Changes

===Theology===

===Theology===

In 1939 he explained his theological odyssey:<ref>Niebuhr, "Ten Years That Shook My World", ''The Christian Century'' (April 26, 1939) in ''Sources of the American Mind: Volume II,'' ed. by Loren Baritz, (1960) pp 542-546 </ref>

In 1939 he explained his theological odyssey:<ref>Niebuhr, "Ten Years That Shook My World", ''The Christian Century'' (April 26, 1939) in ''Sources of the American Mind: Volume II,'' ed. by Loren Baritz, (1960) pp 542-546 </ref>

{{cquote|...About midway in my ministry which extends roughly from the peace of Versailles [1919] to the peace of Munich [1938], measured in terms of Western history, I underwent a fairly complete conversion of thought which involved rejection of almost all the liberal theological ideals and ideas with which I ventured forth in 1915. I wrote a book, my first, in 1927 which when now consulted is proved to contain almost all the theological windmills against which today I tilt my sword. These windmills must have tumbled shortly thereafter for every succeeding volume expresses a more and more explicit revolt against what is usually known as liberal culture.}}

{{cquote|...About midway in my ministry which extends roughly from the peace of Versailles [1919] to the peace of Munich [1938], measured in terms of Western history, I underwent a fairly complete conversion of thought which involved rejection of almost all the liberal theological ideals and ideas with which I ventured forth in 1915. I wrote a book, [''Does Civilization need Religion?''], my first, in 1927 which ...contains almost all the theological windmills against which today I tilt my sword. These windmills must have tumbled shortly thereafter for every succeeding volume expresses a more and more explicit revolt against what is usually known as liberal culture.}}

 

In the 1930s Niebuhr worked out many of his ideas about sin and grace, love and justice, faith and reason, realism and idealism, and the irony and tragedy of history, which established his leadership of the [[Neo-orthodoxy|neo-orthodox]] movement in theology.  

In the 1930s Niebuhr worked out many of his ideas about sin and grace, love and justice, faith and reason, realism and idealism, and the irony and tragedy of history, which established his leadership of the [[Neo-orthodoxy|neo-orthodox]] movement in theology.  

In radical contrast to the Promethean illusion, God reveals himself in history, especially personified in Jesus Christ, as sacrificial love which overcomes the human temptation to self-deification and makes possible constructive human history.

In radical contrast to the Promethean illusion, God reveals himself in history, especially personified in Jesus Christ, as sacrificial love which overcomes the human temptation to self-deification and makes possible constructive human history.

===History===

===History===

In ''The Irony of American History'' (1952) Niebuhr questioned whether a humane, "ironical" interpretation of American history was credible on its own merits, or only in the context of a Christian view of history. Niebuhr's concept of irony referred to situations in which "the consequences of an act are diametrically opposed to the original intention," and "the fundamental cause of the disparity lies in the actor himself, and his original purpose." His reading of American history based on this notion, though from the Christian perspective, is so rooted in historical events that readers who do not share his religious views can be led to the same conclusion.<ref> Martin E. Marty, "Reinhold Niebuhr and the Irony of American History: A Retrospective." ''History Teacher'' 1993 26(2): 161-174. 0018-2745 </ref>  

In ''The Irony of American History'' (1952) Niebuhr questioned whether a humane, "ironical" interpretation of American history was credible on its own merits, or only in the context of a Christian view of history. Niebuhr's concept of irony referred to situations in which "the consequences of an act are diametrically opposed to the original intention," and "the fundamental cause of the disparity lies in the actor himself, and his original purpose." His reading of American history based on this notion, though from the Christian perspective, is so rooted in historical events that readers who do not share his religious views can be led to the same conclusion.<ref> Martin E. Marty, "Reinhold Niebuhr and the Irony of American History: A Retrospective." ''History Teacher'' 1993 26(2): 161-174. 0018-2745 </ref>