Ritschl, ALBRECHT, Protestant theologian, was born 25th March 1822, at Berlin, where his father was a clergyman. His university studies were carried on at Bonn, Halle, Heidelberg, and Tübingen. In 1846 he 'habilitated' at Bonn, the subject of his thesis (in the treatment of which he substantially reflected the views of his Tübingen master, Baur) being the relation between the gospel of Marcion and the canonical gospel of Luke. His next published work, on the origin of the early Catholic Church, was of similar tendency, though seeking to modify the conclusions of his contemporary Schwegler as to the influence and extension of Ebionitism in the apostolic and post-apostolic age; but in the second and completely rewritten edition of the same work he took up towards the fundamental positions of the Tübingen school an attitude of antagonism, which he ever afterwards maintained. He now denied the alleged Ebionitism of primitive Christianity altogether, and, accepting as genuine the epistles of James and Peter as well as the Apocalypse and Acts, maintained that none of the apostles had regarded the law as religiously binding, and that they only continued its observance as a national custom among Jews, leaving Gentile converts free. Ritschl, who had become professor extra-ordinarius of Theology at Bonn in 1853, was promoted to an ordinary professorship in 1860, and in 1864 was transferred to Göttingen, where the rest of his life was spent. His lectures, especially those on Christian ethics, soon became famous for their originality and vigour. While in Bonn he had also published a tract on the relation between the church and its confession (1854), and a Latin dissertation on the wrath of God (1859). The list of his Göttingen publications includes, besides his principal work, a treatise on Christian perfection (1874), a tract on conscience (1876), a history of Pietism (1880-86; 3 vols.), a tract on theology and metaphysics (2d ed. 1887), and a volume containing three academic discourses (1887). He died at Göttingen, 20th March 1889.
His principal work, on the Christian doctrine of justification and reconciliation, was published in three volumes (1870-74; 3d ed., with noteworthy alterations, 1888), the first of which traces the history of the doctrine, the second discusses its biblical premises, and the third its theological meaning. An English translation of the first volume by the present writer appeared in 1871. The work as a whole expounds with much force and effectiveness a theological system marked by great dialectic acuteness and subtlety, ingenious and searching exegesis, and bold disregard of ecclesiastical tradition. The distinguishing feature of the Ritschlian theology is perhaps the prominence it gives to the practical, ethical, social side of Christianity. As a reasoned system it starts from a definite theory of cognition, eclectically derived from Kant through Lotze, which has sometimes been called a subjective idealism, and criticised as denying all objective reality to the objects of theology. But hardly with justice. For, though doubting the possibility of demonstrating God to the merely speculative intellect, Ritschl holds that God is really, effectively, practically revealed to man on his religious side; in other words, becomes known to those who have found their need of Him. God is to be thought of as love; there is no other conception of equal value. In particular the conception of His holiness is an obscure one, and His righteousness is in fact identical with His grace. All metaphysical statements as to His absoluteness or existence through, or in, or for Himself are of no religious value. In connection with his doctrine of God, Ritschl attaches high importance to the conception of the church as being the community within which alone men can have reconciliation with God and freedom from the sense of guilt, and so be able to act from motives of love, and realise that human and divine fellowship of perfect love which is the kingdom of God. In this Ritschl expressly differs from Schleiermacher (in many other respects a master whom he follows closely); but, while rejecting the Protestant formula of the latter, that the relation of the individual to the church depends on his relation to Christ, he is very far removed from the position of Roman Catholicism. His doctrine of Christ attaches no value to the hypostatical distinction of persons in the God-head or to the ecclesiastical doctrine of the two natures or the three offices, but states the divinity of Christ in terms of His peculiar and unique relation to the church, which He founded by His life and work on earth. This work was atoning work; but the reconciliation with God and immunity from the sense of guilt which He secured for the church were obtained not by vicarious endurance of the punishment due to sinful men, but by His perfect fulfilment, in loving deed and word, of the work of His calling, and by His perseverance in it in spite of all opposition, and by His patient endurance of all suffering even unto death. The justification possessed by the Christian as a member of Christ's community is practically shown in his freedom or dominion over the world. This dominion is exercised, in trust in God's providence, by patience, by humility amid all the vicissitudes of life, by faithfulness of the individual to his calling as being his contribution to the kingdom of God, and by Christian prayer, which is chiefly thanksgiving or humble recognition of the divine rule. Ritschl is usually classified as an 'eclectic mediating theologian'; perhaps 'intermediate' would be a better word, for his theology is uncompromisingly opposed alike by the 'rationalist' and by the 'orthodox' parties. The Ritschlians now form a large and important school in Germany, the most prominent among them being Kaftan, Herrmann, and Bender.
See the Life by his son Otto (2 vols. 1892-96); Stählin, Kant, Lotze, and Ritschl (trans. 1889); works by Pfeiderer (1891), Mielke (1894), and Pfennigsdorf (1896); and Garvie, The Ritschlian Theology (1899).