverse elements and is in no way intolerant, continues to view them as foreigners to this day, despite their education.
What good was the Prussian educational system? Do our conditions exist in spite of it? What good did Falk’s Kulturexamen* do? Were the young priests who were subjected to it even one iota better than their predecessors, who did not cram a fresh load of culture into their heads after their schooldays?
* The aptitude test for members of the clergy instituted by the Prussian Minister of Culture Adalbert Falk in 1873 – trans.
print version
return to list
previous document