[Bremen, about April 23-May 1, 1839] Fritz Graeber, I am very busy at present with philosophy and critical theology. When you get to be eighteen years of age and become acquainted with Strauss, the rationalists and the Kirchen-Zeitung then you must either read everything without thinking or begin to doubt your Wuppertal faith. I cannot understand how the orthodox preachers can be so orthodox since there are some quite obvious contradictions in the Bible. How can you square the two genealogies of Joseph, Mary s husband, the different accounts of the institution of the Eucharist ( this is my blood ; this is the new testament in my blood [Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20]), of the men possessed by the devil (one says simply that the devil left him, the other that he entered into the swine), the statement that the mother of Jesus went out to look for her son, whom she believed to be mad, although she had conceived him miraculously, etc., with the authenticity, the literal authenticity of the Evangelists? And the discrepancy in the Our Father , in the sequence of the miracles, John s peculiarly deep interpretation, through which, however, the form of the narrative is obviously obscured what about that? Christi ipsissima verba [Christ s very own words] of which the orthodox boast come out differently in every gospel. Not to speak of the Old Testament. But nobody tells you this in dear old Barmen; there one is taught according to quite different principles. And on what does the old orthodoxy base itself? On nothing but the old routine. Where does the Bible demand literal belief in its teachings, in its accounts? Where does a single apostle declare that everything he says is directly inspired? This is not surrendering reason in obedience to Christ, as the orthodox people affirm; no, it is a killing of the divine in man to replace it with the dead letter. I am therefore just as good a super-naturalist as I was before, but I have cast off orthodoxy. Thus I cannot now or ever believe that a rationalist who seeks with all his heart to do as much good as possible, should be eternally damned. That is at odds with the Bible itself, for it is written that no one is damned on account of original sin but only because of his own sins. But if a person resists original sin with all his might and does what he can, then his actual sins are only a necessary consequence of original sin and therefore they cannot damn him. April 24. Ha, ha, ha! Do you know who wrote the article in the Telegraph? The author is the writer of these lines, but I advise you not to say anything about it, I could get into a hell of a lot of trouble. I know about Kohl, Ball and Hermann almost exclusively from reviews by W. Blank and Str cker, which I copied almost word for word. But that Kohl talks nonsense and Hermann is a feeble pietist, I know from my own ears. D. is D rholt, office boy at Wittenstein s in Unterbarmen. For the rest I am pleased with myself for not having said anything in the article that I cannot prove. There is only one thing which annoys me: I haven t presented Stier in as important a light as I ought to have done. He is not to be disregarded as a theologian. Aren t you astonished at my knowledge of the characters, especially of Krummacher and D ring (what I said about his sermon I heard from P. Jonghaus), and of literature? The remarks about Freiligrath must have been really good, otherwise Gutzkow would have cut them out. But the style is atrocious. By the way, the article seems to have caused a sensation. I put all five of you under obligation on your word of honour not to tell anyone that I am the author. Understood? As far as abuse is concerned, I heaped most of it on you and Wilhelm because I had the letters to you right in front of me when the urge to abuse somebody overcame me. F. Pl macher especially must not get to know that I wrote the article. What a lad that Ball is though! He is to preach on Good Friday, does not feel like studying and so learns by heart a sermon he finds in the Menschenfreund and gives that. Krummacher is in church, the sermon seems familiar to him, and it finally occurs to him that he had preached that sermon himself on Good Friday 1832. Other people, who have read the sermon, also recognise it. Ball is called upon to account for it and must confess. Signum est, Ballum non tantum abhorrere a Krummachero, ut Tu quidem dixisti. [This is an indication that Ball has not such an aversion for Krummacher as you indeed said] I am very much obliged to you for the detailed review of Fawt. The treatment of this piece certainly bears the stamp of that wretch Raupach.  This low cur pokes his nose into everything and ruins not only Schiller by using his images and ideas over and over again in his tragedies, but also Goethe by maltreating him. I doubt very much if my poems will have a big sale; more likely they'll have a stinking one, since they are going for waste paper and bumf. I could not read what you wrote in red ink, so shall send you neither 5 silver groschen nor cigars. This time you will get either the canzone or part of the comedy which I have begun but not finished. Now I must go to my singing lesson. Adieu. April 27 Fragments of a Tragicomedy Horned Siegfried I The Palace of King Sieghard Council Meeting Sieghard Councillor Sieghard Siegfried Councillor Siegfried (Exit.) II Master Smith (Exit Siegfried with Apprentice.) Master Smith Siegfried (returning) Master Siegfried Master Siegfried Master Siegfried Theodor Hell Siegfried Theodor Hell Master Siegfried (Throws him down.) Master (Siegfried is sent into the forest, slays the dragon and, on returning, the Master;scatters the journeymen in all directions, and goes away.) III In the Forest Siegfried (Enter Leo and Michelet.) Leo Michelet Leo Michelet Leo Michelet Leo Michelet Siegfried Leo Michelet Siegfried Leo Michelet Siegfried Leo Siegfried (Exeunt Leo and Michelet in different directions.) Siegfried That is as far as I've got. I have left out the bits of narration and only copied out the introduction and the satires. This is the last piece. Now it is the turn of the King of Bavaria a to be dealt with but here it comes to a standstill. The thing lacks complexity and rounding off. Please ask Wurm to see about the poems for the Musenalmanach I must finish now, the post is going. Yours, Friedrich Engels May 1, 39
Letters: Letters of Frederick Engels