Lecture XXXVIII (Nr. 0506)

[501] in Harvard, but it did exist. And this interrelation is in my opinion absolutely necessary for the education of theologians---that is the first function; for the simple PROFESSIONAL education, it is absolutely necessary. Then it is necessary for the openness of the theologians---professors and students---for the other activities of so-called higher education, or high teaching, or university---however

you call it. Then the third, namely the relationship of these other faculties TO what is going on in the theological faculty. And the very fact that . . . you were in Union Seminary for many years . . . the other side, namely the looking of the university to what is going on in the divinity school was not as fully developed as it is here, and I think this is a great mistake. Now if you have the isolated seminaries, which are under church rule, then I would say they are very dangerous for the spiritual life of the country because they keep the ecclesiastical groups in isolation from what is going on in the totality of the educational life. QN: I still cannot understand how you distinguish these different ultimate concerns in these levels of the faculties. Are they the same ultimate concern, or are they different? PT: This is very simple. Ultimate concern qua ultimate concern are always the same, simply because it has this name "ultimate concern." It is ULTIMATE, and in this sense it is always identical. But the CONTENT is always different, the way in which it appears THROUGH the concrete elements.

And this is different in the great religions, it is different in the daily-life work of everybody in every country and in every religion. Take the same Protestant group, take a very narrow one---I don't want to name any---[laughter---in them, even the people who are shoemakers and who are businessmen