Before Analogy: Recovering Barth'sOntological Development

What is the nature of Barth's development over the 1920s? Barth himself understood this period as his "apprenticeship," and cites his 1931 book on Anselm as a significant juncture in moving beyond this stage in his thinking. Barth's emphasis upon both change and continuity lies at the heart of the discrepancy between two prominent interpreters of his theology, Hans Urs von Balthasar and Bruce McCormack. On the surface it appears as though their disagreement centers around Barth's employment of dialectic and analogy in his theology. However, our thesis is that this focus conceals the ontological strategies Barth's multifarious uses of analogy and dialectic always implied. Although McCormack is right to suggest that Balthasar's depiction of a shift from dialectic to analogy is inadequate, in the end McCormack's account of Barth's development over the 1920s conceals as much as it reveals. The following essay attempts to demonstrate the kinds of insights which can be made of the past accounts of Barth's development which focused on the transition from dialectic to analogy. Far from relegating these accounts to the sidelines, McCormack's work helps us see all the more clearly just what was at stake in figures like Balthasar's work. By looking past McCormack and Balthasar's respective periodizations of Barth's development, a clearer focus upon Barth's theological ontology can begin to take place.     

Speculating about Divinity? God's Immanent Life and Actualistic Ontology

This article argues that counterfactual statements concerning God's life in himself are both theologically informative and genuinely warranted by Karl Barth's notion of God's 'being-in-act' as presented in § 28.1 of the Church Dogmatics. To this end, the proposed reading aims to mitigate recent emphases on divine Entscheidung as the primary category for construing Barth's theological ontology. Without offering a resolution to alleged 'tensions' in Barth's doctrine of God, the author nevertheless suggests that there are good reasons to prefer certain streams of Barth's thought to others, with the notion of God's love offered as a test case.     

Karl Barth's 'Dialectical Catholicity': Sic et Non

This essay attempts to achieve three things. First, it brings to the foreground an important but largely forgotten conversation partner of Karl Barth's theology: Roman Catholicism, and sketches Barth's critical and constructive engagement of it from his teaching at the University of Muenster (1925–1930) to his late booklet "Ad Limina Apostolorum". Second, it argues that Barth's engagement of Roman Catholicism functions as a crucial moment of his "dialectical catholicity", through which he discursively applies his critical, reflexive principle of "genuine Protestantism". Third, the essay puts forth a critique of Barth's transcendental account of "genuine Protestantism" by drawing on Martin Luther's concrete, ecclesially embodied pneumatology.     

In Defence of Karl Barth's Doctrine of the Trinity

Two common complaints against Barth's doctrine of the Trinity are here addressed. First it is argued that Barth's adoption of the term Seinsweise , or 'mode of being' to refer to the trinitarian persons is not in any way a departure from the traditional doctrine. Second, the suggestion that Barth's doctrine shifts over the course of the Dogmatics is examined and refuted.     

Religious Diversity, Christian Doctrine and Karl Barth

Abstract:   The recognition of the heterogeneity of the goals of the world's religions has led to a greater alertness to the doctrinal questions raised by the presence of truth and rectitude which Christians might recognize in the other religions. In this article J.A. DiNoia's proposals for the recognition of subordinate and non-oppositional truths in the other religions, and his more recent defence of Barth's account of the religions in Church Dogmatics §17, are brought into dialogue with Karl Barth's account of truth extra muros ecclesiae in CD §69. It is argued that the latter raises a number of crucial doctrinal questions for DiNoia's own proposal for the recognition of subordinate and non-oppositional truth, and that it is a more important resource for contemporary discussions than is the controversial CD §17.     

Karl Barth's Christology as a Resource for a Reformed Version of Kenoticism

Abstract:  This article starts by examining the 'shift' in thinking on kenosis from the sixteenth-century doctrine established by Lutheran orthodoxy to the nineteenth-century understanding developed by Gottfried Thomasius. Karl Barth's understanding of 'kenotic Christology' was largely controlled by the nineteenth-century definition and, as a result, he rejected it. However, Barth's later treatment of the incarnation in CD IV/I provides resources for taking up the language of kenosis in a positive way that would be thoroughly 'Reformed' in character. There are considerable theological gains to be made by such an approach.     

