My Most Recent Publication

By -
Ecclesiology has just published (online; I think the hard-copy will take a little more time to get out) an essay of mine. Those of you with the proper permissions can likely access it. The essay deals with Barth on infant baptism, and it does two things: first, it traces the development of Barth’s doctrine through the Church Dogmatics period; and, second, it concludes by hinting at the line of thinking I intend to pursue in my dissertation. Here is the bibliographic information, and below is the abstract:
W. Travis McMaken, “Authority, Mission, and Institution: A Systematic Consideration of Matthew 28.18-20 in Karl Barth’s Doctrine of Baptism,” in Ecclesiology 53 (2009): 345-61.
ABSTRACT: Many of Barth’s most faithful and devoted interpreters have taken issue with his unapologetically non-sacramental account of baptism in CD IV/4 and his attendant rejection of infant baptism. While many questions have been raised concerning the veracity of the exegesis that Barth produces in support of his position, little attention has been paid to the way in which Matthew 28.18-20, when systematically considered, relates to his account of baptism. Taking the themes of authority, mission and institution as analytic tools, this paper examines the role played by the Matthean passage throughout the Church Dogmatics period, and considers how these themes relate to Barth’s rejection of infant baptism. It is suggested in conclusion that understanding baptism as the ‘sign of the gospel’ allows us to move beyond Barth’s rejection of infant baptism without abrogating his concern for mission.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Hi Travis,
I am looking forward to reading this. I am a children's pastor in Seattle and am looking at our baptism classes and the theology that supports them. Keep up the good work.
David Hallgren (PTS '07)
September 10, 2009 10:45 PM
W. Travis McMaken said…
Thanks, David! I'll do what I can.
September 11, 2009 2:42 PM
Unknown said…
Am I reading the abstract's conclusion correctly? That Barth's rejection of baptism somehow undermines his concern for missions?
September 11, 2009 4:04 PM
W. Travis McMaken said…
Chris,

Barth rejects infant baptism because he wants a "mature" church capable of and committed to its evangelical mission. But, in working out his rejection of infant baptism, he tends to exclude any but this most formal orientation toward mission. I think he could have hit the mission note a lot more strongly if he had made certain other moves with respect to baptism. That is what my dissertation will attempt to show.
September 11, 2009 4:27 PM
Unknown said…
Ah, I think I misunderstood; I'm fairly ignorant of Barth studies (even if I've read a decent amount of him). Wouldn't a more sacramentarian view of baptism (whether paedo- or credo-) lend more weight to his argument vis-a-vis a "mature" church?

Do you personally think that paedobaptism undermines the impetus to proclaim the gospel, to "make disciples…," etc.?
September 12, 2009 11:00 AM
W. Travis McMaken said…
I think a higher sacramentology would help Barth, but it would have to be a different sort of sacramentality than one usually finds in order to be consistent with Barth. Such a sacramentality is what I'm trying to figure out.

I don't think that paedobaptism undermines the church's evangelical commission. My dissertation will be about why I think that. How about yourself?
September 12, 2009 11:57 AM
Unknown said…
That sounds like an interesting tension to live with: a sacramental view of baptism while practicing only credobaptism. I'm sure it can be done, but I'm not sure how (off the top of my head).

As a committed paedobaptist, I'm not at all offended by the question re: missio Dei. It's a good one (and it has been lighting up Inhabitatio Dei recently). I think the practice certainly can inhibit the commission, but that's if the mission of the church becomes conflated with the mission of the state (which is an extension of the deeper problem of confusing the two kingdoms). But the same could be said for credobaptism too.

The fact is, the primary means of God's growing his kingdom in this world has been through the family structure, and the practice of paedobaptism has been inextricably bound to it.
September 14, 2009 9:57 AM
W. Travis McMaken said…
It's always helpful to know the backgrounds of people you're discussing theology with, and I now detect in you a hint of covenantal / Reformed theology. Is that right? I had been (apparently mistakenly) laboring under the assumption that you are a credobaptist - it now seems that neither of us are. :-)

Part of what I want to do in my dissertation is problematize traditional / covenantal Reformed accounts of paedobaptism by drawing upon Barth's rejection. Then, I'll (hopefully) go on to put paedobaptism on new and more solid footing.
September 14, 2009 10:05 AM
Bobby Grow said…
No! I'm the credo around here ;-).
September 14, 2009 2:47 PM
Unknown said…
Yes, Travis. I live and move among the Reformed, and, while I'm Anglican at heart, I'm nonetheless plenty influenced by the Dutch redemptive-historical theology of Ridderbos, et al.

I'm looking forward to following your project. It's my opinion that paedobaptist theology in general could use a fresh perspective.

