Lowith's 'Meaning In History' (Book Review)
Löwith, Karl. 'Meaning in History: The Theological Implications of the Philosophy of History.' Chicago: University Press, 1950.
Summery
'Meaning In History' by Karl Lowith is written in chapters summarizing fourteen different philosophies of history. These different perspectives were expressed by the world's greatest thinkers, and they represent many different time periods and cultures. Lowith attempts to demonstrate that our modern philosophy of history is neither pagan nor Christian, but rather an awkward and contradicting fusion of ideas that originated in Christianity but have evolved into a vastly different thing. Lowith begins his study by explaining our modern philosophy before guiding his readers back through history towards the Christian origin.
Christianity began with almost no philosophy of history outside of what related to salvation. Early Christians typically just accepted whatever the Roman perspective was about secular history. Saint Augustine was the first to systematically study secular history from a Christian perspective, but he believed that its historical course was totally different from that of the Church.
The first Christian philosophy of secular, or "profane," history was to interpret it as a parable. According to this philosophy, secular history holds meaning only in so much as it relates to the history of salvation. The history of the Bible is the history of salvation. Pre-Christian history was the reduction of all humanity down to Jesus, while the Christian era is about one man expanding out to encompass all humanity.
As history progressed, thinkers increasingly fused secular history with salvation history starting with Bossuet. Vico's concept of sociopolitical cycles reflecting God's periodic revitalization of human society furthered the integration. Eventually, the fusion of secular with spiritual became almost total until the spiritual philosophy of history as a movement towards salvation was abandoned and replaced with secular concepts that mirrored the old structure while forgetting its origins.
Today, our philosophy of history still retains the concept of salvation, but this concept has been totally divorced from its spiritual roots. Modern secular historians now ignore spiritual history as much as early Christians ignored secular history. This transition, or flip flop, was completed by Proudhon, Marx, and Comte but their disparate projects began to fail in the twentieth century. The aftermath of this trajectory is that twenty first century Western philosophies of history are mere shells uprooted from their Christian past while inspiring little real faith (postmodernism).
Even stripped of its religious origin, however, the concept of historical meaning was powerful enough to inspire even atheists to preconceive of history as a linear process with purpose. This powerful idea of progress through history arguably inspired the West towards innovation and world conquest.
Lowith's book opened my eyes to the idea of progressivism and the way that modern secularists see the world. The book's layout, working from the Bible to modern philosophers, was a brilliant way of demonstrating the evolution and devolution of Christian philosophy. 'Meaning In History' renders modern secularists and progressives far less intimidating by demonstrating that their philosophy is founded upon the very religion they claim to reject and deconstruct. The book's concluding section made modern atheism look like an absurd and childish protest movement after it described how the entire worldview was made possible only after the conquest of Christianity over paganism.
Conclusion
There were numerous ideas in this book I had never been exposed to. I had never heard of Vico before, but I found his ideas interesting and worth consideration. The book also gave me an interesting new perspective on Old Testament history and God's judgement. I had never heard of Orosius nor his defense of Christians after their being blamed for Rome's collapse. I have read Voltaire before, but I had never gotten a broad summery of his philosophy before reading this book.
I found Lowith's ideas and writing style hilarious, but he seemed to be a rather simple and unsophisticated thinker in comparison to some of the other philosophers he reviewed.
The book's analysis of Burckhardt helped me understand the origins of the modern method of social studies teaching. The idea of having sections of history is somewhat helpful (like "Renaissance," "Enlightenment," etc), but I can see from my own education how they hindered my understanding of how history develops over time through these artificially defined eras. The educational method that evolved from Burkhardt's method seems to encourage the compartmentalization of ideas and cultures, and the creation of categories and generalizations that limits a student's ability to understand history's flow. Burckhardt's view of Christianity, and particularly his belief in the failure of modern Christianity, is sobering because his critique is so honest and rings true. Modern attempts to blend Christianity with secular society have always resulted in ideals that strike me as different from what first century Christians believed and practiced. I felt myself more challenged by Burkhardt's denouncements of modern Christianity then I usually feel during Sunday sermons.
I think every Christian needs to evaluate their heart and decide what their faith means to them. Are they Christians because Christianity represents a wholesome addition to a wealthy suburban American ideal? Or, because it fits so well with their image of manhood? Or, because they believe it has sociopolitical consequences? Or, do they believe it because they have renounced the world and look towards a reborn universe?
It seems to me that 'Meaning in History' serves many purposes. It is a good introduction to the various authors it discusses, and it contains a powerful thesis that will lead to internal exploration about the true meaning of history.