Undergraduate Papers Now Online: Take 2

I tried this once before, but that attempt didn’t take for a number of reasons. So, I’m trying again. These are papers that I wrote while studying in the BITH department at Wheaton College (IL), from which I graduated in 2004.

Final Essays from My Class on Karl Barth’s Doctrine of Election

Reading Scripture: A Typology of Denominational Positions on the Question of Women in Ordained Ministry

Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology: A Look at 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 5

Melkizedek Through the Testaments

An Evangelical Doctrine of the Eucharist: Sacrament, Gospel, and Witness

N.B. Just in case anyone for some reason inconceivable to me wants to quote from or otherwise make use of these materials, I want to make it perfectly clear that I retain full copyrights. If you would like to make some use of them, please contact me first to get my permission.

Comments

Jon said…
Just read your essay on Barth's doctrine of election - you seem to say B is unique in that he make his doctrine of election christocentric.

I disagree - I find that B is unique in that he places his doctrine of election WITHIN the doctrine of God. On my reading of the Reformed tradition - the doctrine of election is not construed apart from Christ but Christ is often the foundation. I'm thinking Calvin who talks of Christ as the "auctor" of election etc. etc. and even Turretin I think links to Christ although in a nuanced way. You should read Stephen Holmes chapter on B's doc of election in 'Listening to the Past'
WTM said…
Yeah, that thing is more than three years old, so I can't be held responsible for mistakes. :-)

Which means that I think you are right. I think Barth is unique in the way in which he makes election Christocentric, but he is certainly not the first to think about election in relation to Christ.

In a similar way, others have thought about election in relation to the doctrine of God. The Reformed scholastics are a shining case in point of this with their concern about the divine decrees. However, again, Barth is unique in how he treats election in relation to the doctrine of God.
I was wondering on your typology of positions on ordination you had no category for "those who say 'yes' from careful exegesis," as if all who say yes appeal only to experience and/or culture? Would you modify this typology if you were writing today?

BTW, I don't think any of us should be held eternally responsible for what we write in college. I shudder when I look back. :-)
WTM said…
MWW,

I certainly think such a position is possible, and I would change this typology if I was writing today. Two things: (1) I don't think I found any denominations with much exegesis done in support of women in ministry, (2) if you read the conclusion, you will see that I actually accuse those who in the typology say "no" because of exegesis (that's their self-understanding) of doing poor exegesis.

As I recall, the typology deals with the self-understanding of the various denominations, not what I actually think is at work.

Popular Posts

Abortion, Authoritarian Self-Deception, Evangelicals, and Trump: a collected Twitter essay from Christopher Stroop

Brief Reflection on the Suicide of a Pastor

Does God "Exist"? Meh. (With Apologies to my Atheist Friends)

Marilynne Robinson on Theology

Moltmann, Barth, Bloch, and Blumhardt (any 'B's missing?)