Bobby, sounds like famous last words…
September 15, 2009 10:06 AM
Post a Comment

Popular Posts

So You Want to Read….Dietrich Bonhoeffer?

By -
Image
"I fear that Christians who stand with only one leg upon earth also stand with only one leg in heaven." "The exclusion of the weak and insignificant, the seemingly useless people, from everyday Christian life in community…may actually mean the exclusion of Christ; for in the poor sister or brother, Christ is knocking at the door." "Since ethical thinking in terms of realms is overcome by faith in the revelation of the ultimate reality in Jesus Christ . . . there is no real Christian existence outside the reality of the world." "People who reject their bodies reject their existence before God the Creator." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer Prelude Andreas Steinhoff [Attribution], via Wikimedia Commons I envisioned having a lot of time for blogging this summer, but that simply has not been the case - the last month has been a crazy one, to say the least. For two weeks, I was working at a theology summer camp of sorts, the Duke Youth Academy, and s...
Keep reading

So, You Want To Read Karl Barth?

By -
Image
Every now and then I am asked for advice about studying Karl Barth. So, I thought that I would share some of my standard advice here. But, before I do that, let me just say that I am by no means a Barth expert as compared to the people whose books I will mention below. I would be thrilled to find myself in their league one day, but as of yet that remains a distant dream. Still, I have been reading Barth for long enough, and under the supervision of a number of the scholars that I will mention below, that I think I can provide a decent orientation. I have never read Karl Barth before. Which of his books should I read first? Barth’s most famous work is the monumental 13-volume Church Dogmatics . Reading the CD with understanding is not an easy thing, so you definitely do NOT want to start here. Luckily, there are two smaller works by Barth that serve as helpful introductions to his work. Evangelical Theology: An Introduction - Based on the lectures that Barth delivered duri...
Keep reading

Karl Barth on Hell, the Devil, Demons, and Universalism – A Florilegium

By -
Image
You know, all the most interesting topics. Although Barth often confessed that he didn’t find these questions particularly interesting. At best they might draw sideways glances, as it were, as one travels the theological road. But I found a number of places in the records of Barth’s later conversations that I thought folks might find interesting, so I’ve collected them here. And if you aren’t familiar with the term “florilegium,” here you go ! All these texts are from the first volume of Barth in Conversation , with pages numbers given in parentheses along the way. As usual, italics are in the text and bold is mine. Hell “Now we come to hell. You shouldn’t laugh! There is nothing to laugh at! What does hell mean? I think hell means to be in the place where you are once fore all damned and lost without ceasing to exist, without losing the image of God, being what you are but being damned and lost, separated from God, whose creature you are, separated also from your neighbor, from...
Keep reading

George Hunsinger’s gloss of the Christ Hymn in Philippians 2

By -
Image
I’ve been reading George Hunsinger’s (my doktorvater , for anyone who might be new around here) entry in the Brazos Theoloical Commentary on the Bible series on Philippians. Anyone who has studied with George will find this book to be a compendium and application of many of his most characteristic and beloved analytical tools and patterns, and I’ve been enjoying it immensely. But one of the things that really stood out to me was how he glossed the so-called “Christ hymn” of Philippians 2. George Hunsinger, Philippians , Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible (Grand Rapids: BrazosPress, 2020). The gloss that Hunsinger provides is not a historical-critical interpretation. Rather, it is an ecclesial, ecumenical, and theological interpretation that attempts to fill in the blanks for how to understand this proto-liturgical formulation in light of the later formulations of the ecumenical creeds. In order to achieve this gloss, Hunsinger engages in “ecclesial hermeneutics” and makes “...
Keep reading

2010 KBBC: Week 3, Day 1

By -
On the Monstrosity of Christ : Karl Barth in Conversation with Slavoj Žižek & John Milbank By Paul Dafydd Jones For a while, I hoped to frame this conversation in terms of a dramatic interchange – something along the lines of “A Slovenian philosopher, a British theologian, and a Swiss dogmatician walk into a bar…” Alongside an eye-wateringly hip assemblage of cinematic references, literary allusions, and comedic scenes – my early favorites being when Barth imagines a young adult novel, entitled Are you there God? It’s me, Žižek , and when Milbank waxes poetic about the Twilight movies – I wanted to engage some topics that would likely receive attention, were the authors to meet for drinks. Primarily, I envisioned an intense discussion of the logos asarkos and the logos ensarkos , with Milbank talking up the former category, Barth emphasizing the latter, and Žižek asking whether recent debates are but symptoms of secret puzzle, embedded in the Church Dogmatics – a puzzle that...
Keep reading