Beruf and Berufung in Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics: Toward a Subversive Klesiology

Abstract:   This article explores Karl Barth's understanding of calling in relation to vocation as found primarily within the Church Dogmatics . Its novel aspect resides in the methodological decision to read Barth's treatment of Berufung explicated in volume IV/3.2 in light of his critical distinction between Beruf and Berufung in volume III/4. Such a move is salutary considering the discursive nature of Barth's systematic thought progression within the Dogmatics , but it also offers much to explain the themes treated in the later volume, which do not fall specifically under the umbrella of vocation. Barth is not offering a doctrine of vocation ( Beruf ), but rather a doctrine of calling ( Berufung ), which brings implications residing in how one reads this section of the Dogmatics as well as in the possibility of constructing a theology of calling, an enterprise I call klesiology.     

Creative Reappropriation: Barth's Use of Calvin in the Münster Ethics (1928/29)

This article demonstrates Calvin's impact upon Barth's ethics through a close reading of Barth's MÏnster lectures on ethics. Already in these early lectures Barth insisted on the coherence of dogmatic and ethical reflection, and developed the basic structure and some characteristic themes of his mature ethical reflection in the Church Dogmatics . By showing the ways in which Barth was influenced by Calvin in these formative first ethics lectures the case is made that a thorough understanding of Calvin's theology is necessary for a correct appreciation of Barth's ethics and of his theology as a whole.     

SCIENCE AND RELIGION IN THE THEOLOGY OF DIETRICH BONHOEFFER

The German theologian and martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer is not widely known for engaging with scientific thought, having been heavily influenced by Karl Barth's celebrated stance against natural theology. However, during the period of his maturing theology in prison Bonhoeffer read a significant scientific work, Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker's The World View of Physics. From this he gained two major insights for his theological outlook. First, he realized that the notion of a "God of the gaps" is futile, not just in science but in other areas of human inquiry. Second, he felt that an infinite universe, as considered by science, would be self-subsistent and could exist as if there were no God. Bonhoeffer replaced Barth's radical critique of religion with the even more extreme view that it is a mere passing phase in history that grown-up humanity can dispense with. At the same time Bonhoeffer began an important critique of Barth's reaction, namely, the latter's retreat to a "positivism of revelation." While Bonhoeffer did not go quite as far as one might like, his approach opened up hopeful avenues for an answer to "the liberal question" and even a revived place for some kind of natural theology.     

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ: Karl Barth and the Historicization of God's Being

Abstract:  In the excurses of Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics IV/1, Barth invests the resurrection with greater ontological significance than is typically acknowledged in contemporary accounts of his mature theology. In this article, I systematically develop the numerous statements in CD IV/1 in which Barth conceptualizes the resurrection as the historical fulfillment of God's eternal being. Subsequently, I identify the similitude between Barth's theology of the resurrection and Hegel's as presented in his Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion. The article closes by suggesting that the similitude between Barth's view and Hegel's may include points of material correspondence.     

The Imago Dei and Election: Reading Genesis 1:26–28 and Old Testament Scholarship with Karl Barth

Abstract:  Barth's treatment of the imago dei within his interpretation of the Genesis creation story ( CD III/1) divides biblical scholars and dogmaticians. In an attempt to bridge the impasse Barth's relational interpretation is re-examined. A narrow focus on the small print exegesis of Genesis 1:26–28 has often led to Barth being misread. In contrast, attention is given to Barth's hermeneutical principles and his exegesis is placed within the wider context of his understanding of the creation story. Even in terms of his own hermeneutic Barth's reading of the imago is shown to be problematic. This hermeneutic can, however, be applied to provide a reading of the imago as a relationship to God and the world analogous to Israel's election. Such a reading is exegetically defensible and theologically suggestive.     

The Body of Christ: Rethinking a Classic Ecclesiological Model

Abstract:   The image of the church as the body of Christ is deployed by Karl Barth and Robert Jenson in the service of very different and equally unsatisfactory ecclesiologies. While Barth's concern for divine freedom causes him to accentuate the distinction between head and members to the point of positing two churches, Jenson's stress on Christ's objective presence in the world risks collapsing Christ into the church. Against both positions, attention to the fact that human bodies can be encountered in what may be distinguished as second- and third-person modes allows the image of the body of Christ to be deployed in a way that precludes both any confusion of divine and human agency and any separation of Christ from the earthly-historical community.     

RETURNING BARTH TO ANSELM

This article focuses on Barth's explication of Anselm's Proslogion 2-4 in his book on Anselm and attempts to show how Anselm helped clarify for Barth the ontological nature of his own early theology, in particular what he meant by the "is" in his affirmation "God is God." Our contention is that Barth's continual pointing to Anselm's Fides Quaerens Intellectum as a vital key to his own theology should not be overlooked. In fact, we argue that only by returning Barth to Anselm in this way can we begin to understand more thoroughly one of the key contributions of Barth's theology generally and its potential relevance to contemporary onto-theological debates.     

