on Barth

Critics have commonly given attention to religious dogma to characterize part of the Church’s insufficient causes. Some would argue holding to these restricts one’s efforts in finding truth. There is also the argument that whatever might have been beneficial in church dogmatics is now stale and outdated. Perhaps it would not be to those that Karl Barth would direct his attention. Instead he would be more inclined to stir an interest in those who want to know more the value of the dogmatics. In his foreword to Dogmatics in Outline he admonishes those who would hold a skimmer’s view of the subject and consider the outline the last word in the study; he refers them to Paul’s words “If anyone will not work, let him not eat.”

Indeed, Barth would not hesitate to offer his view on the matter. How could he not? So many misunderstand what dogmatics are. Much attention has been given to explaining and compounding on the ideas of science. In this process we have neglected to engage the concepts of science to the study of dogmatics, for they are very much the same. Along the way, during this disconnect, the Christian Church, which in terms of the scientific is the study subject of dogmatics, has lost its ability to speak clearly to the world around it. It is safe to say the Church has let this happen, forgetting the authority, while certainly not equal to Scripture, dogmatics demonstrate in the faith life.

Using the Apostles’ Creed as a backdrop to his discussion, Barth shapes the argument phrase by phrase for the renewal of dogmatics in the life of the Church and the Christian. By so doing, the Christian can then acknowledge God as the original Creator, having no equal or competition (alone in the highest) and move towards a more stable view of Him as the Almighty, demonstrated as the Father, Son and Spirit. As it may be in our time, Barth understood how difficult it was to speak of such things to a society not interested in listening. This is all the more reason to refresh the thinking about dogmatics.

As we rediscover this treasure, we cannot suppose it is only beneficial to the Church; this argument is made clear in The Christian’s Place in Society. The Christian, described by Barth using Paul’s words as “Christ in us,” must present the goal and future that society can find when Christ is allowed to work in the “special people apart from other people.” This is the Christian’s responsibility. Society cannot have connections “with the kingdom of Heaven” outside of what is displayed in the lives of the faithful. God can be seen in His activity in the events of history and should be the focus of what is implied in these matters.

Too often, in Barth’s view, we can derail from what is important to the issue. A case in point would be the religious experience. A religious experience does not take the place of God’s revelation to us. Its parallels are too close to that which can remove us from God. So, the real revelation comes, for us and others, when we allow God to move in our “secular life.” In other words this thought of God must be lived: “Life can be lived only by being lived.” His willingness to share this freedom with us brings us from death to life, brings “Life into life,” and exposes our dependence on Him.

Barth sums this process up in one word: understand. Understanding is our key to finding peace in the situation. It also allows us to recognize where our growth as people originates. We are called to move into a trust with the Creator that spears our hearts towards the eternal and follow more closely God.
It is an unspoken observation and/or compliment—thought perhaps not entirely. The ability of a speaker (preacher, professor, etc) to eloquently present a subject matter without the use of a manuscript demonstrates to a listener a quality of trust and confidence in the individual. This is the feeling I had while reading the two selections from Barth; reading the foreword in Dogmatics in Outline indicated he hadn’t used a manuscript due to the circumstances he found himself in. In these small readings there was a passion about what was important in a Christian life pouring out.

For Barth, God was the ultimate, the “highest.” Everything that can be spoken of has to come out of that acknowledgement. It should be impossible for the Christian to view the world without seeing God. This knowledge we have of God does not come from our own understanding. Rather it is part of God’s desire to reveal Himself to us and our response to that is based on the faith we demonstrate. So not to confuse this God with thoughts of other gods, Barth clearly asserts the God he refers to is the One who has revealed Himself as the Trinity—Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Out of this great freedom (faith) given to us we should be willing to offer our “Christian instruction,” lest we find we have yet to truly believe (Outline, 34).

Barth’s overwhelming charge to bring Christian influence into society brought for me a reflection into John’s words in Revelation 3:15-16. Being a lukewarm source of water does nothing for the work of the churches John speaks to. There is no real use for Christ the person who remains in a lukewarm state. Rather it is in our willingness to be a refreshment or cleansing to those who would accept, all the while acknowledging this ability comes from the Creator. That is our place in society. Barth argues that we betray society when we are content “building churches and chapels and do not learn to wait upon him in a wholly new way” (Christian’s Place in Society, 281). That is a strong assertion considering how it would appear society often betrays itself or those in it; Barth’s arguments come out of a time when there is a sense of this betrayal, and he certainly knew this betrayal personally. Regardless, considering the work of God, what other option is there for the Christian other than to “follow attentively what is done by God” (Christian’s Place, 327)?