I don't think he really was religious although he cherished some Buddhistic and Christian sympathies. This is quite well perceived in the fact that he started writing an opera Die Sieger with a thoroughly Buddhistic plot but then an opera called Jesus of Nazareth as well.

If I recall correctly, then when he was writing Parsifal, he was inspired by Christian communion. You can even see that from the utterly beautiful and poetic libretto sections he wrote for Parsifal's communion scenes. Nevertheless, I don't think he ever was a fully converted Christian or Buddhist. If I recall correctly, then Nietzsche thought that Wagner's sudden Christian sympathies were there just to appeal to German nation and he accused Wagner in hypocrisy as Wagner claimed these views to be sincere (that in Nietzsche's opinion seemed to be quite unbelievable or even impossible). Nietzsche writes in The Case of Wagner: "If Wagner were a Christian, then Liszt was perhaps a Father of the Church!"

In A Communication to My Friends Wagner writes that seeing Lohengrin as merely Christian-Romantic, doesn't consider nor comprehend the work's underlying essence but only its accidental surface. He also writes that those trying to read "Christian or impotently pietistic drift" into his Tannhäuser just weren't able to comprehend Tannhäuser's character. Despite being Christian myself and immensely enjoying the beautiful libretto of Parsifal, I think Wagner's works were essentially analysing the essence of being a human and portraying the struggles of it.

In his letters to Liszt (see Correspondence of Wagner and Liszt Vol. 2 from Gutenberg) he at least once gets super excited about Buddhism and later seems to criticise Liszt for his Christian views. I don't dare to analyse that criticism myself as I don't think I have the competency or understanding of Germany's religious atmosphere during that era. His Buddhistic sympathies seem to me to be connected with his fascination with Schopenhauer, who also had Buddhistic views. However, I think Wagner's religious (and philosophical) ideology might not have been as legitimate as it sometimes seems but rather an overlap between his personal philosophy and some religious or philosophical doctrine, resulting in a mix of different ideas Wagner used in his operas. Wagner strikes me as a classic Romantic-German artist - generally very knowledgable about all sorts of things and erudite, but the fact that he uses these ideas in his works doesn't essentially mean he was a converted and practicing Christian, Buddhist or Schopenhauerian.

 

"I believe in God, Mozart and Beethoven, likewise in their disciples and apostles; I believe in the Holy Ghost and in the truth of the one and indivisible Art; I believe this Art to be a divine emanation that dwells in the hearts of all enlightened men; I believe that whoever has steeped himself in its sublime delights must dedicate himself to it forever and can never deny it; I believe that all men are blessed through Art and that it is therefore permissible to die of hunger for its sake; I believe that in death I shall attain the highest bliss - that in my life on earth I was a dissonant chord, which death will resolve in glorious purity . . ."

 

What is the source/context of this quote? I'm having a hard time finding information about it.

 

I would add to annaw's fine summation above that Wagner was not a believer in a supreme being. He viewed the sacrifice of Christ not as a payment for human sin but as an example of ultimate compassion for mankind and as a Schopenhauerian/Buddhistic demonstration of the overcoming of the will. I would agree with annaw in calling this a philosophy more than a religion. When religious symbols and ideas occur in his operas they can be taken as representing broader conceptions of human nature and life.

You might be interested in a thread I started some time ago discussing the religious aspects of Parsifal.

https://www.talkclassical.com/61698....com/61698-religion-wagners-parsifal-christian.html?highlight=parsifal+religion

 

This is somewhat off-topic but the original books' thread you quoted in the OP (which itself is a great summary of Wagner's religious views) is pure gold :lol:. Ah, reading the tries to analyse that "open mouth" regie production of Parsifal certainly brightened up my morning.

 

I'm confused about the "I believe in God, Mozart, and Beethoven" quote. The book that has that quote says that it is by a character named "R." from a "story" that Wagner wrote called Death in Paris. I can't find anything about this story other than that book (and maybe another book on Google). The author seems to think that the quote could be Wagner expressing himself through a character. I can't find much information though.

 

The quote is from Wagner's work An End in Paris written in 1841. It's a prayer of a dying man but not the character who tells the story. You can find an English translation from Google.

 

It might be noted that we don't neccessarily know what someone really thinks about religion even when they do tell us directly. (One must always be mindful of the audience, real and anticipated, for any statements. This problem is one of the reasons that autobiographies are so rarely reliable. People frequently are not really honest with themselves, and even less so when they know that others are watching. Religion is one of those subjects with particularly strong emotional effects, and thus one that is often a case where statements are altered for the sake of manipulating others. It should probably not be surprising that it is so often a bedfellow of that other forbidden topic here, politics)

 

He might have said he wasn't, but I think he was. I'll bet that as he died, at the very last moment he ran into the arms of Jesus, crying. Of course, this is only conjecture.

 

Singing "Amazing Grace," no doubt, langsam und schmachtend, with a pause after "a wretch like me," allowing time for self-reflection and for Jesus to say, "You? You're kidding, right?"