Karl Barth on the Ascension: An Appreciation and Critique

This exposition of Barth's doctrine of the ascension in Volume IV of the Church Dogmatics –'one of the major works of ascension theology'– begins by highlighting some central themes in representative patristic and modern discussions of the ascension and then provides a close and critical reading of the Dogmatics . Of special interest are questions regarding Barth's understanding of the specificity of the Christ-event, the structure of his doctrine of reconciliation, the relation of ontology and soteriology, and the function of the doctrine of the ascension in a thoroughly a posteriori theology.     

The Stranger as Sacrament: Karl Barth and the Ethics of Ecclesial Practice>

Recent theology has devoted attention to ecclesial practices as a matrix for ethical reflection. Barth stands in ambivalent relation to these developments. On the one hand, Barth urges consideration of the relation of church practice to the gospel of divine action; on the other, Barth's christocentric account of ethics might be corrected by an ethics of ecclesial practice. The ambivalence is explored in an interpretation of Barth's account of the ministry of the Christian community in Church Dogmatics IV/3 and of his treatment of love of one's neighbour in I/2.     

Law and Gospel,or the Law of the Gospel? Karl Barth’s Political Theology Compared with Luther and Calvin

This essay is an attempt to understand the significance of Barth's redefinition of the "law/gospel" rubric for political theology. Barth's thought is exposited at length, and illumined by comparison with Luther and Calvin. Luther emphasizes the distance between gospel and the law, distinguishing between serving God in the secular regiment, and serving Christ in the spiritual regiment. He thereby challenges the improper relation of state and church, but does so in a manner that can lead to a passive dualism. Calvin holds that preaching the law to the state includes preaching the gospel; thus, the church has a positive vision against which it can evaluate the state's service to God in Christ. This leads, however, to the danger of a 'clerical guardianship' of the state.
Barth finds a positive connection between the two governments in the fact that both communities are based in Christ, in whom the gospel is their law. This grounds his high view of the state as predecessor to the heavenly kingdom, as well as a prophetic mission of the church to the state. This does not lead to a new Christendom, however, first, because Barth hopes not for a kingdom wrought by human hands, but for the Theocracy of God, and second, because Barth sees the fallen reality of both church and state, the state pagan and violent, and the church a poor witness. In the end, though Barth makes a strong case for supporting theological critique of the state, while avoiding Constantinianism, he is unable to solve the problem of how to connect the gospel and the law in the civil community.     

Storming Heaven with Karl Barth? Barth's Unwitting Appropriation of the Genus Maiestaticum and what Lutherans Can Learn from It

Abstract:  This article seeks to demonstrate that Barth radically misunderstands the Lutheran doctrine of the communication of attributes, with its centerpiece the genus maiestaticum . However, misdirected as Barth's criticism is, the doctrine is not without its own problems and, instead of giving expression to the integrity of Christ's person and the co-presence of his natures, is in danger of subverting itself. After showing that Barth's Christology actually employs what for all practical purposes is the majestic genus of the Lutherans, I propose that the Swiss theologian's thought may offer ways of resolving the tensions inherent in the Lutheran tenet, and that by means of resources that the Lutherans already possess.     

Grace as Pardon and Power: Pictures of the Christian Life in Luther, Calvin, and Barth

Christians have long understood grace both as a declaration of acceptance and as a power that transforms. This article illumines two theses while investigating the relationship between these understandings of grace in Luther, Calvin, and Barth's development of the law/gospel dialectic and the doctrines of justification and sanctification. First, though each theologian makes use of both understandings of grace, each also tends to emphasize one over the other. The unity and tension within and between these perspectives help to show that while both pictures are of the greatest importance for each other and cannot be separated, they also exist in tension, as long as they are worked out in the lives of sinners. Second, the author claims that the positions of Luther and Barth are more alike than is generally recognized.     

Some Dogmatic Implications of Barth's Understanding of Ebionite and Docetic Christology

This article shows how Barth's understanding of Ebionite andDocetic Christology shaped his trinitarian theology and argues that theologianstoday should learn from Barth in order to avoid the pitfalls of groundingChrist's uniqueness either in experience or in an ideology instead of in Christ himself. The article exhibits how Barth's insights relate to the views of a number of prominent contemporary theologians, illustrating how thesetheologians, in varying ways, actually reach problematic conclusions preciselyto the extent that they do not actually begin their christological reflections with the fact that Jesus is the Son of God simply because he is.