Barth on How to Approach the Theological Tradition

By -
Daniel Migliore, “Karl Barth’s First Lectures in Dogmatics: Instruction in the Christian Religion” in Karl Barth, The Göttingen Dogmatics: Instruction in the Christian Religion, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991): xxxiv-xxxv.
In the Göttingen lectures Barth refers repeatedly to his mentors in the Reformed tradition as “the older writers”, “our older Protestant predecessors”, “the older Orthodox” theologians, “our forefathers”, “our older Protestant fathers”, “the older dogmaticians”. Indeed, he cites them far more often than either Calvin or Luther. Barth not only takes the Reformed scholastics seriously, but finds their theologoumena impressive despite their “baroque garb”.

But while he often employs the categories and distinctions of the scholastics, he does not slavishly follow them. Wishing that theology today could regain something of the “remarkable objectivity and perspicacity” of the “masters of the old theological school”, he nevertheless tries to say better what they intended to say, and not infrequently diverges explicitly and sharply from their positions. While Barth considers continuity with the Reformed school a mark of his theological method, this does not mean for him a “repristination of the older Christian or Reformed dogmatics”. What he is after is something quite different from mere repetition of the Reformed traditions. His aim is to explore to what extent the lines drawn by the elders are necessary and right. The material must be thought through again from the very foundations. While respect is owed to the teachers of the church, their work cannot be simply repeated. True dogma is not something given but something sought. Received dogmas are only preliminary stopping points in what is a continuing task of theological reflection within the church. According to Barth, it is necessary initially to suspend the validity of any given dogma in order to test it and see to what extent it can be established anew. Even the decisions of Nicea and Chalcedon are in principle open to correction.
Of course, we in our own day must approach Barth in much the same manner.

Comments

Bobby Grow said…
Which is what makes Barth one of the best of what it looks like to be a "Reformed" theologian. semper reformanda!
February 07, 2011 12:00 PM
Glenn said…
Mr. McMaken
It is true, isn't it, that we must always be hearing the dogma new? Didn't Barth say that God's revelation must constantly refresh our dogma?
Enjoyed your report on the 2010 conference, too.
February 10, 2011 11:22 AM
W. Travis McMaken said…
Hi Glenn,

There is a distinction between the dogma, and the church's dogmas. The latter are a witness to the former, conceived as Jesus Christ. Given that sort of distinction, I'm not clear how your comments and what I have posted from Migliore finally differ. So, yes, I think that is true. :-)
February 10, 2011 12:06 PM
Mike said…
Amen to what Bobby said. Trying "to say better what [the old masters] intended to say... While respect is owed to the teachers of the church, their work cannot be simply repeated. True dogma is not something given but something sought" -- all that seems to me to represent the best of theological work.

Incidentally, I was fortunate enough to take several classes with Dr. Migliore during my years at PTS. Wonderful lecturer and very kind man.
February 09, 2012 1:14 PM
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