 

Yeah! And then he threw a pie and hit Jesus right in the face, and said "Yes, I'm kidding! You're Jewish!"

 

You should do more standup.

 

Wagner worshipped at the altar of Wagner.

 

He wanted to create a new religion with himself and his art at the centre. And he did for his devotees. As John Culshaw said of Bayreuth, "It's not a theatre, it's a shrine!"

 

This article, contrasting Niezsche with Wagner, by Roger Scurton might be illuminating.

https://www.roger-scruton.com/about/music/understanding-music/181-nietzsche-on-wagner

 

Questions like this just show how so many people are just purely biased and given their own belief systems spoon-fed by their times.

 

Which questions? What do you mean?

 

The solution is monogamy and the love that comes with that that goes beyond lust. It’s the bond between two people that you see unbroken in many elderly couples. That’s true love, and the children that come from it generate even more. Building a family like this is what love truly means.

When put into perspective saying that what Wagner portrays is lust is very reasonable.

 

Reasonable to you.

One can always put things into a "perspective" that results in defining them to fit one's own picture of the world. Wagner's works are multi-level creations, and one of those levels is the shadowy realm of the unconscious. It isn't always a comfortable place to visit. To describe his unprecedented and unflinching exploration of the limits and limitations of passion in such a superficial and mundane term as "lust" is ridiculously shallow as well as demeaning.

Yes, we all approve of happy families filled with birthday parties and anniversary bouquets. It seems that even the old philanderer himself made a pretty good home life (for an obsessed genius, that is). Somehow he managed to get himself adored by his wife and his son, which is more than my father, a distinct non-genius, did.

Everyone loves love till death do us part. But try making an opera out of it.

 

The problem is that he was an extremist, so his journey to morality convinced a lot of people half way to do bad things, and his resolution Parsifal had almost no effect. He's like a reverse Beethoven.

 

How about actually dealing with the substance of the works of this composer you despise. Mr.1996D? I did put a certain amount of effort into post #77, and made some specific points. Is continuing to offer generalized sermons about the downfall of morality, harping on Wagner's affairs, and contrasting them with your own "maturity" the best you can do?

I think you see every subject on the forum as little more than an opportunity to preach. It has an air of showoffishness that doesn't exude "maturity."

 

It's all in good fun, I certainly don't hate Wagner but embracing the deconstructionism that we have full license to use today, and honestly if Wagner gets banned it would put a smile on my face, he's already banned in Israel and today statues are falling like flies so it's possible. If the virus lasts a long time I might write a few books under a pseudonym.

 

Please refrain from personal comments. The thread OP asks if Wagner was religious. Please focus on that issue rather than each other.

 

Wagner did not believe in God but he was fascinated by religious symbols as he is shown in his work. He of course wanted to replace religion with art and mainly his own art with himself as an object of adoration. As a monstrous egoist he had endless powers of self-adoration and sought those who would reflect his own self-obsession - himself and his art. It has of course become somewhat of a religion for some of his admirers and they faithfully make their way to Bayreuth to pay homage at the shrine. I can remember chuckling at the program where Stephen Fry went to Bayreuth - The guy was treating the theatre as some sort of shrine and lowering his voice as he went in in reverence. I kept wanting to say ‘No Stephen! It’s a theatre! It’s a theatre which makes lots of noise with lots of noisy instruments!’ But that is how the Wagnerian faithful view it

 

Wagner did not believe in God but he was fascinated by religious symbols as he is shown in his work. He of course wanted to replace religion with art and mainly his own art with himself as an object of adoration. As a monstrous egoist he had endless powers of self-adoration and sought those who would reflect his own self-obsession - himself and his art.

and that's why his works are so good and he is the face of opera world.

 

What are some good places to start for reading what Wagner thought about religion?

 

https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Richard_Wagner

 

Originally Posted by DavidA
He of course wanted to replace religion with art and mainly his own art with himself as an object of adoration...

It has of course become somewhat of a religion for some of his admirers and they faithfully make their way to Bayreuth to pay homage at the shrine...

If you happen to like Teutonic self obsessed opera...

Well he did manage to make a christ in the Aryan image.

If you can't see the obvious no point in arguing.

Is DavidA saying this is "bad" to replace religion with his own art? I don't see it as bad, since religion is only a tool, anyway.

His post does sound kind of negative, but it really doesn't matter in light of the idea of "religion as only a tool." This idea puts art on an equal footing with religion.

 

Please concentrate on the OP.

Do not discuss religion in general.

A number of off topic and/or purely religious posts have been removed.

 

Was Taggart religious?

But seriously, folks: John Philip Sousa!

 

Don't be fooled by "The Stars and Stripes for Eternity."

