BOOK REVIEW:
For the Sake of the World: Karl Barth and the Future of Ecclesial Theology. Edited by George Hunsinger. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004. 214 pp. ISBN 0802826997. 

“The angels laugh at old Karl,” his onetime student John D. Godsey recalls Karl Barth writing. “They laugh at him because he tries to grasp the truth about God in a book of Dogmatics. They laugh at the fact that volume follows volume, and each is thicker than the previous ones. As they laugh, they say to one another, ‘Look! Here he comes now with his little pushcart full of volumes of the Dogmatics!’—and they laugh about the persons who write so much about Karl Barth instead of writing about the things he is trying to write about. Truly, the angels laugh.” The story is a fitting conclusion to this impressive collection of Barth essays, which were first offered at the opening of the Center for Barth Studies at Princeton Theological Seminary. While this collection might get a smile in the heavenly realm, there will be no belly laughs. For the theological reflections found here are truly focused on the theology that Barth wrote about, with just enough biographical aside to keep things interesting. 

Eberhard Busch struggles with supersessionism, a belief that some ascribe to Barth, that suggests that God’s covenant with Israel has been replaced by the new covenant in Jesus Christ, that led to centuries of Christian oppression of Jews. Barth believed that Christians stand with Jews in an indissoluble solidarity, Busch insists. Clifford Green explores the political convictions of Barth, with special concern for economic justice and peace, writing an ecclesial public theology. While quite aware of the profound changes in the geopolitical situation since the time of Barth’s death, Green finds rich soil in which to dig. 

Not all of the essays are filled with praise. Caroline Schröder, struggling with Barth’s theology of the providence of God, is concerned about a superiority over unbelievers who do not perceive the place of divine providence. In response to these concerns, Randall Zachman insists that there is no arrogance in Barth, but the humble astonishment of a believer. This is really a discussion about grace, and the scope of grace in the human experience. Is grace simply a part of the human experience, Schröder asks, or does it determine our lives, even our depths? God’s providence, Barth will conclude, is cloaked in mystery, and known only in faith. 

Caroline Simon wonders if Barth might have written more about the Christian responsibility to love others, beyond the community of Christian believers, and toward the whole world so loved by God. She compares Barth’s call to care for our own with the work of Pastor Andre Trocme in the French village of Le Chambon during the Second World War. In that village, the Christian faith of the people protected the village and the Jewish people there from Nazi destruction. Simon suggests that Barth, even in documents like the Barmen Declaration, where his passionate concern for the well being of the church is foremost, fails to adequately call the church to a Christian love for neighbor. 

Volume editor George Hunsinger’s essay is last, and considers Barth’s understanding of eternity. Eternity, for Barth, exists in the form of the triune God’s eternal becoming. God’s existence is eternal for both God’s sake and for the sake of the world. In creation and election, we realize that the human creation joins God in eternal life, by God’s determination that it is so. In every case, responses offered by scholars are up to the substantive challenge. 

John D. Godsey’s stories about his teacher are a sweet treat at the end of the collection. One more, then: “A graduate student asked Barth: “What is the role of reason in your theology?” Barth answered: “I use it.”

William C. Goettler
Co-Pastor
First Presbyterian Church, New Haven, CT

PUBLISHED IN THE BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE FOR REFORMED THEOLOGY, FALL 2006, VOL. 6, #2.