 

I don't believe that Wagner was religious with the meaning the most of us have in our minds for the religion. Wagner worshiped the German and Greek mythology and if he was believing to something that was the German virtue and the immortal achievements of our ancestors. What Wagner managed was to turn his music into religion for the Germans. If religion is (also) an inspiration for the people, Wagner's music is really a strong one with a lot dedicated believers (fans) and the Bayreuth the eternal cathedral for all of them. In Germany, if you are rich or famous you can do a lot of things. But, one thing you can't: Not to attend Bayreuth! How many of the famous are going to church in Christmas? Only few. How many are attending religious festivities? Fewer! But, all of them, every year, are fighting for a Bayreuther Ticket. (I managed only once to be there. I payed more than 1000 Euros for a ticket. And I'm not reach or famous. But, also for me, Wagner deserves every sacrifie, despite I don't like to turn humans to Gods...)

 

I don't believe that Wagner was religious with the meaning the most of us have in our minds for the religion. Wagner worshiped the German and Greek mythology and if he was believing to something that was the German virtue and the immortal achievements of our ancestors. What Wagner managed was to turn his music into religion for the Germans. If religion is (also) an inspiration for the people, Wagner's music is really a strong one with a lot dedicated believers (fans) and the Bayreuth the eternal cathedral for all of them. In Germany, if you are rich or famous you can do a lot of things. But, one thing you can't: Not to attend Bayreuth! How many of the famous are going to church in Christmas? Only few. How many are attending religious festivities? Fewer! But, all of them, every year, are fighting for a Bayreuther Ticket. (I managed only once to be there. I payed more than 1000 Euros for a ticket. And I'm not reach or famous. But, also for me, Wagner deserves every sacrifie, despite I don't like to turn humans to Gods...)

No doubt Wagner would smile at your devotion. He loved people who were devoted to him and treated him with such reverence. I think, however, you will find other groups of people in Germany and elsewhere turning humans into 'gods' too, like people paying 1000 Euros for a seat at a football match final and regarding the players they are watching are 'gods'. Yes, I've heard the fans actually say it! So you are in good company when you do it! They believe their 'gods' deserve every sacrifice too! I would also imagine there are far more of the faithful who pack the football stands than pack out Bayreuth each year.
Oh and fyi some of us have been in church meetings around the world whose attendance dwarfs the attendance at Bayreuth. Maybe not for the famous but then who wants to associate with the famous?
BTW I hope if you are married your wife was in agreement with you paying 1000 Euros for your ticket! I remember an interview done with a football fan who'd just paid an outrageous sum of money for a ticket on the black market. He said, "Don't tell my wife - she'll kill me!" :lol:

 

Was Hegel religious? Not in a narrow sense but many would argue that Hegel is one of greatest Theologian. He is more "religious" than religious people.

If according to Hegel, religion describes the same phenomenology of human consciousness through fantasies and metaphors, then Wagner's works expresse religious idea through artistic means better than others.

 

All composers of 'high art' music (classical and its derivatives) are coming from a long tradition whose origins are in The Church and sacred music, so in this sense they are essentially religious in nature. This idea of religion and the sacred has been melded-in and subsumed by the category of "high art" done with the highest of purposes, for our 'sublime contemplation.'
In fact, the reason our concept of "Art" was "invented'" in the nineteenth century was because the paradigm simply shifted.

So, Milton Babbitt is "religious;" so is John Cage, Boulez, Stravinsky, etc.

 

Science arguably started with the The Church in the high middle ages with re-discovery of aristotle under the title 'natural philosophy'.

That doesn't mean present scientists are "religious"!

 

The concept of Art was not invented in the 19th century. The erroneous idea that an iron with nails sticking out of it might be perpetrated on the public as Art might be an invention of the 20th century.

 

Still railing against modern art?

Thanks for explaining why this is. Of course, with you, no explanation is needed, since everything you say is correct, and you're never wrong.

The paradigm simply shifted, with the Enlightenment, to a more rational way.
"Sublime contemplation" was now the norm, not blind faith. This concept of 'ART' should appeal to rational thinkers, not those "true believers" who wish to believe otherwise.

 

The question is really irrelevant. As long as the art is "for sublime contemplation" it can deal with questions of religion, and Wagner's music came from the tradition of art as explained above. All art produced under such criteria can be said to be "religious" in the sense that it is designed "for sublime contemplation."

The OP's question seems prompted by a conflict between earlier pre- "art" music which comes from & represents a straightforward immersion in religion (such as Bach's Lutheran music) and "art" music which deals with the sacred and religion in a different, more intellectual way, rather than as an assumed belief.

This new "art" music handling of religion came from a later time when religion was losing its absolute authority, and secular ideas began to emerge, as someone else explained.

The resistance to our newer idea of Art seems to be from those who are conflicted by an absolute "true believer's" conception of music & art which comes from an overt religious connection, as compared to the more rational idea of art as being designed for sublime contemplation.

 

Thread: Was Wagner religious?

Does it matter? He seems to have been more interested in Norse mythology than the Christian kind.

 

Norse mythology is just as potent as Christian religion or mythology, since they are both forms of "sublime contemplation."

This new concept of "art" as we now know it transcends such simplistic questions which worry about whether "Wagner the man was really a religious true-believer."